By Jonathon Van Maren
Earlier this month, Chatelaine magazine released a massive survey on masculinity in the 21st century, replete with polling, photo shoots, and video interviews—including many insights on manliness from our very own prime minister, Justin Trudeau. If you’d like to discover for yourself how utterly confused our culture is about what masculinity is now or should be, feel free to check it out for yourself—having had the misfortune of going all the way through it myself, I’ll share just a few observations.
There were, as expected, a few shocking statistics that cropped up. For example, a mere 18% of men “would describe themselves as feminist.” Hilariously, when famous self-styled feminist Justin Trudeau was asked who he would consider to be a “manly man,” he fumbled around, started and then swallowed a few sentences, and then finally gave that famous shrug of his and said he couldn’t think of anyone—“I don’t know what a manly man is.” (Really? Not even any Canadian war heroes or anything?) When he was asked if he considered himself a feminist, he fairly flung himself at the question, which was clearly the one he’d showed up to the interview to answer in the first place.
Amusingly, Trudeau actually had the…well, guts—to say that while being a man had helped him in politics, he found this to be unfortunate. Being a man in politics had given him an “unwanted credibility” that he sought to overcome, he said. Considering the fact that he beat several women for the Liberal leadership that were far more qualified (with far more impressive resumes than Justin), this seems to again be the empty virtue-signalling that Trudeau and his peoplekind adore so much. Trudeau also thoroughly manhandled a question on mansplaining, obviously delighted by the opportunity to again present himself as a champion of women when it involved no sacrifices on his part.
There were some sobering statistics, too. A full 20% of men said they got their sex education from pornography, which considering the misogyny and sexual violence that saturates today’s porn, is an enormous problem. Only 11% said they got any sex education from their mom, and a mere 7% got any education on the issue from their dad. Instead, friends—49%–and pornography seem to be teaching men what they know about sex. Men between the ages of 25-29 have been especially impacted—a full 43% of them say they got their sex education from porn. When asked if they “watch porn with their partner,” 20% said no because they do not “want anyone to know what I watch,” while another 28% said that porn consumption was “me time.” That’s an understatement if I ever heard one.
Chatelaine magazine attempted to unpack what it means to be a man in this century, but instead managed to reveal the confusion that has consumed our society, and especially men. Prominently featured was one biological woman identifying as “trans,” who was musing on what sort of man she’d like to be. When men were asked questions on feminism, they balked, often demanding to know what that means, exactly—and I have to say that the fact that only 18% of men would describe themselves as feminist shocked me. I’ve noted before that Trudeau’s constant yammering about the label attracts mostly yawns (only 32% of women call themselves feminist), but even I thought 18% was low.
So there you have it. Today, almost nobody can tell you what being a man should mean, some believe that a biological woman can be a man, our prime minister cannot name any manly men, and nearly half of men in their twenties are learning about sex from pornography. I’d say that what Chatelaine has told us is that a serious cultural conversation on what masculinity means is necessary—and that we can leave Justin Trudeau out of this one.
For anyone interested, my book on The Culture War, which analyzes the journey our culture has taken from the way it was to the way it is and examines the Sexual Revolution, hook-up culture, the rise of the porn plague, abortion, commodity culture, euthanasia, and the gay rights movement, is available for sale here.
2 thoughts on “Justin Trudeau can’t name one “manly man,” and other things from the Chatelaine “man survey””
“I don’t know what a manly man is.” – That’s actually a fair and honest response.
Like, seriously, the question itself automatically means that if you name anyone, literally ANYONE, all other men not names are immediately relegated to being “unmanly men” by default. It almost implies that in fact, the bulk of men are actually “girlie men”, like the standard is being set by the 80s/90s SNL Arnold Schwartzenegger parodies Hans and Frans.
What disqualifies a candidate, and what can make up for it?
Is there a forumula, such as “Gets monthly pedicure = leaves bathroom door open while urinating” or “Liked K.D. Lang at Lilithfair, favourite festival show ever = killed 13 men in SE Asian with only teeth and the lid from a bic pen”?
Are we going to fall back on the reliable classic “Real men don’t eat quiche”? If so, what if you trick the guy by telling him it’s a backed omelet?”
Trudeau is a dork, but half of his problem is that he assumes that other Canadians are as educated as he is, that they share the same ideals, and that they think about things a bit more deeply than they do.
That sounds like praise, but in a strange way that makes him less fit to lead the country than Stephen Harper, who near the beginning and near the end of his time in the PMO basically called all Canadians (particularly his support base) apathetic, poorly educated and simple minded morons.
You would think that he might have named his father as a manly man. At least that would be an easy, acceptable and relatively humble throw-away response.