{"id":14868,"date":"2026-03-16T19:44:08","date_gmt":"2026-03-16T19:44:08","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/kashmirthunder.in\/?p=14868"},"modified":"2026-03-16T19:44:08","modified_gmt":"2026-03-16T19:44:08","slug":"epic-fury-the-men-of-maga-might-be-the-most-emotional-us-leaders-ever","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/kashmirthunder.in\/index.php\/2026\/03\/16\/epic-fury-the-men-of-maga-might-be-the-most-emotional-us-leaders-ever\/","title":{"rendered":"\u2018Epic Fury\u2019 \u2013 The Men Of MAGA Might Be The Most Emotional US Leaders Ever"},"content":{"rendered":"

Natalie Kon-yu, Emily Booth, Michael Burke, Tom Clark<\/strong><\/p>\n

In 2016 and again in 2024, Donald Trump ran against two supremely qualified presidential candidates, who both lost. Both had decades of service to government and high-ranking jobs within Democratic administrations. Both were women.<\/p>\n

Hillary Clinton and Kamala Harris\u2019 losses have prompted a thousand think pieces on whether or not the United States is ready to elect a female president. The old adage, dating back to the Cold War, is that women are too emotional to be trusted with the nuclear button.<\/p>\n

But the men in the current White House might be the most emotional leadership group the US has ever had. And while their outbursts often seem spontaneous and even silly, we should take them seriously.<\/p>\n

War and fury<\/strong><\/p>\n

Trump chronicler Michael Wolff shared his belief this week that \u201cnothing\u201d Trump says is ever \u201crelated to meaning\u201d but it\u2019s \u201call related to what he is feeling\u201d \u2013 which, he says, informs Trump\u2019s behaviour around the Iran war. The Daily Beast, which reported Wolff\u2019s comments, approached the White House for comment.<\/p>\n

Communications director Steven Cheung responded by calling Wolff \u201ca lying sack of s\u2013t\u201d who has \u201cbeen proven to be a fraud\u201d. (Wolff has been criticised for his casual approach to fact-checking, including in his Trump biography.) Cheung continued:<\/p>\n

He routinely fabricates stories originating from his sick and warped imagination, only possible because he has a severe and debilitating case of Trump Derangement Syndrome that has rotted his peanut-sized brain.<\/p>\n

This in itself is unusually emotional (and colloquial) language for an official White House communication, but is not surprising in the era of Trump 2.0.<\/p>\n

From \u201cI HATE TAYLOR SWIFT!\u201d to the president\u2019s many legal suits against those who have wronged him and his apparent need for his name to be on buildings \u2013 including the former Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts \u2013 big feelings are on full display in the era of Donald Trump.<\/p>\n

Those big feelings are also reflected in the Trump administration\u2019s policies. What is ICE but an agency dedicated to the irrational fear of foreigners? Greed, envy, anger, lust, fear: they are all on constant display in Trump\u2019s White House. They come from his chief of staff Stephen Miller, former DOGE head Elon Musk, Hegseth and Vice President JD Vance.<\/p>\n

Even the name for the current war on Iran, Operation Epic Fury, is emotional. Compare it to the names of the initial wars on Afghanistan (Operation Enduring Freedom) and Iraq (Operation Iraqi Freedom).<\/p>\n

This comes after Trump renamed the Department of Defense to the Department of War last year, to make it sound more aggressive. \u201cMaximum lethality, not tepid legality,\u201d Hegseth said of the change, which is reflected in his language about Iran this week:<\/p>\n

Death and destruction from the sky all day long [\u2026] This was never meant to be a fair fight, and it is not a fair fight. We are punching them while they\u2019re down, which is exactly how it should be.<\/p>\n

Fear, anger and MAGA<\/strong><\/p>\n

Sociology professor Thomas Henricks explains how fear, a negative emotion \u201cthat feels bad to possess\u201d, is often converted to anger, \u201can emotion that restores agency, direction, and self-esteem\u201d.<\/p>\n

Sociologist Arlie Russell Hochschild has long focused her research on feelings. She was studying MAGA supporters before they had a name. For her latest book, she looked at how shame and pride motivated this cohort in Kentucky. Many of those she spoke to \u201csaw Trump as a bully \u2014 but a bully who stood up for them, against what they perceived as urban liberal elites\u201d.<\/p>\n

Giving loyalty to a dynamic leader, writes Henricks, can seem \u201cthe surest route to regaining\u201d personal power that feels like it is \u201cslipping away\u201d.<\/p>\n

English professor Lauren Berlant believes Trump supporters are attracted to the president\u2019s performance of freedom, through saying whatever he feels. When expression is policed in the name of civil rights and feminism, she observes, it rejects \u201cwhat feels like people\u2019s spontaneous, ingrained responses\u201d.<\/p>\n

But the \u201cTrump Emotion Machine\u201d delivers \u201cfeeling ok\u201d and \u201cacting free\u201d. It means \u201cbeing ok with one\u2019s internal noise, and saying it, and demanding that it matter\u201d.<\/p>\n

Gender and emotion<\/strong><\/p>\n

For centuries, political philosophy has noted that much social power is \u201caffective\u201d, relating to moods, feelings and attitudes. Whatever you think of Trump, his policy and style make him exactly the kind of case study political affect theorists have been waiting for.<\/p>\n

He is the most conspicuous proponent yet of what we call aesthetarchy \u2013 or rule by feelings.<\/p>\n

Many feminists and other writers have critiqued the gendered inequity of displays of emotion. Explaining the politics of sex roles, feminist philosopher Marilyn Frye says we all internalise and monitor ourselves to adapt to outside expectations \u2013 or \u201cthe needs and tastes and tyrannies of others\u201d.<\/p>\n

For example, \u201cwomen\u2019s cramped postures and attenuated strides and men\u2019s restraint of emotional self-expression (except for anger)\u201d.<\/p>\n

The crying man was once mocked as womanly and the athletic or politically powerful woman was seen as manly. Both transgressions maintain positive valuations of the masculine and negative valuations of the feminine. Sex roles were once a stronger form of control than they are now.<\/p>\n

Yet in MAGA, we have something different happening.<\/p>\n

Tantrums and explosions: MAGA men<\/strong><\/p>\n

Hegseth has been criticised, even ridiculed by some media outlets, for his emotional outbursts in media briefings. A Pentagon briefing on US strikes on Iran last June, during which he lashed out at reporters, was labelled a \u201ctantrum\u201d by The Daily Beast.<\/p>\n

Miller, too, has been criticised for on-air \u201ctemper tantrums\u201d. Insiders revealed his daily conference calls \u201croutinely descend into him loudly berating staff and launching into full-on meltdowns\u201d.<\/p>\n

Vance, who made headlines for leading a verbal attack on Ukranian president Volodymyr Zelensky at the White House last year, wrote in his memoir about his struggles to control his anger: \u201cEven at my best, I\u2019m a delayed explosion.\u201d<\/p>\n

It is hard to imagine Democrat women getting away with such behaviour. Just this week, Fox News titled an article: \u201cHillary Clinton storms out of Epstein deposition after House lawmaker leaks photo from inside.\u201d It described a \u201cstunning moment\u201d when Clinton was made aware of the fact that Colorado congresswoman Lauren Boebert violated House rules by taking and sending a photo of her during her deposition.<\/p>\n

In 1983, Andrea Dworkin published Right-Wing Women, a confronting study of Republican women\u2019s active participation in conservative politics in the US. She proposed that right-wing activist women submit to men and the patriarchy in exchange for structure to their lives: shelter, safety, rules and love from men.<\/p>\n

As these rewards are conditional on their ongoing obedience to men, right-wing activist women become not just complicit, but enthusiastic perpetrators of violence and discrimination against other women.<\/p>\n

What motivates the trade? Fear of vulnerability to men and male violence, which they believe naturally finds a target in \u201can independent woman\u201d.<\/p>\n

The \u201chates\u201d Dworkin documents are just as relevant now, more than 40 years later: anti-abortion, antisemitism, homophobia, anti-feminism, disregard for female poverty, and more. The tirades of White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt against diversity, equity and inclusion are prime examples of a woman attacking feminine solidarity to strengthen her quest for power.<\/p>\n

MAGA women can be emotional \u2013 but we only see them unleashing emotions that serve the needs of the most powerful men.<\/p>\n

Instead of embodying soft emotions such as empathy, care and kindness (like New Zealand\u2019s former prime minister Jacinda Adern), the women of MAGA strive to be as tough as the men in their administration.<\/p>\n

Look at Kristi Noem, who was secretary of homeland security \u2013 until she was ousted last week. A new book reports Trump saw Noem\u2019s pre-election admission of shooting her own dog as a reason to appoint her to implement his mass-deportation agenda.<\/p>\n

And she did play this hard-nosed role. She responded to the murders of mother Renee Nicole Good and intensive care nurse Alex Pretti by ICE agents by saying the victims were involved in \u201cdomestic terrorism\u201d.<\/p>\n

MAGA women often nod to conventional femininity with their hyper-feminine looks. Both Noem and Leavitt have been described as having what commentators dub \u201cMar-a-Lago Face\u201d. This \u201ccaricature of femininity\u201d, often achieved through surgery, Botox or fillers, not only signals wealth, but is a form of submission.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe unspoken message Mar-a-Lago face gives to men in power,\u201d HuffPost reporter Brittany Wong suggests, \u201cis that the woman is willing to tear into their flesh and change their entire individual appearance to gain approval.\u201d (Admittedly, a few men, such as Matt Gaetz, have also been accused of having Mar-a-Lago face: a masculine, rather than feminine, caricature.)<\/p>\n

Yet, as we have seen, power for MAGA women is always conditional. Noem\u2019s \u201ctoughness\u201d was not enough to save her. Many possible reasons have been cited for Noem\u2019s firing, including the US$220 million advertising campaign for ICE featuring her on horseback, and alleged misuse of public funds.<\/p>\n

But she is not the first administration official to be accused of such things \u2013 or incompetence. Remember when Hegseth accidentally sent a top-secret group chat detailing an upcoming US strike to a journalist? He still has his job.<\/p>\n

Macho sensitivity<\/strong><\/p>\n

Men\u2019s anger, lust or avarice has often been rationalised as acceptable or inevitable on a gendered basis. Women\u2019s emotional outbursts were long labelled hysterical.<\/p>\n

But on Truth Social, X and other MAGA forums, emotional outbursts no longer need rational underpinning to be positively valued. They can be seen as perfectly masculine. As Berlant says, unleashed emotion by MAGA types on social media is seen as anti-political-correctness: \u201cbeing ok with one\u2019s internal noise, and saying it, and demanding that it matter\u201d.<\/p>\n

Trump\u2019s actions, such as his threat to sue comedian Trevor Noah for a joke at the Grammys, are seen as another example of strongly anti-woke, pro-white leadership, rather than thin-skinned emotional hysteria. So is Trump calling Robert De Niro \u201canother sick and demented person with, I believe, an extremely Low IQ\u201d last month, in response to the actor calling him an \u201cidiot\u201d.<\/p>\n

Behind the machismo there is a strange vulnerabilty, a heightened sensitivity to the slightest criticism or perceived threat to the white, male order.<\/p>\n

Last month, Daily Show host Jon Stewart pointed out the hypocrisy, after MAGA complaints about Bad Bunny performing in Spanish at the Super Bowl. \u201cWhen did the right become such fucking pussies?\u201d he said. \u201cRemember 2017? Remember what you hated about liberals? Perpetually offended, safe spaces, censoring free speech, culture of victimhood. Remind you of anyone?\u201d<\/p>\n

In some ways, perhaps this public outpouring of emotion from the predominantly white men in Trump\u2019s government should not be surprising. A former high-school acquaintance of Miller told Vanity Fair that, even as a student, he was \u201call about this victimhood idea, that he was this lonely soldier crusading\u201d.<\/p>\n

The rise of the alt-right, which contributed to Trump\u2019s arrival in office, coalesced through movements such as GamerGate: the online social harassment campaign against female video-game journalists by predominantly white men on 4chan, who felt both victimised and infuriated by calls for more inclusive casts in video games.<\/p>\n

Stewing in the same digital sewers were the incels: single men who consider themselves hard-done by women who have not deigned to have sex with them. The number of lives this cohort has claimed through violent attacks is comparable to those killed by Islamic State terrorists in the same period. They are particularly known for their appetite for violence.<\/p>\n

These acts are, in part, fuelled by the irreconcilable shame and humiliation they feel at the wounding of their masculinity, along with a desire for retribution against women and any men who provoke their jealousy.<\/p>\n

Trump\u2019s administration, and indeed his own emotionally volatile behaviour, validates these hurt feelings through his slashing of funding support for diversity and inclusion initiatives, and violent roundups of people deemed \u201cun-American\u201d \u2014 even some US citizens. In this way, the current administration is a GamerGate fantasy brought to life.<\/p>\n

Power through feeling<\/strong><\/p>\n

Political philosophy tells us social power often manifests primarily through aesthetics, or how things feel, rather than logic. The rise of totalitarianism in Europe during the 1920s and \u201830s motivated many journalists and commentators to pay close attention to this problem. Much of the work was published after 1945, some of it posthumously, by well-known writers such as Hannah Arendt, George Orwell, Primo Levi and Simone Weil.<\/p>\n

Emotions \u2013 particularly anger and fear \u2013 are classic tools used by authoritarian leaders. But anger can work the other way, too. Political science professor Bryn Rosenfeld argues it can power action against repressive regimes, fuelling resistance and encouraging risk.<\/p>\n

Either way, Trump\u2019s electoral success and political power \u2013 helped by his supporters\u2019 deep emotional identification with him \u2013 show that the philosophers are onto something important.<\/p>\n

Natalie Kon-yu is Associate Professor, Creative Writing and Literary Studies, Victoria University. Emily Booth is Research fellow, University of Technology Sydney. Michael Burke is Associate professor, First Year College, Victoria University. Tom Clark is Interim Executive Dean of the First Year College, Victoria University.<\/em><\/p>\n

Source: The Conversation <\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Natalie Kon-yu, Emily Booth, Michael Burke, Tom Clark In 2016 and again in 2024, Donald Trump ran against two supremely qualified presidential candidates, who both lost. Both had decades of service to government and high-ranking jobs within Democratic administrations. Both were women. Hillary Clinton and Kamala Harris\u2019 losses have prompted a thousand think pieces on […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":14869,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jnews-multi-image_gallery":[],"jnews_single_post":[],"jnews_primary_category":[],"jnews_social_meta":[],"jnews_override_counter":[],"footnotes":""},"categories":[6],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-14868","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-opinion"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/kashmirthunder.in\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14868","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/kashmirthunder.in\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/kashmirthunder.in\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kashmirthunder.in\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kashmirthunder.in\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=14868"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/kashmirthunder.in\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14868\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":14870,"href":"https:\/\/kashmirthunder.in\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14868\/revisions\/14870"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kashmirthunder.in\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/14869"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/kashmirthunder.in\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=14868"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kashmirthunder.in\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=14868"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kashmirthunder.in\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=14868"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}