Most people I know were repelled when Elon Musk responded to Taylor Swift’s endorsement of Vice President Kamala Harris with a post that said: “Fine Taylor … you win … I will give you a child.” It’s creepy to talk about impregnating people you don’t really know.
Sign up for Shifts, an illustrated newsletter series about the future of work
But Musk’s language – and statements by both former president Donald Trump and Sen. JD Vance — represent a dangerous thread that runs deep in this presidential campaign: the unnamed but ever-present one in which right-wing men are fighting to restore old sexual hierarchies and reassert their control of women’s bodies and priorities. The same sort of guys who fear they will be “replaced” by migrants also fear that smart, capable and, yes, sometimes childless women will end the sweet deal they have long had as so-called alpha males. These retro dudes are watching closely as more women choose friendships, careers and sometimes cats over their peculiar kind of masculinity.
And now that Harris, a “childless” woman by their limited definition, is a whisker away from the presidency, well, let’s just say some men don’t seem to be handling this well.
🎤
Follow Opinions on the news
The language in this corner of the culture war is decidedly predatory. We can start with Musk’s promise to “give” Swift a baby after she endorsed Harris. To “give” suggests that a child is bestowed by men on lucky women. Even if a woman were interested in Musk’s offer, it ignores the fact that women assume the physical burdens and risks of pregnancy.
Then there’s the odious use of the word “will,” which hinted that Swift has no choice in the matter. “I will give you a child,” evokes all the terrifying ways that women have had so little say in their fertility. Former secretary of state Hillary Clinton said that what Musk proposed was “another way of saying rape.”
Which isn’t far removed from something Trump said this month. While discussing one of the several instances in which he has been accused of sexual assault. Trump insisted the incident “never happened,” and explained that the woman in question would not have been “the chosen one.” It’s hard to know exactly what that weird, religion-inflected phrase means, but it is bizarre to suggest the victim of a sexual assault should be somehow grateful for being singled out.
Woe unto any woman who decides to reject him and choose for herself. Consider the way Trump, once the most powerful man in the world, reacted to Swift’s endorsement of Harris. “I HATE TAYLOR SWIFT,” he wrote. To which former Republican congresswoman Liz Cheney responded: “Says the smallest man who ever lived.”
Trump followed up Friday with a another disturbing all-caps response to polling that showed him running well behind Harris among women: “WOMEN WILL BE HAPPY, HEALTHY, CONFIDENT AND FREE! YOU WILL NO LONGER BE THINKING ABOUT ABORTION! ... I WILL PROTECT WOMEN AT A LEVEL NEVER SEEN BEFORE.”
It’s unclear how a 78-year-old man who’s been found liable for sexual abuse would define women’s health, happiness and protection, but suffice it to say his vision might not be widely shared.
All this father-knows-best junk has long been in fashion among the tech bros in Trump’s Amen Corner. The kind of men who call themselves “alphas” often suggest that they should be the high-IQ deciders for all of us, and particularly for women.
In their imaginary world, there is a natural order of humans — and they’re at the top. Musk this month shared this post by Autism Capital with his millions of followers on X: The only people who can think freely are “high T alpha males and neurotypical people ... this is why a Republic of high status males is best for decision-making. Democratic, but a democracy only for those who are free to think.”
Among Musk, Vance and billionaire technologist and Vance-backer Peter Thiel, there’s considerable support for the idea that the greatest threat to the United States is falling birth rates. These men cannot seem to imagine women as anything except busy child-bearers. This philosophy dovetails with Vance’s extreme antiabortion views, which as recently as 2021 did not include exceptions for rape or incest.
In this alternate universe, reproductive choice isn’t an option; even women who are no longer of childbearing age must do their part. In a 2020 interview with Vance, Eric Weinstein, a managing director of Thiel Capital, declared that “the whole purpose of the postmenopausal female” is to help take care of grandkids — a remark to which Vance assented. Earlier this week, Ohio Senate hopeful Bernie Moreno, a Trump-backed Republican, called suburban women’s focus on abortion “a little crazy,” adding that he did not think that women over 50 even care about abortion.
This election is going to test whether we want men who think like this to decide how we live our lives.
Vance has criticized no-fault divorce laws, which have helped many women escape abusive marriages. And, weirdly, he has complained that childless cat ladies “run everything.”
If only. However, it is true that Swift, an avowed cat lady, did snag a male dream job by becoming a billionaire adored by millions of women. And depending on how women vote in November, we might soon have our first female Decider in Chief.
Sign up for Shifts, an illustrated newsletter series about the future of work
But Musk’s language – and statements by both former president Donald Trump and Sen. JD Vance — represent a dangerous thread that runs deep in this presidential campaign: the unnamed but ever-present one in which right-wing men are fighting to restore old sexual hierarchies and reassert their control of women’s bodies and priorities. The same sort of guys who fear they will be “replaced” by migrants also fear that smart, capable and, yes, sometimes childless women will end the sweet deal they have long had as so-called alpha males. These retro dudes are watching closely as more women choose friendships, careers and sometimes cats over their peculiar kind of masculinity.
And now that Harris, a “childless” woman by their limited definition, is a whisker away from the presidency, well, let’s just say some men don’t seem to be handling this well.
🎤
Follow Opinions on the news
The language in this corner of the culture war is decidedly predatory. We can start with Musk’s promise to “give” Swift a baby after she endorsed Harris. To “give” suggests that a child is bestowed by men on lucky women. Even if a woman were interested in Musk’s offer, it ignores the fact that women assume the physical burdens and risks of pregnancy.
Then there’s the odious use of the word “will,” which hinted that Swift has no choice in the matter. “I will give you a child,” evokes all the terrifying ways that women have had so little say in their fertility. Former secretary of state Hillary Clinton said that what Musk proposed was “another way of saying rape.”
Which isn’t far removed from something Trump said this month. While discussing one of the several instances in which he has been accused of sexual assault. Trump insisted the incident “never happened,” and explained that the woman in question would not have been “the chosen one.” It’s hard to know exactly what that weird, religion-inflected phrase means, but it is bizarre to suggest the victim of a sexual assault should be somehow grateful for being singled out.
Woe unto any woman who decides to reject him and choose for herself. Consider the way Trump, once the most powerful man in the world, reacted to Swift’s endorsement of Harris. “I HATE TAYLOR SWIFT,” he wrote. To which former Republican congresswoman Liz Cheney responded: “Says the smallest man who ever lived.”
Trump followed up Friday with a another disturbing all-caps response to polling that showed him running well behind Harris among women: “WOMEN WILL BE HAPPY, HEALTHY, CONFIDENT AND FREE! YOU WILL NO LONGER BE THINKING ABOUT ABORTION! ... I WILL PROTECT WOMEN AT A LEVEL NEVER SEEN BEFORE.”
It’s unclear how a 78-year-old man who’s been found liable for sexual abuse would define women’s health, happiness and protection, but suffice it to say his vision might not be widely shared.
All this father-knows-best junk has long been in fashion among the tech bros in Trump’s Amen Corner. The kind of men who call themselves “alphas” often suggest that they should be the high-IQ deciders for all of us, and particularly for women.
In their imaginary world, there is a natural order of humans — and they’re at the top. Musk this month shared this post by Autism Capital with his millions of followers on X: The only people who can think freely are “high T alpha males and neurotypical people ... this is why a Republic of high status males is best for decision-making. Democratic, but a democracy only for those who are free to think.”
Among Musk, Vance and billionaire technologist and Vance-backer Peter Thiel, there’s considerable support for the idea that the greatest threat to the United States is falling birth rates. These men cannot seem to imagine women as anything except busy child-bearers. This philosophy dovetails with Vance’s extreme antiabortion views, which as recently as 2021 did not include exceptions for rape or incest.
In this alternate universe, reproductive choice isn’t an option; even women who are no longer of childbearing age must do their part. In a 2020 interview with Vance, Eric Weinstein, a managing director of Thiel Capital, declared that “the whole purpose of the postmenopausal female” is to help take care of grandkids — a remark to which Vance assented. Earlier this week, Ohio Senate hopeful Bernie Moreno, a Trump-backed Republican, called suburban women’s focus on abortion “a little crazy,” adding that he did not think that women over 50 even care about abortion.
This election is going to test whether we want men who think like this to decide how we live our lives.
Vance has criticized no-fault divorce laws, which have helped many women escape abusive marriages. And, weirdly, he has complained that childless cat ladies “run everything.”
If only. However, it is true that Swift, an avowed cat lady, did snag a male dream job by becoming a billionaire adored by millions of women. And depending on how women vote in November, we might soon have our first female Decider in Chief.
