Transcription
Masculinity is a set of attributes, values and behaviors associated with being a man. It is a social construct that is distinct from biological sex.
The term “toxic masculinity” refers to a specific societal expectation of men that is enforced and policed by men – a narrow, inflexible script of being a man that emphasizes reliance on aggressive behavior, de-emphasizes other more positive traits that are sometimes coded masculine and dismisses any and all traits for men that are coded feminine. It also refers to the incredible and damaging pressure put on men to behave this way in order to achieve or maintain their “status” as men.
When the term “toxic masculinity” is used, it is NOT an assertion that men are naturally violent. It is also NOT an assertion that all aspects of masculinity are naturally toxic. Confronting toxic elements of masculinity often runs into the problem of misunderstanding the concept or ignoring the concept for fear of self-reflection, and this has made defining what toxic masculinity is NOT as important as defining what it is. I'm going to be spending a lot of time in this video trying to get people over the hurdle of what is and is not toxic masculinity because that seems to be the biggest roadblock in the discourse. Here are some common bad arguments so that we don't have to deal with them in the comments.
“You think men are toxic! You think masculinity is toxic!” No. The term “toxic masculinity” does not refer to all masculinity being toxic nor is it a condemnation of men or manhood. It refers to a form of masculinity – not all masculinity. Most who reject toxic masculinity would conversely praise other traits that society often codes as masculine like courage and protectiveness.
The Good Men Project describes it thusly: “Toxic masculinity is a narrow and repressive description of manhood, designating manhood as defined by violence, sex, status and aggression. It’s the cultural ideal of manliness, where strength is everything while emotions are a weakness; where sex and brutality are yardsticks by which men are measured, while supposedly 'feminine' traits—which can range from emotional vulnerability to simply not being hypersexual—are the means by which your status as 'man' can be taken away.”
Toxic masculinity positions masculinity in general as superior to femininity, reinforcing a vertical hierarchy. A vertical hierarchy is an unequal social or economic institution or structure. The term toxic masculinity is designed to describe not masculinity itself, but a form of gendered behavior that occurs when expectations of manliness go wrong. Put even more simply, everyone on the Boston Red Sox are Major League Baseball players, but not ALL Major League Baseball players are Boston Red Sox. Some of them are Blue Jays and Yankees and such. Nobody is calling all baseball players the Red Sox, and nobody is calling every expression of masculinity “toxic.”
It should be noted, however, that this absolutely DOES NOT mean that there exist toxic men and non-toxic men, as if they are neatly divided up like baseball teams. It means that some BEHAVIOR is toxic and some BEHAVIOR is not. Everyone is susceptible to negative behavior traits, even those making a conscious effort not to do so.
“We should call it something besides toxic masculinity!” Perhaps by calling toxic masculinity something else, we could make men less defensive when discussing it, right? No such luck. Example: The term “patriarchy” sounds fairly neutral and scientific in language and contains no scary words like “toxic” but when the topic of patriarchy is brought up, the same men who dismiss the concept of toxic masculinity cry out and dismiss patriarchy as well. The word is not the problem. The words could be anything, and the same defensiveness would occur. If we changed the word “toxic” to something less harsh like “bad,” the same people who exclaim “Oh, so you think ALL men are toxic!” would instead say “Oh, so you think ALL men are bad!”
“Hegemonic masculinity” describes a form of masculinity that is narrow but not specifically toxic masculinity. “Traditional masculinity ideology” describes some of what toxic masculinity is, but does not describe it specifically enough and encompasses other things that would muddy the waters – not to mention the fact that it is not immediately positioned as a negative in its wording. Also, jargon terms that require a second definition just to understand the meaning of the one of the words do not lend themselves to educating the masses. They are more helpful in academic settings. Furthermore, again, even this academic term would eventually be rejected by the same people who reject the term “patriarchy.” Some attempts to use a different term are meant in good faith as a means of making it more palatable, though that seems an unlikely result, and some attempts are made in bad faith in hopes of removing discussion about toxic masculinity altogether.
“Men invented the car, you know!” Listing men's achievements is irrelevant because nobody is dismissing said achievements or attacking men.
“What about toxic femininity?” The early feminist movement wrote a lot about what we might now call “toxic femininity,” meaning the results of society placing a great deal of pressure on women to look and behave in a similarly idealized way. Example: eating disorders.
“You still think all masculinity is toxic masculinity! You can't fool me, I'm a man who goes his own way and...” The fact that the term “toxic masculinity” has a qualifier – “toxic” – is evidence in and of itself that those who use the term either in academic settings or in conversation do not believe all masculinity is toxic. Because that's how words work.
“Men who believe this are nu-male, beta-male, soy cucks!” Please say this or some variant of this in the comments if you want to expose yourself and prove toxic masculinity definitely exists. The point of toxic masculinity is that it makes men see anything less than the aggressive, uncaring “ideal” of masculinity as worthless and the subject of ridicule, thus putting unnecessary pressure on men to perform this version of masculinity. If you want to prove toxic masculinity exists, please go ahead and say this, as it is the most blatant example and proof of toxic masculinity – the policing of what is and is not properly masculine.
All caught up? Excellent. Let's talk about Conan the Barbarian. In Conan the Barbarian, young Conan's parents are slaughtered by the forces of Thulsa Doom. Conan becomes a slave, but his strenuous physical exercise eventually transforms him into Arnold Schwarzeneggar. He becomes a gladiator, then a thief and then exacts revenge on Thulsa Doom and his serpent cult. Conan was not born violent, but he was taught by his father that the only thing he can trust is his sword, and the circumstances of his life – a system of enslavement – hardened him and made him the violent barbarian. Men are not born with toxic attitudes or born violent. They are taught by others explicitly, as seen here, or taught implicitly through social interactions with other men that express this narrow form of masculinity. These social systems are not literally pushing The Wheel of Pain endlessly until it makes you hard and unfeeling, but, well, it's a pretty solid metaphor, right? Conan had no choice but to push the wheel and exist in this strict hierarchical system. He did not choose this, and the system pre-dated himself. Most people are not slaves, but all exist within vertical hierarchies that do us a lot of damage, and much like Conan, we have no choice but to participate in them.
In this iconic scene, Conan is asked what is best in life. To crush your enemies, see them driven before you and to hear the lamentations of the women. What Conan is describing here actually fits in quite well with the description of the values of toxic masculinity.
“Crush your enemies.” Alright, so, aggression. A component of toxic masculinity is the expectation that men – real men – are strong. Not only physically strong like Conan but “emotionally” strong. However, in this narrow version of masculinity “emotionally strong” means “unemotional.” Emotion becomes incompatible with being strong. Anger is considered an exception to the rule or not labeled an emotion at all. Example: Conan understandably grieves the loss of his love interest. Another character claims that Conan cannot cry, so he will cry for him. In this narrow version of masculinity, Conan's unemotional response to the loss of his romantic partner is seen as noble even though it benefits no one – least of all Conan – to suppress his feelings.
In general, women live longer than men. One factor that causes men bodily harm is stress. According to a study last year, work stress is six times more likely to kill men than women despite being otherwise healthy. Everyone puts pressure on themselves, but men are told by society that being “strong” and not expressing your feelings in a healthy way are both positive values. In truth, keeping your feelings inside causes added stress. Toxic masculinity can be harmful to women if men are given the impression that aggression is a positive, but it is also harmful to men who are given the impression that expressing your feelings in a healthy manner is “weak.” This pressure to be “strong” all the time can cause adverse health effects. It is not the ONLY reason there is a gap in mortality between men and women, but it appears to be one contributing factor.
So, what else does Conan say? “See them driven before you.” OK, so, pride? There is nothing about being a man that means having to see oneself as larger than life, but toxic masculinity makes it difficult to feel secure about being merely average when our vertical hierarchies demand both control and competition. And the last thing Conan says? “Hear the lamentations of the women.” OK, so, let's talk about that. Here, Conan, encountering women, mindlessly calls them “sluts.” In another scene, Conan is “gifted” a woman. Toxic masculinity tells men that they should be prepared for sex at any time and that it is only natural to believe oneself entitled to the attention of women. The toxic script says that if men think about sex all the time, then that is the natural course they must take, and that men therefore must be extremely forward about sex. That sex is an inevitability, mandatory and can skirt around the borders of consent. You can imagine how women feel about this sexual aggression, especially when it is justified as “boys will be boys.” Under this narrow scope, if violence is an indicator of power, then violence against women is acceptable if it is in service of men's “natural” desires.
According to the American Psychiatric Association, more than any biological reason, these cultural lessons are what link men to aggression and violence. This leaves boys and men at disproportionate risk for school discipline, academic challenges, health disparities and substance abuse. Men are also over-represented in prisons and are significantly more likely to commit violent crimes than women. Also, because of the competitive nature of toxic masculinity, aggression between men is a contributing factor to men being at greater risk of being the VICTIMS of violent crime as well.
You know how Conan the Barbarian is pretty good and the sequel, Conan the Destroyer, is pretty bad? Well, saying the first one is good and the second one needs some work doesn't mean someone hates the Conan movies. Comparatively, saying some aspects of what we consider masculinity are positive and some aspects of what we consider masculinity are negative does not mean that someone hates men. If you can understand and accept someone liking Conan the Barbarian but not Conan the Destroyer, you can understand someone appreciating men but not like men abusing women.
If toxic masculinity is such a destructive force, its defenders might say, then how did it propagate itself? Part of what we have come to call toxic masculinity is belief that physical strength separates men from women and therefore makes men either superior or at least superior at “things that matter.” Men who believe this often deflect by calling women their “partners” but still believe that the workforce and important positions should be dominated by men. This hierarchy, most historians and experts say, began to happen when human beings started to raise livestock. The first known patriarchies were nomadic herding societies – meaning the first to depend on raising livestock – and that male privilege and women’s oppression reached their height in advanced agrarian societies that depended heavily on both human labor and animal breeding. Vertical hierarchies of economy were created by those who hoarded the most wealth. That's not to say this happened everywhere. Anthropological and historical studies of societies in Africa, Pre-Columbian North America and New Guinea show numerous cultures in which women had not been devalued or pushed down the hierarchy. Matrilineal societies are historically quite common and have included significant female control over land and property. Sexual violence and treatment of women as property were largely unknown in these societies and historically only increased with the introduction of male dominance – often from outside forces.
Like many societal woes, toxic masculinity has its roots in vertical power structures, hierarchies that elevate some people – often not based on true merit but pre-existing systems that benefit them – and disenfranchise others often for reasons beyond the control of those disenfranchised. Hierarchies are NOT held together peacefully, as the circumstances in which they were created and maintained involve the exploitation of those lower on the ladder. Hierarchies are held together by force. Capitalism is maintained by a ruling economic class that exploits workers, for example. Those who defend such hierarchies claim they are “natural” and that makes them somehow unavoidable. Of course, no hierarchical system has always existed, which disproves this, and even if it were natural, something being “natural” does not make it automatically better. Indoor plumbing is not natural, but we wouldn't give that up. It is not a coincidence that those who defend the existence of these hierarchies – whether based in economics, race, gender, etc. – are also those who benefit most from them.
Hierarchies create incredibly stressful competition, which often guides those in said hierarchies to double down on the worst aspects of the condition that keeps them above others. In the case of male hierarchy over women, this competition makes men resistant to challenges to masculinity, even narrow versions of masculinity like toxic masculinity. Thus, when men are told about toxic masculinity and the dangers to both women and themselves, they often dismiss said criticisms and engage in the behavior even further. Challenging toxic masculinity can make some men take on even more toxic traits because humans living in hierarchical systems have been conditioned to be “competitive.” If masculinity is what makes them male, and being male is a higher position in the gender hierarchy, then criticism of masculinity feels like an affront and a challenge to said position. Even though criticisms of toxic masculinity are intended to help men and not hurt men, the criticism is mistakenly perceived as an attack, even when this criticism is brought up by other men because men are not only competing against women but also competing among other men. This is true in other hierarchies as well. When capitalism is criticized for the disparity between the rich and poor, capitalists counter by demanding even fewer regulations and more tax cuts for the rich, thus increasing the disparity between the rich and poor rather than resolving it.
If the hierarchy between men and women is so resistant to change, what can we do to better the situation? The truth is, power structures like gender hierarchies cannot be dismantled by your individual growth on the subject. Your growth is important, both to yourself and to those with whom you interact, but it will do nothing to the hierarchy itself. Your personal growth is not the end of toxic masculinity or this hierarchy, it is only education about toxic masculinity and this hierarchy. That's definitely a good thing, but it is the start and not the end of the journey. I don't want that to sound discouraging, though. There is some good that can and should be done on the individual level. Some things can be done like actively pushing back by telling your friends, family and co-workers when they are engaging in toxic behavior – and I recommend this wholeheartedly – but that still is not the end of the journey.
Combating toxic masculinity is what we can do now, within the system in which we currently exist, but obviously, the system itself needs to change. Powerful, far-reaching structures and attitudes can only be dismantled or at least diminished through powerful, far-reaching movements like direct action, drastically changing education on the matter taught from an early age and working toward changing hierarchical power structures in other aspects of life. The world needs to work toward horizontal leadership in all forms and eliminate the obsession with competition in order for any of these hierarchies to completely lose their power, especially since these hierarchies feed into each other. And if you are asking me for an exact plan on how to do this, I hate to disappoint, but I am an educator and not an organizer. I don't have a blueprint to change the world. Although, education is the first step, and I hope that this video has been more helpful than harmful.
To recap, toxic masculinity is a hegemonic form of masculinity that protects aggression and unemotional detachment, and it defines manhood in narrow terms while de-emphasizing positive traits that are sometimes coded masculine like personal integrity and courage. It is unhelpful or dangerous to people of all genders and is empowered by a rigid, vertical hierarchy that has existed for centuries. Said hierarchy can't be taken down overnight – we can't just cut off the head of Thulsa Doom and change the world with one stroke -- but within the current system we have, we should always make an effort to minimize harm and affect change where we can.