Latest news with #MotherJones
Vox
18 hours ago
- Health
- Vox
The testosterone theory of politics
is an essayist and critic based out of New York. He's written about the intersection of technology & culture for Wired, Polygon, Mother Jones, and others. Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who oversees the US Department of Health and Human Services, has supported the debunked ideas that vaccines cause autism and that organizations like the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have helped cover up the link. He's skeptical of the chemicals in our foods and skies, and worries that we've veered too far from all that is good and natural. Yet for all this, he admits to taking testosterone regularly as part of his 'anti-aging protocol from my doctor.' In April, in an interview with Fox News' Jesse Watters, the septuagenarian began to lament the testosterone levels of our youth. 'A teenager today, an American teenager, has less testosterone than a 68-year-old man,' he claimed. When Watters expressed disbelief, he doubled down, saying that testosterone levels have dropped as much as 50 percent from 'historic levels.' It's not clear exactly what 'historic levels' he was referencing— or, for that matter, what, if any, research he was citing. It's possible that he was misinterpreting the results of a 2007 study that analyzed data gathered from adult men from the 1980s onward and observed a 1 percent decline in average testosterone levels per year (meaning that a 68-year-old man in 1997 would have had 10 percent more testosterone than a 68-year-old man in 2007). The study, however, said nothing about how teenage or young adult testosterone compared. Still, the Fox News clip made its rounds online. On platforms like X, users reshared the video and parroted Kennedy's unsubstantiated claim, voicing suspicions of an intentional campaign to weaken the nation and sounding well-worn dog whistles. 'Mass poisoning mass murder mass replacement,' read one post responding to the video. Questions of scientific literacy aside, it was clear that Kennedy had struck a chord. Testosterone is having a moment. Within the sweaty halls of the gym bro internet, the trend of testmaxxing has gathered steam, with countless videos dedicated to how someone might 'naturally' (and not so naturally) increase their testosterone levels by, say, eating nearly a dozen eggs a day or simply getting on testosterone replacement therapy. The supplements hawked by alt-right podcasters like Alex Jones are often studded with possibilities of '[supporting] normal testosterone levels in men.' Famously, in 2016, Trump paraded his testosterone levels in his presidential bid against Hillary Clinton. And lest we think obsession with testosterone is restricted to the echo chambers of the manosphere, we should bear in mind that the physique idealized in mainstream Hollywood wouldn't be possible without artificially elevated levels of it, as Alex Abad-Santos previously observed for Vox. The same move that supposedly identified the chemical makeup of masculinity revealed just how unstable it was. We live in strange times, surrounded by positions that can seem like contradictions: Our HHS secretary doesn't believe in vaccines, but takes a hormone regularly; the Republican Party works tirelessly to limit access to the substance for people seeking gender-affirming care while simultaneously gutting the federal agency responsible for regulating testosterone in our farming industries (which employs it to increase the 'efficiency by which [the animals] convert the feed they eat into meat'). Meanwhile, evangelical leaders condemn trans people for existing, while also platforming doctors telling post-menopausal women to take testosterone so they might get back their curves. In many ways, testosterone sits at the crossroads of the tensions cutting through our culture today. By paying close attention to the history of the hormone and the often paradoxical roles it is made to play, we can better understand the forces shaping modern life. The road to testosterone Ask most people what testosterone is, and you'll probably hear that it's the 'male hormone.' In fact, type that very phrase into Google and all search roads will tend to lead back to T. The two are considered so interchangeably that they often function as synonyms: testosterone as the chemical essence of masculinity, masculinity as the product of testosterone. Online, this line of reasoning gets pushed to its limits. In one TikTok with more than half a million views as of this writing, a user boldly claims that 'Low testosterone is the cause of 99 percent of all male problems. When a transgender woman wants to feel like a man, she takes testosterone. Why? Because testosterone is what makes you feel like a man.' With testosterone comes all the characteristics and advantages ascribed to men: strength, mental acuity, competitiveness. Just last year, Elon Musk responded to a post on X featuring a 4Chan screenshot that argued that 'women and low T men' weren't fit for leadership because they would naturally defer to consensus beliefs, compared to 'high T alphamales' who were capable of objectively assessing a situation. 'Interesting observation,' replied the world's richest man. Despite the ubiquity and weight testosterone holds today, it's a relatively new entrant in our understanding of the body. In Testo Junkie, Spanish philosopher Paul B. Preciado explains that for most of Western history before the 17th century, sex was understood by a logic of similarity and inferiority. 'Female sexual anatomy was set up as a weak, internalized, degenerate variation of the only sex that possessed an ontological existence, the male,' he writes, citing the scholar Thomas Laqueur. You might call this the Eve-as-Adam's-rib model of sex. Women weren't seen as a distinct category, separate from men in their own right, as much as they were considered a 'worse' version of men. Then, at the dawn of the modern era, a new approach began to emerge. We started to create discrete categories that we might fit the world into, purifying it of ambiguity and hybridity: nature versus culture, animal versus human. Sex was no exception, and an oppositional, binary understanding of man versus woman emerged. Women and men were placed in entirely separate categories, overturning the previous understanding of women as imperfect men. Sex assignment became hyper-focused not so much on the complex web of social roles, anatomy, temperament, and reproductive capacities that organized identity previously, but on easily observable, 'mechanical' features like the shape and size of one's genitals. As Laqueur points out, organs like the ovary, which didn't even have a 'name of its own' for millennia (since it was often referred to by the same word used for male testes), became no less than a 'synecdoche for woman' during this time. These categories were 'not only natural but even transcendental,' in Preciado's words. Or as Ben Shapiro likes to phrase it, 'facts don't care about your feelings.' Today, you can still see this system hard at work whenever a troll uses a hashtag like #WeCanAlwaysTell to discredit someone's gender identity. Of course, the supposed facts didn't always line up quite so neatly with reality itself — as was the case with intersex people who challenge this paradigm — but doctors conveniently solved for this by creating sub-classifications like 'female pseudo-hermaphrodites' that still preserved the 'truly male,' 'truly female' binary. Testosterone didn't properly enter the scene until 1935. That was the year that three independent teams of researchers, each backed by a different pharmaceutical company, identified and synthesized it. There was only one catch: The long-awaited 'male hormone' didn't fit quite so neatly into the binaries that organized our understanding of the body. Research uncovered that hormones weren't exclusive to one sex. Everyone had testosterone, even if average rates tended to differ between traditional sex lines. It turns out that before menopause, women produce three times as much testosterone as estrogen. In fact, contrary to popular opinion, testosterone isn't the 'opposite' of estrogen, it's the precursor — men and women convert testosterone into estrogen using the enzyme aromatase, and higher levels of testosterone in men can actually result in higher levels of estrogen. The same move that supposedly identified the chemical makeup of masculinity revealed just how unstable it was. It was born as a paradox, the double-edged essence of manhood that never was. Maximizing masculinity These tensions haunt testosterone today. On the one hand, we still largely think about sex in terms of binaries, and of testosterone as the chemical distillate of a natural and inviolable maleness. At the very extremes, testosterone has been used to violently enforce old hierarchies. In the '40s, Nazis transplanted testosterone glands into gay men's penises in a brutal attempt at conversion therapy. On the other hand, it doesn't take much to sense the unease that the fluidity of testosterone has opened us up to. If maleness or femaleness were once something you unassailably possessed at birth based on unchanging physical markers and roles, then the presence of testosterone across sexes — alongside the development of other chemical interventions that disrupted traditionally sexed functions like the Pill — contributed to the growing awareness that these categories aren't given as much as they are produced. Critically, these scientific developments happened against the backdrop of broader social movements that sought to challenge the core ideas underpinning patriarchy. As second-wave feminists critiqued the idea of a 'natural' order where men ruled, and women were integrated into more spheres of economic and social life, traditional notions of masculinity began to lose their grip. Testosterone lives between these two slowly colliding cultural tectonic plates. The desire to compare T-levels — whether it's between 'low T men' and 'high T alphamales' or teenagers and 68-year-olds — ultimately boils down to the desire to lament the state of masculinity today while simultaneously legitimizing the reality of 'maleness' by pinning it on some objective and measurable metric. In short, testosterone has become a way that men can not only ground their masculinity in a moment when our ideas of gender are more fluid than ever, but even quantify it — all while borrowing the veneer of scientific legitimacy to feel assured in their manliness. It's this tension that lets conservative mouthpieces insist on the 'immutable biological reality of sex,' as one Trumpian executive order phrased it, while simultaneously making a profit by selling supplements that claim to enhance testosterone levels (and by extension your manhood). This doublethink is on full display whenever a product like Force Factor's Test X180 Legend advertises itself with lines like, 'Let's be honest: being a man is relatively straightforward. … Biologically, to achieve this goal you want more testosterone and less estrogen – maximizing your masculinity.' Major pharmaceutical companies are competing over the growing testosterone replacement therapy market, which is set to break $2 billion in the next few years. In the same ways that marketers for Listerine generated demand for mouthwash in the 1920s by popularizing 'halitosis' (or bad breath) as a medical and treatable condition, testosterone has become positioned as a salve for the supposed crisis of masculinity today. Masculinity is now both something straightforwardly given at birth, but also always needing to be maximized through consumable supplements, a commodified 'biotech industrial artifact' as Preciado provocatively calls it. Of course, this commodity isn't available to everyone. The desire to preserve traditional boundaries also helps us understand the restrictions that have been historically applied to the hormone. One of the reasons that testosterone therapy failed to gain larger traction in the 1940s after its synthesis was that physicians were worried about its effects on women, including vocal change and hair growth. Even today, although the Food and Drug Administration has approved 31 different testosterone products for men (not to mention the many products it has approved for livestock), it hasn't greenlit a single product for women out of this fear, despite studies that indicate that testosterone could offer women a range of benefits from breast protection to osteoporosis prevention. The hormone's male bias has impeded the kind of expansive testing needed for regulatory approval and created a host of misconceptions around its effects on women, even as interest in testosterone for women appears to have grown organically in recent years. It's not hard to imagine the commercial motivation to keep it this way either. Though women might represent an untapped market, offering testosterone to women could also result in what advertisers call 'brand dilution,' or overextending a product to the point of undermining its value. Natural and unnatural In his conversation with Jesse Watters, Kennedy attributed the decline in teenage testosterone levels to the quality of food being consumed today. 'The food our kids are eating today is not really food, it's food-like substances,' he claims. He's not wrong. A recent study found that over half the calories consumed at home in the US come from ultra-processed foods, or 'industrial formulations containing no or minimal whole foods and made entirely or mostly from substances extracted from foods.' Like any medicine, it is both a poison and a cure depending on how it's used. Our renewed interest in testosterone isn't just about the erosion of borders between gender classifications, but about the slowly crumbling walls separating us from the world we inhabit. Around a century ago, hormones like testosterone upended our ideas about how the body communicates with itself — allowing us to see how organs could speak to each other using our bloodstreams. Now, as we discover that the world has worked its way into our bloodstreams in the form of microplastics and the 'food-like substances' we ingest daily, it makes sense that this hormone would be caught up in these broader anxieties. As one user commented in the r/Testosterone subreddit, 'hormones given to animals we eat, pollutants in the air and water, blue light from devices etc all contribute to lowering of hormone production.' High testosterone is seen as a sign of a healthy and self-regulating body, and concerns about declining hormone levels stand in for a broader concern that the natural balance in us has been disrupted by our environment. At the heart of our fascinations and fears lies the growing awareness that our bodies are far more malleable and open to the world than we once thought, that our identities are far more unstable and fluid than assumed. What remains to be seen is where we'll go from here. There are those that want to lean into this radically chemicalized body. Sports leagues like the Enhanced Games, endorsed by transhumanist types like Bryan Johnson, are experimenting with steroids and testosterone regimens in an attempt to 'redefine superhumanity.' Meanwhile, Kennedy's use of testosterone despite his vaccine skepticism comes from the desire to preserve some delineation between what is natural and synthetic — to let in what is real (testosterone) and do away with what is artificial (vaccines). Many like Kennedy are unsettled by the idea that the borders of our bodies and identities are highly permeable, and taking testosterone is a way to try to get the body back to a 'natural' state, before it was disrupted by the unnatural forces outside of us. This desire to use testosterone to protect the 'natural' also runs through evangelicals who see it as a way for women to retain their femininity as they get older, as well as industrial farmers who use it to reinforce a natural order in which animals are treated chiefly as meat for human consumption.
CBC
2 days ago
- Politics
- CBC
Why Trump can't shake the Epstein files
When the Trump administration announced earlier this month that it was dropping its investigation into Jeffrey Epstein and would not be releasing any further "Epstein files," it was already an unpopular decision among the MAGA faithful — many of whom Donald Trump won over by leaning into conspiracy theories about pedophilic political elites. In the weeks since, the rift has only widened. New revelations have come to light about Trump's relationship with Epstein, and what Trump knew about what was in the files and when. Trump has been on the defensive, calling the reports fake. But it doesn't appear to be working, with some of Trump's staunchest supporters saying they now feel "betrayed." Anna Merlan, a senior reporter with Mother Jones who covers disinformation, explains why the Trump administration can't seem to make the Epstein files go away.
Daily Mail
15-07-2025
- Politics
- Daily Mail
Woke journalist makes sick remark about JD Vance's young CHILDREN after previously scolding flight attendant
The editor of a famously liberal news outlet has backed the booing of Vice President JD Vance 's young children during a family trip to Disneyland. Mother Jones editor-in-chief Clara Jeffrey made the declaration on woke X alternative BlueSky after the second family were heckled during a weekend trip. 'People who feel bad for JD Vance's kids as family gets booed at Disneyland. I get it, but better those kids know now what their father is about,' Jeffrey wrote. 'Other kids are watching their parents get shipped off to gulags,' she added. She went on to claim Vance wanted his children to be heckled for political optics. 'Also, JD Vance knows he's going to be booed at Disneyland or the Kennedy Center or wherever. 'He doesn't have to go with his kids, but…he probably wants the optics of his family being booed. So…yeah.' Jeffrey, who previously hit the headlines after scolding a flight attendant who used the word 'blessed' during an announcement, was quickly condemned. 'WTF is wrong with these people!???' Donald Trump Jr. wrote on X. Critics called her a 'soulless ghoul' for seemingly encouraging the harassment toward children aged 3, 5, and 8. 'Imagine the type of soulless ghoul you have to be to say this… Imagine being the Editor in Chief of Mother Jones Magazine,' Republican strategist Andrew Surabian chimed in. Previously, the progressive journalist has been mocked online after making a public post criticizing a flight attendant who wished her and other passengers a 'blessed night'. Last year, Jeffery posted to X that she found the Alaska Air flight attendant's language akin to 'creeping Christian nationalism' after landing in San Francisco. Jeffrey wrote that replacement words such as 'great' or 'fantastic' would have worked just as well, adding that someone sat in her row said:' This ain't Montgomery, sweetie.' That was an apparent reference to the Alabama city frequently associated with anti-black racism. But her post triggered many to hit back and stand up for what they described as 'kindness'. The post drew attention from all users, liberal or Republican, who called her complaint 'petty' and 'miserable', while some took the opportunity dig up old posts where she herself had used the word 'blessed.' Washington Post columnist Marc Thiessen wrote: 'How sad and impoverished is your life that you're offended by someone blessing you? Get a grip.' One user, J Valentine, responded saying: 'Editor of Mother Jones providing another great example of why normies hate progressives. 'Being 'progressive' is often just an excuse for being an insufferable jerk.' 'Respectfully, I'm a pretty left leaning guy and I wish folks a blessed day fairly often. It's just a nice thing to say,' wrote Armand Domalewski.
New York Post
15-07-2025
- Entertainment
- New York Post
Mother Jones editor ripped as ‘soulless ghoul' for saying JD Vance's kids deserve to get heckled at Disneyland
The editor in chief of the left-leaning Mother Jones magazine has been ripped as a 'soulless ghoul' after she suggested it was OK for Vice President JD Vance's young kids to be booed during their family trip to Disneyland. Clara Jeffrey took to social media after footage emerged of protestors heckling the Vance family as they soaked up The Happiest Place on Earth over the weekend. 3 Mother Jones editor Clara Jeffrey was ripped as a 'soulless ghoul' for her recent comments about JD Vance and his family. Getty Images for American Society of Magazine Editors Advertisement 'People who feel bad for JD Vance's kids as family gets booed at Disneyland. I get it, but better those kids know now what their father is about. Other kids are watching their parents get shipped off to gulags,' Jeffrey posted on Bluesky. 'Also, JD Vance knows he's going to be booed at Disneyland or the Kennedy Center or wherever. He doesn't have to go with his kids, but…he probably wants the optics of his family being booed. So…yeah.' The backlash was swift with many blasting the editor in chief for seemingly giving bullies the green-light to target the vice president's kids — who are just 3, 5 and 8 years old. Advertisement 'WTF is wrong with these people!??? Donald Trump Jr. raged on X. 3 Vance recently took a trip to the Anaheim park with his wife and children. Snorlax / MEGA 3 Vance's are just 3, 5 and 8 years old. Snorlax / MEGA 'Imagine the type of soulless ghoul you have to be to say this…Imagine being the Editor in Chief of Mother Jones Magazine,' Andrew Surabian, a GOP strategist, added. Advertisement Others, too, piled on with some slamming her and other liberal critics as imbeciles. 'Those kids are seeing for themselves that those people are animals. They watch their father and mother serve their country and they learn that there is good and there is evil. Guess what side you're on?' one said.
Otago Daily Times
11-07-2025
- Entertainment
- Otago Daily Times
The modern lives of wives
The choices facing married women in 2025 don't change the contradiction at the heart of a marriage, writes Eva Wiseman. What is the state of the wife? Not the state of your wife, necessarily, but of wifedom itself, the whole Harpic-scented project. We are living through a golden age of wife content. Of trad wives, of The Secret Lives of Mormon Wives. A Reddit thread for followers of Laura Doyle's The Surrendered Wife and the "empowered wife" coaching programme (short version: wives, relinquish control) sees women in turmoil. One user, announcing that she is leaving the community, encourages her fellow wives to combine Doyle's lessons with "some more modern twists like [TikTok-fuelled dating trend] black cat theory or ["feminine energy" YouTuber] Margarita Nazarenko". Wives are being pulled apart and put back together, in sometimes Picasso-like forms. It's a contradiction we see daily with our trad-wife influencers, who perform fertility and homemaking and submission for millions of followers, many of whom read it as provocation, thus increasing clicks and shovelling cash and power back into the trad wife's apron. Both trad wives' content and the critical content they inspire in feminist commenters drives tensions, particularly between women who work and wives who stay at home, ignoring the facts that the content creation the online trad wives do is a legitimate business, and that, rather than being two distinct sets of women, these are people whose lives frequently overlap and merge. The second season of The Secret Lives of Mormon Wives has been a ratings hit. A twist came when one wife went live to tell viewers that she and other wives had been "soft swinging" (swinging, allegedly, without sex), a confession that upset their particular balance of devout Mormonism and hot-wife content, but deliciously. Again, a wife here must be two things at once. She's both a committed wife and hot TikTok girlie, she's a business bitch and the world's best mum, she's devoted to God and devoted to clicks, a pile of contradictions stacked precariously on top of each other in the shape of a woman. A generation earlier, women fought successfully to be allowed to work, but the next round of that fight — for mothers to work, too — remains, if not quite unexamined then still, I'd argue, unwon. Of UK women in employment, 36% work part-time, compared with 14% of men, largely due to caregiving responsibilities at home. In this light, performative wifeliness looks like an escape hatch. Sociologist Tressie McMillan Cottom told the magazine Mother Jones: "Women only get to be full citizens if they have control over when and how they have babies. When that changes, your citizenship becomes vulnerable, so you attach yourself to a citizen: men." The cultural obsession with the trad wife and its satellite archetypes will remain, she believes, "so long as there's a threat". Tighten your wedding rings girls, we're in for a ride. — The Observer
