
Thoughts on Toxic Masculinity - andrewminer
https://bitsnbytes.blog/2019/02/05/thoughts-on-toxic-masculinity/
======
temporallobe
The term toxic masculinity is itself sexist. Isn’t that what we’re trying to
avoid?

~~~
krapp
If the term toxic masculinity is sexist, then masculinity, itself, is equally
sexist.

~~~
justtopost
Consider that statement with sexes reversed. Is it still true? Because I never
hear of women being 'toxic'. The term is just name calling, and has a history
of a specific agenda. We can move forward with unsilvered tounges.

~~~
krapp
>Consider that statement with sexes reversed. Is it still true? Because I
never hear of women being 'toxic'.

"toxic masculinity" isn't calling men toxic, it isn't even calling masculinity
toxic, it's referring to a subset of masculine behavior which is harmful both
to women and men, but mostly to women. Why would you consider calling women
toxic to be the reverse?

Is there such a thing as "toxic femininity?" I don't know, I'm not a woman.

But whether or not there is has no bearing on whether toxic masculinity exists
or what it represents. After all, as many people like to point out in
discussions of gender, men and women are different, right? So there's no
reason to assume the _cultures_ of men and women shouldn't have different
pathologies. That's what terms like "masculine" and "feminine" exist to
describe.

------
towaway1138
Good thoughts.

In my mind, "toxic" is just another epithet used in meaningless and
unproductive name-calling. This doesn't spur moral progress, but in fact
impedes it.

Name-calling and shaming _never_ help, but sometimes you can put yourself in a
state of having a pure heart, talk with kindness to someone who is doing
something wrong, and change the world.

------
mimixco
Good points here. There is no such thing as "toxic masculinity." There are
only individual bad behaviors. Being a male does not automatically condemn one
to such bad behaviors. Even the social and cultural norms imposed on men don't
require bad behavior. Each person can take individual responsibility for how
he wants to present himself.

There was a time when we thought that women were "less than." In many
countries, this is still the case. We also thought that black people were
"less than" and this isn't the case, either. It's possible (and important) to
claim our masculinity and the things that make us male without being a
negative factor in society.

We should not be less male, but better males.

~~~
krapp
>Even the social and cultural norms imposed on men don't require bad behavior.

They kind of sometimes do, though. The items on the "negative" list in the
article are often reinforced by cultural pressures and stereotypes associated
with masculinity and "manhood."

To simply focus on individual bad behaviors by people who happen to be men is
to ignore the societal and cultural weight of masculinity and the negative
feedback loops a boy or man can feed upon when finding their identity. These
behaviors don't exist in a vacuum, they persist in part because they signal
conformity to an outdated template of masculinity.

I'm starting to agree that we shouldn't use the phrase "toxic masculinity,"
though. Not because it doesn't exist - I think it does - but it seems
impossible to use without men getting triggered by it. You're disagreeing with
the premise even as most of your comment agrees with what the term describes
and what the goal of recognizing it should be.

~~~
belorn
When I see people use phrases like "toxic masculinity" I always inject the
idea of "toxic Muslim faith". It maps so directly to the language people use
around masculinity, and yet most people who would use the phrase "toxic
masculinity" want to see themselves as tolerant.

There are a lot of negative aspects of Muslim faith, terrorism being one, that
are reinforced by cultural pressures and stereotypes associated with Muslim
faith. To simply focus on individual bad behaviors by people who happen to be
Muslims is to ignore the societal and cultural weight of Muslim faith and the
negative feedback loops a Muslim can feed upon when finding their identity.
They persist in part because they signal conformity to an outdated template of
Muslim faith.

But there is a big problem if we use the phrase "toxic Muslim faith". It does
not spur moral progress, common understanding, or empathy. It is impossible to
use the phrase without Muslims getting triggered by it, even if they agree
that terrorism is a real problem among Muslims. A Muslim that hears the word
"toxic Muslim faith" will uncritically, and not unjustifiably so in my view,
see it as an attack on all Muslims and Islam and not just the subset of
negative Muslim behavior and culture among Islam practitioners.

~~~
krapp
Fair enough, and I don't want to even attempt to open the can of worms about
whether "toxic Islam" exists and whether it _is_ an expression of toxic
masculinity, given the patriarchal nature of Islamic cultures and the gender
roles enforced by Abrahamic religions, so on and so forth.

But the objections here still aren't to the premise, but the term. Meanwhile,
women just want to live in a society that doesn't demean them, deny them
agency over their bodies or which uses violence against them as social
currency. It seems petty that the only response many men seem to have is that
it's mean and hurts their feelings.

Call it what you want, call it something else, it's still a real thing.

~~~
belorn
What we heard primarily from people favoring restrictions against Muslims such
as the travel ban, is the need for security against the bad behavior which is
associated with the targeted demographic.

It was not petty when Muslims only response to the travel ban was to get their
feelings hurt. They can not accept the framing of the narrative that all
Muslims are responsible for terrorism any more than men can accept that all
men are responsible for sexism. It is impossible to have a civil discussion
with such starting point and thus what we get is a singular response of
objection to the narrative rather than a civil debate about the real down to
earth problems that society has and how to fix them. Only by removing the
framing around the demographic and focusing on the individual can any real
progress be had.

> whether "toxic Islam" exists and whether it is an expression of toxic
> masculinity

Or maybe "toxic masculinity" is an expression of religion, given religion role
in defining gender roles. Opium of the people and all that jazz.

~~~
krapp
>Or maybe "toxic masculinity" is an expression of religion, given religion
role in defining gender roles. Opium of the people and all that jazz.

I think it's more that toxic masculinity is an expression of culture as
informed by religion.

Many of the negative archetypes around women in the west (woman as deceiver,
woman as seductress) derive from Genesis, and beliefs that women should
naturally be subservient to men (literally, that woman is to man as man is to
God) derive from the New Testament. Political conflicts and power struggles
between the Church and Crown denied women rights as an attempt to control
property rights and inheritance, codifying gender prejudice into law and
social strata. Traditional gender roles and expectations in this case evolved
from these status and class roles and the Christian ideals they were based on,
which viewed women as property, viewed womens' bodies as inherently sinful and
womens' sexuality as being taboo unless it served men.

These attitudes persisted with the secularization of the west and manifested
through media and pop culture by way of the male gaze[0] and rape culture[1]
which normalize the portrayal of women as sex objects, and of sexual
aggression and violence against women as a healthy expression of manhood and
signal of virility and status, or else blames women for their own victimhood.

...all of which just describes toxic masculinity in different terms.

[0][https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Male_gaze](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Male_gaze)

[1][https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_culture](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_culture)

~~~
belorn
If we look at the Abrahamic religions we see a lot of support of violence,
hate and general unpleasantness. If we wanted to support the idea that
everything that is wrong with the world is caused by Muslims we only need to
pick some quotes from the Quran that shows a belief that violence is
acceptable against non-believers. It all describes toxic Muslim faith but in
different terms.

In the end through, talking about terrorism by framing it as part of Muslim
faith is not an effective method to bring civil discussion and progress in
eliminating terrorism. All it does it nourishing hate and polarization in
society which in turn result in increased risk of terrorism. It forces people,
Muslims in the case of toxic Muslim faith, to defend themselves regardless if
they are terrorists or not and distance themselves with those who work against
terrorism. If one want to actually eliminate terrorism it is better to avoid
associating Muslim faith with terrorism and instead focus fully on the
individuals that do the act of terrorism.

We could be standing all day long talking about how a secularization of the
middle east has normalized the idea that a healthy expression of Muslim faith
is to slit the throat of unbelievers and blowing up bombs, or blame the west
for their own victimhood. With the full knowledge that this will not help in
reducing terrorism and only hurt those that identify as a Muslim and are not
terrorist, why continue with such narrative? Why cause harm?

~~~
krapp
>why continue with such narrative? Why cause harm?

Because toxic masculinity exists, and it causes greater harm than wounds to
the ego. Refusing to address the subject except through analogy only serves to
create a false impression of the nature of the arguments being made, and to
distract from the subject at hand. Pretending it doesn't exist as a systemic
phenomenon only serves the status quo.

Even if using the phrase will only result in men being defensive and getting
triggered by it. It exists regardless, and society if left to its own devices
will probably do nothing about it, or the harm that it causes, unless
confronted and dragged kicking and screaming into a more just and equitable
future.

It is incorrect to claim that everything wrong with the world is caused by
Muslims, but no one is making an equivalent claim about everything wrong with
the world being caused by men or masculinity. It is incorrect to equate Islam
with terrorism, but it is correct to equate toxic masculinity with male
culture, because the two relationships are not perfectly equivalent, and not
all analogies between them apply. And to cut to the chase, and what I believe
is the intended implication of the equivalency you're trying to draw here,
feminist critique is not equivalent to bigotry.

So if you disagree with me, as you seem to (and fair enough,) then perhaps you
could address the subject on its own terms?

~~~
belorn
Refusing to address the issue is the catch phrase of the far rights view about
immigration. It is a poor argument for hate speech regardless if it target
someone based on gender or race.

And no, status quo is not served by active addressing the issue rather than
mud slinging. It is a well established fact that immigrants has a higher rate
of crime and sexual assault. To take Swedish numbers, a Muslim immigrant is
1000% more likely to commit rape than a christian born Sweden. Refusing to
debase the discussing by focusing on race and religious demographics does not
mean Sweden ignore rape, nor that it is pretending that the problem does not
exist (which the far right constantly accuse the government of). Instead the
government create policy that address segregation, low income and other
factors that plays into crime regardless of skin color or religious faith. A
far cry from refusing to address the issue and serving the status quo.

We know how to take the high road in regard to racism, and as a bonus it
actually work. Feminist critique when used as an excuse for hate speech does
neither. "Toxic masculinity" is misandry, plain and simple, and by continuing
with such language all we get is more hate rather than effective policies that
address the problems at hand.

That is the disagreement I have with you.

~~~
krapp
Alright, I can see we can't even agree on terms here, so I'm going to bow out.

Thanks for the mature discussion on the topic, though. Even though I disagree
with you I'm glad you put more effort in than the usual casual dismissals and
snark this sort of thread usually attracts.

