A Question to the Forums: WTF is "Toxic Masculinity"?

[VanQ]

You know, I'm the whitest little nerd boy you've ever met in your life. I've been skinny and pale and bad at sports my entire life. Out of all the traits I've seen in this thread that are considered bad, about the only one I can say comes naturally to me is that I don't show my emotions. I've had people call me emotionless plenty of times, but really I'm just an introvert.

Look, I've been called pussy, ******, all those kinds of things plenty of times. I always followed it up with a right "fuck you too, mate" back to the person that called me it. Is it unpleasant? Sure. Is it toxic? No, I don't think so. I know that the current generation prefers the right to not be offended over the right to free speech and all the good and bad that comes with it but I'd take my thick skin over a world where every edge was covered in Styrofoam any day.

The list of "Toxic Masculine Traits" always just seems like a list of the things I was bullied for in school and as far as I can see, some people just couldn't handle it and have held grudges their entire lives. You wanna know what though, even though I was bad at sport, pastier than a glue factory and skinnier than Skeletor with Bulimea and was teased and bullied about it, I moved on and am actually good friends with many of the people that teased me for not having those "masculine traits."

So before you go and tell me I've never had to deal with it, remember what they say about assuming. Grow a thick skin is the best advice I can give EVERYBODY. Because when you stop giving a reaction, people either lose interest or become convinced that they're the ones being idiots. Or they take it to a point that everyone else thinks they're an idiot and there is no sweeter revenge than watching an asshole make a fool of himself.

Ok, I'm sorry I assumed you were coming from the position of 'I've never had to deal with this, therefore it's not a problem'. Instead, you're coming from a position of 'I dealt with this, so everyone who hasn't just needs to suck it the fuck up', which, in all honesty, probably isn't much better. Hell you can't even say it's not a thing, since you yourself had to deal with it (Almost like preconceptions about masculinity and how men have to act is why you were called ******/pussy for not appearing to live up to those concepts, and the fact that the societal pressure of those preconceptions is so great it affects children at school is REALLY telling).

And why, why is 'Grow a thicker skin' the best solution the denizens of the internet give? Why? It's really, really shitty advice, when you think about it. Like 'Oh, you're being all emotional and affected by this because you couldn't harden the fuck up'. Hell, when you think about it, isn't that... kinda feeding the problem of toxic masculinity, when part of that IS people going 'Stop being a pussy and harden the fuck up'?

But ok, let's actually see how it applies to some of the problems Toxic Masculinity causes. Let's harden the fuck up. Suffering from a crippling mental illness but unable to seek help for it due to a lack of an emotional support network? Better harden the fuck up. Been raped, sexually assaulted and suffering PTSD but unable to get the help you need because 'men don't get raped'? Harden right the fuck up there. Being physically and emotionally abused by your spouse? Time to make Metapod jealous and harden the fuck up bucko! Losing custody to your wife based on the automatic assumption that she, as a woman, is the 'caregiver' and you, as the man, was the 'breadwinner' when in reality you were a stay-at-home dad? Make that skin real thick and get used to seeing your beloved children once a fortnight there mate!

Or, instead of doing the usual tripe of 'Well, thicker skins and all that' and bitching about how 'this generation is too whatever the fuck', actually... I dunno, realize that what worked for you was only on a personal level and is in no way, shape or form indicative of a solution to a societal-wide problem that has existed for decades, as both the situations in which Toxic Masculinity is harmful to men and the men it harms varies to a massive degree? I dunno, that'd probably be a better solution then going into a thread talking about this and going 'Wehh, damn feminists not wanting men to do things'.

That's very sweet of you. I said my problem was with the people on the first page that were complaining about guys liking football and being frat boys and you decided that means I'm a rape apologist.

No really, that's the least offensive rant I've ever received on this forum by a long shot. If people have been raped or have mental disorders they absolutely SHOULD seek IMMEDIATE ATTENTION. I'm work in Biochemistry in a Pathology Lab because I wanted to heal people. I can only tell you that people that do not immediately seek attention for such things are harming themselves as much as the person that harmed them initially did.

But really, keep telling me how my not having a problem with men liking football and calling each other pussies when they cry over how videogames hurt their feelings and how I think a bit of High School hazing makes a person stronger makes me a rape apologist. Go on, like I said, it's the least offensive rant I've seen in a long time.

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

I think it has two meanings.

The first meaning: a traditionally masculine trait, feature, institution, etc. taken to a legitimately harmful extreme.

The second meaning: a traditionally masculine trait, feature, or institution, etc. that rubs a feminist the wrong way in any context.

The former is worth talking about. The latter is comedic fodder.

As for toxic femininity, a great place to start would be any woman who is clearly abusing the term "toxic masculinity"...

Personally, I prefer the term "malfunctioning masculinity". A great many people maintain (largely) traditionally masculine lifestyles and attitudes without legitimately hurting anyone. When those attitudes collide with a mentally ill person, the results can be tragic. Of course, there are seemingly countless catalysts for tragedy when you're dealing with a mentally ill person. Hardly makes any sense to start blaming the match that lit the powder keg.

Right, but then couldn't the argument be that "shitheads will be shitheads" in this regards and call it a day? Today's Tec-9 using postal is tomorrow's XM25 grenadier in a mall. I don't think it's wrong to address the issues from an interdisciplinary stand point. Toxic masculinity is but one means to assert control and frameworks to what should be discussed and narrow down the sociological and psychological stressors that cause such heedless carnage.

I identify as a transfeminist. Still think it's a good idea to discuss this as a multi-faceted problem for the reasons you present. That it could very well be one angsty idiot who decides that people need bullets inside them for some reason doesn't negate why it's predominantly men. And even if it were a case of "boys being boys" by nature, then how do we combat it or is it worth sacrificing certain qualities of self-authentication to do so?

I still don't think it's a bad conversation to be had. At the very least it certainly should serve (from my position) as a recommendation for greater gun control regulation. I'm all for self-authentication, but I think Dizzy brings up a good point that this is a gendered discussion. Yet, I don't agree with universally painting participants of a mass-shooting as merely 'ill' and concluding the argument as such with no other discourse.

I also don't see the metaphor of the 'match and powder keg' ... I think it is entirely illogical to ignore that a match doesn't not belong near a powder keg. I can draw conclusions that the match or the inappropriately stored powder keg are both problems. At the very least, it's also a good discussion about how we notice the lit match before it is transported to the powder keg in the first place.

Once again, if the change necessary to halt mass shootings requires a sufficiently large reduction of self-authenticity, I'm not likely to endorse it (as a transfeminist, self authenticity is kinda important) ... but your assertion that such an examination of intentional mass-slaying doesn't deserve interdisciplinary examination I find to be wholly unacceptable a premise.

Particularly when we may very well be doing disservice to a very real issue that may require unforeseen means to counteract.

 

[FieryTrainwreck]

snip

You and I are not going to agree on this issue, and nothing will be accomplished by our discussing it further. Have a nice day.

 

[mrbah]

to give her the benefit of doubt, I hope she is referring to aspects of what society considers masculine behavior that is built on physical capabilities.
for instance if you are a boxer you will earn respect of your peers for your physical capabilities, so young boys strife to have physical power and be respected.
talking about toxic masculinty made it sound like she believed masculinity (physical traits and mental traits linked to the hormonal differences between men and women, which are based on the body interpreting the body's genes) was inherently toxic.
I think that riled a lot of people.

 

[Knight Captain Kerr]

From what I've gathered it's this dangerous chemical they keep in huge vats that will really screw you up if you get covered in it. Like this.

Spoiler

I'm pretty sure it's meant to mean that societal gender roles and expectations in relation to men can negatively impact them. Examples being the idea that male victims of abuse shouldn't speak up, women raping men isn't an issue, etc. And yeah those are problems. Anyway I hate gender roles and the idea of a binary male/female dichotomy in general.

Toxic Masculinity seems like a really, really bad term to use for it though. There are other better terms you can use.

FUN BONUS:
Does anyone feel that Breaking Bad is about "toxic masculinity"? Think about it, the premise of the entire series is that a man feels pressured into providing for his family and not needing handouts from others to do it.

I think it's more a sad reflection on the state of America's healthcare and general welfare system. But I do think he was foolish rejecting help from his old partner. Still at some point Walt doing what he did moved past just paying for his healthcare bills and providing for his family.

 

[BiscuitTrouser]

False. The reason why historically only men were drafted is because men were considered (and rightfully so, to an extent) disposable. One man and 9 women can keep up the population nine times easier than 9 men and one woman. It's just nature, stop pretending that it is rooted in misoginy.

Its actually illegal, discouraged, and VERY frowned upon in our society to have 9 wives... If the point of the draft was to ensure polygamy kept us alive, why is polygamy so unaccepted? Isnt that sort of counter intuitive?

Sure you can say its from a past 20'000 years ago, but those people didnt have a legitimate legal draft, since they lacked a legal system. Now we DO have a legal system and polygamy hasnt ever been used ever to repopulate after a war, and probably wont ever be, whats the point of hanging onto a 20'000 year old idea created before humanity knocked together even the most basic of governments.

 

[one squirrel]

False. The reason why historically only men were drafted is because men were considered (and rightfully so, to an extent) disposable. One man and 9 women can keep up the population nine times easier than 9 men and one woman. It's just nature, stop pretending that it is rooted in misoginy.

Its actually illegal, discouraged, and VERY frowned upon in our society to have 9 wives... If the point of the draft was to ensure polygamy kept us alive, why is polygamy so unaccepted? Isnt that sort of counter intuitive?

Sure you can say its from a past 20'000 years ago, but those people didnt have a legitimate legal draft, since they lacked a legal system. Now we DO have a legal system and polygamy hasnt ever been used ever to repopulate after a war, and probably wont ever be, whats the point of hanging onto a 20'000 year old idea created before humanity knocked together even the most basic of governments.

I agree, the male only draft is outdated. My point is about it's origins: not in women hatred, but acutally pretty much the opposite. Female lifes were, and still are, considered more valuable. Why else would you hear, whenever some tragedy happens "60 innocent people were killed in the attack, women and children amongst them", as if it is worse because it also happened to women, and not only to men.

Men have suffered tremendously in all of human history because they are for the most part the ones who have to fight the wars, yet nowadays some people try to spin it around and portray it as if it was some kind of privilege, in complete and utter disdain for the ones who were forced to go to the front line to die and not to ask questions.

That pisses me the f**k off! Women complaining how the evil misoginist patriarcy is denying them the right to serve in the military. The guys at Verdun would probably have been happy if they could have gone home after giving away the right to vote!

 

[Thaluikhain]

I agree, the male only draft is outdated. My point is about it's origins: not in women hatred, but acutally pretty much the opposite. Female lifes were, and still are, considered more valuable.

Up until very recently, openly LGBT have been allowed to serve in the US military. This is still the case for the last of those letters. This is not because their lives were seen as more valuable.

Men have suffered tremendously in all of human history because they are for the most part the ones who have to fight the wars, yet nowadays some people try to spin it around and portray it as if it was some kind of privilege, in complete and utter disdain for the ones who were forced to go to the front line to die and not to ask questions.

For many years, it was treated as a great and honourable thing to fight. It's more dangerous to be a race care driver than a garbage truck driver, but it's still the one many more people aspire to be.

That pisses me the f**k off! Women complaining how the evil misoginist patriarcy is denying them the right to serve in the military.

Women are, in many places, denied the right to serve in the military, and generally have their roles severely limited if they are. It is not surprising if people complain about that, especially in nations with purely voluntary militaries anyway.

 

[Ihateregistering1]

Well, this is one of those things where there's the cynical answer and the textbook answer.

Textbook answer: Toxic Masculinity is when the idea of "you need to do this to be a man" leads to bad behavior from people in an effort to seem masculine to others and seem like a "real man".

Cynical answer: Toxic Masculinity is an internet buzz-phrase utilized by men who don't possess stereotypically masculine qualities to try and insult men who do possess them, brought about by feelings of inferiority or jealousy on the part of the wussy men.

Like so many things, the answer is up for interpretation.

 

[The Almighty Aardvark]

I agree, the male only draft is outdated. My point is about it's origins: not in women hatred, but acutally pretty much the opposite. Female lifes were, and still are, considered more valuable. Why else would you hear, whenever some tragedy happens "60 innocent people were killed in the attack, women and children amongst them", as if it is worse because it also happened to women, and not only to men.

Men have suffered tremendously in all of human history because they are for the most part the ones who have to fight the wars, yet nowadays some people try to spin it around and portray it as if it was some kind of privilege, in complete and utter disdain for the ones who were forced to go to the front line to die and not to ask questions.

That pisses me the f**k off! Women complaining how the evil misoginist patriarcy is denying them the right to serve in the military. The guys at Verdun would probably have been happy if they could have gone home after giving away the right to vote!

I've seen plenty of people against women being in the military, and it never has to do with it keeping a reserve of polygamy ready women around for repopulation, or the notion of losing our supply of precious women. Complaints I do see around a lot are that the women won't be able to hold their own and the men will have to pick up the slack. Like having to carry the supplies they can't handle.

The privilege is being deemed capable enough to fight for your family or country if you desired to. The ability to aspire to more than just a baby incubator. Yes, it was beneficial to a lot of women to not be conscripted for war, but it was at the cost of respect beyond that a child would receive. Would you rather be treated like a child for your entire life just so you could be 'valued' like a woman was?

 

[Ihateregistering1]

Women are, in many places, denied the right to serve in the military, and generally have their roles severely limited if they are. It is not surprising if people complain about that, especially in nations with purely voluntary militaries anyway.

Not to get too much into semantics here, but serving in the Military is not a "right". The Military is allowed to deny people for reasons not 100% specified in policy (unlike, say, voting). Being in the Military is a job, you no more have an inherent right to be a Soldier than you do to be a postal worker.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Women are, in many places, denied the right to serve in the military, and generally have their roles severely limited if they are. It is not surprising if people complain about that, especially in nations with purely voluntary militaries anyway.

Not to get too much into semantics here, but serving in the Military is not a "right". The Military is allowed to deny people for reasons not 100% specified in policy (unlike, say, voting). Being in the Military is a job, you no more have an inherent right to be a Soldier than you do to be a postal worker.

You have a right not to be denied a job as a postal worker simply due to your gender, though.

 

[DeaDRabbiT]

I think it's when you work out too much and your nipples end up pointing in different directions - like the guy on Storage Wars the other night. Looked like he had cross-eyed tits.

This comment literally almost killed me.

I had a full drink of water in my mouth and I simultaneously spit it out and sucked it down my trachea.


PS: "Toxic Masculinity" is new SJW speak for the counter opposite of militant feminism, except one is bad and the other is not.

 

[one squirrel]

I agree, the male only draft is outdated. My point is about it's origins: not in women hatred, but acutally pretty much the opposite. Female lifes were, and still are, considered more valuable. Why else would you hear, whenever some tragedy happens "60 innocent people were killed in the attack, women and children amongst them", as if it is worse because it also happened to women, and not only to men.

Men have suffered tremendously in all of human history because they are for the most part the ones who have to fight the wars, yet nowadays some people try to spin it around and portray it as if it was some kind of privilege, in complete and utter disdain for the ones who were forced to go to the front line to die and not to ask questions.

That pisses me the f**k off! Women complaining how the evil misoginist patriarcy is denying them the right to serve in the military. The guys at Verdun would probably have been happy if they could have gone home after giving away the right to vote!

I've seen plenty of people against women being in the military, and it never has to do with it keeping a reserve of polygamy ready women around for repopulation, or the notion of losing our supply of precious women. Complaints I do see around a lot are that the women won't be able to hold their own and the men will have to pick up the slack. Like having to carry the supplies they can't handle.

The privilege is being deemed capable enough to fight for your family or country if you desired to. The ability to aspire to more than just a baby incubator. Yes, it was beneficial to a lot of women to not be conscripted for war, but it was at the cost of respect beyond that a child would receive. Would you rather be treated like a child for your entire life just so you could be 'valued' like a woman was?

Assuming that the two options that you presented are the only options available (I don't think that that is the case),I am not sure what I would choose. What would I give up if I had to pick between being shot at or losing some respect? It's easy to be brave and say i'd rather fight and die, than living with being a little less respected, when you don't actually have to put your money where your mouth is.

Besides, what do you gain for being "respected" when you have a bullet in your head, this is just cynical.

 

[Phasmal]

Probably concepts of masculinity that are harmful to yourself and others? Just a guess.

Or it could be an evil feminazi conspiracy. Could be that.

I dunno.

I don't know why anyone would be against pushing back against parts of something that is harmful, though.
Nothing wrong with people who are traditionally `masculine`, but I'm sure that no one should buy into it so much that they believe there couldn't possibly be anything negative about it, right? Equally, no-one should be forced to behave a certain way due to arbitrary crap like gender.

Like, I don't know, being upset that you lost to a girl so you have to go have a time out and brood and do manly things so you feel like a man again, that's not a good thing, is it?

 

[Piorn]

Maybe it's like female ferrets, who, if not mounted regularly, can't ovulate and die from estrogen poisoning?

My guess would be "toxic Masculinity" just describes "self-concious men". Nowadays you can be proud to be a woman, just like you can be proud to be black, but you can't be proud to be german unless you're talking about football.

 

[Illesdan]

Basically, if you are an American male you cannot be smart, cannot use big words, you cannot dress in anything other than plaid, must adore NFL, must drink beer, must be a frat boy womanizer, idolize male behaviour of the 1960's to 1970's, vote right wing, be a straight white male christian, all while yelling your jingoism for how star-spangled awesome America is. Anything less means you're not a man. That's toxic masculinity.

Pretty much this. Sadly, I know someone who is EXACTLY like this. He's the most opinionated, bigoted, homophobic guy I have ever met, and that's saying a lot, since I'm damned near 40. I've met everyone in his immediate family, and I've come to one, ultimate conclusion; he was adopted.

 

[geK0]

I'm sure testosterone is toxic in great enough doses.

 

[CitizenM]

This is fairly accurate. Taken a step further, it could be interpreted as the idolatry of traditionally "masculine" values such as aggression and dominance, and the ripple out consequences that has for society as a whole.

Very true. Many of the problems with our nations stem from our culture idolizing the worst aspects of human behaviour, deeming those behaviours the sole pervue of "men" and then rewarding abusers for it. It's no wonder most of our captains of industry are sociopaths when we have a population that is only too willing to reward strong, tough, badasses who "don't take no shit from anyone". Yeah, including all us taxpayers who are exploited by them

I'm a Lurker. It's what I do, but this post is so far off I feel the need to respond.

I had a whole giant post written and rewritten, but suffice to say it can be summed up as this. BS. I might have a differing opinion, but as an American Male I have never seen, heard of, or thought the above being standard male behavior.

There are unfortunate double standards where men can't say or do certain things, because they are considered unmanly, but the above is a poor representation of what that would be, at least in the area I live. Much of what is written above is mocked, derided, and considered far outside the norm.

Sorry if my post is overly aggressive, but I'm constantly being overstereotyped at wok as the token millennial and this struck a little close to home. Apologies to anyone if I offended you in anyway with my post.

What I wrote in that post is neither endorsing nor condeming toxic masculinity, merely describing what it is by definition. Whether or not you believe the definition has been institutionalized in society (which it has) or marginalized (which it has not) is beside the point. And just so you know, I don't believe a majority of us fit the steretype; the point is precisely that we DON'T. That's why it's toxic to us to live in a system that promotes and rewards that toxic behaviour.

Don't worry, you didn't offend me. Besides, I personally have a lot invested in millennials since you are the most friendly generation to people like me in the history of humanity. So stop lurking and post more!

Pretty much this. Sadly, I know someone who is EXACTLY like this. He's the most opinionated, bigoted, homophobic guy I have ever met, and that's saying a lot, since I'm damned near 40. I've met everyone in his immediate family, and I've come to one, ultimate conclusion; he was adopted.

They are out there. I was originally born and raised in a small northern town filled with such people. I was really happy when I moved away and found a much more moderate social reality. Btw, was that an "Avengers" reference?