The term, “Toxic Masculinity,” has been quite the buzzword in the last few years and I must say its usage is disappointing. Not the term itself, I find it could be very useful to describe the behaviors that men would do much better without. Instead I find it’s often used as a cudgel against all men and masculine behaviors.
But I find it unproductive to give attention to temper tantrums and I am also sorry for those people who have been so mistreated by a man or multiple men in their lives that they are angry in that way.
So instead I will try to make a productive argument and deal with the definition that basically means, those masculine behaviors that have gone awry.
So what is it when masculinity is being, “toxic?”
Certainly one image that comes to mind is that of a tyrant. Or, someone trying to exert too much control over their environment. Another common example that gets brought up is when it’s said that men can’t cry or show emotion. And finally, the term is also brought up when referring to a man who tricks a woman to satisfy his own selfish desires.
When we think of tyrants of history they are often shown as being too controlling. We can also think of a controlling husband or father as a tyrant.
But do we think of all people in leadership roles as tyrants? Or think of all husbands and fathers as tyrants and controllers? Of course not.
So instead the solution to a tyrant is a more positive role model. For example, when the Allies fought against the tyranny of the Axis powers in World War Two, was it not a positive model of masculinity they were tapping into? So the same masculine fighting spirit that tyrannizes and conquers is that which liberates. Indeed, most people intuitively know that a good leader is the response to a bad one; not removing leaders altogether.
As to the point about men not crying or showing emotion, I believe this is among the lesser, more ignorant arguments that I have heard.
I suppose it’s possible that there are some men that take this too far and actually do insist that men can never cry or show emotion but I have yet to meet any of these men. Instead I find this point to be somewhat of a straw man argument or at least a misunderstanding of male behavior.
Men often encourage other men to control their emotions as a way to encourage strength and stoic behaviors. These are very useful things, particularly when doing the things that men used to be required to do.
Again I use the example of World War Two. If, at the beaches of Normandy, the men broke down and cried when the person next to them was shot instead of continuing to charge up the beach, would the Allies have won the battle?
This isn’t to say that I’m unsympathetic to the stresses of war, but there’s no arguing that it would be better if that soldier can instead control himself and deal with his emotions at a later time; preferably when he and his comrades are not being shot at.
I bring up these things because I’m not convinced that the second point was ever quite as bad as we’re being told.
Winston Churchill freely admitted that he was a crybaby, and we regard him as a hero of the war effort and in that sense we could also look at him as a good example of positive masculinity.
It is also recorded that Jesus Christ wept on multiple occasions and he is worshiped as God by over a billion people around the world. I don’t think there is a better role model than God.
As for the third point, that about men deceiving women to satisfy their own base, selfish desires, this is a part where I must discuss philosophy and morality more explicitly than I have for the others.
The aspects of masculinity are traditionally things like honor, duty, protection, and the like. They are often summed up as chivalry.
Of course this is not to say that a woman cannot be honorable, dutiful, or protective. These things are not so simple as black and white. Men are not purely masculine and women are not purely feminine. On the contrary, mothers are some of the most honorable, dutiful, and protective people on earth. So when I talk about these things being what we think of as masculine domains do not think that it is at the expense of women and femininity; I find the battle of the sexes to be a zero sum game.
So these things are considered by almost everyone to be good. And so we should encourage men to be those things and I believe it is generally our modern age that does not teach them those things.
If a man’s country is invaded, is it not his duty to pick up a rifle and head to the front? And is it not a father’s duty to raise sons who will eagerly do so?
I find those statements to be rather obvious but some of you may be surprised by them. After all, it’s not every day you hear someone saying it is a man’s duty to defend his country. But it is true that all men ages 18-26 are required to be on the draft lists and I don’t think many of you have thought about abolishing the draft or would really want to do so if asked.
So it would seem that a majority of our society still believes a man should defend what’s behind him even if some of them would be much happier to let someone else die while they watch TV and masturbate until the enemy kicks their door, and then their head in.
I say such outrageous things as what I just wrote above because with the modern age, we were promised freedom (from responsibility) and comfort but instead we got pornography and nihilism. And although they’re propped up as freedom and comfort, they actually lead to being enslaved by our vices.
Our lives are more comfortable than they’ve ever been, but is comfort always a good thing?
There are people who openly admit they reject any sense of duty; you may know a few yourself. It seems to be a very naive stance. If you’re reading this you probably live in a strong, safe country so you probably can stay at home and be a selfish wretch but if everyone thinks like that, you won’t be in a strong, safe country anymore. Apathy leads to death.
And such ease and safety and apathy have created men who have time to deceive women in such a way. In a society with a sense of duty and responsibility and with work to be done, surely such things must be less common.
And that is the final point of my solution to, “toxic masculinity.” Reject modernity, men. Embrace the roles that men inhabited for thousands of years.
I have focused on war and soldiers in this post but you don’t have to join the military to reject modernity.
Instead you should focus on those chivalrous male things like honor, duty, and service. Become a father (when you’re ready don’t just jump into it unprepared that would be a disaster), honor your father and mother, love your neighbor, do your duty to be a productive member of society.
And this responsibility is not only on men. I believe it is also the responsibility of women to encourage men to behave better. We are often told today that women are not responsible for men’s behavior, and I suppose this is true in a direct manner, but in an indirect way, women are responsible for it too.
Women should also reject modernity which says that any sort of promiscuous or selfish behavior is okay and sometimes even good. If this were really the case I suspect we wouldn’t hear so much about how ‘this man lied to me for sex’ or ‘that man led me on’ and how aggravating that is to the woman who was deceived.
Women, your behavior has a strong impact on us just as ours does on you. If you do not want to be tricked by devious men, then be on your guard against it. If you do not like his selfish and deceptive behavior, then do not encourage it by going along with it. Leave him behind and instead find someone who is willing to behave properly.
The solution to bad masculinity lies in old forms of good masculinity. We must reject the perpetual adolescence that we’ve been deceived into thinking is okay. Is it so strange that maybe our grandparents and our grandparent’s grandparents were actually right about how we should act? Embrace responsibility. True freedom is not found in lack of consequences for your actions. Freedom is found in disciplined choices.
As I said before, the battle of the sexes is a zero sum game. Men and women both must encourage good masculine behaviors and discourage bad ones.
So the solution to this problem is not to remove masculinity but to encourage a better form of it. It is not the man who would take you on in a fair fight that you have to worry about. It’s the rat-person who seems so harmless but will stab you in the back or jump you with ten of his wretched friends that you have to watch out for. Both are forms of aggression (another thing we usually ascribe to men), but one is much preferable than the other.
One we consider honorable under the right circumstances, one I just called a rat-person.
Thank you for reading.