“toxic masculinity” is a much abused and misused phrase; in particular it is frequently perverted into a misandric slur thrown at individual men (which, ironically, instantiates and perpetuates it) rather than utilized in its useful sense, referring to that subset of aspects of masculinity as constructed within a culture which, when adhered to, cause people to hurt themselves or others. the term is itself pretty much toxic at this point and I hesitate to drop it. but I got a thought poking at me rn, so damn the torpedoes.
so. propositions under this heading that seem relatively consensus-friendly albeit obviously subject to tinkering and exception and so on include:
- men are socialized to alieve that the only socially respectable feeling they can have is anger. consequently, they are likely to reflexively convert any other negative feelings into anger so that they can express them. expressing anger is generally experienced as cathartic, while attempts to express feelings such as sadness or shame may fail even if made, ie, expression does not result in catharsis as processing is impaired/blocked and inadequate. this is pretty terrible for the men in question and it’s not great for those around them either
- men are socialized to alieve that they are worthless and expendable until they prove themselves otherwise by achievement; in contemporary first world societies this generally means their human worth is constituted by their economic productivity, i.e., ability to generate money on one or another level, with contributions in e.g. caring, crafts, art, etc generally not assigned value unless they also generate money. this is pretty terrible for the men in question and it’s not great for those around them either
k. here’s the thought. but first, a flashback. I’m old, and I remember this period of what I guess might be called peak-consensus feminism? in like the 80s and 90s? this is after things had calmed well down from the most radical peaks out of the 70s second wave, which mainstream leftish/self-identifying-as-feminist culture now perceived and painted as comically pverdone (Dworkin and MacKinnon generally carried the poster-child burden for reasons that are understandable, albeit complicated on scrutiny; it was all, name-check Dworkin and/or MacKinnon, ‘of course our feminism isn’t like that,’ proceed with proposal for dismantling instutionalized sexism and establishing guardrails against its recurrence and/or protest against specific instance of gross overt misogyny). but this is also before things degenerated as they have in the last fifteen or so years to the point where “feminism” is apparently perceived primarily or only (!! !! !!; toxoplasma, I guess) as a Tumblr-at-its-worst-but-armed authoritarian abusive purity-stick-waving mob that just wants to beat up men till the world is perfect.
in this, the eye of the hurricane, so to speak, I grew up and came of age in an extremely liberal/blue region and subculture in which I experienced female socialization. female socialization, then and there, consisted of an underlying stratum of traditional gender role teaching and policing (i.e., you still had to be pretty and thin and not too loud, and you still had to perform a lot of onerous style and grooming rituals, which were different than in more traditional settings, but still girl-specific and legion), overlaid by a thick overt explicit continually reinforced layer of peak-consensus feminism messages of egalitarianism and empowerment (you can grow up to do anything you want! you are the same as the boy next to you with the same opportunities and life options! we’ve moved beyond all that risible sexist nonsense from the past now, it’s true there are a bunch of dinosaurs still out there slinging the bullshit but they are clearly Wrong, nobody agrees with them except a few other dinosaurs. the revolution has taken place and this is just cleanup and maintenance. bullshit probably won’t happen to you, and if it does we will all stand up together and speak out against it and make it fall back and stfu)
and my thought is: women raised on this mix now suffer from the exact same kinds of internalized toxic masculinity as men do. (this in addition to the already widely acknowledged collateral damage they take from men as a result of, classic formulation, men’s own — presumably much deeper, which, god help you you poor fuckers — internalization of toxic masculinity, etc, etc). as a girl, you don’t get beaten up in the locker room for insufficient masc swagger or whatever, but you get the equivalent in the workplace when you’re passed over for promotion because you don’t project the right timbre of gravitas with clients or establish sufficient dominance (yes, in spite of sexist stereotypes about assertive women, too bad, it’s eat or be eaten) in team meetings. you don’t get the ‘boys don’t cry’ training in early childhood that guys do, but you do grow up under a pervasive unisex cultural ideal of insouciance, nonchalance, and ironic detachment, and if you violate that ideal by having and expressing an authentic feeling where people can see and hear you, you have failed. you should feel shame, and you deserve contempt.
and look, the emancipation of women, writ large, is fucking great, right, that’s obviously not what I’m questioning, but I do question whether we have utterly fucked up the process by being like: right. equality with men means we compete as men, so men’s problems are now universal problems. you get emotional repression and you get emotional repression and you get emotional repression: everyone gets emotional repression! and we’re all thrilled to be defined by and valued entirely according to our career trajectories or lack thereof! this is called “empowerment” and is what we were fighting for!
in short: due to a horrible misstep* by benign, women-are-people feminism, which I still subscribe to to be clear, toxic masculinity has been universalized. being a woman doesn’t get you an exemption! it’s just added as a whole nother burden on top of (what isn’t but might as well be called — I say it’s coercive gender role policing and I say the hell with it) toxic femininity.
(status: speculative; am n of 1 with no claim to be a representative woman of our time — minor neurodivergences; unusually high alienation; arguably technically ineligible for n given I have ~questions~ about my gender assignment, although said questions arose late enough in life that as I’m talking socialization I’m just running with it. but those two bullet points describe my experience. my experience is neither more nor less nor other than precisely this. and I cannot stop worrying at this fact like a dog with a bone.)
p.s.: it occurs to me that some of the most flagrantly atrocious dominance games and abuses in The Worst Bits of SJ — which are, probably rightly though very distressingly, seen as driven by feminism as she is spoke in these increasingly accursed times — might be usefully examined through this lens. as I pointed out way back at the beginning, much of the current wave of feminist misandry is simply an instantiation of toxic masculinity. consider: these women are suffering from internalized toxic masculinity in the same way as men are. not only as innocent oppressed parties on the receiving end of the collateral damage thrown by men’s struggles with their own socialization, but also via their own struggles with the exact same fucking shit in a pink package.
*actually, something something neoliberal managerial capitalism systematically fomenting and coopting culture war bs to distract from material conditions etc
I wish there were clear examples of non-toxic masculinity that are not just examples of men doing traditionally feminine gender role stuff. Like “non-toxic/progressive masculinity is when men stay at home and cook and clean“ or “non-toxic/progressive masculinity is when men wear pink“.
Backyard grilling. Philately. Firefighting. Pickup basketball. Optimizing your orc warlock’s DPS. Teaching your son how to play catch. Antifaschiste Aktion. War of 1812 Reënactment. Camping. Chess. Knowing your way around practical machinery. That Russian breakdancing thing, what’s it called. Dying for a cause. Cracking open a cold one with the boys.
Now in a sense the actual answer is “no” insofar as basically in 99% of cases if something’s good for men to do then that’s because it’s good to irrespective of gender, so there’s no need to make it specifically male. There’s no need to be all “no Karen you can’t join our Commander table because Magic cards are for BOYS,” or whatever. But there are plenty of things that are both traditionally male-coded and that are perfectly fine good things to keep on doing.
I want to endorse your post and apologise for how I phrased mine. Also DIY woodworking.
@oligopsoneia‘s take here is entirely correct, but there are some maybe-troubling ramifications.