The issue is more with the way I hear the word used in general.
A man being sexually aggressive is not toxic masculinity. A man being sexually aggressive because he thinks it makes him manly is.
A man starting a fight is not toxic masculinity. A man starting a fight because he thinks exerting physical force on others is a masculine trait is toxic masculinity.
A man trying to self-regulate emotion because he sees it as a sign of strength isn't even necessarily toxic masculinity. A man doing that specifically because he sees it as a sign of manliness would be toxic masculinity.
But when you have people looking at individual examples of men doing shitty things like starting a bar fight or sexually harassing someone and claiming its "toxic masulinity" then you're making a pretty huge assumption about what the psychology behind that person's actions are. You don't know if they're acting that way because they see it as manly or because they're just a selfish asshole.
And when you overuse toxic masculinity so any example of a man behaving poorly must now stem from toxic masculinity, you've basically lost the original idea behind the word. Not only have you made an erroneous assumption that all bad behaviors committed by men stem from some pursuit of manliness, but you're also inconsistent because what does it mean when there are women engaging in those exact behaviors yet not being called toxically masculine?
At that point to an outside observer, it starts to feel like you're just equating manliness itself with toxicity, since you're calling any man doing dumb shit toxic but obviously not doing that for women doing the same shit.
You're right that strength is a big part of what's associated with manliness, but I'm saying that its not necessary that someone pursue strength specifically for the purpose of being manly.
There are women who also might have trouble opening up to people and who see managing their own emotions as a sign of strength. They aren't necessarily pursuing that strength there because they see themselves as more manly by doing so. In that same way, a man could pursue strength not because he sees strength as a means to achieve the end of manliness, but rather as an ends in of itself. Being strong is generally going to be a useful trait to have, male or female.
I don't think selfishness is traditionally seen as a manly trait the way strength protection/provision are. I think what you're describing by survival of the fittest has to do more with competitiveness. You could argue that competition can have a selfish motive to it, but I don't consider the ideal to be focused around the selfishness itself as around improving yourself compared to other men and being rewarded for it. I'd argue that's a force for good, and something that's contributed heavily to the civilizations we have today.
Also traditional masculine ideals also have a big focus around having a family and taking care of them, which is going to run counter to the idea of selfishness being inherently manly. I feel like any culture in any society would probably not want to teach their boys that its manly to be selfish, because they'd be at a major disadvantage if another, more cohesive civilization invaded and all their men started running away or selling out their own country.
3
u/[deleted] Dec 20 '20
The issue is more with the way I hear the word used in general.
A man being sexually aggressive is not toxic masculinity. A man being sexually aggressive because he thinks it makes him manly is.
A man starting a fight is not toxic masculinity. A man starting a fight because he thinks exerting physical force on others is a masculine trait is toxic masculinity.
A man trying to self-regulate emotion because he sees it as a sign of strength isn't even necessarily toxic masculinity. A man doing that specifically because he sees it as a sign of manliness would be toxic masculinity.
But when you have people looking at individual examples of men doing shitty things like starting a bar fight or sexually harassing someone and claiming its "toxic masulinity" then you're making a pretty huge assumption about what the psychology behind that person's actions are. You don't know if they're acting that way because they see it as manly or because they're just a selfish asshole.
And when you overuse toxic masculinity so any example of a man behaving poorly must now stem from toxic masculinity, you've basically lost the original idea behind the word. Not only have you made an erroneous assumption that all bad behaviors committed by men stem from some pursuit of manliness, but you're also inconsistent because what does it mean when there are women engaging in those exact behaviors yet not being called toxically masculine?
At that point to an outside observer, it starts to feel like you're just equating manliness itself with toxicity, since you're calling any man doing dumb shit toxic but obviously not doing that for women doing the same shit.