Beware the leftist man: sexism and misogyny, but woke

There’s something about leftist men that rubs me the wrong way, especially when they talk about women and feminism. In my piece “My Feminism Doesn’t Centre Men and That’s Okay,” I discussed how including men in the feminist movement often comes at a cost: they start to dictate the language, the fight, and the goals of feminism, ultimately derailing the movement. I was countering right-wing men who claim that feminism is problematic, that sexism affects both men and women, and that women should simply “get over it.” However, I didn’t touch on another type of man who is just as dangerous, the leftist man, the self-proclaimed progressive who thinks that because he’s a communist, paints his nails, and is bisexual, he gets to call women bitches and make off-colour remarks about women’s vaginas smelling like fish.

These men are harder to identify because they mask their misogyny behind obfuscation, word salad, and performative wokeness. It’s sexism dressed up as progressivism, misogyny cloaked in “critique” of white feminism or disguised as criticism of “pick-mes.” It’s insidious, especially because many well-meaning left-wing feminists see these men as allies and don’t always recognise the manipulation.

This is particularly true when it comes from non-white men. As I said in my previous piece, we often position non-white men, such as Black men, as more oppressed than white men. While that may be true, women remain the most oppressed class, regardless of race, sexuality, or circumstance. When we ascribe victimhood and benevolence to non-white leftist men, it becomes difficult to recognise their sexism.

For example, when a Black man says something derogatory about a white woman, people may frame it as “commentary on white feminism,” when in reality, he could make his point without resorting to calling her a bimbo, criticising her appearance, or mocking her for having “white woman tears.” Because we grant these men privilege and immunity, we don’t confront it, or we notice but allow it. And in doing so, we embolden them.

I want all women to hear and know this: Anything you’ve been told about feminism by leftist men, or by the broader leftist movement, is false. It’s a derailment. Feminism isn’t about accommodating every other group or cause. It’s about women. It’s about females. It’s literally in the name.

Feminism isn’t about “the plight of men.” Even if men had one, the world already defaults to them. They have entire systems, movements, and power structures built for their benefit. The same goes for “the worker” or “the poor.” There are already movements for that, including the trade unions and socialist and communist parties. This is our movement. Our fight. So why are women constantly asked to take on every other disenfranchised group under the banner of feminism, when those movements never return the favour?

The men’s rights movement doesn’t include women. The workers’ movement doesn’t prioritise women. They don’t care about us. Why should feminism focus on anything other than women? That doesn’t make us regressive, tunnel-visioned, or “not inclusive enough.” It means we are focused on the liberation of our own class, the female class.

That’s like saying breast cancer awareness campaigns are exclusionary because they don’t focus on testicular cancer. Or that the Black civil rights movement in America was wrong for not centring white people. It’s absurd. White people, like men, were already the default. They didn’t need to be included.

Men aren’t having their reproductive rights stripped away. Men aren’t raped, murdered, or prostituted at anywhere near the rates women are. The sex industry doesn’t disproportionately harm men. So why, exactly, would feminism fight for them? This movement is for women, by women.

That doesn’t mean you can’t support other causes. You can be a feminist and support workers’ rights or union movements separately. The problem comes when we conflate these struggles and dilute feminism to please everyone else. It’s okay for these fights to stay distinct. It doesn’t make you anti-worker, a fascist, or a capitalist pig.

Don’t let them guilt you into submission.

One of the major issues I have with leftist men is their Marxist or socialist framework. They believe nearly all oppression stems from capitalism and that liberation can only come through dismantling capitalist systems. This is laughable; there’s even a term, “Marxist feminist,” though Karl Marx himself was an anti-feminist and a sexist pig, like most male philosophers and academics of his era. They wrote things almost certainly stolen from women, yet were hailed as revolutionary.

Within Marxist feminism, patriarchy is sidelined. They refuse to acknowledge that patriarchy, not capitalism, is the root of women’s oppression. They prefer “capitalist system” as a clever sleight of hand because it absolves men. Patriarchy names men directly as the agents of misogyny; capitalism spreads the blame. Dismantling patriarchy threatens them because it would strip away their power. Like right-wing men, left-wing men don’t want to lose control; they’re simply more strategic. So they shift the blame to capitalism, a system that could implicate anyone.

They’ll point out that some women benefit from capitalism, and that’s true, but they use this to argue, “It’s not just men, it’s everyone.” That framing lets them escape accountability and gives them cover to be sexist while pretending to critique capitalism. When they call a woman an “ignorant bitch” or tell her to “shut the fuck up” because she “knows nothing about real feminism,” they justify it by saying she’s a “filthy capitalist pig.”

Like their right-wing counterparts, they crave absolution. They’ll say, “Femicide isn’t caused by men, it’s caused by capitalism,” which is just “not all men,” repackaged for the left. The truth remains: femicide, sexual violence, and women’s oppression all stem from men, from patriarchy. Whether you’re Karl Marx or Jordan Peterson, you’re still oppressing women.

Leftist men also hate that feminism centres women. They insist, “Patriarchy is bad because it hurts everyone,” which is false. Must something harm men to matter? If patriarchy only hurt women, which it does, would they still care? Genuine question.

This video by Sasha S. Graham perfectly encapsulates my feelings and my contempt for leftist and progressive men. Watch it in full. Despite this contempt, I will never move to the right. But she’s spot on: Why I Despise Leftists & Progressives

What leftist men do that’s most insidious is call anyone who disagrees with them a “fascist.” And who wants to be called that? It’s a buzzword meant to instil fear and enforce compliance. Ironically, it’s exactly what a fascist would do. Pot, meet kettle.

Leftist men also justify sex work, and that’s what truly infuriates me. These so-called radicals, usually communists or Marxists, claim to be radical and revolutionary yet refuse to recognise that abolishing sex work is a core tenet of genuine radical feminism. They constantly defend it with endless word salad and obfuscation, so much so that we now use the sanitised term “sex work” thanks to them.

They’ll say things like, “If sex work is exploitation, then all work is exploitation under capitalism. So should we ban all labour? If you’re arguing it’s because women use their bodies, well, every job uses the body. Soldiers give theirs to the military-industrial complex. Therefore, sex work equals good.”

It’s another woke justification for a violent, misogynistic industry. They derail the feminist fight against prostitution because they don’t care about women’s well-being. If they truly believed in liberation, they’d recognise how obscene it is to frame prostitution as just another job. They’ll even label you a “puritanical bourgeois” for refusing to glorify women being gangbanged for male pleasure and consumption.

As Julie Bindel wrote: “How can the inside of a woman’s body be considered a suitable workplace? ‘Sex work’ is a ridiculous, offensive euphemism to describe a major human rights violation—prostitution.”

Ultimately, leftist men recast prostitution as a class issue rather than what it really is—an issue of violence and exploitation against women. Instead of focusing on harm to women, they hide behind hollow rhetoric like, “All work is exploitative.”

I see many parallels between the left-wing man and the incel. The incel, “involuntary celibate”, is usually portrayed as a man who, because he’s unattractive and has a repulsive personality, becomes resentful and feels entitled to women. He’s typically right-wing, holding extreme views. That’s often true, but inceldom isn’t confined to the right. Leftist men can embody it too.

These men are the horseshoe end of right-wing politics. They ultimately deny sexism, misogyny, and male accountability. Many have simply realised that women are more receptive to men who appear progressive. They know that incels are socially radioactive and that openly hating women won’t get them dates. So they rebrand.

Beneath the surface, they’re still insufferable Marxist history nerds, men who’ve learned to dress up the same entitlement in “feminist” language. They call themselves allies and male feminists, but the minute a woman disagrees with them on feminism, the mask slips. The claws come out, the nastiness resurfaces, and the “ally” becomes the same bitter incel he always was.

Both feel entitled to women’s attention and agreement. When they don’t get it, they lash out with sexism. Whether it’s “I didn’t want you anyway, you stupid bitch,” or “You’re just a dumb capitalist woman,” it’s the same pathology, inceldom, whether left or right.

Leftists have completely co-opted the feminist movement. They’ve brainwashed many women—and I hate that word because it sounds degrading, implying women are gullible, but it fits. I don’t blame these women; leftist men are skilled manipulators. They use the same tactics as the right: trickery, verbal sleight of hand, and dog whistles.

You see brilliant, well-intentioned women who genuinely want a better world for women, and for everyone, because women are inherently caring. Yet these same women are quoting Marx and other sexist male philosophers, parroting leftist male talking points, and prioritising every other “oppressed” group before themselves. In doing so, they lose sight of what it means to be a woman, what belonging to the female class entails, and what that specific oppression looks like.

They’ve been convinced that their own struggle isn’t urgent or valid, that there are “more important” fights. They’ve been derailed, persuaded that their views don’t matter because they’re “not left-wing enough.”

Remember: this is false.

When discussing the leftist man, two figures come to mind. I’m not naming them because that would only give them more clout, and you can probably guess who they are anyway. The first is a Black man whose content I used to enjoy, mainly the comedic stuff. But lately, I’ve found it unbearable because of his blatant misogyny disguised as anti-racism and radical leftist politics.

He’ll rightly criticise, say, a right-wing, overtly racist Republican woman for offensive remarks and initially make valid points. Then he goes too far. He turns from critiquing her ideas to attacking her appearance and womanhood, turning the argument into pure sexism. It’s no longer about anti-racism or standing up for himself; it’s about using his identity and the power granted to him to unleash misogyny rather than engage with the issue.

He also targets women, usually white women, who aren’t even being political—just dancing, putting on makeup, or getting their hair done. He reacts with moral judgment, calling them dumb or unsophisticated because they’re “white women,” blonde, or self-obsessed. Spare me the defence that these are “neutral comments.” I’m too aware of sexism and misogyny to fall for that gaslighting. He’s weaponising his “progressive” image to justify misogyny, and he gets away with it constantly.

He’s equally derogatory toward non-white women. He claims to “protect Black women” and that only Black women are welcome in his space—as if any woman would want to be “welcome” in a man’s space. But the moment a Black woman expresses a contrary view, no matter how offensive it might be, he unleashes abuse. I agree that Candace Owens is a gross human being, but not because she’s a Black woman with racist views—she’s just gross, full stop. Yet he calls women like her “coons,” “slave catchers,” “Uncle Toms,” and “house niggers,” engaging in blatant misogynoir. And apparently, that’s fine, because she’s right-wing, or because he’s Black and “critiquing” another Black person.

He seems to believe that if a woman, or anyone, does something wrong, like perpetuating racism or sexism, that somehow makes them fair game for misogyny in return. Yes, such behaviour deserves criticism, but responding with sexism or racism, especially toward women and especially from men, is not productive.

Another leftist man comes to mind, and he’s even more dangerous because of his immense popularity. Again, you can probably guess who. He’s mixed-race, from a powerful media family, and has long been surrounded by controversy. Women have called out his behaviour for years.

He’s a sex buyer, first and foremost, and openly supports the sex industry, an industry I’ve discussed before for its inherent violence and exploitation. He argues the typical male line: “What if the woman really likes it? What if it’s empowering?” The subtext is clear: they’re upset they might lose the ability to pay for sex and access women’s bodies.

He’s also made numerous problematic statements despite branding himself as anti-racist and anti-sexist. When viewers, often Black women, point out that his criticism of someone (frequently another Black woman) is racist, he dismisses them as “defenders of white supremacy.” His delusion runs deep. His audience is mostly white men, though he imagines he’s speaking to a diverse, progressive crowd. In truth, he’s catering to a narrow base of men who idolise him. He often sics his rabid white male followers on women, especially vulnerable ones, who dare to critique him. And while you can’t always control your audience, it says plenty when you see them hurling misogynistic and racist abuse and you do nothing. He fans the flames and enjoys it.

The clearest example of his misogyny was his rape joke, which revealed everything about how he views women. He made a video about a school that opted out of a policy protecting students from sexual misconduct. Instead of offering serious commentary, he joked that “at least it’s happening at an Ivy League school with rich people,” implying it was “better for rich men to be fucking rich women than poor women.” He later claimed it was just a joke, but making light of rape, even before clarifying, is indefensible. He got away with it, of course. Some say there was backlash, but there was no real consequence. He’s too powerful, too platformed, too untouchable.

That a self-proclaimed leftist makes rape jokes like that is appalling. Yet he’s protected by his political label. If a right-wing man said the same thing, people would react with outrage. I believe the response should be the same for both: utter disdain and contempt.

Rape isn’t funny. And the joke wasn’t funny.

As I said at the start of this piece: anything you’ve been told about feminism by leftist men, or by the broader leftist movement, is false. Leftist men are not our friends or our allies. They are just as much of a threat and a hindrance to feminism and our liberation as right-wing men. Just because they use words and phrases like proletarian, imperial, fascist, regime, bourgeois, class struggle, or Global South does not mean they are on our side or that they understand the plight of women and the fight against women’s oppression.

They are trying to derail you and uphold their patriarchal power, all while packaging it in a woke little parcel of word salad, misogyny, and bullshit. Continue on your path of female liberation. Do not let them stop you. Keep moving. When they try, ignore them, and keep moving. Keep fighting. Do not get lost in the leftist sauce.