Tom’s vocational pursuits, and the challenges and conflicts of interest they present, fuel the novel’s exploration of how culture wars impact human relationships. Although he’s the novel’s first-person narrator and protagonist, Tom isn’t always a sympathetic character.

The way the other characters interact with Tom conveys how his personal belief system creates tension in his social spheres. Throughout the novel, he makes derogatory or incendiary comments about gender pronouns, sexual harassment cases, women’s bodies, and people’s races or ethnicities. Often, his children, wife, or acquaintances warn him to watch his mouth, but Tom feels targeted rather than convicted. He pities himself, insisting that everyone just thinks he’s “picking fights” when he’s merely expressing his ideas; he worries that others, particularly Amy, feel “ashamed to be connected to someone with my opinions” (35). Tom’s character shows little capacity for self-reflection or change at the novel’s start because he’s so stuck in his own, often outdated views. His character represents the more conservative viewpoints in contemporary “culture wars.” He scoffs at the idea of pronouns and defends white male figures whom he thinks the media has misjudged or punished too harshly. While Tom feels justified in his decisions, behaviors, and beliefs, his ideals actively create dissonance in his home, family, and work lives.

Tom’s overarching lack of emotionality implies that he’s unfazed by the tension that his bigoted beliefs create. The narrative (and Markovits’s representation of Tom) rides the line between satirizing and lauding stereotypes of the “angry white male” (180). Most of Tom’s close friends, acquaintances, and clients share his opinions. Because his friends’ opinions echo Tom’s, readers gain insight into Tom’s character and viewpoints via these secondary characters. In turn, the narrative implies that Tom feels that his opinions have merit because he has support in his opinions. Sam Tierney’s remarks in a dialogue with Tom are particularly clarifying in this regard:

I’m a middle-aged white man who likes to teach dead white men. Eventually […] I’ll say something that one of [my students] takes a righteous objection to. Which wouldn’t surprise me at all, I have many objectionable thoughts. If you stand up in front of kids you end up saying some of them. I don’t have to tell you (70-71).

Sam’s point of view echoes Tom’s, so Tom appears less like an outsider. Sam is acknowledging that he has a minority point of view in his college setting, but he takes no accountability for how his beliefs might endanger his students or create institutional unrest. Tom has assumed a similar stance (as have characters like Brian Palmetto and Todd Gimmell), and they perpetually act wounded when they’re challenged to consider more progressive modes of thought. In Tom’s interactions and narration, he has little emotional affect, which enacts his disregard for others’ feelings, beliefs, opinions, or experiences.

However, Tom’s interaction with Todd Gimmell compels him to address his social, cultural, and political viewpoints. While listening to Todd’s bigoted rant about equality in America, Tom realizes that this is what Miri means when she calls him an angry white male. He also realizes that “this is the road you’re going down, this is where it leads you” (180). Tom’s moment of sociocultural awakening implies that he wants to change so as not to become like Todd, though Tom meditates no further on this revelation for the remainder of the novel. The narrative’s rapid subsequent abandonment of this issue inadvertently suggests that Tom’s change might not be lasting or genuine.