Opinion Meryl Streep says the term 'toxic masculinity' hurts boys: 'women can be pretty f***ing toxic"

[Islam Imamate]

Well, if toxic masculinity doesn't refer to men... doing things that are... toxic... I'm not sure what the hell it is supposed to mean?

Do you have an alternative definition and way to measure it, sugar bush?

Hmm, I don't think you're using the term right though I don't blame you since who the fuck really knows what its supposed to mean at this point? But my understanding its that it refers not to the actions of men but rather a conception of masculinity that associates "toxic" behaviors and attitudes with masculinity. I say "toxic" because what exactly counts is not always clear. Is it referring to anti-social and criminal behaviors like your charts suggest? Or perhaps what @franklinstower was getting at, more mundane behaviors that are still, on some level, less than ideal? No one seems to know, in fact the definition seems to change depending on the conversation and the person using it.

Accepting this definition, to what extent is it related to the stats? I would say its rather naive to believe that ambient attitudes about masculinity that exist within the wider culture and in localized contexts are unrelated but at the same time the reality of male violence is pretty universal and cross-cultural so to boil it down to that is even more naive IMO. I think its clear that men are just biologically predisposed to some of those behaviors, toxic masculinity or not.

And to what extent are these toxic behaviors correlates of positive ones? For instance, risk taking is encouraged among men and that is going to lead to a non-zero number of both positive, smart risks and negative, stupid risks. Encouraging violence is the same; sometimes violence is appropriate and sometimes not. Encouraging men to protect people means that they have to develop the capacity to hurt people and they won't always exercise ideal judgement on these questions. To what extent is what people call "toxic masculinity" in fact a mixed bag with some good? Indeed in some cases might it not be a net positive? Obviously the conception of masculinity within gang culture is a net negative but is traditional masculinity necessarily so? I don't think its a question that is so easily answered.

Our culture celebrates toxic feminitity.

Its hilarious how the gellet commercial was basically just over the top movie scenes of guys being douches......Mean girls is exactly that but for females...yet society loves that shit.

Uh, that's not true at all. Mean Girls is one of the only pieces of media that actually makes an effort to critique what you might call "toxic femininity"

Just because its played for laughs doesn't mean its endorsing that behavior.

 

[MikeMcMann]

What is "toxic"? Toxic is poison. In other words, something that kills things. I hear "toxic masculinity," and I think "things that men do more than women [masculinity/ male] that cause death and physical harm [toxic/ deadly] ."

I think that is a pretty reasonable interpretation of the term based on the meaning of the words. And it also happens to be statistically supportable in MANY ways. I don't hear from the term that all masculinity is toxic-- just that there is something that is leading many men to toxic (literally, deadly) behaviors. No need to get defensive about it; it's just fact.

The real problem is that men immediately go into a knee-jerk defensiveness and want to argue the semantics rather than saying, "Hmm, yeah, we do seem to be fucked up in a lot of obvious ways that women aren't."

Maybe if men did that instead of bothsideing the shit out of everything, masculinity would actually get a little less... toxic.

It would certainly be more manly.

Sure there are toxic elements one can point to of masculinity. There are also elements to be celebrated.

So you are not saying much by identifying them. I can identify toxic elements to femininity, to any ethnic or social group, to a group of husband or wives, or kids, or teachers or police or politicians, or priests or and so and so on.

You are stuck on 'I can identify traits and therefore the term is correct to use' when that is not what makes a term appropriate or not.

The term is itself toxic. It applies a blanket slander like emphasis to masculinity in general and not with regard to the specific instances you site which would be appropriate.

You apply it as casually as others do a racial or ethnicity slur that holds some truths but is not generally applicable and then basically suggest they are snow flakes for just not accepting the poorly thought out and applied generalization.

 

[CubicleGangster]

What is "toxic"? Toxic is poison. In other words, something that kills things. I hear "toxic masculinity," and I think "things that men do more than women [masculinity/ male] that cause death and physical harm [toxic/ deadly] ."

I think that is a pretty reasonable interpretation of the term based on the meaning of the words. And it also happens to be statistically supportable in MANY ways. I don't hear from the term that all masculinity is toxic-- just that there is something that is leading many men to toxic (literally, deadly) behaviors. No need to get defensive about it; it's just fact.

The real problem is that men immediately go into a knee-jerk defensiveness and want to argue the semantics rather than saying, "Hmm, yeah, we do seem to be fucked up in a lot of obvious ways that women aren't."

Maybe if men did that instead of bothsideing the shit out of everything, masculinity would actually get a little less... toxic.

It would certainly be more manly.

Not a reasonable interpretation at all and it's strange you are arguing so much in this thread despite not knowing what Toxic Masculinity actually is. Also explains why you are using things like DUIs, drug addiction, and HS drop out rates to support the concept of Toxic Masculinity.

 

[MikeMcMann]

You have a point I have to say with the way you've decided to define the term, but really without men going around wrecking shit humanity (to include women) would have gone extinct long ago from being killed off by non-human predators. Passivity doesn't pay off in the natural world.

Do not be fooled by the 'I can identify elements... therefore the generalization is correct' argument as that argument is just one transposed from race baiters and now applied to men in general. It is the exact same argument used to generalize races or cultures as violent or toxic or other based on isolating examples and then applying that to the entire group via generalization and that is wrong.

Heroic Masculinity is equally applicable. Men rushing to the front lines to defend the home and family at the risk of their own life. Go watch the Chernobyl mini series and look at all the 'heroic masculinity' after the fact trying to contain the problem and save a bigger catastrophe. Watch Titanic the movie and see it in action.

To focus on certain aspects only (whether toxic or heroic) and to then try to stereotype by that is generally done based on an agenda and that agenda is not about fairness.

 

[Serenity Now]

you say this like it is some kind of revolutionary insight. power has always been a detrimental component of human societies. there's a lot of things that get you respect that otherwise shouldn't - being good looking, or wearing a suit. these are inherent flaws in society. my issue with your rant is you want to equate women as being some kind of unique problem that must be dealt with. if i am reading that wrong then i apologize, but you seem to have a problem with there being a focus on male related issues instead of women, and it comes off more as some deep seeded hatred against women than anything else.

nothing you wrote offended me. quite the opposite, i sense a lot of bitter resentment, and from a lot of guys. i feel like the more appropriate response these days is to just address their resentment rather than ridicule it like i normally would do,

because it is a shitty world, and a lot of young men don't know how to find their place in it. they let society dictate who they are and what they should be, and it's a sad thing for me to witness. i'm a person who does the opposite, and i make my choices and i live and deal with them. and while maybe my life isn't perfect, i feel pretty content and happy because i am in control of my life. i think it's a good lesson to share with other men in a context away from what a society saturated with sex and confusing messages does to young men.

No is not a revolutionary insight...it's obvious yet people beat around the bush and don't acknowledge the fact that society rewards "power hungry" guys, which only perpetuates Toxic Masculinity.

My point about women is that women are part of society thus women also reward these "power hungry" guys, just like other guys reward these power hungry guys as well....That's my point, that both sexes in one way or another support these power hungry guys....So if we want to put all this blame of Toxic Masculinity on guys only, that's bullshit IMO since women are also rewarding them.


Alright lets say people didn't give into Power hungry dudes anymore and weren't impressed by them anymore......Do I think Men will still murder/rape more than women? Absolutely, genetically speaking they are more predisposed to that, so males are more susceptible to doing that.....However society rewarding these individuals only increases that toxicity....This is why I said it's Humanities Toxicity that creates these horrible conditions....Hitler was being praised by his society, both men and women...they rewarded his toxicity.

 

[Jack Stevonovich]

What is GOT?

Game of Thrones

 

[franklinstower]

Hmm, I don't think you're using the term right though I don't blame you since who the fuck really knows what its supposed to mean at this point? But my understanding its that it refers not to the actions of men but rather a conception of masculinity that associates "toxic" behaviors and attitudes with masculinity. I say "toxic" because what exactly counts is not always clear. Is it referring to anti-social and criminal behaviors like your charts suggest? Or perhaps what @franklinstower was getting at, more mundane behaviors that are still, on some level, less than ideal? No one seems to know, in fact the definition seems to change depending on the conversation and the person using it.

Accepting this definition, to what extent is it related to the stats? I would say its rather naive to believe that ambient attitudes about masculinity that exist within the wider culture and in localized contexts are unrelated but at the same time the reality of male violence is pretty universal and cross-cultural so to boil it down to that is even more naive IMO. I think its clear that men are just biologically predisposed to some of those behaviors, toxic masculinity or not.

And to what extent are these toxic behaviors correlates of positive ones? For instance, risk taking is encouraged among men and that is going to lead to a non-zero number of both positive, smart risks and negative, stupid risks. Encouraging violence is the same; sometimes violence is appropriate and sometimes not. Encouraging men to protect people means that they have to develop the capacity to hurt people and they won't always exercise ideal judgement on these questions. To what extent is what people call "toxic masculinity" in fact a mixed bag with some good? Indeed in some cases might it not be a net positive? Obviously the conception of masculinity within gang culture is a net negative but is traditional masculinity necessarily so? I don't think its a question that is so easily answered.

Uh, that's not true at all. Mean Girls is one of the only pieces of media that actually makes an effort to critique what you might call "toxic femininity"

Just because its played for laughs doesn't mean its endorsing that behavior.

I like the mixed bag conception you point out here. There are good qualities that are masculine and that is why you see people defending those qualities and warning against demonizing them.

From my perspective it might be useful to define toxic masculinity not by how much masculinity is present in a person but by how little femininity is present in the same person to being about balance?

Yang energy is masculine active hard manipulative (think applied science) loud etc. A person who only has these qualities is missing half the picture, soft, quiet, allowing, accepting, emotional etc.


It must also be taken into account the general psychological health of the person in question. A ton of masculine energy combined with resentment and anger and judgment leads to a very toxic person that is psychologically and/or emotionally aggressive or abusive.

How much unresolved pain is being repressed in this masculine person? How many wounds from childhood are darkening this person's interactions? Being masculin have they repressed these feelings and failed to move through them and resolve them in healthy ways?

There is also an unreasonable cult of masculinity portrayed perfectly in westerns that creates an ideology of masculinity that men try to follow. Rather than being naturally what they are men often force themselves into idealized positions that do not reflect what is really present in them. This is fragmenting.[/QUOTE]

 

[TidWell]

Men are more likely to commit murder, suicide, rape, and genocide. MUCH more likely.

They are also more likely to drop out of school, drive drunk, become addicted to opioids, etc...

Please tell me again, on what planet are the problems related to faulty notions of masculinity not a thousand times more toxic than those related to notions of the feminine???

I'm sure Streep means well, but her comment doesn't stand up to much critical thought. Sorry fellas, facts don't care about your feelings.

Why are you on an MMA forum wouldnt that be consider toxic to your fragile mind, also do you interact with people in real life or just read off stats you find online?

 

[cooks1]

lol

You: "Don't criticize men about toxic masculinity because they might kill you and dozens of other innocent bystanders."


Me:

Well, men seem to be doing most of the killing around here. And we seem to be doing it a lot more over the past 25 years. Anything fundamental change about how the world operates over the last 25 years? It's just a suggestion.

 

[franklinstower]

Why are you on an MMA forum wouldnt that be consider toxic to your fragile mind, also do you interact with people in real life or just read off stats you find online?

I dont see how this addresses anything on this thread other than maybe as an example.

 

[luckyshot]

you say this like it is some kind of revolutionary insight. power has always been a detrimental component of human societies. there's a lot of things that get you respect that otherwise shouldn't - being good looking, or wearing a suit. these are inherent flaws in society. my issue with your rant is you want to equate women as being some kind of unique problem that must be dealt with. if i am reading that wrong then i apologize, but you seem to have a problem with there being a focus on male related issues instead of women, and it comes off more as some deep seeded hatred against women than anything else.

nothing you wrote offended me. quite the opposite, i sense a lot of bitter resentment, and from a lot of guys. i feel like the more appropriate response these days is to just address their resentment rather than ridicule it like i normally would do,

because it is a shitty world, and a lot of young men don't know how to find their place in it. they let society dictate who they are and what they should be, and it's a sad thing for me to witness. i'm a person who does the opposite, and i make my choices and i live and deal with them. and while maybe my life isn't perfect, i feel pretty content and happy because i am in control of my life. i think it's a good lesson to share with other men in a context away from what a society saturated with sex and confusing messages does to young men.

It’s also not like this is a new state of affairs. It’s been an aspect of Romantic revolt against bourgeois conventionality for like 200 years.

Not a reasonable interpretation at all and it's strange you are arguing so much in this thread despite not knowing what Toxic Masculinity actually is. Also explains why you are using things like DUIs, drug addiction, and HS drop out rates to support the concept of Toxic Masculinity.

Are those actions not harmful to one’s wellbeing? And society? And potentially fatal in some cases? That’s toxic.

I think it’s strange that I am the one looking at the words and tying them to clear, measurable phenomenon— men DO have higher suicide, homicide, assault, addiction, drop out, etc. rates— but other posters are telling me that I don’t know what the term means... or that it doesn’t really mean anything.

My definition works. But you are telling me I can’t use it— without providing a clear alternative.

That’s a double bind.

Why are you on an MMA forum wouldnt that be consider toxic to your fragile mind, also do you interact with people in real life or just read off stats you find online?

One does not actually HAVE to be a moron in order to like MMA, believe it or not.

Sure there are toxic elements one can point to of masculinity. There are also elements to be celebrated.

So you are not saying much by identifying them. I can identify toxic elements to femininity, to any ethnic or social group, to a group of husband or wives, or kids, or teachers or police or politicians, or priests or and so and so on.

You are stuck on 'I can identify traits and therefore the term is correct to use' when that is not what makes a term appropriate or not.

The term is itself toxic. It applies a blanket slander like emphasis to masculinity in general and not with regard to the specific instances you site which would be appropriate.

You apply it as casually as others do a racial or ethnicity slur that holds some truths but is not generally applicable and then basically suggest they are snow flakes for just not accepting the poorly thought out and applied generalization.

You want to equate “toxic masculinity,” I think, with women being petty, or gossipy, or whatever difficult-to-quantify stereotype you are thinking of. But those stereotypically female traits— while they might be negative— aren’t the same as actually causing death. So, there is quite a difference, it seems, between “toxic masculinity” versus some hypothetical female equivalent.

 

[Arkain2K]

That's all it takes with the new left.

A single comment breaking with the horde on a single trivial facet of a single issue, and suddenly your "woke" card gets revoked. Predictably despicable, and not at all a cherry pick from Twitter or an outlier.

The regressive left's definition for "progress": We don't care who you are, as long as you think and act exactly how we want you to think and act. If you step out of line, then you're "one of them".

Diversity is welcomed...except for Opinions.

 

[Madmick]

The regressive left's definition for "progress": We don't care who you are, as long as you think and act exactly how we want you to think and act. If you step out of line, then you're "one of them".

Come to life.

 

[luckyshot]

Come to life.

The regressive left's definition for "progress": We don't care who you are, as long as you think and act exactly how we want you to think and act. If you step out of line, then you're "one of them".

Diversity is welcomed...except for Opinions.

Holy cow, how long is this meme going to continue? All because there are some ideas from academic circles (white privilege, toxic masculinity, institutional racism, etc.) that have leaked out— and often been misinterpreted or misapplied— that you don’t agree with.

Never mind that each one of these ideas can be backed up with evidence. Also never mind that no one actually makes anyone believe any of these ideas in order to be an economic progressive or social liberal or whatever.

You don’t like these ideas. They make you feel defensive. There are some bad actors on the left.

That is all the ammo you need to justify your reactionary biases.

 

[Madmick]

Holy cow, how long is this meme going to continue? All because there are some ideas from academic circles (white privilege, toxic masculinity, institutional racism, etc.) that have leaked out— and often been misinterpreted or misapplied— that you don’t agree with.

Never mind that each one of these ideas can be backed up with evidence. Also never mind that no one actually makes anyone believe any of these ideas in order to be an economic progressive or social liberal.

You don’t like these ideas. They make you feel defensive. There are some bad actors on the left.

That is all the ammo you need to justify your reactionary biases.

Flings accusations of defensiveness in a defensive post.

Partisan. Dimwitted. Lacking self-awareness.

 

[luckyshot]

Flings accusations of defensiveness in a defensive post.

Partisan. Dimwitted. Lacking self-awareness.

See? Instead of addressing the substance of the post, you glom onto the one word you think you can successfully attack, throw back three insults, and there you go.

Evidence unaddressed. Biases unchallenged. Checkmate libtards!

 

[Islam Imamate]

I like the mixed bag conception you point out here. There are good qualities that are masculine and that is why you see people defending those qualities and warning against demonizing them.

From my perspective it might be useful to define toxic masculinity not by how much masculinity is present in a person but by how little femininity is present in the same person to being about balance?

Yang energy is masculine active hard manipulative (think applied science) loud etc. A person who only has these qualities is missing half the picture, soft, quiet, allowing, accepting, emotional etc.


It must also be taken into account the general psychological health of the person in question. A ton of masculine energy combined with resentment and anger and judgment leads to a very toxic person that is psychologically and/or emotionally aggressive or abusive.

How much unresolved pain is being repressed in this masculine person? How many wounds from childhood are darkening this person's interactions? Being masculin have they repressed these feelings and failed to move through them and resolve them in healthy ways?

There is also an unreasonable cult of masculinity portrayed perfectly in westerns that creates an ideology of masculinity that men try to follow. Rather than being naturally what they are men often force themselves into idealized positions that do not reflect what is really present in them. This is fragmenting.

I have thought about something related to this recently. If there are values that you might say are "feminine" that I think are in short supply its humility and modesty. I say this because confidence is often an integral part of many conceptions of masculinity while idealized, traditional women tend to be modest and humble. However, in reaction to the "overdose" of confidence in men, which is really just arrogance, society has decided that the solution is not that men embrace humility but rather that women embrace arrogance.

Modern capitalism seems to have this trend towards androgyny whereby men are encouraged to be feminine and women encouraged to be masculine until they are interchangeable cogs in the machine. Its pushed under this guise of social justice, and to be fair there are indeed legitimate social justice issues that at times overlap with it, but I think ultimately its happening because it serves the will of the machine.

 

[Madmick]

See? Instead of addressing the substance of the post, you glom onto the one word you think you can successfully attack, throw back three insults, and there you go.

Evidence unaddressed. Biases unchallenged. Checkmate libtards!

Why? I disagree with virtually every point in your post, and I've voiced that in more detail in many other threads, but you can't be swayed regardless of how rational the rebuttal. There's nothing to be gained by conversing with you.

You're a closed book. You exist to be flogged or ignored.

 

[luckyshot]

Why? I disagree with virtually every point in your post

True. Despite the evidence I've provided and you've left unaddressed.

and I've voiced that in more detail in many other threads

More detail? Nah. Just more words.

you can't be swayed

I can be swayed. By evidence. Posters like @Jack V Savage have swayed several of my views by presenting empirical facts that contradicted my previous viewpoints.

regardless of how rational the rebuttal.

Why don't you try it some time?

There's nothing to be gained by conversing with you.

Not as long as the extent of your "conversation" is hurling insults, I suppose.

You're a closed book.

Lol, anything but.

You exist to be flogged or ignored.

That's kinky, baby.

 

[TheGreatA]

Every person can be toxic, and certain types of "toxic behaviour" are universal to both men and women, but it would also be fair to say that there are toxic forms of behaviour that are more commonplace amongst either men or women, due to gender differences (testosterone production obviously being a huge factor).

I think that men must be capable of withstanding this type of a "collective" criticism of themselves. Social shaming, to a degree, is necessary. Instead of averting my eyes from it, I have acknowledged these criticisms, and have produced my own. My foundations are not so weak that I would feel "emasculated" or "shamed" by a mere suggestion that some of "male behaviour" is misguided and unproductive. For thousands of years we have studied "manhood" through philosophy and crafted legislation around its more toxic aspects, so why would we feel offended by the accusation now?

I suppose the biggest problem that I have with the concept of "toxic masculinity" is that there seems to be an unwillingness by other groups to recognize similarly toxic collective behaviour, for example, among females, or minority groups (either sexual or ethnic), along with the necessity to bear social shame for partaking in those unproductive patterns of behaviour. Therefore many of the criticisms towards masculinity are thrown from a "glass house", amongst ranks of people that are unwilling to acknowledge any of their own faults.

A toxic woman who has her 5th abortion by an unknown father, should be subjected equally to this sort of "social shaming", as the toxic man ought to be. A toxic immigrant who bypasses the rules that all men ought to be subjected to, by crossing a border illegally, whereas law-abiding immigrants are required to under-go a legal process, is a man that ought not to be handled with "kid gloves" either.

To reach an "equal state", we must also criticize and shame people equally, and not merely those who are presumed to be in "power".