I spent the 23 and 24 of February with my family, it was my Nephew's 8th birthday party and I thought it would be nice to go. He got lots of nice presents I got to "talk geek" with my brother-in-law for awhile.
But I did have to get back to my suburban home, and used the radio as entertainment and information. For part of the return, I listened to Penn State University's NPR affiliate, and heard the following segment on Harnessing the Power of 'The Angry Black Woman'. The anger of any Woman of Color is often righteous, as the segment itself mentioned:
. . . the biggest superheroes we've ever have have been black women who have looked at a set of conditions that are designed for them to fail and designed to kill them and said, we're going to live anyway. And not only are we going to live - we're going to thrive.
But anger is also often seen as something negative, something that needs to be kept in check. Except in one case, asan earlier part of the segment mentioned:
Unless, of course, we're talking about white men being angry and then, you know, the whole sort of American political system is designed to respond to white male anger and white male discontent.
But that anger is even nuanced. Trump's campaign and presidency seem to be based on responding to white, reactionary, male anger and discontent. Anger that can be directed out at groups like Muslims, refugees, Latinos and Latinas and women. Anger that may be rooted in the gains that women, LGBTQ+, etc have made.
There is also, though not as widespread, an "active anger" in white, male, America. An anger that is directed up, at the powers that be. An anger rooted in seeing how the power structure has worked, and how it turns many Americans against their economic interests. This is the anger of Tim Wise, or of white, male members of antifa.
It's is also an anger that may mean needing to confront privilege, and to look inward. These may be why, it seems, that activist anger is not so common among white men.