Throughout history, the political sphere, was (and remains in many ways to be) denoted the male or the masculine sphere. Its residents were men, its norms and values were constructed and dismissed by men, the voices heard were all of men. When finally, in 1918 women were given the right to vote in the UK, and when in 1919 American born Lady Nancy Astor took seat as the first elected female MP in Britain, ‘The Political’ began to cut off the rusty padlocks clasping shut its tall steel doors and slowly and in great uncertainty invited in the women.
Though the doors were unlocked, they were heavy and hard to open; and though the world has seen many strong female political leaders and politicians, I will not credit politics with progressive perfection or even advancement so far as would be satisfactory. A hesitation reinforced by recent political events in the West.
Here I introduce the protagonist of this article, alike in their political far-right conservatism and everyday misogyny: Andrew Tate and Elon Musk. What comes to one’s mind instantly upon mention of these two, is ‘MAGA’ and ‘BRUV’ (and maybe Tesla … but Musk’s automobile pursuits are not of interest here); the issue that these two names ignite is one of politically active misogyny.
But who are they?
Elon Musk, founder of Tesla and new owner of X (formerly Twitter), has just been hand picked by US President Donald Trump, to lead the new “Department of Government Efficiency” or “DOGE”. Asides from being underwhelmingly qualified in the political realm, and his personal politics watering an already fertile ground for a fascist America under the Trump administration (an opinion grounded after the catastrophe that was Musk Nazi salute at Trump’s inauguration); the political power awarded to Musk, gives space for the sovereignty of toxic masculinity and patriarchal pre-eminence.
Similarly, Andrew Tate went viral online for his deeply sexist comments and hegemonic masculine views promoted on his podcast “TateSpeech” (a name ironic in its rhyme, for what it does in fact entail is hate) and again for his recent arrests and charges of rape, human trafficking, and money laundering. Earlier this January, he founded the BRUV party. Standing for “British Restoration of Underlying Values”, through which his pursuit is “bringing greatness back to Britain”. Sound familiar?
Evidently both men are strongly right wing in their politics, but what does their engagement in politics say about political identities and gender?
Tate is known for promoting the ‘alpha male’ persona, pushing a notion of masculinity that entails dominance, self-reliance and self-interest – hegemonic masculinity – in contrast to which femininity is painted as weak and inadequate. Both Musk and Tate have endorsed or personally voiced views of this nature, a narrative which they often frame as a broader cultural battle within which masculinity is becoming ‘sieged’ by the progressive.
Explicit support for them proves that weaponizing the masculine identity results in political gain. In promoting ideals of the ‘alpha male’ and traditional gender identities, no matter how misogynistic, they have won popular support from the right wing political demographic. However, whether a narrative tool for their own political advancement, or just unfiltered reflection of their sexism, the engagement of mainstream media and political attention on Tate and Musk is dangerous for wider and further societal equality.
It sheds spotlight and disseminates the views of a ‘rightful’ gender hierarchy, painting the political sphere (and society) as safer under the hands of men. Musk and Tate both stand strong in their strive to hold the space for male dominance. Placing such strongly misogynistic characters in the forefront of political news and culture, fuels the fire of hegemonic masculinity and political patriarchy that threatens progressive advancement. What it tells us about political identities is that toxic masculinity still wins votes.
Misogyny in politics remains rife!!
Misogyny within politics has been a continuing topic of relevance; from the “Who won legs it” Daily Mail article, all the way across the seas to the “Ditch the Witch” propaganda that led to former Australian prime minister Julia Gillard’s iconic speech. There is suggestions to say that there has been progression in regard to gender equality, at least in the fact that it is becoming recognised as an issue in need of solving. Why then is it that outright misogyny is being thrown like a ball to a dog from our politicians to their voters.
Evidently, women in cabinet and in charge have not halted the stride, nor changed the course of action, for the promotion of male dominance – in many cases Margret Thatcher is only credited with her attainment of being PM per her masculine traits. The political and public endorsement of Musk and Tate, as well as the lack of pursuit (or lack of success in) to silence their sexism shows that intolerance and hate speech are expected and accepted by many under the guise of ‘masculinity’.
What Elon Musk’s and Andrew Tate’s political engagement and popularity show us, is that politics and toxic masculinity remain dangerously intertwined. The political identity then is masculinised, and the masculine identity is political.
While we must allow room for the freedom of speech and belief and diversity in out system of democracy, it is gut wrenching to see the spotlight shone on personified symbols of everyday sexism and to see misogyny mechanised as a political tool and stance. It shows the world, the young and the influenced, that power and authority are awarded through sexism, misogyny and discrimination.