Why Is It Always a White Guy?
The socialization of males in American society (which varies considerably based on one’s race and class) relies in no small measure upon the encouragement of men to achieve self-definition, independence, strength, and a sense of purpose through violence.
Military service represents the paragon of this ideal, however, the dynamic is similarly prevalent in sports and fitness activities. Interlocking fields of male endeavor, in ways that are both overt and covert, participate in the social reproduction of what is essentially a socially sanctioned cult of violence; one that confers honor and status upon men that can establish dominant status over weaker men and women as well as those who are members of defined racial/ethnic groups. Real men bring the pain. Women are pain.
But let’s not just pick on the men here – women participate in this too. When women join institutions that have been created by men for men, who often merely tolerate women (i.e. police, military, prisons), they are forced to adopt the prevailing values of the organization in order to “fit” the culture and achieve recognition and success. Rejecting presentations of self that evoke a “feminine” persona, favoring gender-neutral presentations, and sometimes participating in a culture that is violent and abusive toward women and other non-white male groups (for reasons that they want to be perceived as one of the “cool girls”) involves a process of self-negation that can be deeply harmful. Adopting/mirroring some of the worst of what has historically been male-gendered behavior is not the way to achieve equality; it’s the behavior of a weak person who is trying to pretend they are a strong person (but everyone smells the fear).
Sociologists have gone to considerable lengths to study issues like domestic violence and gang violence. But very little work looks at violence specifically in connection with white men as a social group. In his book “Angry White Men,” Michael Kimmel, a sociologist at Stony Brook University in New York, takes up the issue of American anger within the context of male entitlement (what he calls “aggrieved entitlement” and criminologist Mike King calls “aggrieved whiteness. He explores an idea that has achieved quite a bit of recent currency: the idea that white Americans are the real victims of racism/reverse racism; that they have become oppressed victims of politically correct “woke” multiculturalism.
Pointing to what he calls “masculinity at the end of an era,” Kimmel addresses his critique to straight-identified white men, whom he argues are unhappy with changes that occurred in American society over the past 30 years. According to Kimmel “meritocracy sucks when you are suddenly one of the losers.”
At a gun show in Shippensburg, Pa., Kimmel passed time with a guy he calls “Rick,” who manages the K.K.K. table. Men like Rick, he points out, “feel like they’ve been screwed.” They suffered financial losses as a result of a series of recessions and other economic changes, which left them feeling emasculated and humiliated. The outsourcing of most traditional manufacturing jobs and the rise of the service economy, says Kimmel, produced nothing short of a radical cultural shift. “Betrayed by the country they love,” he writes, they are “discarded like trash on the side of the information superhighway.” These particular men are “downwardly mobile…and they’re mad as hell.”
Their sin, according to Kimmel, is a failure to adjust. Yet what many find difficult to admit is that for years they benefited from a birth privilege that put white men on top. White men, he writes, “have been running with the wind at our backs all these years,” and “what we think of as ‘fairness’ to us has been built on the backs of others.” This new “fairness” that they are being forced to confront now feels like oppression. Yet what’s really happening here, Kimmel argues, is that their economic role has changed and they don’t know who to hold to account or what to do about it.
So instead of adjusting to social change, Kimmel says, some men have chosen to feed their rage. But they don’t get mad at the corporate overlords who shipped their jobs overseas or the banks that took their houses. No. Instead, they rage at ball-busting feminists (“feminazis”) for stealing their American manhood; they hate immigrants for stealing their jobs; and they seethe with resentment over the idea that poor people on welfare are picking their pockets and living off their tax dollars.
To pass the time, America’s angry white men listen to other angry white men like Rush Limbaugh and Mike Savage on the radio; their kids stay busy playing violent video games and, in the worst case scenario, open fire on their classmates at school. Oddly enough, all of this is occurring at a moment in time when white men still maintain almost all the power in the United States. There is, I should add, a growing movement among men to claim that white men are the real victims[for more on this see MRM/Men’s rights movement].
Working Class Social Identity: Joe Lunchbucket vs. The Welfare Queen
White working-class men comprise a large demographic in the American social landscape. Andrew Levinson writes in his book The White Working Class Today that nearly half of white men and 35-40% of white women in the labor force identify as “working class.” Their occupations span skilled and unskilled as well as young and old workers. With that, if we were to locate the moment in time when this group became disaffected, we would have to go back to the time period of the race riots in the U.S., which occured in the late ’60s and ’70s.
Photo by Rebecca Cook/Reuters
At this time black social identity became identified with urban decay, social disorder, and most especially “welfare.” President Ronald Reagan would later capitalize on these populist sentiments when he invoked his now famous “Welfare Queen” script to turn whites’attention away from the economic dislocation and other disruption caused by his administration’s “trickle down” economic policies of the late 70s and 80s. The “great communicator,” as he was known, effectively channeled white anger and outrage and helped redirect it toward blacks. Working class whites, who would otherwise vigorously defend social welfare programs like Medicare and Social Security, ultimately associated “welfare as we know it” with blacks, whom they felt were not deserving of benefits for lack of having contributed to the system through paid work like whites.
Adding fuel to the fire was the fact that black incomes rose during this time period while many white incomes stagnated. Major economic changes, combined with desegregation politics and school busing programs (all of which were perceived negatively by whites), occurred within social context that saw increases in anti-poverty New Deal successor programs aimed at blacks. This created deep social cleavages that remain intact in our present day. The “War on Poverty” was ultimately a war that working-class whites would not support; it is a war, nevertheless, that continues its rampage across our contemporary social and political landscape.
So where do we go from here? The trick is perhaps to not demonize these groups but to engage in dialogue to understand them. Questions for policymakers and members of political parties who desire engagement with this target demographic might include what changes in social policy could help ease some of the sufferings of these groups?
Bear in mind that despite their historic structural advantage, working class groups have endured economic hardships that cannot be addressed through continued “hard work.” Though it appears that its really only the white working class men who are taking up arms.
How do we call attention to social problems that are demographically associated with “whiteness” and patriarchal social structures (which are shown to foster problematic, even violent behavior) without alienating white men?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eo6oR73FCXA
Sources:
For a more in-depth look at these issues, consult the article written in Slate.com by Jamelle Bouie, entitled “Why Democrats Can’t Win Over White Working Class Voters.”
Michael Kimmel, Angry White Men: American Masculinity at the End of an Era, Nation Books, 2015.
The 3 white men found guilty of the murder of Ahmaud Arbery
Shooters Gallery of Angry White Boys
Discussion Questions:
What do you think about Kimmel’s main argument? Do you think there might be a relationship between “entitled” male anger and high-profile incidents of violence? What other explanations might you offer?
What does Kimmel mean by his term “aggrieved entitlement”?
What do you think about Kimmel’s theoretical framework? His theory draws from a model that identifies the following social variables to make an argument about what kinds of places might be more at risk for school shootings: 1) local gun culture; 2)local gender culture; 3)local school culture; 4) political ID; 5) race; 6) religion; 7) and region. Do you think this model could help identify schools at risk (though perhaps not outright predict) mass shootings and school violence?
How does Kimmel’s framework explain the “God, Guns, and Gays” concerns of working-class white voters? Why do cultural issues like this appear to trump the economic concerns of this group?
Do you have a relative or friend that listens regularly to what some refer to as “hate media” and “outrage media?” Do they gravitate towards conspiracy theories? Have you noticed changes in their behavior and general level of happiness over time?
Michael Kimmel’s concept of “aggrieved entitlement” refers to a psychological state where certain white men believe they have been unfairly deprived of status and privileges they perceive as rightfully theirs. This sense of loss is primarily attributed to the progress towards racial and gender equality and economic changes that have not favored them. Kimmel argues that this perception leads to a deep anger and frustration, manifesting into violence and alignment with extremist groups
His argument does suggest a correlation between this sense of aggrieved entitlement and high-profile incidents of violence, particularly those involving white men who feel marginalized or disadvantaged by societal changes. This feeling of entitlement, when thwarted, may lead to aggression as a way to reclaim perceived lost power or status. This can be seen in the context of increased domestic violence, public shootings, and the rise of white supremacist and men’s rights groups From a psychological perspective, it’s essential to consider other factors that might contribute to this phenomenon. Mental health issues, societal and familial pressures, and individual susceptibility to extremist ideologies also play significant roles.
How does Kimmel’s framework explain the “God, Guns, and Gays” concerns of working-class white voters? Why do cultural issues like this appear to trump the economic concerns of this group?
Working-class white voters often prioritize concerns about “God, Guns, and Gays” over their economic struggles due to a variety of factors. These cultural issues are deeply tied to identity and community, serving as core aspects of their values and way of life. Threats or perceived threats to these values can provoke strong emotional responses, overshadowing economic considerations. These cultural issues are highly visible and politicized, often used by politicians and media figures as rallying points. They are framed in ways that resonate with working-class white voters, creating a sense of solidarity and shared purpose around these issues. This makes them seem more immediate and pressing than abstract economic policies, which can seem distant and complex. Also, working-class white voters may feel that cultural issues are more within their control or more directly impactful on their daily lives than economic policies. They may believe that they can more easily influence or participate in discussions and actions related to these cultural issues, compared to the often opaque and bureaucratic nature of economic policy-making. While economic concerns are important, the prioritization of “God, Guns, and Gays” among working-class white voters reflects a complex interplay of identity, community, political messaging, and perceived immediacy of these cultural issues. These issues resonate deeply with their sense of self and community, driving them to prioritize them over economic considerations.
I do think there is a strong connection between the anger many poor white communities feel and the violence that spreads from those communities. Any group of people suffering from circumstances beyond their control will naturally feel quite angry. As many within these groups do not have the education necessary to understand the actual cause of their misfortune, they will turn their hatred on the closest thing that they also don’t understand: minorities. The “aggrieved entitlement” these white men feel is the unmanaged anger born from their unhappy lives. This anger spurs them towards only caring about the reinforcement of their own cultural ideals, even if it is at their own detriment. To change these people, we must first change the way they live and the social factors that got them there. Only then can they be free of the rage their socioeconomic position creates and make better choices.
Kimmel’s main argument brings up great points on the prevalent, reoccurring pattern of mass violence in the U.S. An “entitled” white man who suddenly becomes angry because they realize they’re being left out in some way, whether financially or by another group gaining the same rights they’ve always had leads to nothing good. Humans are driven by emotions, particularly negative ones. One of the most prominent ones we see in acts of violence is fear. Fear can be dangerous, as enough of it interfering with everyday life can lead to imminent action. It can replace logic and any form of rational thinking. You always hear the phrase “Who in their right mind would ever think of doing ___?” But that’s just it – they’re not in their right mind. Look at school shootings, the majority of them are done by white males. Fear overrides everything – this is the fear of being forgotten, discarded, and left for fend for themselves.
Kimmel’s term “aggrieved entitlement” is based on the sense of a “perfect America” that radical white men once envisioned for themselves. These men believe they were promised certain entitlements, only to never have them in the first place. This picture perfect dream is based on an America that was believed to have existed – usually in the early 1900’s – but never actually did.
I personally think Kimmel’s model is flawed. Whether or not a person becomes a school shooter is based more on their personal life and mental health. While political affiliation, local culture, and religion can certainly influence factors that lead to school shooting decisions, it isn’t enough. Every person is different, and how influenced they are by politics and other social factors can differ. Instead, threat assessments need to be utilized better. This includes taking concerns about safety seriously, tightening gun control, and increasing funding for mental health.
The theoretical framework of “God, Guns, and Gays” is based more on what the media spits at the right. Economics can be boring and complicated. However, utilizing emotion and perceived “nostalgia” of what working class white men love and miss can strike a greater response, leading to action. “God, Guns, and Gays” is much easier to understand and get upset about, as many think this affects them more than economics.
My aunt’s boyfriend loves to gravitate towards hate media. He shows this by posting memes related to his “disadvantaged state” every day on Facebook and Instagram. What makes this amusing is the fact that he never gets any likes or comments.
I do agree with Kimmel’s argument in that white men feel the need to be seen as the dominant ones and have issues when they aren’t. My friends and I usually say the man’s masculinity is threatened when they act the ways described in the article. It’s like they have something to prove but no one really knows what. This article, however, describes the reason behind it. Society and the economy have changed and these white men are not adapting to those changes. And on order to feel like they’re on top again they need to make other people feel weak; in ways such as being the best athlete, being the toughest or strongest in the room, or by using a weapon. This is why I do believe there is a relationship between “entitled” male anger and high-profile incidents of violence. When they can’t get the muscles or popularity that puts them on top, they resort to violence through weapons that give them the “strength” they couldn’t get before. And the people who are like this are never happy. They always talk about what’s wrong with the world and what they wish things would be like. I also thought the idea that women can also be examples of this was interesting. I have seen girls, both online and in person, that act in these ways and it makes you think as to what the reason is; whether they are forced to in order to succeed in their career, or if they just want to be a part of the “cool” crowd.
I believe that Kimmel’s main argument is accurate. Along with this I also believe that there is a relationship between entitled male anger and profiled incidents of violence. The main reason for this is because they feel that they have lost power in some way causing them to be “demasculated”. These kinds of people tend to find each other and make groups like for example the KKK. I think Kimmel’s theoretical framework can somewhat show what kind of schools would be at risk of a shooting. For people with “aggrieved entitlement”, the phrase “god, guns, and gays” include three controversial beliefs. So this phrase can symbolize the things that “angry white men” may see or perceive as a threat to themselves. I do know people who heavily watch and pay attention to hate media and conspiracy theories. Overtime their behavior and mood does change. They also begin to constantly search for negativity to drive them but it instead eventually leads them to having depression and sadness. Their lives also constantly revolve around these things and their beliefs begin to change also.
In his work, sociologist Michael Kimmel explores the concept of “aggrieved entitlement” as a key factor in understanding various forms of aggression and violence, particularly within the context of masculinity and gender dynamics. Kimmel argues that aggrieved entitlement arises from a sense of entitlement that has been frustrated or denied, leading to feelings of anger, resentment, and a perceived loss of power or status.
Kimmel’s concept of aggrieved entitlement is rooted in the idea that men, particularly those who adhere to traditional norms of masculinity, feel entitled to certain privileges and advantages by virtue of their gender. When these entitlements are challenged or perceived to be under threat, whether through societal changes, shifting gender roles, or personal experiences of rejection or failure, men may react with a sense of aggrieved entitlement. This can manifest in various ways, from individual acts of violence and aggression to broader patterns of discrimination and oppression.
One of the key implications of Kimmel’s concept of aggrieved entitlement is that it can help us understand the motivations behind acts of violence and discrimination, particularly among men who feel entitled to power and privilege but perceive these entitlements to be jeopardized. By recognizing how feelings of aggrieved entitlement can fuel toxic masculinity and harmful behaviors, we can begin to address the root causes of gender-based violence and work towards creating a more equitable and just society.
Kimmel’s work serves as an important reminder of the ways in which gender norms and expectations can shape our perceptions of entitlement and influence our behaviors. By unpacking the concept of aggrieved entitlement, we can better understand the complexities of gender dynamics and work towards building a more inclusive and compassionate world for all individuals, regardless of their gender identity.
I think Kimmel presents his case truthfully. I do think there is a connection between angry, entitled white men and violence. This is supported by my belief that white men have historically been viewed as the governing class. They believe that they are better than everyone else in the community. A culture where equality is being pushed for would find this difficult, according to entitled men. They frequently place the blame for their life’s events on others, refusing to accept accountability for their own acts. It is evident when Kimmel says, “No. Rather, they are enraged at foreign workers for taking their employment, at feminists for robbing them of their American manhood, and at the impoverished for lining their own wallets and subsisting on public funds.” They want to place the blame on someone they think are more in control of them. Rather than identifying the perpetrator, they would prefer to view themselves as victims. Although it’s untrue, many believe that their manhood is being stripped away. When “aggrieved entitlement” is first used by Kimmel He is saying that White guys believe they have been treated unfairly and are furious. They believe they have a right to take action against the abuse. They believe that they ought to pursue defenseless individuals. As if using violence will somehow make their troubles go away, which is never the case.
In my opinion, Kimmel’s main argument about the entitlement of angry white and its relation to their outburst of violence is very much true. I think that the white that are used to having things handed to them are starting to hate the fact that things are becoming fair instead of society staying in their favors. They feel like they are losing their power in a society where their power at the cost of others and in a country that has been built on the backs of the oppressed.
I personally have never experienced being around someone that has gravitated towards conspiracy theories. Most of my friends are fairly aware of what is going on in the world and most of them are usually on the side that is fair to everyone and tries to find piece. Also, most of my friends are people of color so we have many similar political opinions.
The United States has always had a history of white supremacy that goes back to the colonial era. Where they used the concept of “Manifest Destiny” as an excuse for the appropriation of most of the North American continent. Times have changed and as Kimmel puts it “the failure to adjust” has led some white men (because we can’t generalize that all white men have the same mentality) to feel “oppressed” by this new era of fairness. The anger of the working class white men stems from the fact that they feel betrayed by a system that they perceive now favors minority groups; groups that do not deserve such benefits because they “have not contributed to the system through paid work like white”. They are not solely angry at minority communities but they also despise their female counterparts for empowering themselves. Female empowerment means that men are not incharge and their fragile egos take it as an attack directed to their “manhood”. Which of course, according to studies develops a sense of hypermasculinity that encourages the use of violence as a means to save their manhood.
I do think that Kimmel’s main argument of American anger within the male context of entitlement has some good points, but I think that some of the things that he says just don’t make sense, because he is talking about how white men are losing their power but they still hold a majority of the power. This just shows how insecure, racist, and sexiest these men are since they don’t want someone in power unless they are a white male.Then criminologist Mike King talks about aggrieved whiteness and how white Americans are the real victims of racism and reverse racism. I think this because white Americans feel threatened, they feel that their power and benefits are being taken away by other minorities. So these white Americans lash out and start forming groups of people that have the same beliefs as them (ex. KKK). Which also makes no sense since white males still hold most of the power. I think there is no reason for these men to have all this rage against non white people having power.
After reading this article I do agree that there may be a relationship between “entitled” male anger and high-profile incidents of violence. There are a lot of angry white men out there who act in certain ways that are not very attractive or even normal. That’s not to say that all white men are crazy and erratic but some most definitely are. We see groups act out in rage, I believe this rage stems from feelings of unsuccessfulness and frustration. Kimmel makes a point to use his term “aggrieved entitlement.” He defines it as the sense that those benefits to which you believe yourself entitled have been snatched away from you by unforeseen forces larger and more powerful. They feel as if they were given the shorter hand but Kimmel says it is their own failure that they can’t adjust, and I agree. They decide instead to act out in fits of rage while degrading the “feminazis” for taking their manhood and the immigrants for stealing their jobs. Sorry guys but these reasons are not valid enough to harm others in your country and act out for your “people”. They want to protect their masculinity but I don’t think this is not how a strong masculine brother or father would act towards women in their lives.
Kimmel’s main argument definitely contributes to what we’re seeing today with white men doing terrible things. These men feel desperate as they have lost control and power over the years combined with the fact that the media is telling them that they’re entitled to being “white,” it outrages them individually because how can they be privileged if they’ve lost all their power? This “entitled” anger has to be vented out in some way which is why they often form these hate groups to commit incidents of violence because they feel like they’re trapped by society and they want to finally let that anger out. Once they form these groups, they can feed off of each other which makes them more extreme and violent. I feel like Kimmel means by “aggrieved entitlement” that these white men feel like they deserve and have a right to do what they’re doing and their expressions. Trying to be in their shoes, they have been on the decline as jobs are being shipped overseas, their socioeconomic status has been declining, and now the media is telling them that they’re “privileged” and they see other racial/ethnic groups being more successful than them. This lets them feel “oppressed” in a way they’ve never felt as the dominant social/racial group which leads to them resenting society and feeling a sense of “entitlement” that they deserve to be able to express their feelings. This entitlement is why they form groups of like-minded individuals of the same situation which further exacerbates them because of group mentality. Considering the 7 factors outlined, they may have a correlation of risk to school shootings although there are so many other variables involved it may be impossible to narrow down exactly how much of an influence they have. America is uniquely plagued with gun violence no other first world countries have which is very puzzling to me. However, factors such as gun culture, school culture, political ID, religion, and region definitely play a role in how easily one can acquire a gun, its acceptability appearing with a firearm in public, and who is more prone to perpetrate these crimes. Socio cultural concerns tend to elicit the most emotional response from white-working class voters. This emotional response is the best “call to action” for politicians to capitalize on to use during elections. To them, it’s a part of their culture, identity, and way of life possibly more so than their job/economic concerns.The slogan “God, Guns, and Gays” encapsulates what white-working class voters who have been a core block of American society think and believe in. It perfectly explains their way of life, ideology, religion, and how they view the world and how they think the world should be. These concerns strike at the heart of how white-working class voters live and their ideology, so they will feel threatened and attacked if the world is moving towards a direction that doesn’t align with their way of life. I don’t have friends or relatives that listen to “hate/outrage media” but I have met and been around with people who do. They generally are very passionate about their ideology and thoughts with few willing to compromise. They think their opinions are facts and a part of their identity, and disagreeing with them feels like you’re attacking them as a person. They’re more likely to gravitate towards conspiracy theories that have little to no proof which can make them polarizing to talk or interact with. Because they’re so passionate about their beliefs, they can be wildly emotional when talking about it but they’re “happy” in their own ways interacting with those who echo the same sentiment.
I feel that Kimmel’s argument is valid. It makes sense that when white men experience their privilege being taken away and are forced to participate in “fairness”, they feel that they are victims of society. This mentality manifests into an anger that requires them to prove their masculinity to others, resulting in violence. It consumes their lives, shifting their priority from their economic situation to taking their anger out on others, complaining about human rights movements, immigrants, and other topics that make them feel as though they have privilege. I often see these people online on social media, especially Twitter, complaining about how the government is ruining the country, that people of colour are lazy and abusing government assistance, and similar arguments, however, they do not recognise their own situation. They, ironically, spread hateful misinformation on topics that they are uneducated on, most likely from the media that they consume. In terms of physical violence, the pattern of angry white men committing violent crimes is clearly identifiable. While spreading hate online and verbally is still concerning, taking spite and anger out on innocent people in order to feel like they have power is an issue that needs to be dealt with. Oftentimes, because these people are deemed as normal, they are deemed as “mentally unwell” or other justifications for their behaviour, rather than addressing the real cause of the issue.
I do agree with Kimmel’s main argument that one of the reasons some white men are angry is because their economic role has changed. So, one of the ways they deal with that emotion is to lash out which can include arguing with feminists, hateful towards minority groups, or being violent. I do think there might be a relationship between “entitled” male anger and high-profile incidents of violence. One example that come to mind is the Tree of Life shooting. The shooter had anti-semitic and white supremacist views, who decided one day to go to the Tree of Life Synagogue with the intent to kill. This example shows that there is a relationship between “entitled” male anger and high-profile incidents of violence. Another point Kimmel made was that some of these men have a failure to adjust, which I agree with. There are some people today that think society should go back to what it once was. Which would never work because nowadays most people think more progressively. Overall, Kimmel made some good points as to why some white men are angry.
Aggrieved entitlement or what Mike King calls “aggrieved whiteness” refers to white males and their anger towards a changing nation not favoring the white male. Essentially it comes down to blaming others for their issues. Whether that is immigrants, “the gays”, etc, they do not like the changing culture in America. They feel that American has left them behind and forgotten about them, I am sure many have said something along the lines of “we built this country, now they’re throwing us to the side like trash”. According to Kimmel, they have failed to adjust to the lack of privilege given to them at birth that they have been riding on for so long.
I would like to add that they feel that they are now the marginalized group and that they are likely believers in the Great Replacement Theory, that they will no longer be the main, dominant group of America and they will not have the strength in numbers that they have had for centuries.
I think Kimmel has some compelling points in his defense. He continues by explaining how they have always enjoyed a societal privilege that gives white men the upper hand, and now that things have started to change, they are unsure of how to react. This is something that occurs frequently in the world today when older individuals desire to maintain the influence they once held back in the day. They attempt to hate these changes by directing their hate onto organizations they perceive as usurping their power due to a sense of entitlement. The “failure to adjust” that Kimmel refers to has its roots in white men’s sense of entitlement. These angry white guys do not want to be informed they are not superior to everyone else since society has traditionally encouraged that belief. I believe this could partially account for a link between “entitled” male rage and high-profile violent occurrences. These enraged white men may decide to resort to violence in response to someone or some group “taking away” something they believe is rightfully theirs. In other words, violence may be employed as a tool to restore the power of the angry white man if someone’s cause poses a threat to it.
I agree with Kimmel’s main argument, although we should not generalize it as all white men we can realize that there are definitely too many white men that act upon their rage. I think that there is a relationship between “entitled” male anger and high-profile incidents of violence. A lot of these men that hold such anger feel like they are in the right to express and take out their anger on the world; they also do not care about who gets hurt in the process of them “expressing” themselves. These angry white men also take out their anger on the wrong groups of people, for example, they could be complaining about how the government screwed them over but then they will go and take their anger out on other citizens that are facing the same (if not worse) problems as them. This really makes you think, are these white men actually angry about not having access to the proper resources or are they just mad that they aren’t at the top of the food chain anymore? A lot of this “anger” seems like fear-mongering, in reality, white men have always been at the top of society and now that they’re seeing a slight change in that they feel threatened even though it would be extremely hard to remove all white men in power. They’re scared of something that hasn’t happened yet but they consume media that has convinced them that the white race is on the brink of extinction in all industries. Those white men are scared of what it would be like to be at the bottom of society so they have their guns and go around screaming about their rights in order to appear a lot bigger and a lot more superior than they actually are. They are feeling a mixture of anger and fear of not being at the top anymore, and they think that they are entitled to take matters into their own hands so that they no longer feel small.
I feel Kimmel’s argument regarding the correlation between “entitled white male anger” and violence is valid and worth some thought. And I feel some social media and news outlets know this. Hence, they fuel the fire by running the “immigrants are jumping the border to steal your job” or “welfare queens are running around spending all of your tax dollars” narratives because they know how this demographic will react when these claims, which can’t be further from the truth, are shown to them. I also feel Kimmel’s theoretical framework makes logical sense; however, I do not think it can help identify schools or communities that would have a potential risk for a shooting. It seems now that there is a mass shooting every other day and now, we are seeing a larger demographic than just white men committing them. For instance, recently in Nashville, Tennessee, there was a mass shooting in an elementary school by a former student who was transgender. Additionally, the school shooting that occurred at Virginia Tech on April 16, 2007, was perpetrated by an Asian student further proving we cannot truly narrow down who is going to commit a mass shooting down to one gender, race, culture, etc.
Kimmel makes valid points about the entitlement white men feel they deserve in society. Although, we shouldn’t generalize white males to be all dominant in all aspects of life, such as those mentioned who got the short end with the shift in the economy, it’s known for nearly forever, white males were the ‘alpha’ compared to other genders, races, etc. I understand why white males who ended up not as successful as others to be resentful and angry towards other. This being they don’t want to own up to their own failure in their own country. It’s understandable it’s “emasculating” and “humiliating”, anyone would feel this way, maybe not emasculating if they were female. However, this shouldn’t be the reason for their unnecessary and unreasonable hatred towards other who might appear to have stolen their ‘right’. Those who are female and of other ethnicities, and those who found refuge in this country. Also, the fact that these men believe they are major losers of this economic change have not considered the lives of those of females and other ethnicities in this country. The white males haven’t lived like anyone else so they lack empathy. So, when they finally get a sense of unrighteousness from their own country in which they live, they feel cheated on. Even though those of the opposite gender and other races have felt the same treatment throughout history.
The economy is constantly moving and new technology is constantly being invented and made better than the last. So, I suggest to those “angry white men” to self-reflect on themselves and acknowledge why they are acting in such hatred to those who have done nothing wrong. These people are in the same pool looking for the same jobs to support their family and themselves. If these “angry white men” want to take back their jobs, instead of being hateful, try to further their skills to earn higher skilled jobs that other mights not be able to obtain. It’s similar to applying to college, it’s competitive and you want to be the person who stands out with the best looking resume and track record. The economy is moving forward and upward and the best way to deal with that change is to move up with it.
I think that Kimmel’s argument is definitely worthy of considering when it comes to the connection of “entitled white male anger” and violence. I mean look at our government right now…our government is essentially a anger white entitled male that is proposing polices that are a catalyst and have historically been a catalyst of violence, hate and discrimination. I think this year’s election proved that their are a lot of “angry white males” (females included) out there that feel neglected and I think that is valid. But what I believe it comes down to is education because like the article mentioned the “blame” for these circumstances are being put on blacks or minorities when this is not the case at all but the quite opposite. I think the “angry white male” complex is fueled by phony, one-sided media and a lack of education, which is something that we have failed with as a country.
Why do cultural issues like this appear to trump the economic concerns of this group?
I’m not quite sure why the cultural issues seem to be more of a priority over the economic concerns for this particular group of people. However, it appears that the cultural issues are more tied to each person that makes up this group, on a personal level. People can identify and relate to the cultural issues, especially if they don’t quite understand their current economic situation. Often times in any group of people, it seems like people are more likely to advocate for something they feel they can relate to rather than something they don’t understand. When you ask a person, “What economic concerns do you have?” Most people don’t know how to answer that question. I feel I could answer the question in depth, only because I’ve had the privilege of my education, as well as the means to obtain up to the minute info about the economy. Yet it’s still a strange thing to really wrap your head around if you aren’t aware of in your life. In some weird physiological way, I know I am more inclined to advocate or be interested in cultural issues that might be a problem for me or those around me, rather than the economy. Even if the economic situation for me wasn’t fair or ideal, for some reason it isn’t as appealing as some other cultural issues, that’s just my opinion.
I believe that Kimmel makes some strong points in his argument. I found it incredibly accurate that he called the sin of the angry white men he is referring to “failure to adjust.” He goes on to describe how they have lived their whole life with a social privilege that causes white men to be at the advantage, and since things have been changing, they don’t know how to react. This sense of entitlement that has been engrained in them leads them to try to resist these changes by targeting their rage towards groups that they see as taking away their power, as Kimmel mentions, such as feminists and immigrants. The root of this “failure to adjust” Kimmel talks about is the fact that white men feel entitled to certain things. Because society has always supported the perception that they are superior to everyone else, these angry white men do not want to suddenly be told they are not. I think this could explain a correlation between “entitled” male anger and high-profile incidents of violence to some extent. If someone or some group is “taking away” something that these angry white men think is rightfully theirs, it is possible that they would decide to retaliate with violence. In other words, if someone’s cause is threatening to the power of the angry white man, violence may be used as a weapon to reestablish that power.
Kimmel makes some very important and relevant claims. White men feel that they were born with a sense of entitlement and should be treated as such. So when faced with economic loss, these men, “don’t know who to hold account or what to do about it” so “they rage at ball-busting feminists (“feminazis”) for stealing their American manhood; they hate immigrants for stealing their jobs; and they seethe with resentment over the idea that poor people on welfare are picking their pockets and living off their tax dollars”. These are the men who feel that they are obligated to have whatever they want. They use their white privilege to blame other, less privileged people for their problems.
Even though these men feel that these progressive women and minorities are pushing them to the side, white men still have so much power. They still hold the top positions to companies. Today, white men take up about 90% of CEO positions. It is only because certain white men do not have all the success and economic support that they used to have that they blame other people for their problems.
It is very obvious that they still have all this power but these angry white men have still not accepted the fact that we live in a very progressive era for many people. There has been a great social change. Women especially have been gaining more power and roles in the world. With all this progression going on around them, these men feel threatened and emasculated. These men are angry that they do not have all the power and privilege that they used to have.
It is hard to believe that there are still people in the world with such hatred towards others of a different race, gender, sexual orientation, etc. Even in 2017, there is still racism and gender discrimination. One would think that we would have moved forward and progressed but there are people out there who have not been able to move forward and stick to what their family have believed for all of these years. Generations and generations have passed down these beliefs that make it hard to change how some people think and live.
Kimmel does bring up some interesting points and emphasizes how strange it is that some men are still acting entitled and that the world has been unfair towards them. I think some of these men have had such a strict upbringing of what is right and not right that it is hard to see other people’s sides of the story. This can be a difficult thing to change but our society as a whole is making important changes that will be beneficial to all.
I believe that Kimmel’s argument is displayed accurately. Several white men in today’s society strive for complete power. Ironically, if they do not achieve that power they will act in a child-like manner. They are incapable of accepting the new social changes that occur in our lives each and every day. They do not want to accept the fact that women are able to maintain power, and are entitled in the work force. I believe both genders should be equal and should be able to sustain their own rights, and to be treated equally. Andrew Levinson states, “That nearly half of white men and 35-40% of white women in the labor force identify as “working class” (The White Working Class Today). This is incredible, this shows that women are qualified and are determined to work. By women working, it does not take away their manhood, it simply demonstrates the fact that women have the ability to execute everything a man can do. Having the ability to dominate, and one up someone else is a significant role in a white mans life today. By putting the blame on immigrants for “stealing” their jobs; and resenting the fact that poor people on welfare are picking their pockets and living off their tax dollars, is just plain ignorant. Several people want to blame others, and want to ignore the fact that society is evolving each and every day. People can not accept the fact that we do not live in the 1960’s and 1970’s anymore. Traditionalism impacts a person’s life daily. We do not live in single sided society anymore, we live in a diverse, multi-powered society that is still working on being more diverse, and more multi-powered. The pictures displayed at the bottom of the article show how certain men release their anger with violence. A major social problem that society is dealing with today is gun control. These pictures depict the deep meaning behind men who struggle with empowerment issues.
Kimmel’s argument displays why this surge of undirected anger is finding a dangerous host in white men. Many angry white men feel less secure and valued in their masculinity and whiteness than they did in the “good old days”. As Kimmel suggests, their stagnant or decreasing economic success leaves them in a position that makes them vulnerable to feelings of resentment and anger. This anger is especially aimed at women or minorities and because of their aggrieved entitlement, they see equality and elevation of these groups as a direct threat to their societal privilege as white males. Kimmel mentions that instead of finding culpability in the nebulous and complex ideas of trickle-down economics and economic dislocation, white men have been susceptible to political claims that minorities are stealing their jobs, “femenazis” are taking over, etc. This is a more concrete area in which to direct their anger, albeit inaccurate. Although I agree the ramifications of angry white men stem from their inability to adjust, I do not believe they are solely responsible. As a society, we must take responsibility to ask why this group has adjusted so poorly and how we can educate about white privilege in a way that decreases aggrieved entitlement. Demonization is certainly not the answer, and will only contribute to the anger and resentment.
I agree with Kimmel’s main argument. White men are angry about changes happening and having to share power with women and minorities. These men are “feeding their anger” and acting out about being forced to adjust to changes in authority however, they fail to realize they are still mainly in power. In history, while males have always been the face of power, without any “threat” from women or minorities. However, if you look at the makeup of jobs and politics today, white men are still clearly the majority. Even though we like to think, as a society, that all races and gender are equal, that is simply not the case. White, heterosexual, able-bodied men have a large amount of privilege over anyone that is not one of those things. Kimmel uses the phrase “aggrieved entitlement” to show how men are reacting to what they believe is a dig on their masculinity. Kimmel highlights a possible correlation between the entitlement of these white men and violence, which I agree to be true. It also seems to be that violence conducted by white males are not as heavily covered in the media as violence done by females or minorities. The media is feeding this anger and rage by white men and almost encouraging it by not shutting it down. Along with this, Trump is the presenting exactly what these angry white men want to hear, and feeding into their entitlement. Until the people in power, including the face of our country, turn their back to these ideas and mentalities, they will never end.
I think Kimmel’s argument starts out with a good foundation. Explaining the concept of men being encouraged to use violence as a way to show their masculinity is a point that is valid and the examples of military service and sports help give this argument more credibility. Kimmel also comments on in changing economies and political climates, the “white man” has had a hard trouble adjusting. This is an interesting argument that I had not thought about before reading this article. I can see how economic troubles can cause anger and feelings of humiliation, but what is concerning is how instead of looking at the people and situations that have caused the economic problems (i.e banks and governments) they look towards groups that are gaining rights through progressive societies such as women, immigrants, and people experiencing extreme poverty. These white men with rage claim to be the “real victims” and create movements to encourage these beliefs such as the Men’s Rights Movement. This real victims argument goes along with Kimmel’s explanation of aggrieved entitlement which to me means having privilege form certain aspects you were born with (i.e gender, race). Kimmel also adds on the point of certain variables that put places at a higher risk of mass shootings and violence. I think that these aspects, especially those of gun culture, gender culture, political identification, and race, add to the argument over white men’s anger. After reading other articles for this class, seeing these aspects thoroughly explained illustrates how our education and political system could be doing more to prevent these mass shootings from happening. Taking a closer look at students and into their mental states due to torment and feelings of being emasculated, like white men in this article, is a way to indicate if boys and men have the capability to go into a state where mass violence can be seen as revenge for their “injustices.” The issue of white men’s anger can take a tole on our society if not handled in the correct way. At the end of this article, Kimmel comments on trying to find a way to approach the topic of problems associated with “whitness’ without alienating these men. This is an interesting point to close on because it leaves the reader to think critically about ways to do this. Not ever white man will accept that they were born with an innate privilege because of their gender and race and approaching these kinds of people is the trickiest. The way I can think of doing this is showing statistics and data that prove these points to be done from several different studies. The overwhelming amount of data showing these problems may be able to show people about privileges and how acknowledging it can help move society into a direction where we can address them and try to fix them. While doing this, the person showing the data must not attack these men and their lack of privileges in other areas. Overall, Kimmel makes excellent points that can help people analyze the problems of white men’s anger but also give a perspective of where this anger came from in the first place.
Kimmel’s term “aggrieved entitlement” refers to the idea that social power and dominance can be directly related to gender, specifically men who in these instances believe that they are deserving of such power and that they are being unfairly treated because others have taken it away. Such entitlement results because white men have typically lived fairly privileged lives and were always given a high level of authority until recently when this has been challenged. As a result, these angry white men think that they can justify acts of violence because they have in a sense been “wronged.” These violent and destructive actions help to bring back feelings of masculinity and dominance. Honestly, I have never considered Kimmel’s argument based on the correlation between white male entitlement and violence due to this loss of assumed power. Yes, I think the economy has changed structurally due to the increase in minorities and women entering into the workforce and white men have taken a hard hit. In accordance with Kimmel, I think that the bigger issue here is that these angry white men need to learn how to adjust or use the increase in competition to empower them to work harder to maintain their “power.” I think sometimes white men fail to recognize that they have been so privileged and the fact that their power is diminishing not only makes them unhappy but it truly frightens them. Often, I think that white men mask this fear as anger and violence, which only brings out their weakness more.
I think that Kimmel presents a very intriguing argument in regards to the white men of our country. I can understand how white men have always been in control of our society throughout history. It is eyeopening to see Kimmel’s claim that as white men struggle to adjust to society’s changes, they displace their anger on other groups, like women and immigrants, for taking their power away. As these groups finally gain their rights, some white men see this as a greater disadvantage to them rather than an improvement to society as a whole. Societal influences have created this powerful gender framework that in order to be a “man,” men must show strength and maintain power. With any threat to this power, men have been taught throughout their childhood or through media to fight these threats with aggression to maintain their dominant roles. I agree with Kimmel that rather than white men try to work with the changes in society, they find it easier to point the finger at these other groups and turn to violence. I believe Kimmel makes a valid point with the connection that these angry white men use their aggression and violence towards groups, they feel have damaged their social/financial statuses, to solve these perceived problems and keep their glorified power. Kimmel has made me realize that even though our nation has been taking steps forward with equal rights for women, African Americans, homosexuals, etc., the people that are angry with these changes are predominantly white men. Kimmel has clearly shown me that in order for our nation to truly flourish, white men need to be willing to share their power and adjust to the changes within our society.
Kimmel’s main argument seems to be that white men, as a result of minorities receiving rights that used to be reserved for only straight, white men, feel as though they are becoming the victims. White men have always had privilege. However, they are losing their unfair advantage on the rest of civilization. Their priority status is starting to be revoked in certain cases. This is the reason why so many white men supported Trump. They felt like their power was dwindling, and Trump reassured these men that he would restore their power by putting everything back to the way it was in the 1930s, when white men still had all the power.
However, as far as the connection between white men and violence goes, there may be other factors at play, such toxic masculinity. This means that men do not talk about feelings or hardships in fear of being called names or bullied. They don’t reach out for help and may feel like they are at the end of their rope, resulting in them lashing out. I still believe there is a connection between “entitled” male anger and violence. Supposedly, violence done by men is a way to express power, whereas violence is a last resort for women. These privileged white men have slowly but surely been losing their privilege and power over minority groups, and they want that power back. Hate crimes and mass shootings may be attempts to scare minorities back into submission, as well as display the power that white men still have.
I also believe that cultural issues trump economic concerns because, according the many studies, white men have it best when it comes to money. They are paid more than women and any other race. So when the incomes of black people increased during the 70s and 80s, it was only closing that gap between the incomes of black people and white men. They also have no real excuse for their racism/sexism/homophobia/hate for any other group. It makes no sense that these angry white men choose to fight people who just want to live the same way these white men have been living. The phrase “meritocracy sucks when you are suddenly one of the losers” accounts for a lot of this. In a world where people are starting to be evaluated on proficiency, and only proficiency, their white man status means less and less. The people who have been working harder than they have for years are starting to be picked over those who would be hired simply for being a white man. Their jobs are being taken by people who actually deserve them.
Michael Kimmel’s argument presents the idea that there is a relationship between white angry men who feel entitled to often contradictory and bigoted beliefs and the socioeconomic upheaval they may be facing. Although Kimmel is right, I believe that he is just scratching the surface of the cultural issues associated with white men alone and not a case study on issues that minorities face. He does address, however, some of the root causes of these cultural and social issues like rhetoric supporting defunding and deregulation paired “Welfare Queen” mantra which has fueled a certain level of socioeconomic upheaval for many Americans. In regard to policy solutions, partisan politics will inevitably curb efforts to enact progressive changes in benefit programs and other socially-minded government assistance. Moreover, Americans must realize the plunders that certain socioeconomic policies may have on a large percentage of their population, so it is imperative that these progressive shifts occur. Federal and state governments alike must ordain social policies that are both fiscally aware and sustainable so that these programs can having lasting effect on reversing social mobility gaps. With this incoming presidential administration and next year’s new Congress with both a majority Republican in the House and the Senate, partisan politics will curb these crucially needed changes mentioned above.
There is no better time to discuss “angry white men” and the actions they take when something does not go their way. Donald Trump is our newly elected president and if he is not the perfect example of an “angry white man”, I don’t know who is. I agree with Kimmel when he states that angry white men “rage at ball-busting feminists (“feminazis”) for stealing their American manhood; they hate immigrants for stealing their jobs; and they seethe with resentment over the idea that poor people on welfare are picking their pockets and living off their tax dollars”. These attributes perfectly explain our new president and what he has done in his past as a person, which does not make me or anyone else happy with him leading our country. For me, I think that this country in particular is a patriarchy which is a sad truth, but it is how society works. If men in high places in the real world get humiliated or have their manhood embarrassed, they resort to foul language and violent actions. Now, I am not saying that this is all white men, rather I want to point out and agree with Kimmel that there has been a past of white men taking measures into their own hands either passive aggressively or plain out aggressive and violent. This is why Donald Trump is a perfect example of these angry white men that Kimmel describes. On the other hand, regarding school shootings and other malicious actions concerning killing, I think there is a different story. I believe that kids who grow up wanting to shoot up a school or kill someone is a result of a bad childhood, bullied throughout your life, or a mental illness of reenacting a violent video game. These three things separate or cohesive I believe are the main causes of what brings these “white men” to kill or be overly angry to the point of not caring for any life around you. Again, this does not account for every white man rather it brings in the certain situations that happened concerning white men when they are oppressed or discriminated in any way. Violent actions seem to be a reoccurring scene when “white men” are aggravated or if their power feels threatened.
One of the most interesting aspects of this article to me is the political influence that leaders can have over the social dynamics in a country like the U.S. As I was born long after Reagan was in office, I had no idea that his influence had such a profound effect on the social culture of the country, and most importantly the dynamics between races. The mentality that some people have, as mentioned in the article, that welfare is negative and something that only Black people utilize, showcases how vulnerable the public is to political maneuvers. More importantly, individuals with less education are far more likely to be swayed by political leaders. It is really interesting to me that this type of mindset did not always exist, as this is a general opinion I’ve always been aware of. It seems as though there must always be a scapegoat, and regardless of whether or not it is deserved, people generally pick on those who are viewed as an easy target. Rather than get upset with Reagan for his economic disappointments and political failures, people were more willing to vilify blacks and those with lower socio-economic status because it was a far easier enemy to target.
In the American culture and many other cultures the social system of Patriarchy has been implemented. Males have been seen as dominate both in the household and in society. Males can grow up with the notion that they have power and privilege over others, which can lead to anger when they start to feel inferior to others. I do agree with Kimmel when he argues that males, “rage at ball-busting feminists for stealing their American manhood; they hate immigrants for stealing their jobs; and they seethe with resentment over the idea that poor people on welfare are picking their pockets and living off their tax dollars”. It is easier to point fingers at someone or a group of people then trying to solve the problem for oneself. Males believe the only way to deal with their “entitled” anger is through violence. Being exposed to gun use or having a violent childhood can also factor into why violence is used to resolve male anger. In our society today violence is used to resolve various problems, as it is what we are exposed to through the military and media.
Michael Kimmel’s argument of white male supremacy and violence accurately describes the situation in which a group of people that have always been on top are threatened. The biggest problem with white male supremacy is that this is all our country has known- white men have always been on top and there was no question about it. Today, societal changes have threatened the dominance that white men have. Although white men are still the dominant group, I think society has been breaking away from the ideals and practices of history with the introduction of new means of power. The upcoming election is a great example that demonstrates how white men act when their power is threatened to be taken away. Trump’s supporters are mostly white males who have not been negatively influenced by the words he has said and policies he plans to ensue. He is targeting this specific group of people because they are the most relatable to him, and he knows exactly how to win their vote. As a white male, Trump clearly believes that he has a right to hold the highest form of power and people from all other groups are subservient to him. He fears the fact that white men may be moving away from this position of power, and these fears have promoted his own assertion of his position as an “angry white man.”
I believe there is a relationship between “entitled” male anger and high profile incidents of violence. Additionally I agree with various aspects of Kimmel’s theoretical framework. When looking into public rampage shootings one can note the correlation between race, socio- economics, age, and location. Another aspect to study is American culture and to what extent, how armed is our culture? These factors of gender, race, gun control, media and mental health are linked and different rampage shooting cases overlap that demonstrate these factors. Cases of white men engaging in public rampage shootings include the Aurora, Colorado Movie theater massacre, where the shooter Holmes, had an access to a gun, and was influenced by the media, yet he was ruled sane by psychiatrists and mental health experts. The Columbine shooters Eric Harris, Dylan Klebold were thought to have been influenced by music and video games that desensitized them to violence. Public rampage shootings has led to a series of discourses to rationalize how to contend with this as a social problem, and the angry (often) white men that engage in these acts. On December 14, 2012 President Obama delivered a speech on the night of yet another outbreak of public shootings in Newtown CT. He said, “As a country, we have been through this too many times. Whether it’s an elementary school in Newtown, or a shopping mall in Oregon, or a temple in Wisconsin, or a movie theater in Aurora, or a street corner in Chicago—these neighborhoods are our neighborhoods, and these children are our children”. His sentiments echo similar aspects of Kimmel’s theoretical framework about the random nature of shootings. Even though there are attempts to study and monitor rampage shooting their irregularity, and the fact that there are too many angry white men makes it difficult to prevent them. However by creating stricter gun laws, monitoring violence in the media and further studying mental health can be applied to help this issue of high- profile incidents of violence.
Statement by the President on the School Shooting in Newtown, CT https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/12/14/statement-president-school-shooting-newtown-ct
I like the quote, “meritocracy sucks when you are suddenly one of the losers.” I never thought of the country being like this but I think that Kimmel hits the nail right on the head. There are many things that our country has taken steps forward in throughout many decades like women’s right, gay rights, and many other things. I realize now that many of the angry people are the white men. I did not truly understand why until now. In this article, they do not want to be taken over because they are used to being in charge. They liked the way things worked when they were the most skilled or the ones in power and now that some situations are changing, the men are becoming the losers. Now everything they are losing in is automatically wrong because they do not have the main power. I think Kimmel also sums it up when he says their sin is the failure to adjust. They are failing to adjust and becoming the “losers” in some cases causing the group of “angry white men.”
What stuck out the me the most was Kimmel saying, “have been running with the wind at our backs all these years,” and “what we think of as ‘fairness’ to us has been built on the backs of others.” This explains the root of the problem with “Angry White Men” and where their irrational anger, racism, sexism, and feelings of superiority come from. On a small scale, this is almost like when an only child gets a new sibling, and is not longer getting the attention and perks they are used to. These white men was to maintain their position as superior and are hating the fact that women and “inferior men” are getting the equal rights they deserve.
Furthermore, when we watched the video in class of the little boy crying at the doctors, the father kept telling him to be a man, which is what is ingrained in men at a very young age, which contributes to their need to be violent, athletic, and tough. So I do believe there is a relationship between angry white men and violence. These men want to believe that they are above everyone else, and therefore want to blame those they believe they have power over. They want to take back what they believe is theirs, which in reality was only our society not yet coming to terms with equality. So, this violence from white men coming from their desire to be treated as superior is their irrational response to to the mistreatment they falsely believe to be happening.
I thought the article made an interesting point, saying we should try to understand people before we judge them and make assumptions about why they are angry or have certain beliefs. I can understand how a recession would make people angry and they want nothing more than to put the blame on someone other than themselves. I didn’t know that in the 60s and 70s the income of black families rose and those of white families stayed about the same. If I had a family to support back then, I might also be upset that my income didn’t rise and others did.
I do think there could be a correlation between “entitled” male anger and high-profile incidents of anger. This discussion question immediately made me think of the Columbine shooters. Eric Harris and Dylan Kebold were not bullied. They were not picked on in school, they didn’t come from abusive or broken households, but they felt like they were better than everyone else. They thought their fellow classmates were uneducated people who didn’t deserve to be their friend or to be alive. They wanted to scare their fellow classmates, not because they wanted revenge, but they wanted attention.
These white men who believe they are better than others, believe they have been screwed over, believe their situation is unfair reminds me of Eric and Dylan. Dylan and Eric were in an environment surrounded by people they thought they were better than: their high school. White men are surrounded by people who they think shouldn’t make more money than them: their country. Dylan and Eric lashed out, and perhaps that’s why there are angry white men. They are so frustrated that they lash out too.
From reading this article I got the impression that society as a whole is moving forward, but the white supremacy group wish to be moving back to a period of time when they were not challenged by other groups of people. America as a country is becoming more diverse by accepting more genders and races as a whole community. The few white supremacy groups that still exist need to realize that we are moving forward. The only way that our country can come together as one is for us to be on the same page. When i was reading through the article one part really struck me. The part when they said that they was a gun show in Shippensburg PA and there was a booth for the KKK. Groups like this are making it hard to move toward everyone being treated equally. Race and gender should not be a factor in the type of person you are. The type of person you are should be based on the qualities you posses.
Before reading this excerpt, I was surprised to find how unaware I was and how little I knew on the topic. After reflecting on my own experience with the idea of the “angry white man,” I immediately thought of a Facebook post I had seen a couple days earlier. One of my Facebook “friends” had posted a picture of his tattoo shop where he had hung a 30 ft. long sign across the top that read, in huge bold letters, “TRUMP.” The caption on the picture read, “Here’s a great way to lose half our business.” The post blew up and received almost 200 likes and 30 comments that pretty much all read “GO TRUMP!” I couldn’t help but wonder to myself if these people who supported and liked this message knew exactly what they liked. If they were asked, could they actually give reasons for why they were voting for him, information about his intended policies etc.? One comment even read, “There has never been a better time to support casual racism!” Whether they are knowledgeable or not, to me, the post, as well as the ridiculously oversized sign cried attention and masculinity. The sign might as well read: “Get off my lawn!”
In response to Kimmel’s description of “masculinity at the end of an era,” I find this to be extremely true. Up until the last 30 years, the white male was on top. Of course, people at the top of a pyramid will not argue that things are unfair until the pyramid shifts and they are at the bottom. It’s common that white males seek positions of authority, such as the police force, in the hopes of defending and ensuring their masculinity. Masculinity can be described as being tough, harsh and assertive. All qualities that can additionally be classified next to violence.
After reading kimmel’s arguments, I believe that the phrase “aggrieved entitlement” is used to describe what the average person thinks of as a white mans attitude that they are superior and more deserving of success than any other and that they can act out against others to prove so. The main argument I believe Kimmel makes is that white men who were born into opportunity could be angry that times have changed and they now have to adjust their work ethic when they previously didn’t have to. In some cases, yes there are “angry white men” who are mad that the country is changing from its old ways and that not only white men are successful now a days, but I feel as if a vast majority of white men are not angry and do not exhibit any of these characteristics. Also, most of the men that they are referring to as angry did not experience time when only white people were in power, so I don’t believe that is the motive of their anger. There will always be racist people in the world which is wrong, but I believe the term “angry white men” is a very inaccurate phrase and a harsh generalization considering most men are not angry. One instance I can relate to the feelings of an “angry white man” is when welfare for people who aren’t working or actively seeking a job is taken out of their hard earned salaries. I understand this is not the case for all families or individuals on welfare but it is certainly a possibility.
With the example of the columbine shooting. I don’t believe that instance is a good example of a mass shooting performed by an angry white man because the two crazy kids who committed the horrid crime clearly had a mental illness which caused them to act out violently. Power and/ or race was not the motive, something was just clearly wrong with both of them.
Kimmel stated that they are angry because instead of adjusting to the new changes, they refuse to change and just feed their anger. “Feeding their anger”, which I assume means violence toward certain group of races or blaming other races. “At a gun show in Shippensburg, Pa., Kimmel passed time with a guy he calls “Rick,” who manages the K.K.K. table. Men like Rick, he points out, “feel like they’ve been screwed.” They suffered financial losses as a result of a series of recessions and other economic changes, which left them feeling emasculated and humiliated”. As Kimmel said, these men are angry due to the fact that companies are now outsourcing traditional jobs and they felt as if the country betrayed them. As said before, instead of adapting to these new changes, they are getting angrier and they want to blame the people such as immigrants or feminists or even people on welfare for stealing their money when they don’t deserve it. These angry white men want Trump to become the next president of the U.S. because he promised them he will bring the jobs back to America and send all illegal immigrants back to where they came from. These points made by Trump is very appealing to these men because they think the problem is on the immigrants, feminists, and people who are on welfare. When in reality that’s not true at all.
What these angry white men fail to realize is that since they were born, they were privileged. They don’t want to admit that because they don’t see themselves are privileged. So when things change that benefited them before, they will get angry because they are no longer benefited by certain things. This relates to racism toward blacks. They think people who are on welfare don’t deserve it because they are not working for what they want and live off on welfare, which they earned. To them, it’s not fair that the government is taking their money and give it to poor people. The problem is, they also think people who are on welfare are mostly black people. This creates huge conflict. As said before, these guys are angry and they want to release their anger. Instead of finding the actual problem, they blame other races. This only leads to violent hate crime toward black people. What they fail to realize is that there are just as many white people, if not more, who are on welfare, but they don’t seem to think about that.
Sadly this is the reality. I personally don’t think whatever we do, we can change these people, but we can change the future generation by educating them about what the real problem is in this country. We should be teaching kids when they make mistakes, they should just own it up and stop blaming other people.
There was a lot of discussion of why boys engaged in criminal affairs such as mass shootings. A few theorists, teachers, and psychiatrists shared their thoughts on why boys did the things they did and gave out some wide spread blame. Some blame went to goth music or violent video games. Others, blamed absent father figures and the living environment in rural areas. But the blame of more serious cases such as sexual and physical could have related more than the others.
When trying to investigate and categorize why the shootings were getting even more popular than the 1990’s, one of Michael Kimmel’s comments was intriguing. If African Americans are involved in shootings (which was popular in the 1960’s -1990’s) investigators or the media are keen to link up African Americans and violence. Taking some notes from James Gilligan on page 77, violence such as mass school shootings come from the need to prevent others from laughing at you. Reticule plays a lot on boy’s minds. So men have a higher tendency to protect their masculinity that could take a blow from mass humiliation.
Ultimately, the correct categories that should be taken into consideration, instead of race, are the categories Peter Langman created. He sorted the outcome of the shootings in groups such as traumatized, boys in the pass who had suffered sexual or physical abuse, psychotic, boys with a history of schizophrenic symptoms, and psychopathic behavior that included lack of empathy for others.
This article addresses an issue that is very prevalent in today’s society. As Americans continue to turn on the news every morning or read the paper, countless incidents involving hate crimes towards opposite races has spiraled out of control. Quite always, these crimes are conducted on black individuals by whites and as Kimmel argues, on the basis of anger. Not anger per say for existence, I would hope that that issue has gone to rest. However, anger that their economic situation has worsened or staggered because of medicare and welfare programs. The “angry white men” see this trend as a direct effect of struggling African Americans, instead of seeing a larger picture. It’s always so easy to point blame on another, specifically on a group that one is not a part of. That group could be on the spectrum of race, religion, gender, etc. America has experienced too many hate crimes in spite of these differences.
By the term, “aggrieved entitlement,” Kimmel is making the statement that the angry white male feels shortchanged and as if he deserves more than another because of the hard work he puts in day to day. These men may see their struggles as a result of those who put in less work. However, those individuals may not have the born privilege these men have. We spoke a lot in class about white privilege, and although I at first was defensive about the topic, I now realize how true it actually rings in today’s society. Defensive behavior is not uncommon as Kimmel points out. These “angry white men” most likely feel the same way which results in feelings of entitlement. They feel a loss of manhood.
I see Kimmel’s overall point in addressing a correlation between these mass shootings and anger from these white men who feel shortchanged, and it disgusted me reading about all of the examples and occurrences. Children are being raised in environments where they hear these constant complaints and outrages over communities “stealing” their hard earned money. Children are very susceptible to form opinions based on their parents, so this is an issue that needs to be controlled. Violence will only continue in generations to come with this mentality.
Kimmel’s argument of the white man’s feeling of “entitlement” leading to high-profile incidents of violence, is not only the opinion of the author, but due to the statistics of domestic abuse and committed violence, a fact. After years of systematic confusion between classes and races, White men have been left to believe that they are the superior over all. Sadly, this believe has stemmed from us allowing white males to believe the superiority is true, dating all the way back before the civil war. We have created a system of firm racist classes that have become difficult to reconstruct.
I do believe that we have taken many steps in the right direction. Aware that the miles ahead are many, the way to break this concept of entitlement for white men and stop allowing the violence effected by it, is to continue to break the race barrier in every field including equality in education, the corporate field, politics etc. Though clearly not easy, We have seen the reality of these racist classes in history, allowing it still to occur today in society.
If we allow men to still dominate in leading households, families and corporations, we should not only want, but expect them to do so with a sense of responsibility. Kimmel’s point of the White Men blaming others, using violence in return, for their job loss or lack of success is a matter that is unacceptable to allow to continue. The violence has been proven to be connected to this view of entitlement. If we put “The White Man” on a pedestal above the rest of the classes and races, we will become easier to step on.
I believe Kimmel’s main argument comes from the idea that white people or white men specifically had most, if not all the power in the United States. His interpretation on how to deal with “angry white men” differs from not trying to undermine their viewpoint outright but trying to understand them and see where their frustration lies. The connection between anger from white men and increased violence by them most probably is sourced in a lack of adequate education. I like to think that if you know more, you hate less. I see that understanding a viewpoint that is counter to what’s my own as a way to be more informed, less ignorant, and more respectful. If people were better educated on ways to bring an injustice to the forefront of political conversations, then I believe less violent tactics would be used. White men lost their power base during the 70’s and 80’s to the emerging success of civil rights. Looking from an impartial viewpoint, white men should and ought to be angry, but they should understand why and how the political and economic circumstances changed to help other races and genders of the United States.
Kimmel’s theory on how to notice potential mass shootings and school violence, I see having most effect on area’s that see a change in various demographics of race, gender, and religion. Suppose a traditional white, Christian, and conservative county in Texas starts to change to an overwhelming multicultural, Muslim, and progressive county. Knowing the local stance on gun control in Texas, it’s safe to assume that people will have guns. Now, imagine a white parent who lives in this county and was economically successful until the integration of the multicultural people. The parent might blame the other races and their viewpoints while spreading his ideas into his children. Parents have a fundamental influence on children and their behaviors. This child who is hearing his white parent struggle feels the need to solve “the problem”. I see Kimmel’s theory working during this scenario. Children are often the tools of mass violence, when really they are just victims of poor education and bad influences.
I have a family member who really believes in all the hate media against progressives and their ideas. He just reads a meme and automatically shares it and believes there is truth to what the meme says. He would rather read a meme that has a low chance of any truth about a political candidate than actually listening to a political candidate talk about an issue. As I have said before, the more you know, the less you hate.
I most definitely agree with Kimmel when it comes to white men failing to adjust. I think that white men have always been looked at as more powerful and having authority and more privileges over others. Now that men and women of all races are looked upon as equal, white men have an attitude that they find it unfair that their jobs are being taken. In reality, they are just having difficulty adjusting to the fact that minorities are working hard to get to where they want to be and now earning the jobs they deserve. This causes them to blame minorities and then eventually act on the issue using violence. I think that white men already think they are born a place of importance in society solely because of their sex and the color of their skin. They think they have earned a place that isn’t even rightfully theirs. I think there is a connected between entitled male anger and violence. There have been repeated events throughout our history, even the past few years where white men have acted out of anger and ending up killing many people. This is exactly what Kimmel means when he says aggrieved entitlement.
Kimmel uses “aggrieved entitlement” to refer to an angry white man’s compensation for humiliation towards a loss of manhood within the changes in society. I am disgusted when men like Rick state that they “feel like they’ve been screwed” and “betrayed by the country they love,” when our country is simply working towards racial equality. I feel that this mentality is childlike as they refuse to work towards progress and embrace change. After reading this article, I believe there is a correlation between “entitled” male anger and high-profile incidents of violence. Kimmel’s theoretical framework successfully identifies variables that could potentially help identify schools at risk for violence. High-profile incidents of violence can be attributed to psychiatric, community, sociological, and cultural issues. For example, all students enter a classroom with a set morals taught by their parents. If their parent happens to be an “angry white man,” this will indicate what sort of differences they will and will not tolerate. Although this is an unfortunate cycle, students should be educated on tolerance and acceptance of others. Kimmel states, “when sense of self is gendered, masculinity must be restored.” Therefore, a step towards tolerance will reduce incessant bullying, gay baiting, or compensation for humiliation.
I am going to address the first few questions that were provided in this chapter.
What do you think about Kimmel’s main argument? Do you think there might be a relationship between “entitled” male anger and high-profile incidents of violence? What other explanations might you offer?
I have never thought about there being a relationship between “entitled” male anger and high-profile incidents of violence until I read this article, and then began to question this question. I am grasping that one of the main points of this piece is that white men are angry because they are no longer at the top of the lists as they think they should be. I do agree that other races and other genders are beginning to advance, but I also still believe that the typical white male is still very much at the top of most lists or categories. When thinking about police brutality and the thought that white males are feeling inferior to other races and genders a lightbulb clicked on. I had never thought of inferiority and/or insecurity being the source of these actions until now. It all makes sense: because white males (which most police officers are) are feeling as though their special treatment is wearing out, they have to make sure people remember who they are and how much power they have.
When it comes to other genders such as women and angry white men, the violence is a factor, but does not seem as prevalent as the high-profile incidents of violence. The attacks against women seems to be most present in the work place. For example, if there is a man in power (which is usually the case), he will do whatever he has to in order to stay on top. Although most of the time this man will not even have to try, he will just act as he pleases knowing that he will get his way in the end. This does not mean that this is always the case, but it is very common. It’s still a little shocking that no matter how much the times progress that many people will stay in the past if only because it benefitted them and their needs.
Kimmel’s term “aggrieved entitlement” presents itself in a clear way. He speaks of how white men are “unhappy with changes that occurred in American society over the past 30 years” (paragraph 2) This admits that white men are becoming/were already annoyed that other minorities are gaining rights and moving on the path towards equality. The white man over several periods of time throughout history seem to need to always put themselves up higher than others and when someone steps into their territory they get heated and mad. They feel they deserve more/better than the others, and have thought this way since they were born. As for the economic role, it seems the people who changed the economy to where it is now, are the same people causing the issues in regards to equality. Like Kimmel says “So instead of adjusting to social change, some men have chosen to feed their rage.” (paragraph 5) Some men are mad when it comes to “feminists” because there is the whole equality issue that they don’t seem to grasp. The white men are claiming, jobs are being taken and feminists “stealing their American manhood” as if they forget that men can be feminists as well and how immigrants are taking their jobs. Therefore, claiming to be the “real victims” because other minorities are gaining the same rights the white men have always had. Due to this factor Trump is gaining white men’s votes because he seems to be offering what the men believe they deserve, in other words, their entitlement they were born with. This is scary because it would be setting us back several years, for every culture. Minorities that just began benefiting from certain rights they’ve worked hard for would be, as it would seem, to be taken away.
I think the cultural issues trump the economic concerns of white men because of the diversification of America and because they have a scape goat. The article extensively talks about the state of denial white men live in when it comes to who and what is responsible for their economic pitfalls. During the Ronald Regan days the media and politicians directed their anger at people of color probably because it was easy for them to notice. “Their” neighborhoods were becoming more diverse, ethnic shops started appearing around town, jobs were integrated, and being white was no longer enough. When the feminist movement gained momentum the idea that women could live beyond the domestic sphere also threatened their masculinity because they could no longer “control” their wives/girlfriends/daughters. Politicians and the media made a spectacle out of these pokes to their white male privilege and promoted extra racial and gender tension. All of these things threatened the power white men have which lead to them feeling emasculated and powerless. A major principle of masculinity is control so when this is lost, they feel lesser than. It much easier to blame black people than themselves or the leaders they elect because people of color have always been the scape goat throughout history. Anything that threatens their privilege is more important than anything economic because masculinity is a social construct. So the idea that being a white male should allow you to have a good job, live in a nice neighborhood etc. is a concept society came up with. Economic status is just a portion of social status making it only part of the reason white men feel emasculated.
When I look at the men involved in the school shootings, or look at Copper Cab that was screaming in the video “Video Games Kill People” it doesn’t seem to be an issue involving sexual orientation, race, or gender. Culture has a major influence on people, and when not taught what is socially correct, people will wrong others. Does a normal citizen, that is completely mentally stable and holds a moral compass, smile during a mugshot? These “white boys” seem to be men looking for attention. Their psyche is flawed, and this allows them to commit the terrible deeds that they do. James Holmes is not the sort of man that had a moral compass. There are reports saying that he had killed for fame, and one report saying that he did not even remember firing into the crowd.
I believe it is coincidence that the men that act out in this irrational way are white males. To me it is a lack of moral code and not being taught what is right from wrong. It is an issue in society that they cannot tell a man that there is another way to deal with their issues rather than screaming or lashing out. A school system that better educates citizens and teaches them that the world can be heavily affected by what they do must be set in place to keep the world moving forward, rather than backward.
The concept of white male anger and rage, more specifically from previous generations, has been a fascinating discussion, one which I have engaged in with family, some friends, and especially online. The arguments Kimmel makes are all completely valid, and certainly provide a basis as to why these men feel the way that they do. But I believe it is something more than that; I think that these older generations of white men do indeed KNOW that the tide is turning, and has been turning for some time. I do believe that they understand that they will one day be the minority, not the majority, and this concept has caused them to attempt to rail against those who do not look or act them in, in a futile effort to retain the powers they still have, powers and privilege that was abundant when previous generations were being raised. I also feel that one of the most overlooked aspects in this sort of discussion is simply the fact that older generations of white men, and women for that matter, were nowhere near as exposed to people of color as people of my generation (millenials) have been. As we discussed in “The case for reparations” the redlining of major cities meant that people were strictly segregated, and still are for many cities. This sort of segregation was, frankly, a self-defeating purpose. Not only have those in power screwed people of color the opportunity to own property in the same neighborhoods, they have also screwed THEMSELVES by not allowing these populations to assimilate, and understand each other. Those in power during the redlining process banked on the concept that people of color would never have the same rights as white people, and as such, white people wouldn’t need to associate with them, as they never would have to deal with them! It is quite apparent that the populations that still have the most segregation, with the most white people, and the least people of color, are those most resistant to change. We also discussed a similar concept in class last week, with regard to immigration. That the people who are most stout and strong anti-immigration policies, are the same people that live thousands of miles from the border, people that would never have to deal with immigrants in the first place. This also goes for white people, who rage against black people, yet nearly never come into contact with them. This fear of the unknown, I think, is the real root of the problem. The human mind is extraordinarily powerful, and can have a person or group of people thinking that another group of people are savages, without ever having met one another before.
Kimmel’s argument appears to be focused on the change for white males of the early to mid-20th century to those of today. Previously, white males were placed on top of socially constructed hierarchy by birth, they enjoyed power and privileges because of that alone. Now, they are forced to live in a ‘meritocratic’ society, in which they must achieve to succeed; one is which success is not necessarily determined by race or gender. Some men have felt a fall because of this change. I agree with Kimmel when he infers that the only men who are truly angry are the ones who do not accept transformation and allow it help them flourish; instead they allow it to beat them down. The males who have embraced the movement of equality have transcended, for many now have the benefit of working alongside brilliant minds such as Anna Wintour, J.K. Rowling, Shirin Ebadi, and all the other ‘non-famous’ brilliant women. The men who embraced these women have now risen to the top beside them, while the others are stuck in the past without success. These males’ failure to recognize the importance of separation between birth and social status are those who are mistakenly playing the victim card.
The generation of millennials has been trained to spot and suspect propaganda on all media outlets. Those of the generations prior were not unintelligent about these matters, simply untrained. The male population, as well as others, were made to believe that anyone who was not a white male was inferior, physically and mentally. As the article points out, the American government projected propaganda regarding the link between people of color and monetary issues in order to protect the reputation of the Regan administration. Now, the idea of white male superiority is null. The pendulum has even swung so far that white males feel there might be “reverse discrimination” happening now. The white males who are still angry about these “injustices” in society need to see things more clearly in order to keep up with the new world and benefit society positively.
As I read through this article I was not surprised/taken aback as much as other students may have been. I readily identified with this article and the attitudes described in “Angry White Men” as I have often classified my estranged grandfather under this category (and my mother has additionally done the same for over 20 years). This grandfather of mine also quite often attempts to project viewpoints on race/gender roles/ education etc. that are extremely outdated and often just downright sexist/racist/offending. I 100% know that the only media that my grandfather is interested in could be classified as “outrage” media. He is widowed, living by himself in Lancaster County PA, his only acquaintances being Amish men. He believes that he deserves to be treated differently from everyone else because he is a white male that served in the military and “worked hard” to move throughout the social ranks. He doesn’t agree with “the direction that the world is going in”, and thinks that people just need to “man up”. As the years have progressed, I have only see this man become more disconnected and bitter with regard to the world around him, and it is truly sad. I of course do not agree with anything he says and I am occasionally ashamed to be related to him. But the idea of “Angry White Men” is not a far cry from a sad reality that many individuals have to face.
I think Kimmel’s viewpoint is one that is very valid. I would agree that there is a correlation between “angry white men” and incidents of violence (i.e. school shootings). I think it tends to be overlooked that many of these acts of violence have been carried out by white men. I also think the first reaction when there is a violent act by a white man is to say it’s mental illness. Not to say that mental illnesses are not a valid reason for someone’s instability, because mental illness is just as much of a disease as any other. However, I don’t think there’s the same initial reaction if theres a violent act carried out by a person of color, a female, or other minorities.
Also something that stood out to me was the following: “The trick is, I think, to not demonize these groups, but rather we should aim to understand them.” I assume that “these groups” refers to these “angry white men.” That being said, I agree that groups shouldn’t be demonized, but I’m not too sure that aiming to understand them is the most effective approach. I think maybe added on to that should be an aim to have them understand. I say this especially thinking about the upcoming election and Donald Trump as a presidential candidate. His running has opened the door for so much open hate and anger of “angry white men” towards people of color, women, immigrants, Muslims, and so forth. In that case I question whether the best approach is aiming to understand them, or rather trying to make them understand.
I think why cultural issues seem to trump economic concerns of these groups is an interesting point of discussion. I think it’s understandable for any person to be frustrated if one’s economic opportunities seem to be stagnant or seem to be lesser than once before. However, I also believe that these are hardships that any working American (or even working person in general) has to face at one point in time. Also in a place like America, I think it’s important to remember that this is a country made up of immigrants – even these “angry white men’s” ancestors were immigrants at some point. In my opinion, much of the frustration that there aren’t as many opportunities for these groups stems from privilege. I also think people have such a negative connotation in regards to the word “privilege,” which tends to only make people more upset. Privilege is not to say that a person hasn’t worked hard for what he/she has. It just relates to the example that everyone is working to climb up a mountain with a knapsack on their back. There are some groups whose bags are filled with things that make it heavier, whereas those with privilege have bags that are a bit lighter. Everyone still has to work hard to get to the top of the mountain, just some people are at more of a disadvantage. That being said, I think privilege is looked at too negatively rather than something that some people just fundamentally have (which they have no control over), whereas others do not. Relating all of that back to the economic frustrations of these groups, I think it tends to be privilege that turned into entitlement that turned into anger. I think it’s completely valid to be frustrated with the economy, with government structure, policy, etc. However, I think to blame certain groups for one’s grievances is a matter of ignorance and not understanding how political/economic structures work.
A major issue in the article is the lack of understanding within this group of ‘angry white men’. The reason for the lack of superiority of the angry white man has nothing to do with “feminists stealing American manhood, immigrants stealing jobs, or poor people on welfare” mentioned. The problems are within their own faults. They claim to be “betrayed by the country they love” but, on the baseline America claims to be built on equal opportunity. In other words, the angry ones are those who are holding our country back.
America can never become better and overcome all its issues unless things are forever changing and redeveloping. A person should never go through life with a sense of entitlement, in a sense that they deserve more than they work for. No one is stealing anything from the ‘angry white male’, they are simply no longer superior for only being a white male. If their idea of independence, manhood, and strength directly correlates to incidences of violence that is their first problem. The prejudice ways they chose to fight their battle hold our country back. Equality in all corners should be seen as the new superiority.
I think that Kimmel made some very strong arguments. I do believe that some white men feel “entitled” based off of history. They are the ones who have always been in power and seem surprised when things might not go their way. I am still surprised to see comments from the KKK. They are the people with the problems and for them to feel “screwed” shows how behind they are socially. When discussing the gun violence, I have never been too surprised when the shooter is a white guy. If the shooter was a girl these issues would seem so different and there would definitely be a different reaction from the public. I think that violence is associated with men in comparison to women. Also, I feel if the shooter was of a different ethnic background people would automatically assume that there are different motives. If you see a white boy in a school shooting you automatically assume they have a mental illness or have had some type of bullying issue. However, if the shooter was of muslim decent people would think there was some type of cultural or religious motives involved due to our countries naive ethnic prejudices. I do see how some people might be aggravated when they work hard just to be taxed to pay for people on welfare. The only reason I feel this way is because I have an Aunt who has not worked a day in her life because she would rather take art classes than to get a job and support her five children. I do understand how this is not every case of people on welfare, but sometimes I guess I see where the angry white man is coming from. When white men complain that immigrants are taking their jobs I can not relate. The United States is a melting pot and a place where people come to create a better lives for themselves and their families. How could I be angered by immigrants when at one time my relatives were immigrants from Ireland? These angry white men do need to see the full picture, but most of the time they are too closed off in their views. I think that many Trump supporters would be extremely angered by this module. They still do believe that America should be a country of white men ruled by white men. I wish were people were able to read this.
Before reading Kimmel’s position, I had never considered there to be a correlation between the anger felt by privileged white men and incidents of violent. Now, after reading and understanding Kimmel’s argument, I definitely believe there is a relationship between the two as well as a direct effect on our society. In reference to white men feeling as though they have been “screwed” as a result of social changes and progress taking place, Kimmel describes, “their sin…is a failure to adjust”. I feel as though this statement perfectly embodies the current position that some white men, specifically the white men that Kimmel defines, are in. History has shown us how our country has been and continues to be dominated by white men. In order for society to steer away from their control and power, social changes are being made. As a whole, change tends to scare people, and some people, in this instance, white men, decide its acceptable to manifest their fear through anger, violence, and hate towards those who they choose to place the blame on.
In addition, I find it interesting how white men use their feelings of being “emasculated and humiliated” to influence their behavior of anger and violence, when there is no evidence to show they consider the feelings of other people such as minorities. If their feelings are allowed dictate how they act, why don’t they grant others the permission to do the same thing?
My family had a family friend on my mothers side (white side) who’s family was affiliated with and supported the KKK. Had I never known he was, I would have continued seeing him as a really fun guy to be around. It wasn’t until the real estate market went for a dive that I saw a different side of him. He was very much into the business of investment properties and small property management. When the market crashed, he took a hit too. One of the conversations we had at dinner consisted of him expressing his dislike and frustration at the “low-life” culture that was making the market crash. Basically he was saying that the market crash came from people of color trying to bite more than they could chew. Obviously this was not the cause of the market crash, but he strongly believed they were a reason for his now lack of income. Instead of analyzing the situation and understanding the market crash, he immediately pointed fingers to help him cope with the loss. He made it known that night that he would support the clan in anything they would plan to do in reference to the housing market. He strongly believed that the clan was the only group that could help change his situation. My father (who is black) and a realtor, had pointed out to him what was really happening to the market. Unfortunately the family friend was not able to see eye to eye. However, several years later and down the road as he became accustomed to my father and became friends his target scapegoat group no longer seemed to exist. One Christmas dinner he apologized to my father for the night of disagreement about the housing market and the crude remarks he made, because after he analyzed the situation he was able to see the true issue in the housing market. When I first saw that mans true colors I was hurt, and I saw that he wasn’t happy, but he was indulging in ignorance to help him understand the situation at hand. Since he only knew the way of the clan and supported them, he didn’t have much room for desiring to seek the truth in the matter. The sense of brotherhood, the sense of a resource in times of need, and the overall feeling of being a part of something is what made him feel secure. However, he did not see how his sense of security was actually someone else’s fear.
**my moms side is not affiliated nor supports the KKK. The family friend”s family did….sorry for the unclear wording.
Its no lie that white males are the most privilege than any other race or gender. They are born with a a set of privileges that other genders and races are not born with. Its not their fault for this, they did not ask for this. However, they should be aware of it and not abuse it. I believe that times are so different now and that we as a society are heading in the right direction. We have set backs and some people that are being difficult and refuse to go with the change but how does that reflect on them. To heard people continuing thing like the KKK is disgusting and it makes you think about what goes through their heads. Why do they think that is ok? Its not. They are trying to point the blame for their problems on people who have done nothing do them.
Kimmel is right, we can’t afford to alienate anyone. The organized structure of his argument was good, and in doing so he addresses all walks of life, whether it be race, religion, etc. The man knows what he is talking about. But in doing so, it brings something to my attention. If we are socially separated by so many things, how can we expect everyone to be treated equally? The fact that we are socially separated by the amounts of melanin in our skin, what chunk of land we originate from, what imaginary diety we worship, which of the two political evils we side with, and many other things and STILL expect everyone to be treated equally is literally insane. No matter what separates us, we will always be equal in that we are human. This might reduce our individual identities, but is our human identity not enough? We must be willing to abandon all of these things that separate us and simply help our fellow man. I believe this should be our outlook, but I think we are too far gone to accomplish this. Too many of us have too much hate and pride in our hearts for everyone to be treated equally.
After reading this article is it definitely understood that there is a serious problem. Over the past few years there has been a rise in aggravated assault as well as violence in general. This needs to be dealt with because like Kimmel explained there was still a KKK booth set up at a festival. This promotes violence when change isn’t coped with, when people aren’t adjusting to change and not accepting the new societal views. To me, when Kimmel says “aggrieved entitlement” he suggests that white men feel as if they are entitled because that’s how it was when the nation was divided and set up. The article makes it clear that men are now only getting angry because of a shift in power and due to minorities stepping up. This correlates to Trump’s candidacy because he wants to change this. His goal is to prevent this from occurring. If angry white men vote for him as the president they believe that he will get them back their power and money. Although this may seem great for the angry white men there are other people in the world. Trump is neglecting minorities such as gay rights, women’s rights, black lives matter and immigration. The nation should be fighting for equality not putting others above one another.
I believe that Kimmel’s term “aggrieved entitlement” perfectly sums up the underlying issues presented by this article. White men have felt a sense of entitlement since the beginning of our nation, but they were unaware of this entitlement because of the issues that they faced, and the idea that because they had hardships too, they are not entitled. The idea that white men are just now becoming angry at the slight rise of power and rights that minorities are facing, whether people of color or women, is something that is widely believed by minorities, but widely unaccepted by white men. Men feel that others gaining rights has a direct negative effect on them and their rights and economic safety, which is utterly untrue and ignorant. These beliefs, however, are one of the reasons that Trump has become such a powerful person in the presidential election. Angry white men believe that Trump will somehow “get them back their rights and money”, not realizing that by supporting Trump, they are simply taking away the rights that others have worked so hard to ensure. Trump has strong beliefs against issues such as black lives matter, gay rights, immigration, and women’s rights and feminism. By downplaying and completely hurting these groups of people and their fights for equal treatment, white men believe that they are being ensured what they have always been given access to – not realizing that this is only given to them at the unfortunate cost of others. Trump is using the idea of “God, Guns, and Gays” to try and create a world for white men as it used to be, preaching that white men have been wronged, and that the world needs to go back to the way it was, which is when the rights of minorities were even lesser than they are now.
After reading Kimmel’s main arguments, I think that there seems to be a generalization held to all white males. While I believe it is true that years ago, white men were assumed to inherit positions of power, I don’t think his reasoning can be generalized to all white males. The main argument Kimmel makes is that white males who were originally handed opportunity, power and success, are angry that they now have to work hard and compete to obtain certain levels of success. Concentrating the displeasure of the change in society over the past 30 years, I think there are more factors underneath the surface that can fuel these “angry white men”
Thinking back to 30 years ago, many white men in the work force now were only kids, so they were never in a position of power, and probably didn’t even notice that power was held mostly on white men. Kimmel actually brings up the politics of welfare and how white men can feel the burden is on them to fund these programs for blacks who were “not deserving of benefits”. I can agree with the argument Kimmel makes here. Since white men were the predominant work force, they feel they have been working hard. However, as more and more blacks have been integrated in the work force, they needed to start somewhere. Having no prior work, when blacks were increasingly given more opportunity in the work force and the idea of welfare came out, white feel since they were the ones with the most money, they had to sacrifice more of their hard earned funds, to people who had not worked as long as they had. Naturally, these white men became angry when it came time to provide a large sum of funds to a system that helped out a group other than themselves. However when it comes to entitled male anger and incidence of violence, I don’t think correlation can prove causation.
For example, the Sandy Hook and Aurora shootings were both done by two white males. However, when we see high profile acts of violence such as this, there are usually other factors present in the carrying out of these terrible acts. A big factor in these high profile acts is mental health. I don’t think we can link the shooters motives in these events to displeasure of increasing competition and decreased entitlement in society.
Actually, he’s not generalizing to all white males. We’ll discuss this in class on Thursday.
The article, “Angry White Men”, was eye opening to read. The concept of school shootings has been an issue for a very long time and has come up often, but there are so many aspects that go into the psychology behind the shootings that I never thought about. For instance, it never seemed significant to me that the shooters were white boys. I completely agree with the author when he said that, “there is no doubt we’d be having a national debate about inner-city poor black girls.” If the killers were either black or female the world would explode with debate after debate and gun laws would probably be tighter. Even to me, a woman, the fact that the shooters were men never meant anything to me. It’s probably because the world associates violence with men more than women. Men are always seen as the abusers and women as the victims. Also, the ethnicity of the killers never seemed important. However, as is very evident today, the ethnicity of the killer means a great deal. When the killer is white and the victim is black: scandal, when the killer is black: scandal, when the killer is white and the victim is white: not a big deal. It’s easy to forget the horrible things that white people do to each other, but if people of different races do horrible things to each other the world never forgets it. One thing I don’t fully agree with is the fact that everyone around the killer is stupid if they don’t realize what is going on inside the killer beforehand. The kinds of people that end up going on mass killing sprees tend to be charismatic and rather calm before they snap. More often than not, the people around the killer won’t know that there is anything wrong until that dreadful day. All in all, this excerpt was really interesting to read and offered a lot of different idea surrounding such a devastating topic.
The anger of white men is a serious problem that we are currently facing in our society, partly because it is contributing to Donald Trump’s success in the presidential race. However, while I find this trend of increasingly hostile white men disturbing, it is not all that surprising. Whenever someone has an immense amount of power and privilege, the last thing that person wants to do is to lose it. White men in particular, have enjoyed many advantages over other social groups throughout American history and it is only recently that this demographic has begun to lose those advantages. This has obviously frustrated the white men who believe that it is their right to have privileges over non-whites. When this factor is combined with decreasing economic opportunities, the end is result is anger and in some cases violence. Thus, the fact the many white men are so hostile is predictable. Furthermore, it very well may be wise for society to address these angry white men. If society could help them to embrace the positive changes that have taken place over the past few decades and to see that they are no better than other social groups, then there may be fewer instances of racism and sexism in the United States. Yet, if these angry white men continue to refuse to embrace change, then I fear that political candidates such as Donald Trump will become commonplace.
I think Kimmel’s term “aggrieved entitlement” perfectly operationalizes the cognitive dissonance, or discomfort, White men feel when people who are traditionally oppressed start vocalizing their pain to the White man. After centuries of passivity, marginalized groups of people are finally starting to speak out about their discomfort with the damaging words of white men and, unsurprisingly, this act brings attention to his ignorance and offensiveness. Rather than admitting to the privileges and obvious advantages White men have had historically in our country, they are claiming that they are now the ones being treated unfairly. This aggrieved entitlement is exactly what Trump’s campaign thrives on. He plays on the fact that the White working class man feels as if his privileges are being infringed upon, and Trump promises he is going to be their “champion” who fixes this problem and “makes America great again.” If Trump were elected, the blatant dominance of White men over the rest of society would be preserved. Even if a White man did not agree with all of Trump’s policies, he does agree with remaining culturally superior. White men: living in a country built for them, by others.
I believe that Kimmel’s theoretical framework is a valid statement. Looking at the variables, accesses to weapons, hostility between races or religions, and local school culture, I personally believe that logically there is a correlation between them.
For example, if a student is constantly bullied multiple time by the same person or same group and has access to a gun it is possible that person may take action against that group of people. If a person is very happy and everyone is kind to one another that group is assumed less likely to initiate a school shooting due to the fact they have no reason to. The variables that Kimmel has covered allows for people to gain an idea of similarities between the areas of where school shootings have taken place in the past and allow for others to prepare if they show similar characteristics. Attending a high school that specifically fits into the category that would be classified as having a school shooting allowed for my school to be prepared for in an incident were one to take place.
After the Sandy Hook shooting our school district became very concerned regarding the similarities between the two towns. Upon further investigation our school found more alarming facts regarding depression and accessibility to guns that made it believe that we were at a high risk of a school shooting to take place within our district. This lead to simulated emergency drills within primary, middle and high school level within the district. These simulations allowed teachers and students to react in real time to see what to do if this ever happened. This also allowed officials and police to see where we needed improvement so the least amount of causalities would happen if this were to take place. While we have never had an incident take place if it was to happen we would be prepared.
Entitlement and jealousy I believe are part of human nature. “White Males” who have been on the top of the ladder for some time now are trying to defend their place and in some cases attack those who are now reaching their step in the ladder. Women and people of different races who have now risen and seen advancement in social mobility are now in conflict with the would be owners of the social class system. A lot these conflicts that we see today is because of this sense of entitlement that the owners have and that they will not allow any one else to be on their same level. They are jealous of the fact that anyone else can be just like them and they will do anything to differentiate themselves and defend their positions. There has been change in the social aspects of our country and it very apparent that the people in charge are now unhappy that they don’t control things anymore.
I believe that there is a relationship between “entitled” male anger and high profile incidence of violence lets use the South as an example. Before the reconstruction, blacks were slaves and servants that basically built the economy of the south given that it was an agrarian economy. They did this by farming cotton and tobacco in plantations. These southerners, majority of them were illiterates and got their riches from trading these farmed goods. Out of nowhere there came the reconstruction that took away their slaves, their source of income or survival if you may. Now they have absolutely no clue what to do and no more wealth. What do you think would be the outcome? Violence against the blacks that dared to be equal with them. They started lynching blacks and burning them. You can say the same of today’s society. Polices against poverty, welfare etc are being created, immigrants are flocking to the country and these men feel emasculated because they feel like the economy is not benefitting them, they feel a sense of entitlement because they don’t want these poor black people or immigrant getting all these benefits instead they should be getting it because they are white and entitled to it. Eventually they become filled up with hate and carry out acts of violent to feel masculine again. There has been so many shootings lately because this such as the movie theatre shooting in Colorado and the Charleston church shooting in South Carolina
I do believe that there is a relationship between “entitled male anger” and high-profile incidents of violence, as Kimmel suggests. Drawing from Kimmel’s writings, it becomes clear that the school rampages that he assesses stem from a sense of emasculation. We see these occurrences when we look at the majority of the shooters in these events, who were well-known and even vocal about the torturous and unrelenting bullying that they encountered on a daily basis within their schools. Their response to being emasculated can be attributed to main-stream media and culture, in which we learn that the robbing of one’s pride (masculinity) through shame and humility, can be retaliated or regained only through acts of violence, in which we inflict those responsible for these acts and therefore transfer that power and the humility.
After each school massacre, there are debates over guns’ control around the country.After some weeks headlines in the news are replaced by new events and life goes on.Controlling guns’ use in the country can reduce certain crimes but will never resolve the problem of school shootings and the sort.Just as Michael Kimmel says it ” we need to reinstall these angry white men and boys in a cultural and social context in which that anger can find expression”. The white men/boys are angry because they are not accepted by their peers, they have lost their pride; as a result, they kill others in order to be recognized. As a sociologist, Kimmel analyzes what the society cannot pinpoint easily, violence is a coping strategy for these men/boys to reduce or even end their stressful lives. Accordingly, if the model he proposes cannot help to identify schools at risk of mass shootings and school violence, it will for sure contribute to a better understanding of the factors that can trigger such unhappy events in the country. And will bring the school administrators to the mindset of taking into account any suspicious attitudes regardless of race, gender, or social class of the student without marginalizing anyone.
I think that Kimmel’s main argument is oppression. It is only because these “attackers” do not follow the male normative and therefore picked on that led to social development problems. I do not think it is a relationship and entitlement and high-profile violence. I think it’s the correlation between controlled oppression and controlled self-esteem. It is how one takes control of the issues at hand. Brains are calibrated to follow the first instinct and not think things through. Therefore, there the brain is fixed on one situation and follows through the first intensions.
Kimmel defines “aggrieved entitlement” as men aggravation and defensiveness in both of their country and a sense of self being taking away from them.
Yes, because intersectionality is an issue today. There is more then one side of the story that could possibly fit into the puzzle. The model of intersectionality is crucial to understanding and analyzing how one subject influences and affects the other.
Senator Jim Inhofe who belongs to the Republican Party first used this term in 1994. Hence, I think it brings to the issue of to purify culture. This allows politicians to purify themselves in a messy form of ultra-conservatism. Working class white voters who live in the mid-west will absolutely vote for the three “Gs” because it is a common understood language that goes against the modern normative.
It is a cultural issue because they are more worried about conformed unity. Where if the economics come into this group it would be more of a conflict. It relates to race, gender and class because they are only targeting only one group.
I think that cultural issues trump the economic concerns pertaining to this group because it is clear in most cases these people will always be in poverty. The only
I have a few friends that listen to hate media. I have noticed that their behavior has changed as to be more statisfied for a brief period. Hate media exploited issues that have been taken out of the intended context. By doing this my friends also bring down my mood and expects me conform to the same level with them when hate media is shown. Hence, they will be happy and I will be miserable in that event. By all means I am not being their cohort in that respect.
The term “aggrieved entitlement” is Kimmel’s term. He’s one of the top gender scholars in sociology. Kimmel introduces the term in the reading I assigned to both conceptualize and operationalize white male anger in an empirical study of the subject as it applies to school shootings. I’m pretty certain that Senator Inhofe has a lot to say about “entitlements,” but this is not the same thing. One man is a researcher and a scholar; the other won a beauty contest and was elected to the Senate.
I do have a friend that listens regularly to what some refer as ” hate media” and “outrage media”. She tells me that see has seen enough of it that so doesn’t stay quiet anymore. When there are videos of police officers being so violent against the person that is going to be arrested, or just in general when the police officer is hurting the person in where the person ends up getting hurt. For her it isn’t right that the police officers hurt and take advantage of the job they are giving. She told me that, the some videos are so bad that she has to comment on the video so she can take out her anger she has inside of her after seeing the video. Everyone has there own opinion on certain things, but what is happening now with the police officers arresting people and just being so violent isn’t fair. Her behavior has changed throughout this issue of police brutality and she just starts getting anger and expresses herself through comments she makes on social media.
After reading this article I had a million different thoughts going through my mind. Kimmels provides good points for his main argument. The angry white men feeling a type of entitlement, its almost like how certain people feel of the “welfare queens”. Just like they believe the “welfare queens” are lazy and living off the government making people feel that the ones on assistance “deserves” it. Yet on the other hand you have someone who is white that feels “entitled” to certain things just because they just so happened to be born a certain color. My biggest issue with this article is that we are stealing dealing with the same issues for about 30 years. The angry white men are failing to adjust to the evolution of society as we know it today. I do believe there is a relationship between the angry white man and high profile incidents of violence. These last couple years of random shootings such as the 2012 Aurora movie theater shooting. Innocent people were killed, and as stated in the youtube clip, games like Call of Duty and Battlefield in a way has conditioned people to see massive deaths and not feel emotion towards the killing, making people believe that it will have the same effect in real life. Now if one was to have an angry white man play the game “Call Of Duty: World at War” you play as a soldier just killing Japanese people, again conditioning to target a certain group of individuals.
People need to stop blaming others for their problems and accept responsibility for their actions. I feel that people spend too much time and energy on things that wont benefit them in any way. One of my former coworkers listens to “hate media” regularly and I noticed that his personality changed drastically when he started listening to it. to me he was obviously being brainwashed and he didn’t even realize it. he changed to the point that he wasn’t getting along with other coworkers and didn’t have any respect for customers. His behavior got him fired and he cant blame anyone but himself. People need to start accepting responsibility for their actions instead of blaming others.
I think the point the author is making is a little more complicated than this. There are a lot of “structural” economic problems that are causing people to be angry. Hit hardest have been marginally educated (and in many cases not educated) white men, who traditionally had a lock on the employment markets. In the period leading up to and following World War II they enjoyed privilege and job stability. All of that eroded by the time period of the 1970’s, after which the U.S. lost its exclusive hold and dominance in the areas of trade and manufacturing. During the same time, women and minorities saw gains in the wake of the civil rights movement. All of that increased labor competition hit white men in particular very hard.
So to your point, people need to move on and stop blaming others. Yes. They do need to do that. And as Kimmel points out, many of these men have failed to adjust. Yet at the same time, people can’t simply take “personal responsibilty” and in doing so overcome the power of such dramatic changes in the economy. Now, the economy is hurting everyone. Simply telling people to “suck it up” and take responsibility, while it might be the only thing that people can do at this point to feel empowered, will not in the longrun overcome the damage done by these very large and very real structural economic changes. Likewise, scapegoating others, getting angry, and acting out in violent ways, particulary against women and minorites, is also not the answer.
So the white American male is the villain, eh? He is cranky because non-Caucasians and the feminine gender have moved into his sand box and, in some cases, have kicked him out of his sandbox. Is this what it’s really all about? Is every angry white male angry because of “aggrieved entitlement”? I am a middle class conservative white American male. Let me explain what makes me angry. Illegal aliens flooding into this country and not paying taxes but enjoying free medical care while I have to pay through the nose to afford my medical insurance. That makes me angry! How about watching the news night after night and seeing nothing but mug shots of local black men (and even black women) who committed violent crimes. That makes me angry! What about the black neighbor’s college age son who got three white girls pregnant? The creep doesn’t work and sponges off his parents who do work. One night I am awoken to a woman’s voice outside only to realize that it’s the son and one of the white girls having sex in her car parked at the curb. That makes me angry! One night my outside security light came on. I look out and saw a black man in the middle of my back yard. He froze then fled off into the night. I reported him with a description and later that evening the Police called and informed me that they apprehended a guy who fit the description and he had a record of burglary. That makes me angry! Here’s a good one. This is no lie. I woke up one morning and there was an SUV parked right at the foot of my back steps. I called the Police and four police cruisers arrived. They police had guns drawn and ordered the occupants out, then hauled each one away in handcuffs. They were all black males and the youngest, I was told, was thirteen. Note: there was no police abuse. The police told me the car was stolen and that they chased this car at midnight until they lost it in my neighborhood. It makes me angry that I cannot feel safe in my own home anymore. Another thing that make me angry is belligerent music (rap music) being blasted from cars at all hours. The bass literally rattles the window in my house. This is a product of the black culture; not angry white men. We grew up on the Beatles and the Beach Boys. Let ask this: While Europeans white men were busy setting up the US government and the original colonies what were all the black men over on the continent of Africa doing? While American white men like Robert Fulton, Eli Whitney, Thomas Edison, Orville and Wilbur Wright, Alexander Graham Bell, John Moses Browning, Samuel Morse, Cyrus McCormick, Charles Goodyear, Willis Carrier and Dr. Jonas Salk were busy inventing and making valuable contributions to humanity what were the black men on the continent of Africa doing? Some the of the aforementioned men were from humble beginnings and had no formal education, yet they were persistent and worked hard at their craft. They weren’t all from some privileged class who stomped down potential rivals of other color or ethnicity. While angry white men are still in high positions in this country, do we have genocide going on in the United States? No we don’t. But Africa does. Africa also has black men (Muslim black men) marauding other black populations and hauling their women and children off as slaves. This is going on as I write this. Go ahead, blame this on angry white men too. Everything is our fault. If it wasn’t for angry white men we’d all be slaves to Islam. Oh heck, now I’m being intolerant, aren’t I. Well guess what? I am not going to be tolerant to any religious group who is bent on forcing others to follow their faith under penalty of slavery or death. One last tidbit. I worked with a wonderful man, Ed, years ago who was a professor at an engineering college for 24 years before the college went bankrupt and closed its doors. Ed had a masters degree in mechanical engineering. He started working as a draftsman and went to school at night. He worked hard for his degrees. Well Ed was out of work when he came to work at the company I worked at. He was an engineer’s engineer and I loved working with him. He was never condescending and always took time to explain things (his teaching nature). Well one day Ed told me that he had applied for a teaching job at another college. It was a toss up between him and another candidate who happened to be a black woman with less education and even less work experience but she got the job. In my opinion, that is reverse discrimination. It obvious that the woman got preference due to affirmative action. Ed was upset but he was anything but an angry white man even though he would have had a reason to be. So while everyone is on the band wagon of bashing the angry white man consider all I have shared herein.
There is definitely a relationship between entitled male anger and violence. Just look at the kid who threatened to shoot up his school if Anita Sarkeesian, a feminist speaker, came to speak at his university. Or for that matter any of the abuse and harassment that Anita Sarkeesian has endured. And this certainly isn’t a new thing; Just look at the Disco Demolition Night from 1979. All of these events and many more happen directly because of white men angry about having their privilege challenged. That’s what Kimmel means by aggrieved entitlement. These men, who refuse to recognize their own privilege and assume they are just entitled to it, become violent when their perceived “rights” are challenged.
Kimmel’s theoretical framework looks at different aspects of local culture. Looking at how these aspects affect masculinity in an area could probably work out to be a good indicator of where school shootings will happen if school shootings are, in fact, related to white boy anger.
This is typically a mindset that plenty people will not get over. I have seen where the
younger generation has changed compare to few whites who has such mentally. Society are changing, look today we have people of color in top ranks, that could
could not happen once upon a time. Soon these will all be things of the past, as we are getting more diverse than ever before.
I definitely do believe that there is a relationship between “entitled” male anger and high-profile incidents of violence. It is extremely clear to see the pattern that lyes within the entitlement of gender privileges and it’s causation within the social involvement.White man are led to believe that they are GUARANTEED a great support system in this country. They are guaranteed a fixed job, loving wives and ambitious children. However, they look at the world now and see themselves in competition with other types of males, unlike them of course, and become enraged. They become enraged at the fact that they are no longer the one in absolute “control”, no longer the one who assures nobility and maturity. They no longer acquire manhood. The white men then become desperate, desperate to restore the ideal picture of a “man” in their minds and end up acting in infuriating ways to the outside world. Screaming for manipulation and domination aiming to be the main authority… even if it only lasts a couple seconds.
I do think there is a relationship between entitled male anger and high profile incidents of violence. I think white males have a sense of entitlement because of the privileges that they get in this country because of their race. I think when they feel threatened or feel that their privilege may be taken away from them that turns into anger which eventually turns into violence or aggrieved entitlement. I also think Kimmel’s framework could help to identify schools at risk. I do not have a relative or friend that listens regularly to hate and outrage media. But, I do think if one listens to that type of media excessively it will influence their thinking and cause a change in their behavior.
I believe Kimmel main argument that the American society encouragement of men to achieve self-definition, independence, strength, and a sense of purpose through violence in some form shaping a culture of violence for dominate status. Now that the country is going in a different direction now compared to the 60s “white men” are experiencing loss of jobs which cause them to feel less masculine and they want someone to blame instead of blaming the CEO of these companies it seem like it easier to blame the persons on the lower economic strata for their problem’s.
White anger towards “minorities” is a pointless practice of trivial ideology pre-sentenced to fail because the country is shifting towards racial equality and greater income inequality. At the end of the day there are conflicts within each race alone and all people of all races are in social conflict altogether. In what name they announce their illusional superiority? It’s as well visible to understand that ordinary white people are the victims of their own ‘gods of the city’, however, there’s no tolerance for aggression and violence. After all, all races are in the same cauldron classified into the middle and working classes under decision making rulers immune for outside influence on major national governence. People have a choice to draw peaceful societies but each decision towards the peace costs individual suffering. Education is definitely a strong tool to have a touch of power to initiate change but to get educated is a struggle for many (including all races) young people due to social conflicts created by economic recession.
Kimmel made some great points in the argument. Male immunity operates on an individual and societal level to maintain male dominance. Patriarchal traditions made men believe that they are entitled to power and control. This type of behavior is possessive. People who enjoy watching hate media and outrage media are demonized psychopaths. Aggrieved entitlement can cause a person to kill someone just to reclaim what a person feels entitled to. It’s like taking a toy from a distressing two year old. It’s childish, people need to grow up.
To be quite honest, I think it’s pretty disturbing that white males who act out in anger by killing others in a public setting, are “diagnosed” as persons with mental illness. It’s absurd that that these angry white men think society owes them for being emasculated. It’s ironic how these men are born into white supremacy, born with a gold spoon in their mouth[so to speak] and they have the nerve to act out in rage because “society owes them everything.” But it’s interesting how some of them kill themselves after they have done their satisfaction of killing everyone else. A post that I came across on this website stated “It’s only after we’ve lost everything, that we’re free to do anything.” They rage against society when they feel like they’ve been stripped to their core. After going through their humiliation of whatever sort, they feel they have the power to get it back. When they finally have that white male dominance again, are they really satisfied if they commit suicide afterwards? [Such as the guys in the Columbine shooting and the other white male involved in the elementary school shooting.]
I agree that white men fail to adjust. Everyone has a difficult time adjusting, in general. Who likes change? But blaming change on others instead of adjusting yourself is wrong. We are all equal. And everyone should have always had equal opportunities. Before when minorities struggles with equality, white men didn’t care. They couldn’t care less because it didn’t effect them. But now that minorities are further educating themselves and doing better, they blame minorities for taking their jobs and such. It’s unfair? No, they worked hard to get to where they are now and deserve whatever job they were offered. Racism exists and so does white privilege. To white men “white privilege” seems to take away their accomplishments, but in reality, it’s the truth. Of course they worked hard but the color of their skin gave them a push too. It makes sense that “aggrieved entitlement” relates to angry white men. They feel that they are being wronged. And they want to hurt others like they were hurt. It gives them satisfaction when others are hurt as they were and they get back some control. This usually turns out to violence but they feel that this will bring their “manhood” back and a sense of power. School shootings is about the same mentality. Whatever they were humiliated by, they need to prove themselves and to others that they are in control, powerful, manly. It’s so sad that we live in a generation where you have to worry about getting killed in school. The kid in Copper Cab, is he psychotic? Watching his videos is really scary. I’ve seen other clips he’s made… it’s so disturbing. He has so much anger in him. If he’s just doing it for show and attention, it’s one thing but if he’s actually furious at the world about all the things he talks about in his clips… I think he needs some help. That anger can turn out to be something more serious than a youtube video.
I believe that kimmel’s view of aggreaved entitlement is correct. he states that aggreaved entitlement is the feeling that white men get. this occurs when they have been outcasted and called names and immmasculated and they want to get thair so called entitled rights back. these males believe that they have lost their power and inorder to get their power back they believe they must hurt or do something drastic in these cases its school shootings sadly but through this they feel that they have reclaimed their name. if only they could just realize that the times have changed and only the rich are the entitled ones everyone else is just trying make theirs.
general level of happiness over time?
Unfortunately, I do have a relative who listens to “hate media” fairly often. He re-posts whatever he watches on his blog and his Facebook page so the entire cyber-world can see his anger. This includes his hatred towards minorities taking “White-American” jobs and overbearing “feminazis”. Clearly, when his wife speaks to him about this, he disregards her and claims that the world needs to hear his “genius-ness” on what he reads on the Internet. Since witnessing him reading this, he disputes new ideas and is overall, just angry at the world and everyone in it. His level of happiness is near non-existent, since he mostly focused on spreading his ideas on “hate media”. In turn, he is usually extremely focused or is angry at the world. It’s sad to say that I know this man, but I have had a close relationship since I was very little, and he has changed completely since I was very little.
This topic about how society has catered to the white population, specifically men is quite obvious and ironic at the same time. Kimmel states, that school shooting have been linked to many causes such as; movies media, family structure, school culture and so on. All things considered many of these young teen shooters were both male and white. Also, the majority of the shooting on school campuses or in schools happened Middle America. Many of those states are republican and have very specific ideals of who should run this country and be successful working people with privileges (white supremacists) . This is a century old notion which needs to change. America is very populous and diverse. Change is good and inevitable.
I agree with Kimmel’s argument that there might be a relationship between entitled male anger and high-profile incidents of violence. I believe that white men who are angered and feeling threatened due to their perceived displacement of power in society are directing their anger to marginalized groups who have historically been without power; they feel as if their privilege is something that they deserve and others do not simply due to white maleness. I have a relative who listens to Rush Limbaugh and seems to have an overwhelming displaced anger geared towards minorities and marginalized groups who are receiving jobs better than what he has. It seems as if he feels that these people are less deserving than him, and the fact that they are ranking higher in society angers him. I think white men who were historically born into privilege and effortless receiving of jobs feel lost and angry when this process is less prevalent than it used to be (although still very present). They have this idea that other groups are entering their spaces and unrightfully taking away their jobs and so they place their anger on these groups rather than the institutions and larger social forces.
I believe that there is a pecking order constructed by our society which was built on racism.I believe that race is the main determiner of where one fits in or rather, who gets treated the best or worst. People who feel that the current state of race relations are not that damaging or not that big of a deal need to make conscious efforts to become aware of what perpetuates racism and race division in our society and the very large part that privilege plays in complacency. This is not something that can easily be changed but can be worked on. uUnfortunately denial is very hard to overcome.
White men in this country have been told that they are the leading force behind the nation, for so long they held every powerful position. They were taught that minorities are below them and that they have to FIGHT for what they believe and to make others know that they are not weak. When people particularity white males feel they are losing power something switches in their brain and they go into panic mode. It is as if they rather be deemed violent and harsh then be seen as weak or an outcast. This type of harsh mind set mixed with the variables mentioned in Kimmel’s research is the leading reason for white males and school shootings. The variables I see as being most harmful is the local gun culture since it enables people to be in position of a gun and to feel more comfort in using it to solve their problems. Another major if not the leading variable in Kimmel’s study is gender culture, it establishes the essential power that white males feel they are born into and therefor creates the tension if that power is violated or lost. I think even if there are more cases it would still be very hard to predict a shooting. Even though the research gives so many variables and insights as to why school shootings happen, the shoots are still based on situation. What I mean that every person is so different in how they handle their emotions and problems. So even if someone has all of the variables that might still not go to extremes. I do feel however that the research can be used more as a guide to try and limit school shooting by doing their best to teach students how to deal with their anger and resentment, while teaching tolerance and acceptance of others.
Many things have changed over the years and because a lot of white men feel like it is not in their favor, they have a hard time accepting these changes. It even gets to the point where they become angry and instead of taking it out on the right people they take it out on other people who they feel have taken away their privileges. Kimmel argued that white men have this “aggrieved entitlement” which I believe means that they feel that they have the right to react, negatively or not, because they have been “wronged.” What I don’t understand is how minorities have been treated unfairly and have been deprived and denied rights for many years but to some whites it was not really a major issue, until it started happening to them.
I agree with Kimmel’s argument. White male entitlement could be linked to violence especially in a culture that teaches men to be violent. Violence is seen everywhere and these boys who were bullied experienced violence everyday. They learned it and repeated it in the extreme way because they felt no one cared and wanted to fix a wrong in society. The term aggrieved entitlement means giving justification to those who feel they have been harmed to act violent towards others. I agree with Kimmel’s 7 variables as factors to consider in school shootings. With this analysis, it could incorporate preventive measures in those areas.
I agree with Kimmel about the white male not adjusting to changes made in. the last 30 years. The problem is, I think, white males and white people in general don’t know what privilege actually looks like. What we would consider white privilege would be normal circumstance for white people. Instead of adapting to changes toward equality white males, who have been enjoying privilege from society, are angry to compete. They try to make it harder for anyone else to succeed. Women included.
It doesn’t surprise me that most mass shooters are white males. In fact the most prolific killers are white males but black males in poor neighborhoods make the news. White race is rarely reported in the news and I believe the news is skewed to portray white males as victims of environment instead of angry and dangerous.
I see history repeating itself. There was a time in the south when “poor whites” were upset with former slaves who were literate and possessed more valuables than them. The poor, illiterate whites would vandalize the property of the former slaves and try to make them feel inferior. Although these white had nothing of value themselves, they still felt as though they were superior because they were white. What’s going today is pretty much the same. This world is dominated by the white male and it has been that way for quite some time. So when you have lower class whites struggling to make ends meet, they resent minorities who benefit, or “get ahead”, due to government programs and job placement. The white males who are struggling in this society do not realize that their anger should be directed towards the top 1% earners who acquire all of the wealth and do not spend any of it in order to keep the economy afloat, and help them do better.
Hell yeah some of these white men are angry, and its all about POWER!. The country that they believe belongs to them, and them only, has been trying to evolve- but they refuse to allow this happen. The same country that taught, allowed, and supported their racist behavior, bigotry, and chauvinism- now tells them that they must learn how to adjust and treat everyone as their equals. If they speak against other groups in public they are condemned. They even sometimes face harsh consequences for negative actions towards these groups. They look to the wealthy white men who have the power for help, but these wealthy white men now look down upon them and deem them as inferiors. Of course this is hard for them to adjust to.
I agree with Kimmel’s main argument. I think that there is a link between male entitlement and white men. They believe that they are the most hardworking individuals and the opportunities that were once offered to them should always be at their fingertips. In a way they feel that they are being rejected by society, resulting in them painting themselves as a victim. They can’t fathom being disenfranchised by society like the way many people of color and women have been. They have lived their whole lives feeling entitled and being deemed the most powerful, intelligent, and capable group that when they are faced with the reality of their mediocrity they have a hard time adjusting. When they see minorities and women doing better than them they can feel extremely angry and resentful. I think that there is a relationship between entitled male anger and high- profile incidents of violence because when these angry men have been taught by society that the only way to express their emotions is violence, they will react to constant unpleasant situations, and rejection with incidents of extreme violence that affect others in volatile ways.
I agree with the author that white men fail to adjust. I say this because they are use to having everything to their selves and not having to worry about anybody taking their place in the work force. also now that we are trying to still have everyone have equal rights they do not like that. white men need to get over it because it will never just be a white mans world anymore.
I agree that people in this case white man tent to blame currents problems/issues on the wrong people which are minority. As a replacement of blaming the entrepreneurs that are the ones taking the jobs away. They should be blaming the government, for expending our taxes on wars, and them try to generate more money from those that can hardly afford a place to leave. It is so sad to see that people on the low or middle strata fight against each other, instead of unite themselves to fight against those doing all the harm; which are those on the high strata, those with money and power.
I believe that there is a connection between “entitled” male-anger and high profile incidents of violence. I don’t think that the first thought that comes to mind is seeing the connection, but after reading Kimmel’s side and explanations, it all does come into play. Not to mention, makes perfect sense. What I think is disgusting and sad is that these “angry white boys” are almost written off as having some kind of mental disorder that was not properly treated. WHY?! Why when it is a minority (not shooting) but being shot by the police they must have been doing something extremely wrong, even with no weapons present. Yet these white males randomly enter movie theaters and schools and kill innocent people and children but for them there must be something not right in their brains. This brings me to my point that the angry white men are supposedly so upset that there entitlement has been taken from them, when yet the entitlement very clearly still does exist. That is why thier bad behavior is almost always excused. It is nowhere near the same for minorities. So many minorities are behind bars for crimes they may not have even committed. Its sad. To some extent I agree with Kimmel that we should instead take time to understand them and see what they feel was taken from them. I agree that acting as ignorant as them is not the answer. However, I have no sympathy for these kind of people who can’t see people for people but instead see people for color.
I think Kimmel hit the nail right on the head. “Angry while people” love to blame everyone else for problems that have nothing to do with another race or gender. I think this is so because everything has been handed to them always and they don’t know how to work for things. Therefor, it is easier to blame someone else then to get up and work for what you want. In some cases entitled male anger and high-profile incidents of violence do have a relationship. For example, hate crime has to do with with entitled male anger. But there are a lot of incidents where people kill just because they want to. Like a lot of school shootings are just for the fun of it. I think what Kimmel means aggrieved entitlement white men feel like they have been treated unfairly because others have taken away what they deserve.
I see where Kimmel’s argument comes from and how he sees economic and social change as part of the reason white men are upset. I understand how it can be frustrating and hard to come to grips that economic and power of the white male has changed. This change has caused white men to become frustrated with peers who may not see a problem with having to work a little harder to succeed in today’s world. These angry white males also tend to blame immigration (legal and illegal) and both social and political change for obstacles they historically never had to deal with. For example, a female has just became their boss. They may feel less of a man because they have to take orders from a women. Or they may feel as though no women should be holing a position of power and decision making. I think this angry white male trend will continue to breed conflict and violence and things will get worse; because as time goes on I believe just being a white male will be less and less of a factor than even today on success, resources, housing, and jobs.
I’m not too sure if I agree that aggrieved entitlement is the right word to use when talking about school shootings or the young male in this video. I feel like aggrieved entitlement is something that becomes more relatable with people eighteen and older because of the change in laws like Affirmative Act and adopting and enforcing actual job requirements. (Just being a white male isn’t going to an advantage over all races of women or minority groups during life or in job market.) I see how taunting and emasculating young male students can make them upset and can lead them to resort to violence to reassert themselves.
Can you explain to me, in class or in a response here, how or what young children feel entitled to? Am I just take the entitled part too literal in terms of white males and school shootings?
In regards to young people, he is referring to “entitlement” that derives primarily from gender, which is basis upon which they make claims to dominance and social power. Keep in mind, their gendered self is itself influenced by local cultural factors (i.e. religion, gun culture). The young boys are denied gender privilege (the power that comes from being male) when they are bullied at school, which Kimmel explains occurs in ways that imply they are either geneder deficient (Cho) or gender freaks (Columbine, Paducha). The only way these boys feel they can restore what was taken from them (their intact male-gendered sense of self) is to engage in acts of restorative violence. They take their power back by killing their classmates.
Your reply helped me better understand what he means, thank you.
That’s good to know. FYI….ref our conversation in class, I looked for your comment under “Censoring Disorder,” but can’t find it anywhere on the site. Sorry about that. Please re-post if you can./s
Kimmels talk with “Rick” reminded me of the “Whiteness Project” in how one of the guys interviewed was upset that even though he got a higher score on the test yet the position was filled by a minority. Guys like this feel like they get screwed, but I immediately thought that maybe those minority guys feel like they get screwed too? (maybe not necessarily with the job aspect but in general) After reading this and watching the “Whiteness Project”, I almost feel like white men feel entitled, yet complain about other issues where they say others – like minority’s feel entitled to XYZ because theyre a minority…
Also, I absolutely agree with Kimmel about white men and their failure to adjust!!! Times have changed, and are changing currently, and will continue to change – this is part of life! If people fail to adjust, and fail to see the necessity of adjusting, they do themselves a huge disservice in regards to the idea of “living and learning”. Nothing in life will ever remain a constant – adjusting accordingly is beyond helpful – but a necessity for growth.
It’s very interesting on what Kimmel had to say about the “Angry White Men,” especially the part about the relationship between male anger and high-profile incidents of violence. The more rage, the harsher the violence. Other factors that may cause drastic violence are mental defects like schizophrenia. Then again, this can be used to escape from a jail sentence. There could be family matters that were not resolved that would lead to a rage and lead to violence.
Basic survival of the fittest as I see it. And to hide shame and embarrassment, these men choose to blame failure on people who have nothing to do with their situation. And although this is very wrong, I agree that it is important to demonize these white men, but understand why they think this way and what can be done to help them. I believe because of lack of knowledge, and a set mindset, these angry white men are set back and can’t move forward until they learn how to do better. We can also fit in pride because these angry white men won’t admit they need help instead place blame on people who accept help and are willing to work their way up from the bottom.
I completely agree with Kimmel”s statement on white men’s failure to adjust. They shouldnt blame anyone but themselves for refusing to adjust to change. They are not exempt! Instead of them wasting their energy and time hating minority groups,they should try to do something more productive with their time. dont get mad because immigrants specifically come her for better job opportunities and to do the work you are not willing to do. These angry white men are getting angry at the wrong people, get angry at the billionares moving their company to china,get mad at the governemnt for bailing out all of these banks. These angry men need to blame themselves for being unsuccessful not minority groups. I do agree that we need to try to understand them but the problem witht his is that they have all these negative media encouraging this hate.
I completely agree with Kimmel”s statement on white men’s failure to adjust. They shouldnt blame anyone but themselves for refusing to adjust to change. They are not exempt! Instead of them wasting their energy and time hating minority groups,they should try to do something more productive with their time. dont get mad because immigrants specifically come her for better job opportunities and to do the work you are not willing to do. These angry white men are getting angry at the wrong people, get angry at the billionares moving their company to china,get mad at teh governemnt for bailing out all of these banks. These angry men need to blame themselves for being unsuccessful not minority groups. I do agree that we need to try to understand them but the problem witht his is that they have all these negative media encouraging this hate.
Whenever I read or hear about these topics (male entitlement) it still blows my mind that people in the United States still act this way. But, for the men who do still feel strongly about white male entitlement, I do think there is a strong relationship between entitlement and violence. These men turn to violence because they do not know who else to blame for their hardships. They are humiliated and emasculated (they would never admit this), and turn to violence to fix their problems. Aggrieved entitlement is basically the belief of white men who are raised to believe this is “their” country because they are white and male. I feel like hate media and aggrieved entitlement is so outdated. I also feel that the individuals who do still feel strongly about these issues are ridiculous. They are in need of a reality check like its 2014 how is this still going on?
i agree with Kimmel in that men have a failure to adjust. It’s insane that they are blaming immigrants for stealing their jobs, when they need work just as much as they do. They are suffering from aggrieved entitlement, where they believe that their manhood is being taken away from them. They need to feel like men and feel like the alpha male. They feel like their the only ones deserving, and that’s absolutely not correct.
Yes I agree to Kimmel that white men fail to adjust. They don’t have entitlement to anything. White men are really are suffering from “Aggrieved Entitlement”. And want to blame immigrants. It’s their choice on being angry and not anyone us.
After reading this article, I feel that Kimmel argues that men are primarily the reason why violence occurs. Even though most people do not want to admit it, men always start the problems and will not give up until they feel entitled to win. They want to feel the empowerment that they won and they are on top. It means that they want to fight for what they believe in and won’t give up until it is known that they won. They feel they were promised something and they won’t give up until they are looked at as typical male. There is also a known gendered notion of self which means they want everyone around them to know what it means to be a man. When ripping a male a part, they are going to do whatever they can to prove that they are manly and will do whatever it takes to prove that. Young men are taught that violence is ok because the way that you get back at your classmates is through violence.
The white males who feel this way are definately having trouble adjusting to the time changes, and have a feeling of entitlement to their success. I do not feel that white males are the primary target, but rather any of the lower class citizens with african americans having it worse off than any body else. In my opinion, white males should be the last group complaining about feeling victimized than any other group out there in America.
After reading this article I feel that Kimmel has a lot of really great things to say about angry white men. One of Kimmels points that really stood out to me was when he said that white men feel that they are being treated like the minority when it comes to finding jobs when in fact they have just as many opportunities to find a job like everyone else. White men think that they control everything and they are the best when in fact that is not the way they should think as well. So now because a lot more minorities have come into the country white men are getting very upset and angry because they feel the minorities are taking over what is there’s. Unfortunately now more and more white men because they are so angry about the minorities they are becoming very violent and are attacking people. This is a horrible thing because everyone in this world is suppose to be treated equal and that is not the case. Also the world would be a much better place if there was no violence in the country either. Today more and more white men are involved in school shootings and that is such a shame. I feel Kimmel is trying to get people to see that white men are becoming more violent now because they feel they don’t have any power in the world or any say but that minorities have all the say in the world and are taking over. Anytime a school shooting happens it’s not right because innocent lives are being lost because white men and men in general are upset and outraged. However shooting people is not the answer talking it out would be a better situation but hopefully things will start to get better.
I agree with Kimmel that “white men fail to adjust. I see it all the time in different scenarios but I also feel that it is not just white men it is actually white race. Majority of them are men but there are some women who feel the same especially in this day and age. White men feel that they are the only ones who deserve something. The fact that they are angry about this just shows that they do not know how to adjust and how they are not accepting of the changes of society. They fear the loss of power and because of this they turn to violence such as school shootings to express their anger which makes them feel like they have gained some kind of power back.
I completely agree with Kimmel, when he explains that white men fail to adjust. Why are the white men blaming minorities for getting the opportunities that they are open to as well? It is clear that many white people have this sense of entitlement when it comes to certain things in life. They are starting to look like children who throw temper tantrums when things don’t go their way. There are many people in this world, who work hard in their professions to be acknowledged. However, it is understandable for individuals to act a certain way when things are being altered in their life. Nevertheless, these changes have been going on in the past few years. It gives the white people no excuse to be acting like this when these changes have been present for a while. We are all born with the same rights, which means we should all be offered the same opportunities as each other. Why should one race feel superior towards other races? People should starting worrying themselves and leave another person’s business alone.
Kimmel makes some great points. Specifically how he points out that white men feel they are loosing their entitlement and feel that they are becoming the minorities. Yet they still have all the power make and enforce all of the rules. They break up districts so they get their votes to stay in power while making it difficult for minorities to vote. They forget that this country was founded by immigrants and what makes America is its diversity and that their families were at one time immigrants. Whites aren’t loosing anything, times are simply changing and with that change they feel insecure in their positions of power. Conservatives boast about the “good ole days” but they are simply recalling a delusion not an actual point in history. This inevitable change makes them feel helpless and they resent what they believe is the cause of the changes causing them to lash out in anger. Thus, increasing violence and causing deep biases through out the white community.
The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution with its Bill of Rights clearly contradict the statement on ALL MEN ARE CREATED TO BE EQUAL. It is so visible to see there is a growing issue about white privilege, and disadvantage of minorities in America. These racial issues evoke strong feelings, and problem in our community. Kimmel as a white man is absolutely right when he writes in Angry White Man that “These guys refuse to admit they’ve been handed privilege all these years by a world that puts white men on top”. We have seen massive of white people generally enjoyed a higher status than the black people did. In addition to our discussion, let look at the cases of Martin Trayvon in Florida, and Michael Brown in in St. Louis Missouri. Both unarmed black teenagers were shot multiple times, and killed by angry white men. Despite evidences and witnesses, both murderers’ angry white men are free, and claimed innocent. It’s about owning up to the unequal privilege of being nonblack, despite their acts, poor judgment, profiling, and attitudes towards black people. Racism assumes that white and black can never be the same, because they believed that black people were racially inferior, and different from whites. This is a deep misleading about race, the justice system, and the media in America. Just because you have the tag of the white privilege, and it does not mean to degrade, and destroy an accomplishment by a black man occupied the white house. Nor the white privilege gives them power to kill black men on the street because they look suspicious. To be honest with you, I am endlessly frustrated by how black are being portrayed in America.
I think that Kimmel’s main argument is somewhat true, since men are always the reason for why most of the violence ever happens. Men often start a problem or approach an issue that they try to win at, and even if they are losing, they will not admit to it but continue to make it worse up until they prosper from it in some way. It is a sign of masculinity, no man likes to lose since they are losing their honor which is never a good thing; often this honor leads to violence. Aggrieved entitlement means to feel lied out of your rights or being restrained from what you have a right for. Kimmel’s theoretical framework that identifies school violence is relevant and explains why school violence happens. It is obvious that the problem does not lie just with the person itself, but with the community and how it affected the person to develop onto different forms of violence. The white working class voters are mostly religious and I’m sure that they would vote in favor to whatever allows the working class prosper. Kimmel seemed to believe that whites who are religious and appear homosexual might have a higher chance toward violence because they feel mistreated, and it seems as if he is accusing the people who commit to violent acts as misunderstood males who happen to be homosexuals.
The fact that in this reading white men are blaming immigrants and minorities for taking what they claim is “theirs” is pretty ridiculous. Its sad how people feel certain things are owed to them when in reality nobody owes anybody anything. That is why these men become so angry and violent because they are so accustomed to having things work in their favor that they don’t know how to handle anything otherwise. Furthermore, they need somebody to pin this on so of course they blame the immigrants and minorities for it. Everybody should have the same rights however, white men feel superior and truly believe they are owed the world under any and every circumstances.
In my opinion Kimmel has some good points. For a fact white men are not adjusting well to societal changes and yes they do feed their rage because they know they are loosing control. Everything is changing in todays society. Blaming immigrants for stealing their jobs is just childish. These are the same jobs that they feel like they are too empowered to do, the same jobs they look down on but guess what someone has to do it. Now that the roles in society has changed they are realizing that they have to work hard like everyone else and its making them uncomfortable. They express themselves through violence and violence is not the key. Entitlement is more. They just have to adjust to the change,educate themselves and embrace the change that is now.
According to Kimmel, boys from an early age learn that violence is an acceptable form of conflict resolution and also the admired one. When boys are aggrieved by a system that is cruel and demanding they feel a sense of entitlement. This sense of entitlements makes them think that is normal to use violence against others and to hurt them because they are being hurt. Kimmel points out Aggrieved entitlements is a gendered emotion and its gender is masculine. If some young man experience humiliating loss of manhood, it is their moral obligation and entitlement to get it back.
I do agree with Kimmel that white men fail to adjust. I believe that they are used to getting everything handed to them. Now many different races and women are able to do the same thing that white men are probably used to having authority over, for example, higher levels in the cooperation world. White men are not the only ones who deserve to be looked up to and be in control of everything. Many other people are working very hard, just to get considered where there are predominately white men. White men need to adjust to the fact that we are in the 21st century and everything is not going to stay the same forever. If they feel like other people are taking over and they do not like it, maybe they should work harder just like everyone else has to.
I see where Kimmel is coming from when he says white men fail to adjust. I believe that to be very true. White men have always been born into having rights and privileges that many other races as well as women have not been entitled to. The fact that they are “angry” because things have changed over the last 30 years, just shows ignorance in my mind. White men have always had the “control” and “power” in years past, but now tables have turned. The fact that K.K.K still exists doesn’t surprise me, because clearly cult groups of this sort never seem to diminish that easy. No matter who you are, there will always be people who will round up and start their own group of anger and hatred. The facts are that things have greatly changed in the last 30 years and that should be expected. United States is continually becoming more diverse by the minute. White men and white people as a whole still make up almost more than half of the people living in U.S. However, things are progressively changing in race “dominance” and clearly White Men are angry about that too. White men had everything handed to them from the time they came out of the womb till the time they die, with no questions asked. As that has changed, White men are questioning what happened to their rights and then essentially start blaming others for their problems. In my opinion, White men became spoiled and comfortable by all their privileges that they do not even know how to fend for themselves now that they face difficult times assimilating with changes in American society. It is easy just to blame others and call it a day, but it is hard for one to look in the mirror and realize the reality of their own that took them there to begin with.
I don’t agree with Kimmel. If there’s any factor that is increasing violence among white men population, may be other than the loosing of entitlement. I think times have changed and there are so many social issues that may be influencing in the high percent of violence and crimes existing in all different ethnic groups. This could be dysfunctional families, lack of communication and lack of time from parents to their children, social media and video games. I agree that it may exist some groups that argue that the system is now giving more privileges to black community and Latino community in term of social help such as welfare and others existing help, but not only these two groups benefit from it. Although black and Latinos are still very far away from having so much privileges as white group had since very old generations, we cannot generalize and say that all white people feel they deserve everything.
I don’t know what you mean by this sentence:
“If there’s any factor that is increasing violence among white men population, may be other than the loosing of entitlement.”
Kimmel’s argument in this chapter specifically looks at the overwhelming numbers of white men who commit SCHOOL SHOOTINGS; he’s not trying to explain violent crime in general. His model aims to account for what other social factors combined with white race identification might account for the shootings.
“I think times have changed and there are so many social issues that may be influencing in the high percent of violence and crimes existing in all different ethnic groups. This could be dysfunctional families, lack of communication and lack of time from parents to their children, social media and video games.”
By the way, it’s perfectly fine to disagree with an author/researcher. In fact, I would encourage it! Just know that if you are going to do it, you need to support your argument with data and analysis.That’s how science works. Anything short of this means you are refuting their research/argument on the basis of assertions/opinions. So for example, take the issue of video games. Almost all the research shows that there is no statistical correlation between playing violent video games and violent behavior. You can’t cite this as evidence of an issue the author overlooked, because it’s not supported by research (that’s why he looked at other reasons).
I think there might be a relationship between “entitled” male anger and high-profile incidents of violence. In my opinion everyone gets angry at some point in their life because of the way they are being treated. The problem is not getting angry, it’s what the person does after getting angry. When Kimmel uses the term “aggrieved entitlement” he is referring to angry white men who hold resentment for being treated unfairly. I do believe in Kimmel’s theory of the seven variables that could explain school violence. I also think those variables could help identify schools at risk. The angry white men need a positive way to express their anger.
Kimmel said that white men are suffering from “Aggrieved Entitlement;” in other words, they believe that their country, power and benefits are being taking away from them. Therefore, they tend to blame immigrants and other racial groups for these changes. As a result, the only way they tend to fix this problem is by being violent towards people, especially to weaker ones such as children and females. I don’t think angry white men should blame other people for these changes. I believe they should blame themselves. Also, I believe they can find a better way to fix their problem instead of being violent. For example, they should try to educate themselves about these changes first and try to think in other people’s shoes before making poor decisions because when you’re calm, you tend to make better decisions.
I agree with you. One thing I have observed is how Caucasians tend to get upset with how African American bring up “Civil War” and “segregation”. Well, this is why. They want things to be exactly as their were and African American are not going to let that happen. Time to move on and be treated equal.
I agree with Kimmel and his argument about white male’s sense of entitlement leads to incidents of violence. The violence occurs when the white males, who were in power, maybe without even knowing it, lose their power. The loss of power and privilege is a good reason to be angry but their anger is directed at the wrong thing. These men should be mad at corporations that took their jobs overseas instead of immigrants, minorities, and women who are just looking to have the same power and privilege as the white males.
The problem with these white men is that they feel entitle to things such as jobs, money and security. They could care less how other people make it through the world as long as everyone who looks like them are good. That is a very selfish mentality they have because the world is not only made up of white people, but of all other races as well. Sometimes you have to think if you could blame the white people because for many years things have been going in their favor. People who are in office looks like them so everything works out. Even in history they were the only ones who had a chance to become something in this world and some people expect that to never change. A surprising fact is that sociologist hardly study whites as a race as if they are the perfect ones who don’t need any analysis. The reason why the white people get away with most crime is because 9/10 times the white person who committed the crime had a mental illness. If they did not have a mental illness they would still try to portray it as if they did. This will probably go on forever because as a race whites are the dominate ones who have the power, even if some may not believe it.
I think the reason white man are angry is because they feel like the system is favoring other people since they come on hard times they get angry without really taking into account the bad situation people who are being “favored” are in. i disagree with Kimmel argument that there is a relationship between “entitled” male anger and high-profile incidents of violence. I think that high profile violence (mass killings) are a result of poor mental health, access to a weapon and parenting. i think when an individual is not in the right state of mind along with a parent who doesn’t really speak or have time to speak with their child and the child having access to a firearm or weapon you have tragic event happen. angry white men have misplace anger towards the wrong people for their trouble with jobs, they should look to the government for answer to why they are losing their jobs instead of just blaming. also i think that the government uses the anger from the white males to they advantages because they create tension which will lead to people not wanting to work together to demand for changes from the government the have them just get anger about things that arent the real problem.
I agree with Kimmel’s argument and do not understand why these angry white men blame immigrants and other racial groups for taking their jobs. If they spent half the time they do voicing their anger and setting up KKK tables on working to improve themselves in order to get a job they wouldn’t be poor and angry all the time. This just goes to show that when people are handed things their whole life they take it for granted and when it gets taken away all of a sudden it is someone else’s fault. This reminds me of what a fellow student said in class last week. She said that she saw something on Facebook where a white man said to someone on an airplane, “I get scared when I see one of them on an airplane” talking about a muslim. Then the other person replied “I get scared when I see one of you in a school or movie theatre”. The message here is that you should never point the finger because you have 3 more pointing back at you. This same message applies for this angry white racist, stop blaming other people for your hardships and look in the mirror.
I agree with Kimmel’s argument. There is definitely a relationship between “entitled” male anger and high-profile incidents of violence. White males think they deserve everything first and that they have the power. They do not like it when a woman, or a different race male gets something that they don’t. They do not know how to deal with their anger and take it our on the wrong people when they should be taking it out on themselves. They aren’t the only ones on this planet and need to understand that times have changed and need to become more equal. Aggrieved entitlement to these men feel like they have been treated unfairly leading them to having resentment and acting out on it.
All white males are not angry, but the ones who are think they can control everything. They think they have power over others especially weaker people like woman and people of different race. They need to understand that its on them when something happens they don’t like, not someone else. White males should not get treated better than others just because they think they are strong and better than everyone else. They need to take the blame because blaming others just makes their situation worse. For example, the school shootings were done by young males who held resentment against others and it should have never gone as far as it did. When other males see how these angry males react, they sometimes think it is okay, or back them up. These angry white men need to get out of the past and realize how much things have changed.
I completely agree with Kimmel’s argument that these angry white men have issues with adjustment. I think this idea can be applied to any situation where changes occur and someone fails because of it. It is understandable for people to get upset when drastic changes to their lifestyle occur against their will. However, you can’t just live with this anger and do nothing about it. Instead of publicly complaining and allowing these changes to negatively affect you, educate yourself about them, adjust to the times, and become successful in spite of them if you believe that strongly.
That is the biggest problem Kiersten that people are afraid of adjustments. Humans in general like routine and the ability to know when change is going to occur no matter what aspect of life we are dealing with. When the whites are unable to get a job but see minorities having jobs with high position the whites want to know how is that possible that should be me. The question is would whites go out and look for the information to educate themselves in a positive manner? Probably not. Some people don’t believe in equal opportunity if it directly affects them and could care less about the next person.
I don’t understand why white men are angry and blaming their unsuccessful lives on immigrants and others for taking their jobs.. If you want something, go after it and work hard in order to achieve it just like every other person in this world. Unfortunately, many do not have this same mentality. They think they are entitled to certain things and that jobs should just be given to them. Aggrieved entitlement: aggravated and annoyed that “their” manhood and country have been taken away from them. They think since they are white they are the more dominant race and should have all the power; good jobs and control over everyone and everything. This thought process needs to change since times have changed and this country is a melting pot. Many different races and ethnicities are here. These people need to learn to accept diversity and work for what is theirs, not just expect it.
So White men want to blame their unsuccessful life on immigrants and others for taking their job? Maybe they should blame it on how easy they had it when they were exploiting people, getting easy money through the abuse of power. They no longer can exploit others and use them like they used to. Now they really have to work like everyone else. This sense of entitlement needs to stop.
I have heard how mad they are. You can see from the KKK news how they get together to try to recruit other white people. Sending out flyers to parts of the Hamptons is a very desperate situation.
I had to look up “Feminazi” because I never heard about the word. Feminazi is basically a female that believes that “woman only” spaces are NEEDED in a male dominant society. They do not believe in killing men. They believe in their natural extinction.
Aggrieved entitlement: White men are excessively sensitive, annoyed and aggravated that both “their” country and their manhood has been taken away. They believe because they are white they are entitled to a good job and everything that comes from having a good job. They feel that they should be the dominant race and the one to have power over all races.
When people are angry they tend to pick on whoever is in the way: females, children, and so on. This is how they are handling it. They do not look at the mirror and blame it on themselves but on others.
I think kümmel’ argue ment makes a lot of sense. The white men are not adjusting well to the societal changes. Even something like the wife going to work is still abit of a hard idea sometimes. The framework drawing gun violence makes sense. The commonality of school shootings & war issues with gender is first the fact that there’s access to weaponry. The framework could help solves some reasons for school shootings, but I don’t think it will stop an large number.
I believe Kimmel’s argument is accurately portrayed. I do believe that there is a relationship between entitled white male anger and violence. I believe this because white male have always been seen as the ruling members. They feel that they are superior amongst all members of society. In a society in which, equality is being fought for, entitled men may see this as problematic. They don’t take responsibility for their own actions, they often blame others for their life events. This is seen when Kimmel states, “No. Instead, they rage at ball-busting feminists (“feminazis”) for stealing their American manhood; they rage at immigrants for stealing their jobs; and they rage against poor people for picking their pockets and living off their tax dollars.” They want to blame those that they believe they have more power over. They rather see themselves as victims instead of figuring out who is to blame. They feel that their manhood is being taken away, but that’s not the case. When Kimmel coins the term “aggrieved entitlement He means that White men feel angry and they feel that they have been mistreated. They feel entitled to do something about the mistreatment. They feel that they should go after innocent people. As though, committing violence would solve their problems, which is never the case.
Violence has increased a lot in the past few years, whether its in the media, television, video games, this seems to be the norm. if for example you don’t have have a certain game, you are not cool, or considered to be ” one of the guys”Sports participation, fitness activities, and military service all participate in the cult of violence that confers social honor and status upon men who prove they can dominate weaker men and women; “real men,” it would appear, are men who can control and inflict injury and suffering upon deserving others; real men bring the pain” (Trappen). I have to agree with this most men are raised to be men strong and protect their own. They are considered men not boys if they are able to defend themselves and be tough not sissies. Copper Cab is a violent outspoken young boy I was laughing a bit on the amount of anger he has, but at least he is passionate of it. He did point out on something that is very important in our youth, he stated to ” participate in humanity” and what were your greatest accomplishment in life? what scoring 200 points in a game? even though he is a little angry person but he did pin point on truth, he doesn’t like where his genaration is heading to..i agree with him, this genaration just doesn’t care, they have no morals no care in this world
Copper Cab is indeed funny. We laugh together, but can you see how easy it is to dismiss this kind of rage and not take it seriously? In his particualr case, I think he turned out okay. But others are not always as fortunate. Ignoring their rage allows it to fester and become something that is dangerous.
This kind of stuff still blows my mind, that we still have people living and believing in what they do. I don’t understand how we can come so far with civil rights, both with different races and different genders, and still there are people running a “KKK” booth at a festival. I was actually just watching a show the other day that was on when I turned the TV on (I don’t remember what it’s called) but it was talking about how there are still people in the KKK and running organizations like that against other groups of people. I do believe it isn’t anyone but their own fault for how they are feeling and why they are so angry. Like you said in the article, the reason why they are angry is completely due to the fact that they refuse to change and embrace the new society they live in. These people are so stuck in the past and in the idea of White people ruling that they take it out on undeserving people. I understand that a lifestyle change is hard but we are now in the year 2014, this craziness should seriously be over with.