When it comes to what qualities a political leader should possess, a six-pack is probably pretty far down most people’s lists. However, it seems that brawn is increasingly valued over brains in the US, where several shows of political hyper-masculinity have grabbed the nation’s attention in recent weeks. 
 
Last month, the 65-year-old incumbent mayor of New York, Eric Adams, decided that the best way to demonstrate superiority over his 33-year-old Democratic rival, Zohran Mamdani, was through the bench press. “The weight of the job is too heavy for ‘Mamscrawny’. The only thing he can lift is your taxes,” Adams wrote on X, accompanied by a video of him completing eight bench presses alongside Mamdani struggling to do two. Adams was echoing sneers from the wider conservative movement, which appeared to suggest that Mamdani’s struggle with weights implied some fundamental flaw in his character and, by extension, his politics.

The bench press-off came shortly after another overt show of muscular posturing. US defence secretary, Pete Hegseth, released a video of himself and the 71-year-old health secretary, Robert F Kennedy Jr, doing 50 pull ups and 100 push-ups in less than 10 minutes, their snug T-shirts clinging to toned torsos as they grunted at the pull-up bar. The “Pete and Bobby Challenge” was ostensibly part of an effort to get Americans healthy again. This outpouring of testosterone is to be expected from the current crop of Republicans under Donald Trump, a politician who, on the campaign trail last year, promised to protect women “whether they like it or not”. 

Trump set the tone and his cabinet now seems determined to prove their masculine credentials. But it is disappointing to see Democrats jumping on the beefcake bandwagon. With the midterm elections approaching in 2026, when all seats in the House of Representatives and about a third of Senate seats are up for grabs, the party is desperate to reclaim some of the voters that they have lost to Trump. The young male vote is key, with men aged 18 to 29 swinging to Trump by a 12-point shift that helped him win the White House for a second time. 

It seems that the Democrats think hitting the gym is one way to these young voters’ hearts. Perhaps it’s forgivable that Colin Allred, US Senate candidate in Texas, would hand out policy prescriptions from his home gym, barbells in the background, as he declared: “I’ve just finished my workout.” He is a former Tennessee Titans linebacker after all. But why did Mamdani feel the need to reveal his biceps? He won the Democratic Party nomination for the mayoral race with a smart campaign packed with policy suggestions that tapped into the genuine concerns of New Yorkers. Democrats should be taking note of his core messaging, not his core strength. But instead we see others, such as Colorado state representative Manny Rutinel, posting videos of himself doing pull ups as he promises to flip a Congress seat. 

Perhaps they are trying to shift the perception of liberals being weak or weedy. But that’s hardly the main problem facing the Democratic Party right now. With Trump testing the limits of presidential power, there are countless issues affecting Americans that Democrats could engage with and they need a coherent and serious message to bring to the table. While the manosphere might seem like a good place to be positioning yourself, the posturing comes across as infantile. It would be much more useful if they could turn their attention to more pressing issues than bench presses.

Charlotte McDonald-Gibson is a Monocle contributor based in Washington. Whatever his bench press, Mamdani’s personality-led rise is a marvel. Click here for more on what Democrats can learn from the favourite to win the New York mayoral election.

For the past decade or so, one Israeli red line has seemed inviolate (writes Inzamam Rashid). The country would not strike Hamas officials on Gulf soil, particularly in capitals effectively shielded by US interests. That line crumbled yesterday when the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) confirmed a strike on a Hamas meeting in Doha, Qatar. What once felt improbable now feels like part of a slow recalibration, encouraged in part by the Trump administration’s more permissive attitude towards Israel. At the heart of this is a cold calculation: Israel appears willing to risk straining relations with the Gulf states to press Hamas further into a corner. It also confirms that Benjamin Netanyahu is not interested in mediation. If anything, by hitting Doha, Israel has signalled that it would rather eliminate interlocutors than negotiate with them.

The collateral effect is a fresh layer of insecurity for Qatar. Mediation has long been Doha’s calling card, from Gaza ceasefire talks to Taliban negotiations. But if this role now carries the risk of drawing foreign strikes onto its soil, the incentives might fade quickly. A member of Qatar’s security forces was killed, and the notion that Doha can be struck with impunity is unsettling. Why here and not Abu Dhabi or Dubai? Part of the answer lies in perception; Israel does not view Qatar as a military threat and assumes restraint. Iran, for its part, likely tipped Doha off, tempering any sharp response.

But Qatar’s leadership has responded with fury. Prime minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani described the attack as “state terrorism” and warned that there is a “rogue player” in the region intent on reshaping the Middle East. His words pose a sharper question still: is Netanyahu suggesting that this redrawing of the map extends to the Gulf as well?

Other Gulf states were quick to condemn yesterday’s strikes. The UAE described them as “blatant and cowardly”, while Saudi Arabia branded Israel’s actions as “criminal violations”. For Qatar the dilemma is acute. It can double down on ideology, remain host to Hamas and keep trying to mediate. Or it can follow the UAE’s more pragmatic path: distance itself from Hamas, cultivate discreet friendships with both Israel and Iran, and focus on protecting its own prosperity. Ultimately, this will be a test of how ideological Qatar truly is; whether it clings to its role as patron and mediator or quietly chooses pragmatism in an effort to safeguard its territorial integrity.

Inzamam Rashid is Monocle’s Gulf correspondent. For more on yesterday’s strikes tune in to ‘The Globalist’ on Monocle Radio.

Crowds lined up at the Iconsiam shopping centre in Bangkok last month not for Louis Vuitton or Prada but for a dopamine-fuelled buying frenzy at Pop Mart, the Beijing-based collectibles giant that opened its largest global flagship in the Thai capital (writes James Chambers). Across town at Centralworld, a pop-up from premium bag brand Songmont – a cult favourite in China – is enjoying a similarly warm welcome at its first overseas outpost. Its €500 Gather handbags aren’t in the same league as Hermès or Chanel but they’re a far cry from the fast fashion of Shein or Temu. For the mid-career professionals queueing up, the brand’s Beijing roots are part of the appeal.

The arrival of Chinese retail brands with better products, richer narratives and accessible luxury pricing is happening across Southeast Asia. What stylish women are carrying around Shanghai is now considered cool and covetable by peers from Jakarta to Singapore. Meanwhile, men are opening their wallets for Chinese technical and active-wear from the likes of Benlai and Beneunder. Both are strong on simple wardrobe staples – a potential concern for the Lululemons of the world. Even the mighty Uniqlo could need to limber up for a rare bit of competition. 

To read the full version of this article, click here.