Are you just here to goad or do you have anything intelligent to say? I got banned recently for goading, so I'll not fall into your trap this time. You should probably watch yourself too.
-
Features
Science Says Toxic Masculinity — More Than Alcohol — Leads To Sexual Assault
- Thread starter RavenSky
- Start date
Are you just here to goad or do you have anything intelligent to say? I got banned recently for goading, so I'll not fall into your trap this time. You should probably watch yourself too.
J842P
Veteran Member
It is a persuasive argument, and it wasn't indulging in identity politics.
Having political opinions is not identity politics, as much as you feel like implying JP is a hypocrite.
ruby sparks
Contributor
You're right. As someone wise once said to me, we need to stop putting people into groups and treat everyone as an individual. That way, we would never, for example, lump all feminists into either 2 groups or worse, just one. 
Treedbear
Veteran Member
- Joined
- May 30, 2016
- Messages
- 2,567
- Location
- out on a limb
- Basic Beliefs
- secular, humanist, agnostic on theism/atheism
Yes. It's such a relief to find out I have toxic masculinity and am not actually responsible for my actions around women. Can't wait to see what Kavanaugh has to say about that.
ruby sparks
Contributor
I disagree. I think it was a weak excuse for picking and choosing what terms you get to use for what based on your personal preferences. Ok with putting toxic in front of Feminism. Check. Not ok with putting toxic in front of masculine. Check. Proceed on this basis. Enter a thread on the latter and be critical of that term.
What was it founded on? That feminism is an ideology not a biological trait?
First, explain to me how masculinity is merely a biological trait.
Then, consider that masculinity may also be considered as an ideology, and is, by for example The American Psychological Association.
Worldtraveller
Veteran Member
Lucky for us, no one here would dream of doing that. Any semblance of something resembling this must surely be a mis-perception on your part!You're right. As someone wise once said to me, we need to stop putting people into groups and treat everyone as an individual. That way, we would never, for example, lump all feminists into either 2 groups or worse, just one.
Derec
Contributor
So, if so-called "toxic masculinity" is responsible for sexual assaults, is "toxic femininity" responsible for false accusations of sexual assault?
Derec
Contributor
Counterpart to the sexist term "toxic masculinity" would be "toxic femininity", not "toxic feminism". Feminism is an ideology and many branches of it are clearly toxic, i.e. radical feminism that espouses female supremacism.
You're right. As someone wise once said to me, we need to stop putting people into groups and treat everyone as an individual. That way, we would never, for example, lump all feminists into either 2 groups or worse, just one.
Yup, you're just goading. Lets see how long you get away with it. I'm guessing a lot longer than the 1 post I did.
This reminds me of the posts a while back about "White Fragility" and how that's oh so not racist, but how "Black Aggression" or "Latino Thievery" certainly would be. Buzzfeed has nothing on Talk Freethoght sometimes.
ruby sparks
Contributor
I know. I wasn't saying they were counterparts.
This is true. Well, I'm not sure if 'many branches' is true, but there are some what we might call toxic types of Feminism, imo.
As for toxic femininity, my guess is there's that too (why wouldn't there be?). I'm not sure exactly how it manifests though. I'd need to think about it more. I'm slightly reluctant to now because, well, the thread is more about toxic masculinity. I wouldn't mind comparing and contrasting the two, but not at the expense of doing the former.
ruby sparks
Contributor
I don't think we should say that toxic masculinity is responsible. It (or a set of attitudes that together are sometimes called toxic masculinity, or something similar) is (or are) just risk factors, apparently, along with other factors, such as for example alcohol (in relation to sexual assaults specifically in that case).
Most likely, almost inevitably (because they have to do with human behaviour and thinking) such things will have both biological and learned/cultural/social components.
In my humble opinion, toxic masculinity as an idea and a term shares something with for example the idea of patriarchy, in the sense that maybe, at times, it's overstated, or used as a catch-all explanation in sometimes vague terms, perhaps including by feminists. But almost anything can be exaggerated or overused as an explanation about almost anything. That doesn't mean it's not a valid or useful explanation (which imo both those ideas/terms are) just that it or they are not as much of an explanation or not an explanation as often as some (emphasis some only) might feel.
I think it's fair to say (I stand to be corrected) that toxic masculinity has come to be associated with being brought into discussions either by feminists or those influenced by or alluding to feminist ideas (even though I believe the term was coined by a male, non-feminist sociologist). As such, I wonder if the term has become a bit of a trigger for some who don't like feminism much and thus something to more or less automatically recoil from, or counter, perhaps unnecessarily.
In other words, despite all its flaws, I think it's quite a good term to describe...what it is the OP is describing.
Last edited:
Yet freak out you would if one here spoke of "Toxic Blackness". A problem of prejudice you would see.
laughing dog
Contributor
Someone comes out with a phrase to describe characteristics in male rapists and some snowflakes start to melt instead of dealing with the OP topic.
Toni
Contributor
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2011
- Messages
- 19,896
- Basic Beliefs
- Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
To be fair, it is a terrible term. I don't think that masculinity is toxic. I think that rigid societal norms assigned as 'masculine' or 'feminine' are at best, misplaced and in the extreme are very detrimental. It is detrimental to boys to raise them to believe that it is not 'masculine' or 'strong' or appropriate for a boy to have tender feelings, to feel sad instead of angry, to cry when you are hurt instead of ignoring pain, to mask feelings with 'humor' and violence and drugs and alcohol instead of feeling them. In turn, this is detrimental to society as a whole.
It is detrimental to girls to tell them that to be ambitious is not 'feminine' or to feel or express anger. To equate 'ambition' and 'winning' with masculine and to adopt so called 'masculine' norms of success and winning: ignoring personal and familial feelings and needs in service to the needs of the company or organization or team instead of defining success and winning as creating an environment that encourages innovation and support and service and supports individual needs as well as corporate needs.
We have created a world where workers serve the needs of the corporation which exists to provide profits for a few who pull the strings of puppets they don't even see or care about. This is a backwards, toxic environment for all of us. It serves no one well and harms most of us in one way or another, some of us it harms a great deal.
Yeah, that's exactly what the article is saying.
"Boys will be boys," bonding through cruelty to girls and women, perpetuated misogyny, etc. describe a very specific type of psycho. And this would not be accurately characterized as "anti-social," as a great many posturing woman-haters are quite social, but in a privileged, bullying way, not your garden variety extroverts.
Nice try, though. Not.
ruby sparks
Contributor
I agree it's not the world's greatest term, even masculinity is not the world's least problematical term, but toxic masculinity doesn't say or mean that masculinity is toxic, only that a certain subset of unbenign attitudes associated with it are identified as particular risk factors for certain types of unwelcome or unhelpful behaviour.
Last edited:
ruby sparks
Contributor
But being dark-skinned is not a set of attitudes or anything psychological, ideological, social, political, philosophical, behavioural or cultural which of itself could fairly be described as even being capable of having toxic aspects.
Feminism, for example, is and involves a number of those things, but then putting toxic in front of that apparently doesn't trigger you the way putting toxic in front of something else does.
Last edited:
ruby sparks
Contributor
It is worth noting that some parts of what are called the Men's Movement embrace the idea of toxic masculinity, and try to counter it, including promoting and instigating several programs and support groups for (mostly) young men, and sometimes young men of colour (which, incidentally, shows that it is possible to accept that there are aspects of for instance, instances of black culture, as opposed to merely having black skin, which are toxic).
Examples include The ManKind Project, BAM (Becoming a Man), Boys to Men, Inner King, Inside Circle (for those in prison) and the My Brother's Keeper Ininiative.
Other parts of the Men's Movement, such as Men's Rights Associations, are, as I understand it, more of a reaction to Feminism, and so they seem to mostly focus on other things, by and large. I'm not suggesting those things are necessarily invalid, though imo they sometimes are, such as when it is disputed that men as a group have institutional power and privilege. Of course they do, though perhaps not as much, nowadays, in certain developed 'western' societies, as is sometimes suggested, and as part of a variegated picture where such things vary according to other things and in which landscape there are (and always have been) areas where men are by comparison unprivileged, and other areas where women are.
Examples include The ManKind Project, BAM (Becoming a Man), Boys to Men, Inner King, Inside Circle (for those in prison) and the My Brother's Keeper Ininiative.
Other parts of the Men's Movement, such as Men's Rights Associations, are, as I understand it, more of a reaction to Feminism, and so they seem to mostly focus on other things, by and large. I'm not suggesting those things are necessarily invalid, though imo they sometimes are, such as when it is disputed that men as a group have institutional power and privilege. Of course they do, though perhaps not as much, nowadays, in certain developed 'western' societies, as is sometimes suggested, and as part of a variegated picture where such things vary according to other things and in which landscape there are (and always have been) areas where men are by comparison unprivileged, and other areas where women are.
Last edited:
ruby sparks
Contributor
Examples of 'traditional' masculinity that are not generally deemed to be toxic would be pride in one's ability to win (eg at sports), to maintain solidarity with a friend, to succeed at work, and to provide, protect and care for one's family. And I'm sure there are others.
Some say that 'traditional' gender roles are limiting and unhelpful. I would largely agree (with the caveat that they may suit certain people and should be a free choice). Perhaps some even say they are toxic, but I think it's more difficult to argue that 'traditional' masculinity is of itself toxic, given that it's a mixed bag of positives and negatives (with much to recommend on the positive side) so I would prefer, when using the term toxic masculinity, to refer to only those aspects which are more or less uncontroversially harmful and undesirable.
Some say that 'traditional' gender roles are limiting and unhelpful. I would largely agree (with the caveat that they may suit certain people and should be a free choice). Perhaps some even say they are toxic, but I think it's more difficult to argue that 'traditional' masculinity is of itself toxic, given that it's a mixed bag of positives and negatives (with much to recommend on the positive side) so I would prefer, when using the term toxic masculinity, to refer to only those aspects which are more or less uncontroversially harmful and undesirable.
Last edited: