Kamala's Good Men

November will be a referendum on masculinity

Last night, millions of Americans watched Tim Walz’s son sob with pride as his father took the stage at the Democratic National Convention. In a heart-melting moment that’s since gone viral, you could see 17 year-old Guz Walz say, “That’s my dad!” as the tears ran down his face. While normal people saw the emotional display as proof of a truly loving family, some conservatives reacted by mocking the teen as a “beta male” and a “blubbering bitch boy,” with one podcaster even tweeting, “get that kid a tampon already.”

You couldn’t ask for a better encapsulation of the two parties’ gender politics: Democrats pushing a complex, positive vision of masculinity while Republicans desperately try to hold together their He-Man Woman-Haters Club. In recent months, the campaign has been filled with similar juxtapositions, from JD Vance’s “childless cat ladies” comments to Doug Emhoff’s supportive wife-guy persona. As historic as Kamala Harris’ run is for women, this election has become very much about men.

In fact, the election of the first woman president may end up being a referendum on masculinity. Namely, whether the country will reject the toxic and dying version of American manhood so perfectly embodied by Donald Trump. 

When Trump was elected in 2016, what made it such a slap in the face to American women wasn’t just that we missed our chance to elect a woman president, but that voters so willingly embraced a misogynist monster. It felt as if the country didn’t simply want Hillary Clinton to lose, but to put all women back in their place. Watching Trump win—a serial sexual abuser and rapist who calls women ‘dogs’ while grabbing them “by the pussy”—confirmed many women’s worst suspicions. Their own country did, in fact, hate them.

American misogyny is still going strong eight years later, but Trumpian masculinity seems far less appealing to voters this time around. Democrats have learned how to successfully mock the former president’s anxious masculinity—his obsession with “crowd size,” punishment and sexually violent machismo—while still drawing attention to its dangers. The nightmare of abortion bans have helped, reminding Americans every day that Trump’s version of manhood, as performative as it is, creates tangible harm and requires complete power and control over women. 

That regressiveness was only highlighted when Trump chose Vance as his running mate. The former Ohio Senator’s fixation with women’s reproductive capabilities, whether we’re ‘childless’ or ‘post-menopausal,’ has been perceived (correctly!) as downright strange. 

What’s been most effective, though, is a very smart and specific strategy by the Harris campaign: They’re using good men to remind voters how very bad Trump and his ilk are. 

Vance’s sexist whinging, for example, seems small and juvenile compared to “Coach Tim’s” protective dad vibes. And because Walz, a former football coach and hunter, comes with the traditional trappings of American manhood, his masculinity is that much harder for Republicans to impeach.

Second gentleman Doug Emhoff is similarly positioned. It’s hard to imagine a better foil to Trump than a man who loves and supports his wife, and who is happy to take a backseat to her career. 

Harris’ team isn’t only relying on men formally associated with the campaign: When Amanda Zurawski came out on stage this week to talk about being denied an abortion in Texas despite the risk to her health and life, she was accompanied by her husband, Josh. He spoke directly to other men in the room, saying that abortion “isn’t just a woman’s fight”—reminding voters that good men don’t limit women’s freedom, but fight for it.

That’s why it’s not just the natural march of progress that makes the 2024 election so different from the last time a woman ran. In 2016, the question framing Clinton’s run was whether or not the country was “ready” for a woman president. She became an avatar for women’s progress, the election a referendum on feminism itself. The first female president versus a misogynist huckster. 

Voters have that choice again this November, but by drawing so much attention to this new, positive vision of masculinity, Harris’ campaign is giving Americans something they didn’t have in 2016: The opportunity to still, somehow, vote for ‘men.’

It’s brilliant, if a bit sad. Harris’ campaign has figured out that they can’t just offer up the vice president as the alternative to Trump—they need men alongside Harris to make her more palatable. Still, that doesn’t take away from how vital and needed new models of masculinity are, especially as we face the very real and dangerous policies of Republican men.

So if pushing good men to the forefront is what it takes to elect the first woman president, I’ll take it.