If Masculinity Is Bad, Why Didn’t Tim Walz Admit He Ran From War And Couldn’t Father A Child?
By now it has become clear that the Democrats’ presidential ticket has simply changed out one old lying white guy for another. The latest revelation is that, despite years of claims otherwise, Tim Walz and his wife, Gwen, didn’t actually conceive their daughter, Hope, with the medically invasive and potentially morally fraught in vitro fertilization (IVF) but instead with the less invasive and less controversial intrauterine insemination (IUI).
The Harris campaign and their surrogates in media have once again clamored to excuse these latest misrepresentations about his life as a minor mix-up with Walz again “misspeaking.” But why did he choose to describe his family’s fertility journey as involving IVF, a procedure that generally points to female infertility, rather than IUI, which tends to highlight male infertility issues?
By claiming that his family underwent IVF, he sidestepped any potential stigma associated with male infertility. Admitting to IUI, which is often necessitated by issues with male sperm motility, might have been an admission that he did not meet the traditional expectations of virility. In a society that continues to measure a man’s worth by his ability to sire children naturally, such an admission could have been seen as too emasculating — even for the Democrat Party.
It’s similar to his years-long façade about serving in combat and retiring as a command sergeant major, when his final rank was actually the less glamorous rank of “master sergeant.” With this lie, he sought to bolster his image as a strong and courageous leader, despite the truth being far more mundane. Combat is often seen as the ultimate proving ground for a man, and without it, Walz might have feared that his leadership would be questioned or that he would be seen as less than those who had faced that trial by fire.
The party that prides itself on championing so-called gender equality and dismantling harmful misogyny needs to take a moment for some soul-searching: How can they throw their support behind a man so afraid of being perceived as anything less than “alpha” that he has had to construct a false narrative that hides his own reality?
Fear of Being Labeled a Beta Male
Walz’s continued fabrications raise critical questions: Why would a man in a position of political power feel compelled to lie about his military service and obscure the details of his infertility journey? Whether it’s implying he served in combat when he never did or obscuring the nature of his family’s fertility treatments by opting to present a version that sidesteps any hint of male infertility, these fabrications appear to expose a fundamental insecurity: the fear of being identified as a “beta male.”
The hypocrisy here is obvious: The Democrat Party decries toxic masculinity, denouncing the idea that a man’s worth is tied to outdated notions of strength and virility. Yet their chosen vice presidential candidate still instinctively understands the importance of these traits — so much that he feels compelled to compulsively lie about his military service and now his infertility journey. This is a man who, despite leading a movement against toxic masculinity, is himself terrified of being seen as anything less than the epitome of traditional manhood.
If the culture that still values masculinity is so toxic, why does the Democrats’ new male standard-bearer still need to pretend he’s more masculine than he really is?
Post a Comment