This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Conservatism Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. United States Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Ethnic groups Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ethnic groups, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to ethnic groups, nationalities, and other cultural identities on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ethnic groupsWikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groupsTemplate:WikiProject Ethnic groupsEthnic groups Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Ethnic groups open tasks: Here are some open WikiProject Ethnic groups tasks: Meta-tasks: Place the {{Ethnic groups}} template on the talk page of articles within the scope of this project. Resolve the disparity in importance rankings among different ethnic groups Articles about ethnic groups that currently have issues needing resolution: Category:Unassessed Ethnic groups articles Category:Ethnic groups articles needing merge action Category:Ethnic groups articles needing infoboxes Category:Ethnic groups articles needing reassessment Category:Ethnic groups articles needing attention Iyer Peruvian people Start an article: Wikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groups/Article requests Feel free to edit this list or discuss these tasks. Discrimination Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Discrimination, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Discrimination on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DiscriminationWikipedia:WikiProject DiscriminationTemplate:WikiProject DiscriminationDiscrimination Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale. Men's Issues (inactive) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Men's Issues, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Men's IssuesWikipedia:WikiProject Men's IssuesTemplate:WikiProject Men's IssuesMen's Issues Sociology Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Psychology Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Politics: American Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by American politics task force (assessed as Low-importance). Philosophy: Logic Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Associated task forces: /  Logic Australia: Politics Low‑importance Angry white male is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Australian politics (assessed as Low-importance). Need help improving this article? Ask a LibrarianWhat's this? at the National Library of Australia. The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

The Oxford (sourced via Lexico) entries can't even agree as to whether it's derogatory or not. "Angry white male" is labelled as derogatory whereas "angry white man" is not.^[1][2] The only other dictionary entry I can find for "angry white man" it is in V.S. Matyushenkov's Dictionary of Americanisms, Briticisms, Canadianisms and Australianisms which also does not label it as derogatory or a pejorative. Aside from these conflicting dictionary definitions, the only other instances I can find of this phrase supposedly being derogatory are instances of websites that rehost Wikipedia content and (as alluded to in the article body) David Leyonhjelm filing a complaint after "angry white male" was used to describe him.

In the case of Leyonhjelm, his complaint was thrown out:

But that has been turned on its head by the commission's decision to rebuff the claim at the first hurdle, declaring Senator Leyonhjelm's public remarks showed he was not truly aggrieved, and that the terms "white" and "male" were not considered terms of denigration.^[3]

Granted, the Australian Human Rights Commission isn't the definite authority on the nature of words but it's the only source I can find of "angry white male"/"angry white man" being commented on by an anti-discriminatory body.

It's easy enough to find instances of the term(s) being used in articles but not so easy to find articles discussing the supposed disparaging nature of the term(s). Given what I have typed above, I don't see how we can safely label it as "derogatory" or "racist" or "pejorative". I think it's best any sort of additional descriptor is left out. Cheers, ToeSchmoker (talk) 14:48, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is literally a far left website called https://angrywhitemen.org/ devoted to "tracking white supremacy" Why would they use this term and apply it to "white supremacy" if it wasn't meant to be derogatory? They aren't celebrating white supremacy and they aren't celebrating white men. They're doxing and harassing any white man they can that self advocates for themselves. This term is condescending and dehumanizing and is meant to delegitimize valid grievances that white men have. This condescendence makes this term derogatory, racist and perjorative and anyone who tells you otherwise is either glib or lying or is incapable of seeing their own bias. 2601:985:782:32D0:A1A9:49BB:3FF3:6EAC (talk) 07:17, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• It's SOP to leave in the article in the status quo ante when discussions like this are talking place. A negative descriptor -- either "pejorative" or "derogatory" has been in the article for move than half of its existence, so removing it rewuires a consensus of the editors in this discussion. Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:51, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I'm aware leaving articles "status quo ante" is not "SOP", it's the work of an essay and not Wikipedia policy. But I digress. I will wait, but bear in mind that WP:CCC. ToeSchmoker (talk) 10:03, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, and WP:THEREISNODEADLINE. Beyond My Ken (talk) 16:29, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not really taking sides here (on whether this term is racist, or not) because, to be blunt, I'm not really bothered, one way or another... This enquiry is one of pure curiosity... I would be grateful if someone could explain why the term "angry white man" is NOT a racist trope, but "angry black woman" IS considered to be just that, a racist trope. Indeed, the opening sentence of the lede, describes it as exactly that "...is a racist trope in American society." - This is a genuine query, without subtext or insinuation, because to me, except for the very obvious, they SEEM to be identical in every way... Why is one, one way, but the other, the other way? M R G WIKI999 (talk) 17:53, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

On things like this, the difference tends to be whether the "target" is the class of the perpetrator or victim of institutional or pervasive prejudice. Thus, a stereotype of white people (especially when it is only a specific group of white people, and doubly especially when it's specifically a group of them who are mad that other people aren't being oppressed against hard enough) isn't viewed as a racist one. Does that make sense? DarthCloakedGuy (talk) 11:36, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here is an Article from the most credible news source in India describing it as a voting block.

[1]https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/us-elections-2016/donald-trump-banks-on-angry-white-male-with-no-college-degree/articleshow/53428257.cms

Here is a neutral source from News Week to add to the issue it is a voting bloc.

https://www.newsweek.com/betrayal-american-man-ground-zero-166100

Here is the LA Times one of the most credible US based sources describing it as a voting bloc

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2004-feb-22-op-stranahan22-story.html

If you need more evidence its a voting bloc please ask and it will be explained.

I'm not getting into a BRD debate to prove the points I'm going to edit it one more time then walk away.

I'm aware News Week is a magazine, but it holds more weight than a tertiary source like a dictionary as it adds relevance directly within the scope of the topic. 27.96.192.129 (talk) 07:18, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

However, in order to appease both perspectives then I guess it needs to suffer that consequence. If we're ruled by tertiary sources such as a dictionary then its a stereotype. However, there was also another user stating we should not use tertiary sources.

My main concern now is that the lead itself is far too long. 27.96.192.129 (talk) 13:55, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry this article is gonna end up at arbitration if people don't stop hostile drive by removals of credible sources. This isn't the avenue I want to go down, but it's the one I will go down if I have to. 27.96.192.129 (talk) 22:23, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How do we all think about semi-protection? There's been a lot of vandalism and politicized shenanigans, mostly from IP sources. User:LittleBitMoreKSP (GreebleNeebleGombleWomptus???) 23:02, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To punctuate this concern, a helpful demonstrator has replied to my topic by calling me a "cuck" and requesting I get a real job. This same user has been trying to add racist rants to various parts of the talk page and article. Vandalism is, I'm near certain, a persistent issue with this article because it points out that racist white people both exist and hurt people.

I'm a new-ish Wikipedian and I'm uncertain if semi-protection is just a bandaid fix, or if it's a reasonable reaction to the issue. What do y'all think? User:LittleBitMoreKSP (GreebleNeebleGombleWomptus???) 19:50, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]