What Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg's canceled cage match says about masculine anxiety
Washington (The Conversation): While the cage fight between Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg and Tesla CEO Elon Musk seems to be on hold, if these men do ever end up sparring, it'll give a whole new meaning to the term "tech bro."
The two billionaires' business interests have butted heads in the past: Musk's 2016 test launch of a SpaceX rocket destroyed Zuckerberg's USD 200 million satellite. In 2022, Musk said Zuckerberg shouldn't dominate social media and encouraged people to abandon Meta-owned Facebook. Meta also recently launched Threads, which competes directly with Musk's X, formerly known as Twitter.
But threatening to beat the pulp out of each other represents a new if not bizarre form of one-upmanship for the two men. At one point, it was rumored that the livestreamed fight would take place in Rome's Colosseum, where gladiators once gruesomely battled to the death.
What in the name of Maximus is going on?
Though Musk and Zuckerberg have attempted to frame their pugilistic pursuit as a once-in-a-generation event, they are far from alone. They join the ranks of other high-profile men in public and political positions who have shown off their physical strength to burnish their status.
As a gender scholar, I've seen how these fights let's call them "performances of virility" tend to coincide with beliefs that masculinity is either in crisis or under attack.
Money can't buy masculinity
You don't usually see two wealthy white billionaires duking it out. So what would Musk and Zuckerberg gain from fighting each other?
As sociologist Scott Melzer writes in his study of fight clubs, "Manhood Impossible," fighting is culturally associated with masculinity, and U.S. culture celebrates men's violence in the right contexts.
For white-collar white men, Melzer explains, fighting can help them to feel they have passed a test of adulthood and fulfilled the cultural requirement of strength. The fighting helps them prove to themselves that they are "real men," despite their soft probably manicured hands.
To me, the chest puffing between Musk and Zuckerberg is a desperate display of masculinity for two tech nerds with deep pockets. They say money can't buy happiness. Perhaps money can't buy masculinity, either.
Kris Paap, author of "Working Construction," explains that men who don't take risks are often seen by their peers as weak and effeminate. Men who risk their health and well-being, on the other hand, prove their bravado for the respect of their peers.
This is particularly the case for working-class men. But politicians have also put on gloves to fight for admiration and political clout through displays of physical prowess.
In 2012, Justin Trudeau squared off against Senator Patrick Brazeau in a boxing match. A member of Canada's Parliament who came from money and political royalty, Trudeau declared before the match that he was "put on this planet to do this I fight and I win."
After emerging from the bout victorious, Trudeau's image as a scrawny nepo baby all but evaporated. Three years later, he became prime minister just like his dad.
There are countless examples of other powerful men looking to showcase their virility. Russian President Vladimir Putin infamously rode horses shirtless, while U.S. President Joe Biden once said that when he was in high school, he would have taken Donald Trump "behind the gym and beat the hell" out of him.
For almost two centuries, performances of masculinity from William Henry Harrison to Donald Trump have been a part of successful U.S. presidential campaigns.
The end of men again and again
It is no coincidence that Musk vs. Zuckerberg comes at a time when there is popular perception that masculinity is in crisis. Women are obtaining college degrees at a faster clip than men, while income gaps are closing. Suicides and overdoses among men often termed "deaths of despair" are on the rise.
Belief in a "crisis of masculinity" spikes during times of progressive social change. And proponents of this view tend to blame feminists and other social progressives for critiquing traditionally masculine mores and values, which, they claim, is causing men to spiral.
Gender scholars point to the turn of the 20th century and the 1990s as other moments of social change that sparked similar anxieties.
In 1890, moves toward coeducation stoked debates around girls and boys being taught the same curriculum. Advocates suggested that sex shouldn't matter in the classroom and that girls' education should prepare them for jobs outside the home.
This didn't go over well with men who benefited from gender segregation. The Boy Scouts of America actually emerged in 1910 so that boys were assured a space where girls and women weren't allowed and where boys would be "sufficiently" acquainted with masculinity.
Similarly, the emergence of identity politics in the 1990s, which highlighted rights-based ideologies, scrutinized, in particular, the privileges of white men.
Today, social progress whether it's more women in the workplace, more women in political office or girls permitted to join what is now referred to as "the Scouts" seems to stoke men's insecurities.
You can see it in the popularity of men's rights advocates like Jordan Peterson, who claims men are being asked to castrate themselves in the name of equality. And you can see it in conservative commentator Ben Shapiro's scorn toward the "Barbie" movie, which has been lauded for calling out patriarchal values.
In these moments, men have historically taken predictable actions to reclaim the idea that they are inherently different from women and thus belong in different spaces.
Sociologist Martha McCaughey has pointed out how evolutionary biology has become the popular way to argue that men just can't help their "innate propensities."
This includes the urge to dominate others, whether that's in business, in bed or, yes, in the ring.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Republicans going public with their growing worries about Trump's tariffs
Washington (AP): Manufacturers struggling to make long-term plans. Farmers facing retaliation from Chinese buyers. US households burdened with higher prices.
Republican senators are confronting the Trump administration with those worries and many more as they fret about the economic impact of the president's sweeping tariff strategy that went into effect Wednesday.
In a Senate hearing and interviews with reporters this week, Republican skepticism of President Donald Trump's policies ran unusually high. While GOP lawmakers made sure to direct their concern at Trump's aides and advisers — particularly US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer, who appeared before the Senate Finance Committee Tuesday — it still amounted to a rare Republican break from a president they have otherwise championed.
Lawmakers had reason to worry: the stock market has been in a volatile tumble for days and economists are warning that the plans could lead to a recession.
"Whose throat do I get to choke if this proves to be wrong?” Republican Sen. Thom Tillis told Greer as he pressed for an answer on which Trump aide to hold accountable if there is an economic downturn.
Tillis' frustration was aimed at the across-the-board tariff strategy that could potentially hamstring U.S. manufacturers who are currently dependent on materials like aluminum and steel from China. His home state of North Carolina, where he is up for reelection next year, has attracted thousands of foreign firms looking to invest in the state's manufacturing industries.
Ever wary of crossing Trump, Republicans engaged in a delicate two-step of criticizing the rollout of the tariffs then shifting to praise for the president's economic vision. In the afternoon, Tillis in a Senate floor speech said that the “president is right in challenging other nations who have for decades abused their relationship with the United States," yet went on to question who in the White House was thinking through the long-term economic effects of the sweeping tariffs.
Tillis even allowed that Trump's trade strategy could still turn out to be effective, but said there is a short window to show that it is worth the higher prices and layoffs that will burden workers.
For his part, Greer emphasised to the committee that the US was engaged in negotiations with other countries but that “the trade deficit has been decades in the making, and it's not going to be solved overnight.”
Republican leaders in Congress, as well as a sizeable chunk of lawmakers, have emphasized that Trump needs time to implement his strategy. They've mostly rejected the idea of putting a check on Trump's tariff power, but it is clear that anxiety is growing among rank-and-file Republicans about what's ahead.
Sen James Lankford, an Oklahoma Republican, said there is a company in his state that had spent “millions of dollars" moving its parts production from China to Vietnam. But now that Vietnam is facing steep tariffs, the business is unable to move forward with negotiating prices with retailers.
Lankford pressed Greer for a timeline for negotiations, but the trade representative responded, “We don't have any particular timeline. The outcome is more important than setting something artificially for us.”
Trade agreements between countries typically take months or even years to work out and often require the parties to navigate through a host of legal, economic and business issues. Still, Republicans said they were encouraged by the indications that Trump is entering into negotiations with other nations.
Sen. Steve Daines, a Montana Republican, said at the committee hearing that he was “very encouraged” by news of trade negotiations and attributed a momentary upward tick in the stock market to “hope that these tariffs are a means and not solely an end.”
He told Greer, "Who pays these high tariffs? It will be the consumer. I'm worried about the inflationary effect. I'm worried if there is a trade war that we're going to have markets shutting down for American farmers, ranchers and manufacturers.”
Other GOP lawmakers contended that the pain was worth bearing. Republican Rep. Ralph Norman of South Carolina, a member of the conservative Freedom Caucus, said the president is on the right track.
“It's pain, but it's going to be,” he said. “The president will make the right call. He's doing the right thing.”
Still, traditional Republicans were looking for ways to push back on Trump's tariff plan.
Sen. Chuck Grassley, a senior Republican, has introduced a bipartisan bill to give Congress the power to review and approve of new tariffs, and Republican members in the House were also working to gain support for a similar bill. Such legislation would allow Congress to claw back some of its constitutional power over tariff policy, which has been almost completely handed over to the president in recent decades through legislation.
But the White House has already indicated that Trump would veto the bill, and both Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., and House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., have said they are not interested in bringing it up for a vote.
Sen. Markwayne Mullin, a Republican closely aligned with Trump, said on social media that the bill was a bad idea because “Congress moves at the pace of a tortoise running a race.”
“The reason why Congress gave this authority to the president to begin with is because the ability to pivot,” he added.
But the president's unclear messaging has also left lawmakers only guessing as they try to decipher which advisers and aides hold sway in the White House.
Sen. John Kennedy, a Louisiana Republican, said that as he's received calls from the business community in his state, he's had no answers for them besides telling them the prospects for the economy are uncertain. The communication from the president's aides has often been conflicting, Kennedy said even as he voiced support for Trump's long-term goals.
Kennedy told reporters, “I don't think there's any way to double or triple your tariffs on the world when you're the wealthiest country in all of human history without being somewhat shambolic."
