logo
How should a man be? Bill Burr, of all people, has thoughts

How should a man be? Bill Burr, of all people, has thoughts

Vox26-03-2025
writes about pop culture, media, and ethics. Before joining Vox in 2016, they were a staff reporter at the Daily Dot. A 2019 fellow of the National Critics Institute, they're considered an authority on fandom, the internet, and the culture wars.
What does a contrarian, grievance-happy comedian do when contrarianism and grievance become the norm? Bill Burr, long the poster child for a type of angry white male misanthrope, may be the last person you'd expect to embrace empathy in response to, well, everything — but that seems to be the case.
Burr recently told NPR's Terry Gross that 'there's also a part of me that really hates the fact that I have been so angry.' His new Hulu comedy special, Bill Burr: Drop Dead Years, leans all the way into that remorse, with jokes that — for the most part — sidestep giving into anger and remonstrance in favor of self-reflection. It's a far cry from his old persona, which often reveled in jokes about lesbians, fat people, trans athletes, and other marginalized groups who seemed to draw his ire.
Burr discusses things that he previously would likely have been the first to ridicule: his experiences with therapy, learning how to be a kinder partner, and the real effects of toxic masculinity on men. He even opens up briefly about experiencing intense depression and childhood sexual abuse. It's pretty weighty stuff, treated with surprising and studious care.
Well, no, not exactly. But there is something new to the way Burr is positioning himself as a man in 2025 America. 'He is giving voice to a feeling that the rules or acceptable strategies for climbing the masculinity ladder feel opaque, contradictory, and changing,' Northwestern sociologist Rebecca Ewert told Vox, referring to the status hierarchies men have to navigate in a patriarchal society. 'There have been rules — they have never been consistent. Black men need different strategies than white men. There are different ways of proving dominance in a weightlifting gym than on the floor of Congress. Burr is explaining that they feel more contradictory than ever.'
As a 56-year-old white guy, Burr embodies the much-discussed masculinity crisis — yet while griping about his losses, he's also noticing that even his advantages can be shortcomings in disguise. 'He's articulating ways the system doesn't serve him,' Ewert said, 'but he's also so afraid to lose that system he's been seeing his whole life. And we're seeing that throughout the culture.'
You might think that anxiety over his perceived loss of status would produce even angrier comedy. Yet counter to prevailing cultural narratives about angry white men getting older and more cantankerous, Burr seems to feel liberated by aging. He's happy to be getting along better with his wife, relieved to finally be able to say out loud that he's sad.
'Men aren't allowed to be sad,' he says, in a self-deprecating moment describing how he opened up to his wife about experiencing emotion. 'We're allowed to be one of two things. We're allowed to be mad or fine.' It's far from an earth-shattering revelation, but it feels significant when it's coming from someone like Burr, who previously seemed defiant and even proud of his limited emotional range. He was far from alone; if anything, he was part of a cultural moment that seems geared toward rewarding emotional repression and regressive forms of masculinity.
University of Birmingham sociologist Yuchen Yang points out that Burr's sudden interest in chilling out is self-serving on an existential level. He has for many years served as the poster child for a kind of masculinity that, as Yang put it, 'is not only harmful to women, queer, and people of color, but also detrimental to [men]'s own existence.'
'Dominant cultural beliefs about manhood often lead men into an unhealthy lifestyle,' Yang said. 'Yet at the same time, the stigma around vulnerability also makes it difficult for men to seek help when needed,' he explains, pointing to therapy, medical invention, and simple wellness tactics as preferable alternatives to doubling down.
The real issue, Yang says, is that men are 'chasing a cultural ideal that is far from realistic.' As he points out, 'Very few men can actually achieve this ideal, and those who do get close to it can hardly embody it all the time.' In other words, even as men want to embody a patriarchal masculinity, they're just as trapped by its societal expectations as everyone else.
Over the last decade, the 'manosphere' — internet spaces focused on the lives and status of men, dominated by influencers and podcasters like Andrew Tate, Joe Rogan, and a coterie of their peers — emerged as both a reaction to and worsening agent for this problem. Yang suggests its existence 'is an attempt to resolve the inherent contradictions of patriarchy without overthrowing patriarchy.'
'Those in the manosphere want to recover men's 'natural' masculinity,' he said, 'but there is nothing 'natural' about the kind of masculinity they are invested in.'
While these online spaces give men a sense of community, they also foster growing misogyny, extremism, and disgruntlement. Men now are more isolated than ever, and compared to women, they're dying younger and are more likely to die by causes including suicide, overdose, or complications from alcohol or drug abuse.
Throughout Drop Dead Years, Burr discusses his own struggle with alcohol addiction as well as the broader epidemic of sad men. ('The number one place to see sad men?' he jokes. 'Guitar Center.') Yet he seems to have not only recognized all of this, but decided to evolve in response. Burr makes the point that all of that repression of emotion takes a real toll on men's health — notable in a special that references his awareness of dying throughout. 'You start thinking about your life, you know?' he confesses. 'You take stock in it. I start thinking about how fast my life's going by, how quick my kids are growing up.'
None of this is quite as simple as 'man realizes he wants to be a better person as he gets older.' What stands out to Ewert is his deep ambivalence about all of this. She notes that Burr often swings from serious discussion about his deepest fears and hopes to jabs about women — as if his gut reaction is to punch down in order to remind himself and others that he's not on the bottom.
'I don't see him making a coherent argument. I see a lot of reactions,' she says. 'That's relatable — I think that's what a lot of men are going through.'
There's a sense that Burr has been working out not only how to get in touch with his softer emotions, but how to do softer, less confrontational comedy in a way that still feels nuanced — comedy that we might think of as punching sideways instead of either of the expected directions.
At one point, he roasts his audience members for laughing at a joke he sets up about Joe Biden and dementia. 'Not 30 seconds ago, when I said someone in my family got diagnosed [with dementia], you guys were all — you could hear a pin drop. And you had empathy,' he points out. 'Second you put a blue or a red tie on it — 'Fuck that old man! Fuck him! I'm glad he's gonna die!''
In recent years, comedy has been treated to a litany of comics, from Dave Chappelle to Louis C.K., who, when called out for various offenses, have doubled down on their commitment to disgruntlement. Burr, too, isn't over the idea; he's still frustrated that the rules about who gets canceled and who doesn't are so inconsistent, still talking about how the social phenomenon has rendered him unable to insult someone who deserves it. 'Even if he took my last slice of pizza and is denying it with pepperoni on his breath,' Burr says, 'I can't be like, 'You fat, man-titted c**t.''
But whatever Bill Burr might say about 'cancel culture' as a corrective, in his case, he's managed to do the one thing that the liberal backlash was seeking all along: listening and trying to be a little better. It's the thing that none of those other comics got around to.
'I think he has been seeing the real rewards of emotional connection in his life,' Ewert said. Yelling on stage is one thing, she notes, 'but at your house you realize that not yelling makes you feel better.'
'I think there's hope in this message,' she continued. 'If more of us could talk about men's issues, about men's mental health, as the result of a patriarchal system that puts all of us in a hierarchy, then that helps all of us.'
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

The gays are drinking milk again — here's why
The gays are drinking milk again — here's why

Yahoo

time8 hours ago

  • Yahoo

The gays are drinking milk again — here's why

Apparently gays are drinking dairy milk again. According to a new piece from Them, queers have shifted from the fancy milk alternatives and are starting to drink cow's milk in their coffees once again. And according to Vox , this is thanks to everyone going broke. Milk has been seeing an uptick sales for the first time since 2009, while milk alternatives have been selling less. There are environmental and ethical concerns to be had with these changes, but considering the cost of groceries has been shooting up in recent years, and that dairy milk tends to be more affordable than its alternatives both at the store and at many coffee shops (with some notable exceptions), it seems reasonable to conclude financial concerns are playing a role here for consumers. — (@) ADVERTISEMENT The LGBTQ+ community certainly doesn't have any sort of claim to the world of alternative milk. Some of us never even made the switch — probably more of us than TikTok would like everyone to believe. But it's still weirdly well-documented that some part of culture links gays to alternative milks . Although, according to Them's research, perhaps any truth behind that might be shifting. Anecdotally, writer Lex Goldstein links the shift not only to financial woes but to a drop in the stigma and shame surrounding walking into a trendy coffee shop and ordering cow's milk instead of oat milk. Maybe that's what happens when there's so much more going on in the world to divide us — judging people on their milk preferences doesn't seem so important. This article originally appeared on Pride: The gays are drinking milk again — here's why RELATED

The steamy, subversive rise of the summer novel
The steamy, subversive rise of the summer novel

Vox

time2 days ago

  • Vox

The steamy, subversive rise of the summer novel

is the host of Explain It to Me, your hotline for all your unanswered questions. She joined Vox in 2022 as a senior producer and then as host of The Weeds, Vox's policy podcast. As a kid, one of the highlights of my summer vacation was sitting underneath a tree in my grandmother's backyard and getting lost in a book. I don't get a three-month summer break anymore, but tucking away with a juicy novel when it's hot outside is a ritual I still return to. So what makes for a good summer read and how did this practice even emerge in the first place? That's what we set out to find out on this week's episode of Explain It to Me, Vox's weekly call-in podcast. Next Page Book recommendations — both old and new — that are worth your time, from senior correspondent and critic Constance Grady. Email (required) Sign Up By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms and Privacy Notice . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. To find the answer we spoke with Donna Harrington-Lueker, author of Books for Idle Hours: Nineteenth-Century Publishing and the Rise of Summer Reading. Summer reading is a practice she knows well. 'As a teenager, let's just say I was a bit bookish,' she says. 'That meant that when my family went for its one-week vacation a year — which was a big treat — they were on the beach and I was in some kind of a bunk bed with Moby Dick or Siddhartha.' Below is an excerpt of our conversation, edited for length and clarity. You can listen to the full episode on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you get podcasts. If you'd like to submit a question, send an email to askvox@ or call 1-800-618-8545. How did this idea of summer reading even start? Have we always grabbed books when it's hot out? No, not really. My research focused on the 19th century, and I started looking at newspaper articles, advertisements from book publishers, and the like. And I divided it into two periods: before the Civil War and after the Civil War. Before the Civil War, summer reading was constructed as a masculine practice. The idea was that men would get away from the heat and the pressures of their lives, and they should read something cool. So the essays of Charles Lamb; poetry was mentioned often as well. That all changes after the Civil War, when there's an increase in travel and tourism. The performance of summer leisure becomes an aspiration for a growing middle class, so you have many, many more people engaging in this practice. You have an increase in railroads as well. So you've got an easy way for people to get from point A to point B, and hotels begin to spring up. And as a result of that, publishers start really promoting summer reading. It takes a very specific form, and increasingly it becomes something that women do. It becomes a rather gendered space. Can you talk about that idea of performing leisure a little bit? I think that's really interesting. Publishers would advertise a variety of things as summer reading, but one of the central things was what I call the summer novel. It would be a novel that would be set in Saratoga Springs or Newport or Cape May, at a summer resort. Regardless of how wealthy or not people were, they always seemed to stay there for an entire summer as opposed to a week or a weekend. It would involve a courtship and over the course of the novel, two young people would meet, they would resolve their differences, they would visit various places, and at the end they would be married. By reading these, you'd get an idea of what these resorts were about, and you'd get an idea of how you performed leisure, what you did once you got there, and what the expectations were. So they were serving that purpose as well. There's also a good bit of fashion, so for the young woman, you'd get an idea of how you're supposed to dress. That's so interesting. So it sounds like it's serving the purpose of a mixture of a Hallmark movie with your romance but the drama and intrigue of White Lotus. Definitely the Hallmark characteristic of it. Absolutely. Were these books purely escapist, or did they get at larger themes too? One of the things that I found interesting was that yes, they are escapist in the sense of allowing you to experience another lifestyle, but they were very, very much kind of a liminal space, a space of betwixt in between. For young women especially, it's doing the cultural work of asking, 'What does it look like to have more freedoms as a young woman?' Because there was markedly more freedom — or at least as these books constructed it — during the summer and at summer resorts. You have women hiking and women going out on boats on their own and being unchaperoned, opening up vistas of freedom. Now, admittedly, at the end of all these, order is reasserted. People go back to their normal lives. Marriage as the ultimate institution of tradition gets reasserted. But for the space of the novel there are more freedoms. You have women hiking and women going out on boats on their own and being unchaperoned, opening up vistas of freedom. The novels weren't spaces that were necessarily completely out of touch either. There would be references to a very violent Pullman strike that appeared in one of the summer novels. In the preface to one about Saratoga Springs, there's questions about American imperialism. There's questions about treatment of Native Americans. And so when you take the book as a whole, it's nation-building in a way as well, and it's questioning that in some of them. What was the reaction to the rise of summer reading at the time? Was everyone just ecstatic that people were reading? The publishing industry had a very serious marketing challenge on its hands. Post-Civil War especially, you have rising literacy rates – especially among young women – but you have a very solid and profound discourse that says novel reading is evil, that it is dangerous, especially for young women. The fear was that it would be sexually arousing, that the morals would be questionable. And so you get a lot of criticism, especially among clerics and also a real fear of French novels. They were considered the most problematic. Do we still have a lot of these summer reading conventions in book publishing?

There's a bigger story behind Colbert's cancellation
There's a bigger story behind Colbert's cancellation

Vox

time4 days ago

  • Vox

There's a bigger story behind Colbert's cancellation

is a senior correspondent on the Culture team for Vox, where since 2016 she has covered books, publishing, gender, celebrity analysis, and theater. On Thursday, CBS announced that it was going to cancel The Late Show With Stephen Colbert after Colbert's contract ends in May 2026. The news comes at a politically fraught moment for CBS and its parent company, Paramount Global. It's also the capper on the long arc of late-night political comedy, a genre Colbert was instrumental in building and which now, finally, appears to be on its last legs. In a statement, CBS said its decision to end The Late Show — which began with David Letterman as host in 1993 — was 'purely financial.' 'We are proud that Stephen called CBS home,' the CBS statement said. 'This is purely a financial decision against a challenging backdrop in late night. It is not related in any way to the show's performance, content or other matters happening at Paramount.' Vox Culture Culture reflects society. Get our best explainers on everything from money to entertainment to what everyone is talking about online. Email (required) Sign Up By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms and Privacy Notice . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. That last line, that The Late Show's cancellation has nothing to do with 'other matters happening at Paramount,' seems directly aimed at tamping down speculation about CBS and Paramount Global's political motivations for cancelling a decades-long fixture of network television. Paramount Global is currently attempting to merge with Skydance Media, and company leadership has been acting as though they are concerned that President Donald Trump might try to block the merger. Earlier this month, CBS and 60 minutes announced a $16 million settlement in its lawsuit with Trump over the editing of a segment about former Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris — an extraordinary concession for a media company in a case that experts agree CBS would have likely won in court. The longtime executive producer of 60 Minutes also resigned earlier this year, citing threats to his journalistic independence. Days before the cancellation, Colbert said on his show, 'I am offended' by the settlement. 'I don't know if anything — anything — will repair my trust in this company. But, just taking a stab at it, I'd say $16 million would help,' he quipped. The payout, he added, was a 'big fat bribe.' Colbert's ousting feels symbolic, not just of CBS's apparent decision to bow down to Trump, but of the end of late-night political comedy as a genre. Two days later, reports say, CBS told Colbert they were canceling his show. The network's stated reason for canceling the show has the sheen of believability. It's true that the late-night ecosystem is struggling. Still, Colbert's show has consistently led the ratings for its time slot. CBS and Paramount Global, The Atlantic contended on Thursday, no longer deserve the benefit of the doubt. On Truth Social, Trump — a frequent target of Colbert's jokes — is celebrating. 'I absolutely love that Colbert got fired,' Trump posted Friday morning. 'His talent was even less than his ratings.' Colbert's ousting feels symbolic, not just of CBS's apparent decision to bow down to Trump, but of the end of late-night political comedy as a genre. Sure, John Oliver's Last Week Tonight continues gamely on HBO, but the kind of late-night show that felt urgent and necessary 20 years ago — the stalwart outraged host cracking wise about the foibles of the corrupt federal government and the credulous media ecosystem that enabled it — has been fading for a long time. Now, its moment is coming to a close. Jon Stewart and the rise of political comedy The late-night political comedy show as we know it was developed and perfected by The Daily Show under Jon Stewart over the course of the 2000 presidential election. As the question of whether Al Gore or George W. Bush had won the electoral college wended its way through the Supreme Court, The Daily Show took on a central role: Stewart and his colleagues, including Colbert, were the TV personalities best equipped to talk about how fundamentally weird and confusing the whole thing was. After Bush emerged victorious, The Daily Show became even more crucial. Their skill set was uniquely suited to the Bush years. While the administration took on a pious pose of compassionate conservatism, it was lying to the American people and embroiling the country in an endless foreign war. Stewart and his cohorts knew how to call Bush out on their hypocrisy and be funny about it, too. They were young and edgy, making one of the most exciting shows on television. It felt as if they were telling the truth in a time when no one else was. Stewart always insisted that he wasn't a real journalist and The Daily Show wasn't a real news show. Nonetheless, a 2007 poll from the Pew Research Center found Stewart tied for fourth place in a list of America's most trusted journalists, along with Brian Williams, Tom Brokaw, Dan Rather, and Anderson Cooper. For lots of liberals, especially young ones, Stewart absolutely was a journalist, and so were the comedians he elevated. In 2005, Colbert developed his own Daily Show spin-off, The Colbert Report. Even more biting than The Daily Show, The Colbert Report saw the host playing a parodic version of Bill O'Reilly, then the biggest star on Fox News. Like O'Reilly, Colbert's character was pompous and swaggering, lapping up his audience's applause and pontificating on 'truthiness' and the American dream. In 2006, he headlined the White House Correspondent's Dinner in character and ripped into Bush directly to his face, in a moment that Vanity Fair would say turned Colbert into a 'folk hero for the left.' With The Colbert Report an accepted institution, Colbert and Stewart developed a double act. They held a 2010 Rally to Restore Fear and/or Sanity, with Stewart pleading for sanity and Colbert for fear. In retrospect, those years would represent the zenith of their popularity. Colbert was the first Stewart acolyte to get a Daily Show spin-off, but his wouldn't be the last. John Oliver got his own show in 2014. Samantha Bee got hers in 2015. Hasan Minhaj got his in 2018. The 2010s saw The Daily Show model of news-focused political comedy spread across the landscape of television, no longer a scrappy upstart, but an institution, what we understood as what late-night television was supposed to look like. They couldn't critique hidebound media institutions for failing to do their jobs anymore, because now they were media institutions. There were two big problems with all that success. The first was that the Bush years were over. In 2008, Barack Obama became president, and while his administration had plenty of foibles for liberal comics to skewer, the central joke of the hypocrisy of neoconservatism was no longer available to them. The urgency of their comedy, the sense that they were meeting a moment as no one else could, began to fade away. The second problem was that success meant that The Daily Show brand of comedy was no longer punching exclusively up. They couldn't critique hidebound media institutions for failing to do their jobs anymore, because now they were media institutions. What else could it mean when, in 2015, Colbert took over The Late Show and became the face of CBS's late-night lineup? How late-night television lost its bite When Trump won the presidential election in 2016, part of the received wisdom was that this would be great for comedy. Trump, after all, was a joke. He would offer all those Daily Show graduates plenty of fodder for their routines. Instead, liberal comedy faltered. The skill set they had developed for the Bush years, the ripping away of pious lies to reveal the violent truth below, had no particular effect on a figure as shameless and straightforward as Trump. One by one, the shows of the Daily Show alums began to topple. Patriot Act With Hasan Minhaj went in 2020. Full Frontal With Samantha Bee left in 2022. On The Daily Show itself, hosted from 2015 to 2022 by Trevor Noah, ratings toppled. Colbert dropped his character to host The Late Show, but he criticized Trump often and vociferously as himself. All the same, his work didn't feel particularly biting or urgent anymore. Young people, particularly young men, were more likely to find right-wing comedy to be edgy and transgressive. Yet somehow, with a president this thin-skinned, and a corporate leadership this obsequious, Stephen Colbert has been rendered threatening once again. 'If something was the height of fashion 20 years ago, that almost inversely makes it less likely to seem hip and cool at the moment,' the media critic Matt Sienkiewicz told me in 2022. 'There's a rebelliousness in the way people think of this right-wing comedy, right? Even if it really is regressive and pointing back to old dominant ideas. But it can be branded as being the opposite of Stephen Colbert crying about January 6 during his monologue, which is very much not cool to the teens.' That's part of what's so striking about Paramount's decision to cancel Colbert's show in an apparent attempt to curry favor with Trump: Colbert's work hasn't felt dangerous in a long time. We're a long way from that 2006 White House Correspondent's Dinner, when Colbert delivered his jokes to a tense and scandalized crowd and Bush walked away furious. Colbert is the definition of a mainstream comedian now, and it doesn't seem as though anyone has any illusions that the jokes he cracks in between celebrity glad-handing and crowd work are culturally fundamental.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store