Angry White Men: A Book Review


Angry White Men (AWM) by Michael Kimmel explores variations on the concept of aggrieved entitlement. According to Kimmel’s theory, when an individual or group expects certain privileges based on their status and reality does not conform to those expectations, a backlash can occur.

Aggrieved entitlement is used to explain a variety of social phenomenon in modern America including the upsurge in nationalism, hate radio, men’s rights groups, domestic terrorism, suicides, and white supremacy groups of all sizes. The common thread in all these trends comes from the demographics of the individuals engaged in these activities. As the title suggests, aggrieved entitlement is by and large the exclusive affliction of angry white men marginalized by multiculturalism, feminism, and gay liberation.

The book was written in 2013, when the Trumpocalypse was inconceivable as a realistic option for the country. AWM focuses on the conditions that gave rise to Trumpzilla, but it doesn’t speak directly to his corrosive impact. It also only hints at the underlying sexual frustration and insecurity I believe is at the heart of racism, misogyny, anti-Semitism and anti-gay bias. It does provide useful insight into an influential but warped strata of society, especially when read in conjunction with Carol Anderson’s White Rage and Aaron James’s Assholes.

Misogyny in the Doctor’s Office

When men are oppressed it is a tragedy. When women are oppressed it’s a tradition.
— Letty Cottin Pogrebin

Misogyny, rape culture and male insecurity manifests itself in a variety of ugly ways. The ‘Merican variety is particularly insidious, because it hides behind euphemisms like “religious freedom” and “personal choice.”

The latest example of this self-destructive mindset comes from a federal judge in Texas who ruled that doctors may turn away women who have had abortions and transgender patients on the basis of religious freedom

The judge justified his ruling by claiming that individual doctors’ refusal to treat trans patients or women who have had abortions does not limit their access to health care and coverage.
— Marie Solis: Mic.

The impotent discrimination against women would be laughable if it wasn’t so repulsive. Even if we (like this judge) ignore the impact of this ruling on rural Texas women who only have access to one bigoted doctor, how can we justify the gender bias?

Are doctors allowed to refuse treatment to men who take Viagra or get hair implants?

What about denying service to rapists, child molesters and other male specific criminals, who unlike women who have abortions and transgender patients, actually commit crimes that harm individuals and society?

The double standard against women and transgender people isn’t about religious freedom. It’s about gender tyranny. It’s not about personal choice. It is sexual assault disguised as morality. It is repulsive way to treat women and we are repulsive for allowing it to exist in our society.

Have fun.