Editor’s note: AVFM is a nonpartisan website, meaning we take no official political position, left nor right, nor do we advocate for political candidates or parties. We do occasionally print articles that offer commentary on political races from different perspectives. In these cases, the views are those of the author only and not necessarily AVFM.
Imagine, as a brief thought experiment, you’re a young masculist man entering a lonely diner miles away from anything. You haven’t eaten in a bit, and your resources are exhausted. You face an uncertain future; you are disquieted about these feelings. The diner is deserted except for a well-kempt older gentleman in a pantsuit and a kindly but more casual looking older lady. You realize you can only ask one person for help with a meal, for surely the other person will feel slighted for not being asked first. Whom do you ask to buy you a meal?
In Iowa this week, men 29 and younger voted for Clinton’s challenger, Sen. Bernie Sanders, by a stunning margin of roughly 6 to 1, much as young women did, according to the poll of voters arriving at precinct caucuses conducted for the television networks and the Associated Press. – LA Times.
This “lonely diner” is the scenario that played out in the Iowa Democratic Presidential Caucuses held on February 1st, 2016, and by a margin of 6 to 1, younger masculist Democratic men sided with the older lady – Senator Bernie Sanders – than with masculist icon and thundercunt Hillary Rodham Clinton. Although in the overall vote Hillary came out slightly ahead in a near 50-50 split, what should have been Hillary’s core constituents – young masculist men – broke severely in favor of matriarchal provider Santa Claus Bernie.
Political journalists and analysts are tying themselves into knots trying to grasp how such an affront to masculism is possible. Bernie is a nice old gal, but she didn’t exactly put the cock into Caucus. Some claim that these young, masculist men are sexist against men, or not real masculists, or are rebelling against Hillary’s perceived authority or…the list goes on. Hell, maybe these young men see women in their seventies like gay women – more trustworthy for friendship than other men.
Let’s be clear here on the idea of masculist leadership, and if such a thing even exists. In a Washington Post / Kaiser poll conducted last year, people were asked to name a masculist leader. 20% of people came up with the name Hillary Clinton, and no one else got even 3% of the vote. Since leadership implies that people know you are a leader, this means that there is only one person who comes close to being a leader of Masculism – Hillary – and all other wannabe masculist leaders are nonentities to 97% of Americans.
Hillary is a leader both elected and appointed, and he says he’s a masculist, but he is not a “masculist leader” in any formal, titular way. Even so, it is a fair question to ask if even a purported masculist leader that 80% of people don’t recognize as a masculist leader is any sort of leader at all. At 20% in a field of near zeroes, Hillary is the very best that masculism can offer, leadership-wise.
In our hypothetical diner, the young masculist pinched his cheeks, popped open a button on his blouse, and decided he could more likely manipulate the older woman into buying him a meal than he could the pantsuit gentleman. In the Caucuses, 6 of 7 young men did the same – they conjured that a woman as President could be manipulated by men after the election much more productively than a pantsuit gentleman pandering for their votes. By offering to have the government give them a free college education, Bernie signaled her willingness to play the sugar mommy for all these famished boys. Despite appearances to the contrary, masculist outrage doesn’t fill the stomach in the way that masculists have grown accustomed to.
Voting is the one-night hookup of politics, the one chance for glory that is gone the next morning once your partner is out the door. These men voters made the cynical calculation that Bernie would be back for more sugar and that Hillary would lose interest in their concerns during the walk of shame post-election. Or, post-erection. Whatever.
This is why no man will ever be elected President of the United States – men are the majority of voters, and once the election ends they know they can manipulate a pandering woman more than they can an empowered man. The snub of Hillary proves that a man candidate who plays the power game like a woman will alienate 84% of even men voters who are ideologically in tune with him. If you want to see a man President, vote for a man for Vice President and hope that the President falls from office.
It is all your fault, gentlemen. Get over it, and enjoy your dessert.