Why "The Problem is Toxic Male Masculinity" is Wrong

[mgsgta3]

I see a lot of talk about this lately, with people using this broad term to blame all kinds of issues. I never see any tangible solutions given however, and to me thats symptomatic that the problem is misdiagnosed, or misunderstood. It is also divisive to look at it that way and that in itself makes solving any problem much harder. Are there toxic male behaviors? Of course. Are there toxic female behaviors? Of course. Toxic white people behaviors? Toxic Christian behaviors? Toxic republican behaviors? Of course. Every group, every subgroup, every race has toxic aspects. Some of them have adapted to fit that group in specific ways (like with males being taught not to show emotion) but many of these learned behaviors transcend these gorups and subgroups until the most common denominator is male and female. In that sense I see where people are coming from with the term "toxic masculinity"

Aside from that though I disagree with the use of that term entirely. The problem is not just one thing, but a number of things.
-Toxic societal norms and toxic human behaviors. Women are just as prone to feeling pressured into being a certain way, looking, doing, acting a certain way. They are just as prone to experiencing negative, unhealthy, and detrimental responses to not following these norms, and like men, they also have behaviors that cause harm to not just themselves but both genders.

-Feminism as its portrayed currently, is a joke and pile of hypocritical trash. On the polar opposite side of things there are groups like MGTOW (I'm not even going to try and explain that circus of clowns, google it if you don't know what it means), and given how each group behaves I can somewhat understand how someone gets into being what I'll call a "modern" feminist or a guy in MGTOW. I can see how women would go to a MGTOW site and read some of their hypermasuline-to-the-point-of-being-gay-even-though-they-openly-hate-gays circle jerk content and become a modern feminists as a result. I can see how some men see these "feminists" saying such ignorant and discriminating nonsense that they think MGTOW is the answer.

That's because both of these views are absurd, beyond stupid, and laughable. They're both insincere, detrimental, and take part in obscuring the truth. The only good thing I can say about them is that to some small degree they at least are aware that there is a problem, even if they're lightyears away from correctly identifying it, and therefore unaware that they are a big part of that problem. In truth, genuine feminism and genuine masculism are the same. They both see that there is systematic discrimination, and believe that it should be eliminated. What they don't see though, is the only way they can end discrimination is by operating in unity to end discrimination since both sides play a big role in the creation of these social norms to begin with, but also because both genders are impacted by these behaviors.

Rather than being divided and looking at it in a way that blames the other side we should work as one to eliminate any and all toxic human behaviors that are instilled by society. After all, we do have the same goals. What this also means is you can't pick and choose your discrimination, meaning you can't end discrimination against women if racial discrimination still exists and so on, so all of it would have to go (sexism, racism, religious discrimination, homophobia, political discrimination, etc.) That's because from a logical standpoint you cannot totally eliminate one group being discriminated against if they are discriminating against the other group still since they will in turn discriminate back. Or if you discriminate against them for one thing but not another, it doesn't work like that.

So the problem isn't "toxic masculinity", rather toxic parts of human behavior in general. Parts that can only be made better by acting out our desire of not being discriminated against by...not discriminating, against anyone, for anything. Until we approach these problems in unity and as one and see them in that manner nothing will substantially change. If we could though, just think of the whole world having one goal. We would be unstoppable.

Whether that's a realistic possibility for humanity or not is a matter for the comments section or maybe another post, the main thing about this post is just to accurately name the real problem disguised as "toxic masculinity" and offer a solution.

[Astoriana]

In what I've read about toxic masculinity in academic circles (not here, where everyone just sees the term and immediately screams "BUT WHY DO YOU HATE MEN!!!"), the problem is that men are socialized to believe that having and expressing feelings in any way that isn't fucking or fighting makes you less of a man. It's also the idea that the role of a father is to be absent in order to "provide" and that all of your emotional needs ought to be met by your romantic partners and no one else.

There are solutions in academic circles - which is literally the point of these discussions and journal articles (as @MlleCake has said as well). Mostly, it is suggested that we raise boys with the understanding that they CAN express emotions (and in more ways than just by fucking and fighting) and it won't make them less "male."

I see men's activists always bring up the fact that men are more likely to succeed at committing suicide, and I never see them suggest anything. In academic circles, it's thought by some that the reason for this is that men do not have many close friends. The more close personal relationships that you have with people, the more unlikely you are to commit suicide. This is especially marked with men of a certain age (30s to 50s), whom are likely to be married and/or remarried. I know my dad doesn't have any friends. He has my mom and he has me. It's a lot.

[MlleCake]

I posted something about that and was told I was trying to turn men into women.

By suggesting they benefit from close relationships.

[Astoriana]

@MlleCake It's honestly so ridiculous. The field of psychology is only able to exist because people are all similar enough that behaviour is predictable. These people want to believe in evolutionary psychology which can't even be tested, but they don't want to believe in clinical and behavioural psychology because it doesn't fit their narrative. It's beyond frustrating.

[Jon_25]

I'm not sure what you mean here. I get that some men may be raised wrong, and if that could be prevented great, but before that would it not make sense to figure out WHY they were raised wrong to begin with? Otherwise wouldn't it just recycle and start over?

Also-- and I'm not sure if you just left this out because the post was about male toxicity-- but men aren't the only ones who can be raised wrong. I haven't met many men who fit the description you gave, but just as many men like that that I have met, I have also met girls who have been raised to believe wrong things.
Girls can be raised to believe that they need a man and can't make money on their own. They can be raised to believe that their body is only useful to be a fuck toy for men, and that's their only use in life. They can even believe that men are in charge of them, because their parents always treated them like they were to obey, and never think for themselves.

But not all, or many, girls were raised like this either.

[RaijuRainBird]

I think there’s a different problem. A reluctance on both sides to form egalitarian sexual and social relationships. The key word there being, ‘sexual.’

It’s one thing to have men soften up below the stereotypical ‘man’ — and this should happen. But if this happens, women should ‘harden’ up above the stereotypical woman, as well. It’ll need to be a ‘meet in the middle’ situation where men are less dominant than traditional men, but aren’t submissive and women are less submissive than traditional women, but aren’t dominant, either.

The resting place becomes an egalitarian footing where both genders are less like their stereotypes. And equal footing.

People don’t like this idea, though, somewhat surprisingly. Traditional men don’t like it for the same reasons you’ve picked up on, it makes them feel feminine. But women don’t like the sound of this, either, because they don’t get to stay feminine anymore.

See it becomes a new gender identity that is sex neutral.

[Astoriana]

@RaijuRainBird and you don’t think that has been happening?

Honestly, ever since no-fault divorce became a thing, there have been many more single-parent families where the mother becomes primary caregiver and provider. Can’t really afford to be “soft” in those instances.

There are more women in STEM fields than ever before, and while we’re nowhere near where we should be, it’s definitely a lot more acceptable for women to be in positions of power.

Half of the dudes on here complaining about “Western women” are bitching because they don’t find them “feminine” enough.

[Jon_25]

But getting better jobs and dealing with hard situations, and expressing more than violence and sex drive, are not the same. Nor are they opposites. I'm not sure where you are going with this.

[Astoriana]

@Jon_25 alright then. I’ll bite. What do you think it means?

[Jon_25]

Well if men and women are supposed to "meet in the middle" then it makes sense that if one changes towards something, that the other should change away from that thing, right?

So if guys acting like all they care about is fighting and fucking is a guy thing that guys should change,
doesn't it follow that girls acting like they don't care about fighting and fucking is a girl problem that girls should change as well?

And if getting better jobs and holding up in tough situations is something girls need to change into,
Then doesn't it follow that getting worse jobs and needing more help in tough situations is something guys should change into?

These correlations dont make sense to me. Thats why I think they dont make sense to be what each gender should change respectively.

Things that guys ought to change specifically, as opposed to girls, would be things that girls ought to change opposite specifically, in the same way. So each gender steps away from their line, and towards the middle.

[Jon_25]

Personally I don't think changing to be in the middle is what we should do anyways.
But if we are going to do it, then I'd rather do it consistently.

[Astoriana]

@Jon_25 don’t you think that’s overly simplistic?

I know a ton of dudes in engineering who are coasting while their female colleagues are busting their asses (and not claiming credit, because that makes you a “bad” employee or some other nonsense). I see the reverse happening too, albeit more rarely.

You can’t look at complex social issues as a simple equation. It’s not like men and women are perfect foils for one another - strangely enough, they’re individuals.

But on the whole, as a society, men are emotionally unhealthy due to their limited emotional relationships and responses to situations. On the whole and as a society, women are limited in the workplace due to the expectations of others and “obligations” like childrearing and running a household - where it hasn’t been shown that men take an equal share of the work in the literature (though the trends are changing).

[Jon_25]

I'm not saying that these aren't problems that should be addressed (except that first one I kind of mentioned that in my original reply), but to say that that is an effort to bring men AND women closer to being THE SAME, is not really true.

It's making men more like women in one area, and women more like men in another area. It's not bringing them each to a middle ground between, it's making everyone like a girl in one place and everyone like a man in others. Like a big "S" across the middle line. You aren't achieving your goal by this. That's fine.

What you are going for here is making PEOPLE better. That's great. But that doesn't mean you are changing men or women. You are changing people, as a whole. That's what I don't think matches up with what you are trying to do, and what you are actually doing. I'm all for what you are actually doing (mostly), but not what you are trying to do. If that makes sense..

[RaijuRainBird]

I think you’re both missing my point. I’m talking about the fundamental biological-sexual tension/relationship that underpins male-to-female interaction.

Thus has little to do with public displays of responsibility or career choice, and more to do with non-verbal cues, what you desire sexually and how to schematize the ideal relationship between man and woman — personal or professional.

It cuts much deeper than who’s in STEM careers and who bears financial responsibility, it goes to how you want to be treated in the bedroom and how to make daily decisions under that pretense.

[Jon_25]

@RaijuRainBird Sorry, I don't let what happens in my bedroom effect me outside of it. Maybe I'm weird, I don't know.

[Astoriana]

@RaijuRainBird must be difficult for you, life. You want to fuck every woman you see. How do you have time for anything else?

Or are you trying to say something not absolutely ridiculous?

There’s a lot more to life than sex, and to believe that all the issues wo/men face are fundamentally about sex is both idiotic and short-sighted.

[Paultripps]

The mother gets to be the primary care giver, but the man is still often the main provider. Progress in STEM fields is limited to women’s desire to go into those fields, similar to how many men don’t get into social science fields.

[Astoriana]

@Jon_25 I have absolutely no idea what you are trying to say. Please speak plainly. I’m not in your head.

[Astoriana]

@Paultripps you aren’t a woman, so you don’t recognize how women are actively discouraged from entering into STEM fields. Are you open to me explaining it to you, or are you a hardliner who believes that the only reason women are behind is because they don’t work hard enough?

[Paultripps]

If a woman wants to get into STEM, where is she discouraged? Socially? If you believe that, then men are just as socially discouraged from getting into teaching, nursing, and social sciences. The schools are completely set up to favor girls development in this day and age, they graduate at higher rates from college in less time, and women under 30 make more than men (by like 1-2% but still there). So if you have any valid data or facts, then I am open to hearing them. But women dominate grad school enrollment, professional degrees, and the like. They just aren’t choosing STEM. I don’t see women complaining about not getting into construction, sanitation, or other manual labor fields because they do not want to do that, just like STEM.

[Astoriana]

@Paultripps yup. Hardliner. Cheers.

[Jon_25]

Please read my first reply, I'm not sure if you have yet.

I'm saying that, in order to take both genders and make them the same by bringing them to the center line between the two, you have to give and take EQUALLY from both sides.
If you take a man away from masculinity, you have to take a woman away from feminity.
If you bring a woman towards masculinity, you have to bring a man towards feminity.

M>> @ <> @ <> @ <> @ >>F

They may be the same as each other, but they are not on middle ground. You haven't accomplished your goal.

I'm not sure which parts don't make sense, so I can't explain further, sorry.

[Jon_25]

Wow that stuff came off wrong. Just ignore the symbols, that part's pointlessly messed up now.. 😅

[Astoriana]

@Jon_25 why do you think that masculinity has to be inherently toxic?

The point is not to actually make men and women the same. It’s to make men emotionally healthy, which toxic masculinity prevents.

[Jon_25]

Okay, that's a fine goal. I have no problem with that. I thought you meant bringing them to middle ground, which I don't want to do either, but your method would not achieve it anyways. That goal, your method would achieve. Nothing against that.

I do have a problem with your assessment of men being inherently not healthy emotionally, though. I'm not sure if you saw it, but that's what I originally had an issue with in my first reply. It's the 3rd reply from the top. I never really got a response which is why I don't think you saw it. But that's what I actually would like to clear up, if you don't mind.

[Astoriana]

@Jon_25 you know that telling me to respond to it repeatedly is only going to make me more unlikely to respond to it out of sheer annoyance, right?

If men aren’t being raised to experience the full range of emotions like anger, sadness, fear, uncertainty, etc. and to express them in ways other than the two Fs, then they’re being raised wrong. And honestly, most men are raised this way. We expect men to be perpetually cool and calm... until they explode in rage. That’s not healthy. Suppressing your feelings until they burst forth isn’t healthy. How bursting looks from person to person will vary (for example my father starts screaming and throwing things whereas my ex fiancé got really caustically sarcastic and totally vindictive), but what goes in must eventually come out.

What I would like to see is for men to be able to express these negative emotions (and positive ones too, like love and affection and nurturing) in the moment instead of much later.

[Jon_25]

I know what you are saying, and I am not trying to annoy you here honestly. I have just already responded to that. I would copy paste it but I don't know how that works cause I'm not good at phones. Please just look back at it and pretend I put it here? I can type it all out again if you won't, but it will take a lot less time if we do it the other way. Just look back at it, please..

[Astoriana]

@Jon_25 there’s nothing for me to respond to in your original message soI have no idea what you’re looking for bruv.

[Jon_25]

Really? I'm pretty sure I asked an open ended question in it..

Okay, sorry. Well if I follow with so why is the men who have been raised wrong so much worse than the women who've been raised wrong, and what makes changing those men so much more important?

Also we still don't know what caused them to be raised wrong in the first place, so should that not be something we figure out FIRST to avoid falling into the same pit over and over?

[Astoriana]

@Jon_25 we do though - our definition of what masculinity is and how emotionally unhealthy it makes men. That’s what’s fundamentally wrong with the way men are being raised.

As for your weird rant about how women can be raised to be sex dolls - that isn’t really a thing anymore. You can see that kind of thing in very traditional and conservative communities (like the Mormons) but our society at large doesn’t view women that way anymore. I mean, some neckbeards do but they are the minority.

It’s more important to change men at this point because they haven’t undergone the same paradigm shift as women have. Feminism really did change the way women were raised, but men have been stuck with “boys don’t cry” and “suck it up and be a man” and “don’t be a pussy” forever.

[Jon_25]

I meant why they are being raised that way. As in, what caused that to happen. Because even if we change a generation, if we dont fix the cause, the next one could have the same problem were having now.

You got my point exactly there. That doesn't happen to girls very much at all. Most of them are either not at all like this, or barely to any degree.
Just like the guys you've talked about.
I have only met, maybe... 6-7 guys like what you have described. Not "I shouldn't cry in public and I need to be tough" kind of men, but the "I must only fight and fuck" kind of men. Because the latter has something done wrong, and they ought to not think that, you're right. But that does not represent the majority of men. Not even close.

Its good to address that problem, but not to do so with every man when only a small percentage need it. You seem to be saying that as part of being a man, men always are like this. Thats not true. I grew up around a lot of men, and I know thats only very few of them.

[Astoriana]

@Jon_25 would you be embarrassed to show that you didn’t know something in front of your boss?

[Jon_25]

No, he already knows I don't know stuff. If I don't know, I'm supposed to ask. That's much better than botching the job and getting him in trouble with the buyer, and me in trouble with him.
Why would I be embarrassed to not know something?

[Astoriana]

@Jon_25 how enlightened of you. The men I know would rather die than admit to any weakness.

[Jon_25]

But how would not knowing something be a weakness?
If I am gonna pass out or something, I'll hide it yes. Because I am supposed to be working and I don't want to be seen as weak. No one wants to be seen as weak, girl or guy.

[Jon_25]

Would you want people to see you pass out, as opposed to making it to a bathroom first?

[Astoriana]

@Jon_25 if I’m gonna pass out, I’m gonna pass out.

For me, the real problem with toxic masculinity is the avoidance of vulnerability. You can’t have a close relationship with anyone unless you’re able to be vulnerable. I personally believe that more men succeed at committing suicide than women because they’re lonely and won’t admit it to anyone.

There’s also the idea that the only kind of intimacy that is allowable to men is physical intimacy ie sex. You need a lot more than just that to be a healthy and balanced person.

[Jon_25]

Nobody wants to be vulnerable. Not even girls. Am I wrong?

The problem is that they refuse to be vulnerable in a relationship, and are thereby unable to have one on a level more than just sex, which isn't a relationship. This is what you are trying to fix, right?

If so, then I agree. Men are much more likely to hide their vulnerabilities from their romantic partners.
But that is not because they hate being seen as weak any more than the average person. That doesn't have to do with men.

That is because men dont trust other people not to use their weakness against them, or judge them for it. Kind of like you said, girls are "allowed" to be vulnerable. But with guys, its looked down on. Its not seen as okay to be weak sometimes.

THAT is the problem. Not men not wanting to do it, that's an effect of the problem. The *problem* is that PEOPLE-- a lot of the time women, along with other men-- do not allow men to be weak or vulnerable. They shame them for it. That needs to stop, or men won't.

[RaijuRainBird]

I don’t want to have sex with every woman I see, well, I do list after women I see randomly, but that’s not the same thing as wanting have sex with them.

In truth I don’t enjoy sex that much because I tend to be too egalitarian about it. And this was my whole point from the beginning.

The reality I see is that women prevent egalitarian sexuality through the desire to be feminine and ladylike, perhaps even submissive, during real sex. This insistence to preserve power structures in the bedroom undermines all efforts for equality outside of the bedroom. And *that* is the point I’m making.

It’s hard to take someone seriously when you’ve just demeaned them with your penis and likely called them names during sex and maybe even slapped and whatever else, and then go around in public treating them as if they’re equals. No, that’s not how it works.

If women renounce their ‘ladylike’ desires, they’ll finally be treated equals.

[RaijuRainBird]

I actually disagree with this goal. I think the goal should be to make men and women the same. Moving men more feminine and women more masculine is exactly what we need, until they stand on mutual middle ground in every way, including sexually.

This was my point from the get go, and I realize that my view is even more extreme than yours or John’s, and that’s what I expect. Most men and women alike aren’t willing to go as far as I’m suggesting because they actually enjoy gender roles. People want to remain unequal, and women want to be ladylike and men want (or at least women want men to want) to be ‘manly.’

And so this conversation isn’t about changing that paradigm, it’s becomming about altering the definition of ‘manly’ — preserving inequity between genders by insisting their must be two. And furthermore, implying that if one deviates from these gender roles, their sexual life will suffer because no one wants to be sexual with a genderqueer, or gender non-conformist.

[Astoriana]

@RaijuRainBird ok that's not at all what I was talking about and not anything that I'm interested in discussing so you can take that elsewhere. Cheers.

[Astoriana]

@Jon_25 and that is exactly what toxic masculinity is - an expression of masculinity that is rigid and doesn't allow for any deviation from the norm.

[RaijuRainBird]

But why not? I don’t understand the feminist movement if not to obtain true egalitarian equality. True equality implies the removal of gender stereotypes in favor of one egalitarian gender. Anything else will necessarily obtain a double standard, undermining the entire movement.

But, at least, I take your response to be affirmation that I’m right at some level. Figuring this out recently explains what’s been off on my attempts to date. I come into it with an egalitarian mindset, and the women bail because of that.

It’s as if not conforming to gender stereotypes automatically disqualifies one from any romantic or sexual activity, which doesn’t seem right if everyone involved has got the right parts that work. Personality and other valuable traits are still in play, it just seems like there’s this thing about gender that trumps all other factors in measures of sexual attraction.

Of course I’ve never even considered this before, and assumed nobody else did.

[Jon_25]

Why is that called toxic masculinity then?
It's people--men and women-- treating men as if they can't express vulnerability in a relationship. That causes men to be the way they are.

How men are acting is a side effect of how people treat them in this case. Fix how people treat them, and they won't feel the need to wear masks.

I don't think that toxic masculinity is the problem here. It's the indicator of the problem.

[Astoriana]

@RaijuRainBird I'm really not interested in talking about your sex life.

[Astoriana]

@Jon_25 because that is the term. I didn't coin it; I have no idea why that's the one that stuck. I suggest you do your own reading on the topic because I'm bored now.

[Jon_25]

Okay. I just thought toxic masculinity referred to how guys were acting, not how guys were treated. My mistake. Have a good day.

[MlleCake]

@RaijuRainBird Neutral is good, but why can't women be dominant too? We already are in certain times and places. We have out own ways of being dominant.

[MlleCake]

@Astoriana and @Jon_25 That was an enlightening conversation. Jon, thanks for listening. I see you are trying to engage in the discourse. That's good.

[Jon_25]

@MlleCake Thanks, ya.

[Al-Khawrazmi]

Looks like academics have a very simplistic view of men.
Dr Freud would say that they compensate for not having enough fucking and fighting in their lives :)
But to the point:
Indeed, boys can express the full range of emotions. But what do you think happens when they do so? Do they receive the same nurturing response from the society as girls do? They do not.
Boys are socialized to control their emotions, because it works in the environment they have to live in. If a boy cries, he is seen as a loser by both men and more importantly women. So, if you want to help the boys express emotions, change the environment. And, instead, the academics want to change boys. And it is not going to work, because the environment is still the same. Some academics are just dumbasses (especially in social sciences) your common sense while reading their papers.

[MlleCake]

@Al-Khawrazmi Thanks for demonstrating toxic masculinity for us.

[Al-Khawrazmi]

@MlleCake Thanks for demonstrating sexist behavior :)
I did not know that only toxic masculine men can dislike academics.
Thank you for enlightening us!

[MlleCake]

@Al-Khawrazmi You don't read very well.

[Astoriana]

@MlleCake he certainly doesn’t.

[Jon_25]

@Al-Khawrazmi That is almost exactly what I said. I don't see why they have a problem with it. 👍

[Astoriana]

@Jon_25 maybe if you attempted to expand your views instead of wasting time by engaging in false debates, you would understand.

[Jon_25]

He just said what I did earlier and you seemed to have no problem with, only worded differently. And in different context. I really don't see why you don't like his but were fine with mine.
I didn't think that was a narrow view, it's just what I have concluded from living around people most of my life.

[Astoriana]

@Jon_25 so have you done any research into this topic yet or are you still talking out of your ass?

[Jon_25]

I try to not ever talk out my ass. I'll leave that to Ace Ventura, he does it better than I do. I'm not that flexible anyways. I even have trouble getting my foot in my mouth sometimes.

I'm not sure what you have a problem with...
Did I say something ignorant or what? I haven't changed anything that I said before, and I am speaking from experience in interactions with men and women. It's not like I'm claiming to know everything. I'm just coming to a conclusion based on what I have seen. Isn't that what everyone does?

[Astoriana]

@Jon_25 so you’re still talking out of your ass. Cool. I’m done with you. You have succeeded in annoying the hell out of me. Cheers.

[Deuteros]

It's called predgudicial language. Phrases like "manspreading, mansplaining, patriarchy , toxic masculinity" are divisive and misandrus.

If you use one, you have already list the argument.

[Astoriana]

@Deuteros so is the phrase feminazi, and I’ve yet to see anyone take issue with that type of prejudicial language.

[Deuteros]

I meant prejudicial. Hard to edit on this phone.

[Deuteros]

Feminazi is an insult. I've Never heard it used in academia other than a rebuttal.

[Astoriana]

@Deuteros oh, so your problem is that feminism exists in academia in the first place? Cool. Not interested in having that conversation.

[Deuteros]

Nice strawman, obviously you don't work in academia.

[Astoriana]

@Deuteros specifically in sociology? No. But I am an oilfield environmental science researcher.

Pray tell, what do you do for a living?

[Deuteros]

@Paultripps men make up %98 of workplace deaths, but let's not talk about it, women (who are the majority in college) choosing not to take difficult STEM majors is.

[Deuteros]

I'm an electronic engineer.

[Astoriana]

@Deuteros ah, so you’re not in academia either then. How interesting.

[Deuteros]

I teach at a university.

[MlleCake]

@Astoriana You've exercised more patience than a saint here.

[Astoriana]

@Deuteros and how much do you publish? If you’re not publishing, you’re not an academic.

[Deuteros]

Why are you interested in data compression and encryption or are you moving from strawman to ad hominem? In any case you must know that prejudicial language is being called out as unproductive in most gender studies programs.

[Astoriana]

@Deuteros how would you know? You’re a computer engineer.

[Deuteros]

You asked me if I published. I don't know what that has to do with using inflammatory language like "toxic " to describe half the human race but I responded.

[MlleCake]

@Deuteros It doesn't describe half the human race. It describes a specific set of social norms that boys and men are often trained to follow that ultimately produces anti-social behavior. It is not a description of all men, nor of all aspects of masculinity.

[Astoriana]

@MlleCake I wish I knew more about computer programming. Maybe if I put that statement in hexadecimals or binary, he’d understand it.

[Deuteros]

Another personal attack, nice..

[Astoriana]

@Deuteros right, because you’re totally innocent of the personal attacks.

You bore me. Bye.

[Cccgala]

Stating that, "The problem is toxic male masculinity", is the problem itself.

It does not seem to encourage open discussion as this unnecessary puts emphasis on 'male', thereby polarizing people of the opposite gender on grounds that are not true in all cases.

[lonewolffootwork]

OP thread is toxic male masculinity so there goes the debate not some tricky way to switch the debate to something bigger us male can have our own male debate to fix our problems

#SEXEQUALITYBOTHWAYS

[lonewolffootwork]

I know some male groups are forming right now to fix our own problems because us male didn't take enough care of ourselves lately

[Deuteros]

The use of insulting and prejudicial language to disuade argument is an old, and dishonest tactic. It belongs nowhere in an honest discussion.

[Kiran04]

The problem with framing the issue around "toxic mascunilinity" is that it assumes you can somehow curb masculinity. That you can stifle or eliminate it, but that is 100% untrue. Masculinity happens whether you like it or not. It will happen. It is going to happen. It is ingrained in our genes. What you need to do is teach boys how to be men. Teach MANHOOD, not feminist theory, because only manhood can take the inevitable outcome of masculinity and channel it towards something positive that betters the man, those around him, and the community. Attempting to stifle or change masculinity only bottles it up until it explodes in every way you don't want it to. It must be harnessed, tempered, honed, and channeled. Anything else is a ticking time bomb. Our society no longer teaches manhood. We no longer guide men, only scorn them and the outbursts we get from that are the cause of our suffering.

[Chris_Humble]

I salute you brother.

[ManOnFire]

I agree with this Take. "Toxic masculinity" is a term I started hearing myself in recent years, and it sounds like more of a way to put sole focus on what men are doing wrong while female toxicity is either dismissed or denied.

And in truth, there is an enormous amount of toxic femininity or so many women wouldn't be preferring male friends and co-workers over other females.

[MlleCake]

I actually haven't seen a formal discussion of toxic masculinity where people hadn't seriously considered possible solutions. The main solution we usually suggest is socializing boys a bit differently.

I don't believe that to be a man one must display anti-social behavior. We have tons of solutions for anti-social behavior from social conditioning, to education and therapy when needed.

[Paultripps]

Why do we need to socialize boys differently? If a woman can be what she wants to be, whatever they want to be, then can’t men? To imply we need to be different v meeting in the middle perpetuates the same thing you are trying to prevent. The socialization of boys in school already puts them behind the curve, discourages any behavior typically associated as male, and teaches them having any feelings classified as male are “wrong.” It’s hypocritical and why feminism is losing participation from many women. Fight for equality by looking for things that encourage equality, not correcting men to be what you want them to be...

[Jon_25]

But what is socializing us differently going to accomplish?

What if we are just naturally are less social than women are? I know I am. It has nothing to do with being "seen as manly" it's not like I'm pressured into holding back. I just don't like a lot of social activities. Why does that need to change?

[Caaarl]

@Paultripps Because men and women are different as much as people want to say that they're the same they're not. Women and men are different mentally on a biological level. Men on average have a higher possibility of being anti-social. If you want proof look at rates of crime and imprisonment among men and women.

[Caaarl]

@Paultripps I don't necessarily agree with her that men should be targeted for special treatment and women shouldn't tbh both men and women should be socialized different according to their needs.

[Jon_25]

@Caaarl Woah, woah, woah! Hang on a minute!

You're saying that because men are less social than women, they commit more crimes? As in that the reason they commit more crimes is that they are less social? I find that very hard to believe.

Please explain to me why me being less social causes me to be more likely to commit crimes. I'll listen. But I need more proof to believe that.

[Caaarl]

@Jon_25 anti-social adj. opposed or detrimental to social order or the principles on which society is constituted.

Since more men are in prison by a large number considering there are near equal populations of men and women it pushes the point that men are more inclined to crime.

It's complicated just because you are a man you're not necessarily more likely to commit crime because everyone has different genes. Like for example men have a more spread IQ range then women tend to on average. Just because of that I can't necessarily say were you land but I can take a guess on probability. But if I look at the individual it might be very likely that you will not commit a crime because of your individual characteristics influencing the equation.

Men on average are more likely to commit crime. Since they're more likely on average to be a trouble to society we should do something to counteract that theoretically.

To be fair it's much more complex and we need to stop the bad ones.

[Caaarl]

@Jon_25

A small population of people are committing most of the crimes in the world and most of them are male. We should target men to find the bad eggs and try and get them the help they need. Same should be done for women as well tbh but we need to keep an eye especially on men because they're more prone to this kind of thing especially things like murder.

[Jon_25]

@Caaarl I know this. I agree.

That isn't because they are antisocial though.

[Caaarl]

@Jon_25 Yeah I'm not making much sense. But basically what I meant was men are more likely to commit crime than women because of genes. It is because of genes that they are more likely to be anti-social and because they are more likely to be anti-social they're more likely to commit crime.

[Jon_25]

@Caaarl I don't think so..

I mean genes are probably why we're less social,
And genes may be why we commit more crimes,
But the first doesn't cause the second. That just doesn't make sense, at least that I can tell.

How does me being less social cause me to commit more crimes? I don't see the correlation.

[Caaarl]

@Jon_25 There's social in different meanings. In physiology anti-social is doing things that go against society like crime. But there's social like introversion and extroversion but that's a different kind of social. I think that's what you're getting at but I'm not sure. They are connected to an extent but they're different things.

[Jon_25]

@Caaarl Well committing crimes is committing crimes, no matter what you call it. I thought you meant being, you know, just not social. That's what confused me.

Being antisocial in the sense that you commit crimes against society, will obviously make you commit crimes. There is nothing wrong with that connection.

I just don't think men will inherently be this kind of antisocial BECAUSE they are just not as sociable as girls. That still doesn't make sense. But if that's not what you meant, then it doesn't matter. Thanks for clarifying.

[HikerDude]

Yes, the communists invented some great techniques to keep young men in line. I'm certain you're familiar with them.

[Jon_25]

@HikerDude I don't think I am, what are you referring to?

[HikerDude]

@Jon_25 referring to the OP

[Jon_25]

@HikerDude Sorry, but what's an OP?

[MlleCake]

Gentlemen, Anti-social doesn ot mean "Doesn't like to socialize". And anti-social pehavior is a behavior that is detrimental to society, like violence, rape, murder.

I don't believe men and women are the same.

When I say "socialize men/boys" I am not saying "boys need to be more social". Socializing is the training each person gets in life, through childhood, on hoow to act.

Men and boys are given very few outlsets for emotional expression. we teach them to fuck and fight and sometimes not much else.

Men need healthy, happy ways to have their emotional lives - to express what is deep within them, to be fully themselves with their whole selves intact.

@Paultripps, we need to socialize boys and men differently because we are producing violent, angry people who rape, rob and commit brutal crimes and fill our prisons.

Not that NO women ever do that. We just aren't known for it.

[Caaarl]

@MlleCake That's just not true. If you grow up in a middle class neighborhood the majority of boys probably don't get in a fight. As a young boy I never was taught violence was okay. And the times have changed even more now everyone is so hyper sensitive that if you threw a punch you'd probably be expelled.

We've always been producing a small minority men who have done evil things. It's a small minority but still most of the crime is from socio economic status. If you're going to say men are raised to rape then let's tell it how it is women are raised to commit infanticide Children 2.4x more likely to be killed by their mothers, boys murdered more often. We should purge this toxic femininity from our community.

[Jon_25]

Wait hang on, that's not quite true.

A FEW men are raised like that, but that is pretty extreme. It's a small percentage. Not even close to "most men" being raised like that. At least I'm pretty sure, and I think I've met more people that would have been raised like this than you have, and even most of them don't turn out this way.

[Al-Khawrazmi]

People tend to forget that almost anything can be seen as toxic depending on the context. Even water can be toxic, if you try to drink 50 gallons of it. Indeed, masculine behavior can be toxic in certain context, but so do femininity, water, oxygen, etc. If you want to ban masculinity, because it can be toxic in some cases, then you should ban femininity, water and oxygen too
We need less hypocrites in politics (both at right and left) and more scientific thinking, instead. Otherwise, we will just keep discussing imaginary problems, instead of focusing on real challenges.

[MlleCake]

I'm not going to capitulate to your "not all men" statement.

I'm not daft.

But until all men are actively engaged in creating a less violent society, I will continue to think of violence as a mostly male problem.

[Al-Khawrazmi]

Agree that it would be nice to have some solutions.
The problem is that policymakers think that the solution is changing boys, while we should actually change the way society (and importantly women) interact with boys.
Let me explain...

Indeed, boys can express the full range of emotions. But what do you think happens when they do so? Do they receive the same nurturing response from the society as girls do? They do not.
Boys are socialized to control their emotions, because it works in the environment they have to live in. If a boy cries, he is seen as a loser by both men and more importantly women. So, if you want to help the boys express emotions, change the environment. And, instead, the academics are trying to change boys. And it is not going to work, because the environment is still the same.

[Al-Khawrazmi]

My message is: "Context matters"
In what context do men commit most crimes? In the context of poverty.
If masculinity per se (the way boys socialized in general) was a cause of violent crime, then poverty would not be such a significant factor. Fighting poverty is the most effective way of reducing crime in general, for both men and women. Instead, you want to change the way boys socialized in all contexts. Plus, boys form medium income families and boys from poor families are probably socialized in different ways. So, your solutions really should be:
1) fight poverty
2) In the meantime change the way boys socialized in poor families
But of course, non specific solution is always more attractive, right?

[Al-Khawrazmi]

Indeed, violence is mostly male's problem.
By contrast, prostitution is mostly female's problem.
And both problems a largely caused by poverty.

Nevertheless, we do not argue for changing the way all girls are socialized to prevent prostitution. Instead, we are fighting poverty and helping girls from poor backgrounds climb the social ladder. And we should do the same for boys form poor families, but instead we are trying to change the way ALL boys are socialized, which is not solving the underlying problem.

[MlleCake]

@Al-Khawrazmi Actually, we DO socialize women to see their bodies as a commodity, as we socialize me to do.

[MlleCake]

@Jon_25 Murder is an anti-social behavior.

[Paultripps]

Men just look at violence differently. Violence is a part of life. Every species in the planet, going back to the stone ages. You may think we can civilize ourselfs into not being animals on this earth, but the reality is different. And when that violence happens, you may be glad to have a dude who can protect you. All women or women lead tribes in Africa have plenty of violence, and they throw their men away like sperm donors and manual labor only. So you can fool yourself into thinking violence is something that is taught and part of bad socialization, or realize thousands of years of human history says violence is part of life. With that said, men are more often the victims of assault, and almost exclusively died in wars protecting your ass. Don’t thank us all at once...

[Jon_25]

@MlleCake I didn't think you meant "criminals" by saying "antisocial." That's a whole other argument.

Sorry I tend to think of antisocial as being "not social," not "criminal activity." The former? Ya thats more a man thing, and I dont see why we should change it.
The latter? Ya thats more a man thing, but only a small fraction of men have it even so. And its not mostly because theyre men, it's because of how those specific few are raised, and as @paultripps said, their financial level effects that significantly too.

I am not saying "not all men" are like this. That is obvious. I'm saying "barely any men" are like this. And those are like that because of how they are raised in LARGE part, only SLIGHTLY because of their gender.

That's why I don't think changing MEN should be the answer. After all, some girls are raised like that too. The solution should be to change people of that BACKGROUND and POVERTY LEVEL. That would cut criminal activity much more than trying to change men will.

[Canuckto]

That because you're lazy. There are already solutions MGTOW have pointed out.. Turd Flinging Monkey already has pointed out the solution. Society, parents and women are giving mixed advice to men and boys. No matter what men do he is wrong. The solution then is to walk away because society demonize men. Also society doesn't see men and boy are worth investing.

[Jon_25]

@MlleCake Please tell @Astoriana to have a nice day for me? I can't she won't listen to me anymore, and I hate to leave off on a bad foot.

[MlleCake]

@Jon_25 Don't worry. She heard you.

[MlleCake]

@Paultripps No one is saying men or boys feelings are wrong. What we are talking about is attitudes and behaviors that hurt society, and it's important that we raise men to be healthy and express themselves in ways that do not harm others.

[Jon_25]

Okay.

[ADFSDF1996]

@MllCake No offense but that sounds like indoctrination.

[MlleCake]

@ADFSDF1996 I'm sure it does to you. But we're all socially conditioned from the day we are born. How about I say we just stop conditioning boys to deal with their emotions in violent ways. If I put it like that, it doesn't sound bad.

I want boys and men to have tools for living so that violence, anger, and resentment are less a part of their lives.

I'm sorry, but I fail to see what is wrong with that.

[ADFSDF1996]

A man shouldn’t have to be ashamed of being manly because masculinity isn’t synonymous with violence. It is wrong to force feminine traits onto men who don’t want them because it’s against their will. I won’t let anyone try to suppress my masculinity just because they think it’s “harmful” when in fact it’s not. There’s nothing wrong about men being strong.

Ironically the concept of “toxic masculinity” wasn’t founded by the feminists, it was founded by the Men’s rights activist movement. 4th wave feminists use it to attack masculinity.

Don’t you realize that the process of forcing men to suppress their masculinity, is the same as forcing women to suppress their sexuality? It’s forcing people to act a way they don’t want to act. It’s forcing people to conform to societal norms.

[ADFSDF1996]

Are you implying that you are okay with men being indoctrinated? Indoctrination is basically forcing a set of views onto people and expecting them to obey them without question.

[MlleCake]

@ADFSDF1996 We're not telling men that all of what makes them a man is wrong.

Toxic masculinity refers to only specific things that are held up as essentially masculine that don't serve men well or society.

No one is asking men to be ashamed of positive things.

But violence, criminality, rape, etc. are NOT positive traits, and we don't think they are essential to manliness or masculinity. We think they are societal ills that need to be addressed. That these things are so associated with men, and have become ways some men define their masculinity is a problem. The millions of men who are not these things show us that we don't have to accept them as a given in society. Men do an immense amount of harm to each other with these behaviors, and it seems getting some control over them would be a benefit to everyone.

None of this is to say that there aren't ways femininity needs to be redefined either, or that women don't have our own issues.

[MlleCake]

@ADFSDF1996 You're indoctrinated whether I like it or not.

[ADFSDF1996]

What do you mean I’m indoctrinated. I’m not indoctrinated by anyone since I think critically instead of accepting any set of beliefs without question. Why are you associating those negative traits with masculinity when those traits can be present in femininity as well? Those are hasty generalizations.

[MlleCake]

@ADFSDF1996 Yes, why ARE they associated with masculinity? Good question. I don't think of them as essentially masculine traits. I think you ignored about 3/4 of what I said.

And, you only think you're not programmed, but I hear you repeat the thoughts and ideas of others almost constantly. You're one of the most indoctrinated people on here. It's why I rarely engage in discussions with you anymore.

[ADFSDF1996]

I don’t repeat anyone’s thoughts, that’s a ad hominem. Posting links to show proof isn’t repeating thoughts. The reason why those negative traits are associated with masculinity should be obvious, it’s because the gynocentrists want to scapegoat men.

[ADFSDF1996]

Having similar views as someone else isn’t indoctrination. I’m not going to be a sycophant and support a movement that vilifies me, you only say I’m “indoctrinated” because I don’t agree with you.

[ADFSDF1996]

I’ll quote what you said “We have tons of solutions for anti social behavior, from social conditioning, to education and therapy when needed.” How is this not indoctrination? Not only that but you are also implying to advocate the restriction of free thought, personality and free speech/expression. You can’t just falsely label a guy anti social just because you don’t like him. Also, anti social behavior isn’t exclusive to men.

[ADFSDF1996]

Lastly, I’m not trying to change your views, I understand you have different views and I respect that but that doesn’t mean that I agree with them. All I’m saying is that you can’t expect everyone to agree with you, you have to accept that not everyone will share the same views as you. Morally speaking, it’s not right to restrict or control the way other people are. We can agree to disagree.

[MlleCake]

@ADFSDF1996 I don't expect everyone to agree with me. But we don't always get the luxury of everyone agreeing with social change. Too bad for the ones who get left behind in the old ways of thinking that don't work for the society. They die out eventually.

It is going to become more and more difficult for people to use violence as a means of coping with their emotions. Then they will change or cool heels in jail.

I personally prefer we become a less violent society, with people more able to cope with emotions in ways that are not anti-social behaviors.

[Jon_25]

I still don't think this is a problem for most men. But for more men than women? Sure.

If all you are changing is not allowing them to do stuff that they're, already, not allowed to do, then what are you expecting to change? Being a criminal is already against the law.
How are you planning on stopping them then, without also stopping perfectly fine behavior? I would like to know how you will help the ones who need it, without forcing help on the ones who don't need it? That sounds really hard to do.

[MlleCake]

@Jon_25 I believe that changing criminality is something that will take a multi-pronged approach. But let's speak specifically about violence. Women are taught from birth to be less violent, and it works. We have less testosterone, and that is a contributing factor, but it is not the only factor. Teaching boys and men to be more astute verbal negotiators might help. Teaching boys and men more empathy and compassion might help.

Violence is largely a male issue. Even men who don't use violence advocate for it. We have a lot of men who insist it is physical prowess that makes them superior human beings, and that is about having the physicality to overtake other people. That's violence.

I have had men here call other men pussies or wimps.

These sorts of socialization really do happen. We're seeing it. We witness it. It has an effect.

Perhaps giving men more tools for expressing emotions and avoiding violence would be a benefit to men.

[Jon_25]

Huh. I guess when its done like that, there's nothing wrong with it. If you're just teaching them to not be violent. I mean boys play rough, but violence as in mean or to get what they want, I think that should be taught to anyone that its wrong.
But dont do more. Dont tell them they HAVE to express themselves. They may just not want to, even through violence. Some guys just are quieter. And if they aren't showing what they feel or talking things out like you want them to, that doesn't mean that they are gonna be violent.

See, the only problem (I see) with what you want to do is, it's a very slippery slope. You could just give them more options and teach them that violence isn't okay as a problem solving method or means of expressing themselves.
But then the next person could come and say that they HAVE to express themselves in these other ways, and if they don't that makes them violent and they have to be fixed.
You're on a track that could fix the problem. But it could easily do more.

[MlleCake]

@Jon_25 We have control of that too.

Keep in mind, things I am talking about aren't just women coming up with ideas to fix men. Men have talked about the ways their socialization has made it hard for them to access an emotional vocabulary to express or cope with their feelings. They have literally been told sadness is for pussies, so what can that man DO with his sadness? Admit it? No. That would be admitting vulnerability. They have been told only "fags and women" do that. Literally. I'm not making these scenarios up.

I'm not talking about forcing people to express emotions they don't have just to fit in. But everyone has a full range of emotions, but women are given a lot more leeway to just feel what they feel.

Men have talked about emotionally stunted male role models, and all kinds of social conditioning they received growing up. I know some shit my brother went through. I know shit my teenage nephew has been through. I know some shit my ex's kid has been through.

[ADFSDF1996]

Mllecake You can’t just label someone or something violent just because you don’t lIke them/it. There are different kinds of violence, some are acceptable and others are not. There’s nothing wrong with violence in entertainment (movies, video games etc) or aggressiveness in full contact sports (martial arts, rugby, football etc). Censoring something for the sake of “political correctness” at the expense of someone else’s enjoyment is narcissistic and will only cause more problems.

Self defense/personal defense isn’t violence and is justifiable. You don’t actually expect someone to just stand there and take punishment do you? people have the right to defend themselves and their loved ones.

Criminal violence is indeed wrong because it harms innocent people. Keep in mind that criminal violence isn’t exclusive to males.

[MlleCake]

@ADFSDF1996 I'm not even talking about what is labeled as violence. I think outlets like sports are excellent. Self-defense/defending someone else are very understandable. You're assuming I'm talking about all manners of physical assertion. I'm not. I'm speaking specifically of anti-social behaviors, and that is a much narrower definition, but so many people didn't understand the term anti-social in this thread, I switched to a more generic word.

[Jon_25]

Yes those are good points. I know me and my brothers could have done better than we did if we'd had a half decent man around the house. That kind of thing is pretty common-- although I wouldn't say to SUCH extremes.
But I'm not talking about if he doesn't have any emotios, I'm just talking about if he doesn't want to share them. Even when I know it is okay to express emotions, I don't like to. I don't like to do that because it makes me uncomfortable.

What I'm trying to say it that it is fine to give them better options, but if they are holding out on their end don't make them spill it. That will cause different problems. Don't make him share if he doesn't want to. They are not your emotions, and even if you make sure all the boys can easily and safely and freely and whatever share any emotion they feel and know it's okay and supported, some boys will still want to hide. That's natural. Don't force them to be open-- even when it's okay to be. It's still their choice. That's the slope.

[MlleCake]

@Jon_25 You also don't know what I am talking about if you think that's what we're saying when we're talking about helping men avoid anti-social behaviors. It's not about force.

It's about healthier social conditioning. It's about a society becoming deeply engaged in the well-being of it's members, all of them, of all genders.

[ADFSDF1996]

Mllecake then we’ve finally found something we can mutually agree with. I’m assuming you understand that violence and anti social behavior isn’t exclusive to males.

[MlleCake]

@ADFSDF1996 No, certainly not. And I usually make the caveat someplace that what I say applies only to some men and not only men - but even if I failed to make that statement, I'm not a moron, no.

[Jon_25]

Okay that makes sense. Thanks for explaining.

[JimRSmith]

Toxic masculinity is yet another tosspot term dreamed up by SJWs.

[englisc]

There are certain things I agree with when it comes to toxic masculinity, and other things that feminist view as being toxic that I don't. Here's the definition of toxic masculinty from wikipedia:

"Traditional stereotypes of men as socially dominant, along with related traits such as misogyny and homophobia, can be considered "toxic" due to their promotion of violence, including sexual assault and domestic violence. Other stereotypically masculine traits, such as self-reliance and emotional repression, are correlated with increased psychological problems in men such as depression, increased stress, and substance abuse."

Misogyny, homophobia, sexual assault, domestic violence, yeah, I agree that they're toxic. I don't see these things as having anything to do with masculinity though. Misogyny could be re-labelled sexism/hatred towards the opposite sex - women can be just as guilty of that. Women are probably less likely to be homophobic but many of them are. Sexual assault is more of a problem with men, I agree with that. Domestic violence is roughly 50/50 - people just assume that it's mostly men beating women, don't take it seriously when women do it to men, assume these things because men are generally bigger and stronger.

Self-reliance isn't toxic unless taken to the extreme. We're social animals, we're supposed to have close friends and family - being a "lone wolf" is unnatural, and therefore unhealthy.

Emotional repression, or what I'd call stoicism, is misunderstood by a lot of people, especially women. For example people want to encourage men to open up, things like "it's ok to cry". In certain cases it is, but men deal with emotions differently. When you understand how testosterone works you understand that it makes you cry less than women. These people think that men are just like women and that we're holding back - often we aren't, we just deal with things differently. I think that things like depression and suicide have more to do with other things - the unnatural way we live today - which is why it's said to be a "disease of civilisation".

I think that the problem here is basically blaming the wrong things for these problems and therefore coming up with false solutions.

[Anonymous]

@Astoriana

I just wanted to respond to a few things. I agree partly.

"I see men's activists always bring up the fact that men are more likely to succeed at committing suicide, and I never see them suggest anything"

I've seen them suggest many things - if you haven't you're reading about men's activism in the wrong places. Contrary to what many people believe men's activists agree with feminists on many things, this especially.

"it's thought by some that the reason for this is that men do not have many close friends. The more close personal relationships that you have with people, the more unlikely you are to commit suicide. This is especially marked with men of a certain age (30s to 50s), whom are likely to be married and/or remarried. I know my dad doesn't have any friends."

I'm in a similar situation. Before I got married and had kids I had many hobbies. I'd make time for my girlfriend but I also had plenty of time with the boys too. Then we had kids, and she started to complain that I didn't spend enough time at home. Eventually this led to me never being able to go out without her giving me the silent treatment or throwing a tantrum and threatening to leave, so not wanting to break up especially with children involved I stopped - otherwise if she was just my girlfriend I'd leave. Now I'm isolated. I've heard many other guys say the same things happened to them. All I'm saying here is that women need to understand this as much as men do because you're right, it is an important issue when it comes to mental health. I actually think that a lot of the toxic masculine behaviours are perpetuated because of female expectations of men do, at least 50%.

[PatriarchalOppressor]

The idea of toxic masculinity is total BS and another attempt to shame men into compliance and subservience. Men were socially conditioned by women and the state into disposability on women's and the state's behalf. That's how we got the male-only draft and 'men last in the life boats'. That's why men are the vast majority of suicides, combat and workplace deaths, homeless and incarcerated.
Why isn't that called toxic femininity? Because so long as it's the disposal of men on women's and the state's behalf, it's all good.

Toxic masculinity. What a joke. It's amazing how well people lie to themselves.

[HikerDude]

The reason so many men recoil at the term "toxic masculinity" is that most feminists and those in gender studies use this term to refer to all masculinity. The same people who encourage and celebrate aggressiveness and competitive fire in women decry it vociferously in men.

There is, in fact, no such thing as "toxic masculinity," given that masculinity simply refers to those traits associated with a man. To imply that masculinity--the characteristics of manhood--is harmful is to imply that men need to repudiate our fundamental natures. I wonder how all the feminists would react if they were told they suffered from "toxic femininity"?

[Paultripps]

The problem is actually the way we all talk to each other now. Can be on the left or right, don’t think what I do and that makes the other an instant idiot. Women can talk about how evil men are, but then not exactly my dad, brother, husband or boyfriend. Both genders have pros and cons. Stereotyping men as toxic just because we are men is a stereotype, and exactly what 3rd wave feminists don’t want people to do to them. We aren’t all perpetuators of the patriarchy, and not all feminist are feminazis, but we just can’t all talk to each other anymore!!!

[Jon_25]

Yes this makes sense. This makes much more sense than either extreme, thank you!

Although I still don't think we should change so much.. I mean, not looking down on the other gender is something that should happen, that's true. Even though we're different doesn't mean we aren't equals.

BUT I don't think would should try to act the same. I mean, we ARE different. The whole point is that our differences don't make us unequal. To try to eliminate the differences to make us equal... kind of completely kills the entire point to begin with...

[lilaqua]

I think there's an issue because the term "toxic masculinity" is actually misconstrued. It's not masculinity is bad, but that elements of hyper-masculine ideals are bad. Mostly these effect men not women, and meninist groups actually crusade against these ideals.

[DonCachondo]

Then why not just continue calling it "hyper-masculinity" like it was before? Marketing? I guess whatever works in the current outrage market.

[Unit1]

This here:

"Are there toxic male behaviors? Of course. Are there toxic female behaviors? Of course. Toxic white people behaviors? Toxic Christian behaviors? Toxic republican behaviors? Of course."

Has effectively contradicted your title and your point here:

"So the problem isn't "toxic masculinity", rather toxic parts of human behavior in general."

All these toxic anything parts ARE PART OF TOXIC HUMAN BEHAVIOR.

What you just said is similar to saying that the problem isn't in Berlin when the world wars were started by nazi Germany. Then again, where was hitler, who authorized blitzkrieg? (Germany->berlin)

Not the best example but i hope you get my point.

[Browneye57]

This has to be the most mamby pamby bunch of BS I've seen in awhile.
'Toxic parts' and 'approach problems in unity'" OMFG

Masculinity isn't toxic. It's just a few women whining about it because they want to be men. And even if you put a dick on them they STILL wouldn't be men.

The more women try to be just like men the less desirable they are as women.

[monkeynutts]

It always sounds like a textbook feminist rant, why can't people just be fuckin arsewholes, people should just acknowledge that some guys are fuckwits some of the time, although they may not be a fuckwit all the time. The broad spectrum of human behavior must have enough scope to include the guys you have in your social group, let's just say they are the enlightened intelligent gentlemen, and then you have another group you keep at arms length call them the bunch of fuckwits. You don't beat on them because I'm sure their mothers still love them.

[Canuckto]

You're pretty ignorant. MGTOW was the first anti feminist group. They were the ones criticizing feminism only to get banned from MRA forums. Avoiceformen used to have a lot of men bitch more than MGTOW.

Women use the power of the state. If a woman doesn't like you she can call the police and have you arrested. If going your own way is gay then you're an idiot because women have too much power.
Just like others you haven't done much research why is why you slam MGTOW. I'm not butt hurt over your article but the same crap over and over again.

[Edanurus]

I think the problem stems from a misunderstanding of guys and how they process things. I really don't see how people can say that guys don't show there feelings unless you just have never had any guy friends.

I've never found sitting down and talking helpful, its always made me feel frustrated and leaves me more wound up about it. And its all very well people saying guys should 'express themselves' and that 'society teaches men to hide their feelings'. Well its fine saying teach men to talk about our feelings but when a best case scenario is the awkward look of I don;t have a clue what to say we don't do it the way we're told we should and then get acused of not doing it at all.

[cherryphi82]

The problem is not that there aren't problematic behaviors in humans per se, but that they are excused and even celebrated in some while being condemned in others. For centuries, this has been the case with men's behavior. Only recently has this started changing.

[Paultripps]

Can’t wait for this to happen to women! Pros and cons to each side, but demonizing men and stereotyping them as toxic only makes the problems worse, and makes the divide between us greater...

[cherryphi82]

@Paultripps So you admit that this has been the case for centuries?

[Paultripps]

I think there have been pros and cons for centuries. I am glad my sisters and daughter are living now v the 1800s yes. But I think going back “centuries” is irrelevant. Neither of us were around then. Women have more rights now than ever before in history, and I think we do have more room to grow. But I think 3rd wave feminism is taking us backwards and has forgotten the core value of “equality.” Plenty of things women do as individuals and as a group are toxic to society, but labeling and stereotyping each other as such just makes things worse. It prevents real conversation, dialogue, and progress. So fundamentally I am opposed to it, and if you want true equality you should be too!

[cherryphi82]

@Paultripps Opposed to what?

[Paultripps]

Toxic masculinity as defined means in order to have equality men need to change. Yet if women can be who they want, don’t tell me who to be etc, why should men change? We should each be able to be who we want, yet have equal rights. I don’t want to tear down women as part of this process, or the progress they have made. But it seems that’s what many women want these days, and no I don’t respect or endorse that, and I will present my case against toxic feminazis in the hope maybe we eventually will all live and let live...

[Kiran04]

No, only recently have we been stupid enough to demonize men, which is why we have so many more men lashing out now. Before we celebrated masculinity because we knew how to utilize it as a force for good. Now we just assume it's bad from the get go, but masculinity is inevitable. It will happen whether you like it or not, so attempting to stifle it is just making the problem worse. We need to get back to celebrating it and teaching boys how to be men again.

[cherryphi82]

Women can be who they want to be... in what universe.

[cherryphi82]

@Kiran04 I have nothing against celebrating the good things each gender has. The problem is that one gender has always been seen as the less valued one until recently. Celebrating women does not need to mean demonizing men.

[cherryphi82]

@Paultripps You write "I don’t want to tear down women as part of this process, or the progress they have made. " and then say " Can’t wait for this to happen to women!"

[Kiran04]

Oh yes, and now one gender is always seen as toxic and broken. That's SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO much better. Hell no. I'd happily go back to the way things were than this SJW, feminist era crap that has only lead us all to deeper chasms of unhappiness and division.

[cherryphi82]

@Kiran04 You want women to not be able to hold jobs, get educations, or own property?

[Paultripps]

Stop hating on men and who we are and we won’t hate on you. Not women, just you...

[Paultripps]

Women can be whoever they want in America and the western world. If you don’t believe that, you are holding yourself back. Play the victim and that’s what you will be

[cherryphi82]

@Paultripps Where did I hate on men?

[Paultripps]

Hate - they are excused and even celebrated in some while being condemned in others. For centuries, this has been the case with men's behavior - men don’t excuse or celebrate bad behavior. Bad people, men and women, celebrate bad behavior. Don’t judge women or their behavior, but judge men... if you can’t see the Forrest through the trees you will always be lost!

[Kiran04]

Did I say I wanted to go back to the stone ages? No, I'd happily settle for anything before the mid 1990s when we suddenly went full retard with progressive agendas, political correctness, and 3rd wave feminism.

[cherryphi82]

@Paultripps How is that hate?

[cherryphi82]

@Paultripps Women can behave bad just like men can behave bad. The difference, in my opinion, is that this bad behavior has been excused in men for longer than in women. This statement is an observation. Whereas hate is an intense or passionate dislike for someone.

[Fataters]

I created an account solely because i can't take how wrong and discriminating your argument is.
For one, these guys here (as well as the person who posted this) are talking about how current feminist ideologies are hypocritical and that it is a problem because feminists currently have a strong influence on our society. The main point here is that feminists CLAIM to fight for equality and think that women should be whoever they want to be but complain about toxic male masculinity on the basis that this toxic behaviour has been excused for centuries while ignoring toxic female behaviour. So... women can be who they want to be but men can't?
Also, bringing up the past just implies that you want revenge. But against who? The men and women of the era you talk about is long dead and so is their era. Shouldn't we be focusing on the present and fix its problems?

[cherryphi82]

@Fataters Don't I feel special.

[Fataters]

Exactly. Keep replying with nonsense and no real argument then ask why people dont take feminists seriously

[Fataters]

And yes. You dont feel special. Good job. Want a cupcake?

[Al-Khawrazmi]

People tend to forget that almost anything can be seen as toxic depending on the context. Even water can be toxic, if you try to drink 50 gallons of it. Indeed, masculine behavior can be toxic in certain context, but so do femininity, water, oxygen, etc. If you want to ban masculinity, because it can be toxic in some cases, then you should ban femininity, water and oxygen too
We need less hypocrites in politics (both at right and left) and more scientific thinking, instead. Otherwise, we will just keep discussing imaginary problems, instead of focusing on real challenges.

[cherryphi82]

@Al-Khawrazmi @Fataters @Paultripps You are setting up a strawman. Where do I say I hate men or seek to ban masculinity? Calling out the fact that men's not so stellar behavior has often been excused for many years is not an example of hating men. Neither does it mean that there aren't women who behave in bad ways. Femininity or masculinity are not things you can ban or eradicate.

[Canuckto]

Women aren't Innocent but you women refuse to see that because that would be too much work. Look the mirror, you're your own worse enemy. If masculinity is so toxic why do women want to become more masculine is beyond me.

[Prankster13]

I fully agree. Very well put. Thank you, Sir, this was most informing.
You are completely right. Masculinity is not bad in the slightest. It is actually very natural. The problem is with people in general and toxic behavior from both genders. And we need to fix that if we want toxic behavior to lessen.

Feminists are just making things worse by vilifying all men. Men are not the problem. They just don't like us. And that's bullying. That in itself is a toxic behavior.

[Catholicgirl22]

I agree. I hate the whole anti-male venom many feminists are spewing. They are like a broken record in that every problem a woman faces in her entire life is a man's fault and responsibility to fix.

[JayParris]

I agree. Well thought out mytake.

I think "toxic masculinity" is just a way for feminists to put all toxic behavior squarely on the shoulders of men, just the same as "mansplaining" puts conversations in which one person is a know-it-all and won't participate in meaningful dialogue squarely on men.

Both men and women display toxic behaviors. Both men and women can be pig-headed know-it-alls.

[brennanhuff]

There isn't toxic masculinity, I don't know these school shootings seem to say otherwise. Young boys, nihilism, don't talk about their problems, but want to take it out on society. Our culture reinforces attitudes and dominance and our culture needs to change some of it's notions.

[Al-Khawrazmi]

People tend to forget that almost anything can be seen as toxic depending on the context. Even water can be toxic, if you try to drink 50 gallons of it. Indeed, masculine behavior can be toxic in certain context, but so do femininity, water, oxygen, etc. If you want to ban masculinity, because it can be toxic in some cases, then you should ban femininity, water and oxygen too :)
We need less hypocrites in politics (both at right and left) and more scientific thinking, instead. Otherwise, we will just keep discussing imaginary problems, instead of focusing on real challenges.