The Crisis of Men – and How My Blackness Helped Me to Relate to Men’s Issues

By Shaniqua Davis

Twelve years.

Twelve years I have been working as a social justice advocate in Atlanta, where my family grew up.

Since I was a child, I was captivated by issues of social justice. My father helped construct housing, my mother worked in a soup kitchen. My grandmother helped knit clothing for the poor.

Growing up as a Black Woman, I have seen marginalization from two angles. One as a woman and another as a Black person. I think I’ve had a front row seat to a lot of the social changes in this country, because my family has been closely watching these issues as well. A lot has changed, in my parents generation, and the 12 years I’ve been an advocate.

Twelve years.

Twelve years old is the age of my younger neighbor, the next door neighbor who lives in the unit on our left. Three months ago, he slit his wrists in the school bathroom and got hospitalized.

Thank God, he is okay now, and now in counselling.

It was a shocking wakeup call for me. I finally understood something, an undeniable fact.

Our boys and men are hurting. And they need our help.

It’s come in the news frequently. We have had sporadic male advocates, unfortunately lambasted as privileged complainers. Years of boys and men struggling, crying out for help, but not sure how to. Nose diving in education, mental health, relationships and more. Come 2022, in comes Andrew Tate, a messiah for young men.

He’s obviously a grifter. No doubt about it, an insecure man who thinks domination, cruelty, and misogyny are the correct way to be a man.

However, I have to ask my fellow progressive friends on this side of the aisle. Why are you surprised? Really. Why are we shocked?

Why are any of us shocked?

We have a serious problem in our modern society. And that is when we try to lift men up, those of us on the progressive side – wrongly – wrongly assume that it means trying to tear women down. That is wrong. When only one sex wins, both sexes lose.

I’m struggling to try and figure out in hindsight why soft hearted men like Warren Farrell are no longer active and have been replaced by the likes of toxic scrooges like Andrew Tate. Then it hit me.

What exactly have those of us on the left done to support those like Farrell?

Pretty much nothing. Except, protesting his appearance at University speeches. Years of admonishing men’s movements, and then all of a sudden we wonder why neo-fascist grifters like Andrew Tate begin captivating our boys.

My neighbor, the sweet boy who slit his wrists, is a Tate watcher. But that is not why he slit his wrists. He has been hurting for years. One follows the other. He began watching Tate after his suicide attempt.

The solutions I’ve seen from my fellow leftists, frankly, have been extremely condescending. It seems to me that most of the attempts to address men’s issues seem to be bad faith attacks on themselves for a system they didn’t create.

Are we really going to blame patriarchy on a twelve year old poor working class family boy in Atlanta? Really?

Obviously, men and women face different issues. I’m not saying men have it just as bad as women. Women have a lot to deal with – attacks on our bodies, reproductive rights, abuse, rape, discrimination, and historically it has been much worse.

Identity politics is a useful thing. Seeing that certain groups face certain specific struggles is good. But to cast off any and all complaints of those from the “privileged” group is not the progressive move you think it is. Ahem, rad-fems and TERFs. Class denialism is not helpful, nor is gender reductionism.

We are all victims of a system that seeks to exploit us. Neoliberal – Capitalism. The bio-essentialist and exclusionary types of feminism that my mother’s generation grew up with needs to die. When one of us falls through the gaps, we all fall through the gaps. I’ve been struggling lately trying to get my fellow feminists to understand this.

However, I have noticed that my black feminist friends have been more sympathetic to men’s issues. I know now why that is. Blackness, in our society, is seen as a hyper personification of masculinity, and as a black, I can relate to men.

1. Media portrayals: The media has constantly held up problematic stereotypes and reinforced them. Just as blacks are shown as criminals, men are constantly portrayed as sadistic villains, rarely as well adjusted and loving fathers.
2. Criminal Justice System : Blacks are disproportionately sentenced to prison for the same crimes as certain white people. Statistics on young men are not too different.
3. Education : Blacks are fairing much poorer in education, due to structural inequalities. Surprisingly – the same for young men.
4. Animalistic : Our society consistently portrays blacks as animals that need to be “tamed”. This only reinforces anger and violence within the black community. I have to ask myself. What if it is the same for men? Could portraying men as violent people, actually contribute to the epidemic of male school shooters?

Detractors of this comparison will say that it is a faulty comparison. Blacks have been systemically oppressed, but men have been the oppressors , they will say.

This is a problematic claim, because it asserts that all people within a group are oppressors, and that supposedly those within a privileged class cannot be victims themselves. But worse – some feminists (RadFem morons and TERFs) engage in reverse bio essentialism. The same horrendously racist, toxic garbage used to stigmatize blacks (bio essentialism, scientific racism) as inherently inferior of intelligence, some of these same arguments have been rehashed by so called “progressive” feminists in recent years. Bio essentialism is a cancer. It is false, and it fails to account for the socio-structural causes of inequities in the world.

But just as I’ve been extremely skeptical of the likes of Andrew Tate and other toxic male influencers, I am also worried about the opposite problem. Pseudo-saviors from the left.

I know this, because as a black woman living in America, pseudo – saviors (aka the White Liberal) have been purporting to help blacks, in reality have subversively dragged down blacks in ways you cannot imagine.

When my father was growing up in school as a black boy, he was constantly told by teachers, he isn’t going to make it in college, why not consider trades, yada yada.

In the end, that is what happened. But it brings tears to my eyes thinking maybe, just maybe, if we lifted up, encouraged, and helped blacks to shoot higher, perhaps my father could have achieved more – and had a comfortable job – not now groaning in back pain at home in retirement age from construction. I feel frustration and rage at how Black Americans have been condescendingly treated by those purporting to help, which I call white saviorism – by white liberals.

I fear that these same tactics – of pretending to help, but just ending up dragging down – these same tactics are now being thrown onto a generation of troubled young men. One such problematic figure from the progressive movement I noted recently, is none other than Richard Reeves.

I have known Richard Reeves for a few years, and seen many of his interviews.

The day after my neighbor slit his wrists, I decided to watch Reeves, and then it hit me. Richard Reeves is to boys as White Liberals are to Blacks in America. Sly, cunning foxes. Saying they want to help, and maybe they do – but the intention vs reality are different. The reality only drags them down. I have seen extremely problematic parallels between Reeve’s rhetoric and how blacks are conditioned / socialized in America.

1. Denying discrimination. Blacks for example, face serious inequalities. A black child on average is significantly less likely to go to college than a white child in America. But it isn’t fair, it does not have to be this way. We know blacks, not only are suffering from poverty, but also disproportionately more likely to be admonished and suspended in school. Much of the same unfair targeting occurs to boys, at a young age. Furthermore, Richard Reeves seems to not mention at all the studies that have shown unfair grading, discriminatory teaching and discipline styles imposed on young boys, which account for much of the discrepancy between boys and girls in school. If we have accommodated girls into higher ed, why not boys?
2. Bio – essentialism : Much of the same bio essentialist garbage blacks faced in the 50s and 60s was not by the conservatives ironically, but by the liberals. (think of the liberal friends of Charles Murray, calling black IQ a tragedy). They portrayed us as tragic victims of our own nature, inherently intellectually inferior. Yet, none of these liberals thought to think – what if its confirmation bias? Socialization? A myriad of other causes. Bio essentialism hurts us all. Blacks, women, men, and more. Why is it ok to bio essentialize? It isn’t. Calling blacks stupid, will make them fair worse in school. No different with boys.
3. Unintentional AND Intentional media disparagement : Media often well intentioned, aimed to showcase the plight of blacks. This in turn actually caused self hatred among blacks, internalized inferiority, and further perpetuated these tropes. The very same for boys. Look at how the media negatively portrays schoolboys and fathers. Is this the sort of future we want for our men? Why does Reeves not mention this? What about the blatantly misandrist articles written by the likes of Hanna Rosin (the end of men). Can you imagine such an article written about a different group of people?
4. Just world fallacy : Thinking that the world is just. It isn’t. The black who could not afford college, or tutors, cannot be compared to a white who could. Likewise, why do we assume the boys who could not make it to college, supposedly “didn’t deserve college anyways”? Why have we not created scholarships, bursaries, clubs, and programs for young men at the same energy we did for young women?
5. Door in face technique : My own father had experienced this similar technique from White Saviors. The door in face strategy. One person , lets say bad cop, the conservative – will be painting a really bad picture for their future (prison); meanwhile the White liberal savior (good cop) will be suggesting a less horrendous, but still suboptimal solution (back breaking trades or construction work). This is what blacks suffered. I’ve seen Reeves partake in similar shenanigans. Certain feminists, the likes of Hanna Rosin (bad cop), get to write vile and condescending pieces about young men (The End of Men (the Atlantic)) and have these articles flood the news cycle. Then, in comes good cop (Richard Reeves) with a “solution”, one of which he suggested, young men could “just easily become” stay at home fathers. I have a question for Reeves. Do you think that the same marginalization, oppression, and discrimination that women have suffered for centuries of domesticity, is an acceptable solution for men? This isn’t progressivism. This is rehashed structural inequality and a product of capitalistic oppression. I would really like Reeves to think about how problematic his rhetoric is and discouraging it is for young men to tell them they cannot achieve career success because they are intellectually inferior. I know how this felt as a Black woman in Atlanta, my ancestors did as well. Boys – do not fall for the door in face strategy. The door-in-face was used to send Blacks and Latinos into blue collar jobs instead of white collar work.
6. The Hegelian Dialectic Technique : Agenda, Thesis, Anti-thesis, synthesis. This is a technique that was used to keep blacks down in America for years. The Agenda was Capitalist inequality, the Thesis was disenfranchisement of blacks by policies made to corrode families and wealth in black communities. The antithesis were problematic programs painted as “help” , and the resulting end synthesis was more disarray and poverty among blacks. I see a similar capitalist tool being used against young men, victims of a capitalist system that exploits them as expendable tools. The Agenda is: capitalists draining young men’s wealth and labor and ruining their empowerment / enfranchisement. The thesis was disenfranchising them with e-opiates, poor school policy, and media smearing which caused them to fall off track. The antithesis are unhelpful programs that are not actually uplifting to men economically (men’s support groups that don’t address underlying issues for men), and the end result synthesis is the total disenfranchisement of men from our society all together. This is a tool of Capitalism, where men are not people. Only tools.
7. Stereotype threat : In the same way that making women train chess separate from men will only destroy their confidence and make them feel inferior, discouraged, unconfident, and ultimately fail in competition – Richard Reeve’s disastrous idea to redshirt boys will only have the same effect, just like when teachers recommended in the past that certain black students should be one or two grades below their white peers. What blacks (and boys) need is support, tutoring, and encouragement. Not discouragement. Red shirting is a problematic strategy and will only pull boys further back in their adult careers. Red shirting is not the solution, supports for boys are the solution.
8. The pseudo equality grift (HEAL) : This was the most frustrating of the grifts I heard from Richard Reeves. This is a sly strategy that Blacks faced. In my grandfathers generation, social activists, namely the White Liberal would say things like “just as whites have been allowed into white collar jobs, we can uplift blacks by getting them into good trades jobs”. This is called the pseudo equality grift, because at first glance it sounds like equality – till you realize, its the exact opposite. Health, Education, Administration, and Literacy (HEAL / pink collar jobs) is a perfect example of this grift. Its especially frustrating, knowing my grandfather was told similar things as a black in segregation era America. Reeves suggests that just as girls have been lifted to STEM, boys should be lifted for HEAL in the name of , well, “equality”. Bullshit. An ideal , equal future is best achieved when both boys and girls are encouraged in STEM. In Spain recently, I heard of an unfortunate event where girls and boys were separated for a school event. Girls were given a STEM demo and boys were told to wait outside. I can imagine how frustrating I would feel if the same was done for race, with blacks having to wait outside because “we would not make it in STEM anyways”. Don’t fall for Reeves’s grift. I’ve worked with ADHD and autistic young men and college aged men in my social work, I have seen them excel phenomenally in their education, becoming doctors, dentists, and more. Likewise, even poor black kids in my community with the right support achieved sky high educations. Support is key, not condescending grifts. Pay attention, Reeves.
9. Assumptions that cause problems : Just as scientific racism assumed Blacks were inferior, which ended up causing internalized discouragement, the same problematic rhetoric is used by Reeves. They act as saviors – but their talk only hurts people, whether Black people or our boys. Watch his rhetoric closely, it sounds at first he wants to lift people up, but in reality – its sexism. Sexism is wrong, whether against girls or boys. I’ve been fighting 12 years to end misogyny, I won’t stand for sexism against our boys either, whether in schools or elsewhere.
10. Ignoring discrimination against them in schools: School and academic discrimination against blacks is well documented. Recently, some have emerged for boys as well. Reeves is only quick to mention this and skims past as if it is not relevant. Nor does he recognize the ways girls have gotten special benefits (affirmative action, bursaries, scholarships, clubs). I support all of those, but why is Reeves hesitant to mention boys have not received the same supports? He seems reluctant to address the ways boys have not received special benefits, contrary to mainstream progressive circles. Capitalism affects us all, both misogyny – and sexism against boys are real concerns.
11. Ignoring the very real expendability that boys are socialized into at a young age. Why are young men sent off to conscription, while girls can go to university? In South Korea and elsewhere, this phenomenon exists. In places without conscription, boys are simply called “less proficient in aptitude” and nudged into blue collar work. This is the same strategy used to disenfranchise my black ancestors in America.

Richard Reeves does not mention many of these issues, and misrepresents and distorts them instead. He is the quintessential White Liberal for men’s issues.

In terms of good role models for men? I am honestly not sure. Scott Galloway is probably my top pick. Warren Farrell comes second.

It is unfortunate that it took Andrew Tate for us on the left to wakeup about boys in crisis – myself included. But unfortunately, many (like Reeves) only seem to want to pull them away from toxic influencers to insulate the rest of us away from violence, rather than .. well.. caring about boys? Has anybody noticed this? Around all this rhetoric about the left losing our boys, none of it seems to be caring about the upliftment of boys, just preventing them from harming us. The disposability of them is strikingly similar to how we view the poor, the third world, and racial minorities (like Blacks). These are our sons, not animals.

Yes, its true that toxic males like Tate belong in the dustbin. But our attempts to save boys should be out of genuine concern to lift them up, not more finger waving policing (like in Britain, where they are trying to get government approved influencers for boys… ugh …eyeroll).

Leaving boys adrift economically hurts us all. I have to say this last bit because I know some of you will only care if it affects you. This is the sad mindset facing our atomized neoliberal society today. It does hurt us all. We will be left with half of society aloof, adrift, disenfranchised, and violent. Is this what we want of our sons? Our brothers? Our husbands? This only will hurt women, in horrific ways.

I for one, don’t want such a future. Not for anybody. Not for women, men, boys, girls, whites, blacks, or anybody.

Twelve years. Twelve years. Twelve years.

Twelve years I have been an activist for the Black community.

Twelve years – the age of my neighbor, who nearly committed suicide.

Here’s to another twelve years in the future, hopefully, my activism for the disenfranchised will continue. This time, with boys in mind.

Shaniqua Davis