5 ms·

When I see people use phrases like "toxic masculinity" I always inject the idea of "toxic Muslim faith". It maps so directly to the language people use around m

by belorn 8y ago

When I see people use phrases like "toxic masculinity" I always inject the idea of "toxic Muslim faith". It maps so directly to the language people use around masculinity, and yet most people who would use the phrase "toxic masculinity" want to see themselves as tolerant. There are a lot of negative aspects of Muslim faith, terrorism being one, that are reinforced by cultural pressures and stereotypes associated with Muslim faith. To simply focus on individual bad behaviors by people who happen to be Muslims is to ignore the societal and cultural weight of Muslim faith and the negative feedback loops a Muslim can feed upon when finding their identity. They persist in part because they signal conformity to an outdated template of Muslim faith. But there is a big problem if we use the phrase "toxic Muslim faith". It does not spur moral progress, common understanding, or empathy. It is impossible to use the phrase without Muslims getting triggered by it, even if they agree that terrorism is a real problem among Muslims. A Muslim that hears the word "toxic Muslim faith" will uncritically, and not unjustifiably so in my view, see it as an attack on all Muslims and Islam and not just the subset of negative Muslim behavior and culture among Islam practitioners.

krapp 8y ago
Fair enough, and I don't want to even attempt to open the can of worms about whether "toxic Islam" exists and whether it is an expression of toxic masculinity, given the patriarchal nature of Islamic cultures and the gender roles enforced by Abrahamic religions, so on and so forth. But the objections here still aren't to the premise, but the term. Meanwhile, women just want to live in a society that doesn't demean them, deny them agency over their bodies or which uses violence against them as social currency. It seems petty that the only response many men seem to have is that it's mean and hurts their feelings. Call it what you want, call it something else, it's still a real thing.
- belorn 8y ago
  What we heard primarily from people favoring restrictions against Muslims such as the travel ban, is the need for security against the bad behavior which is associated with the targeted demographic. It was not petty when Muslims only response to the travel ban was to get their feelings hurt. They can not accept the framing of the narrative that all Muslims are responsible for terrorism any more than men can accept that all men are responsible for sexism. It is impossible to have a civil discussion with such starting point and thus what we get is a singular response of objection to the narrative rather than a civil debate about the real down to earth problems that society has and how to fix them. Only by removing the framing around the demographic and focusing on the individual can any real progress be had. > whether "toxic Islam" exists and whether it is an expression of toxic masculinity Or maybe "toxic masculinity" is an expression of religion, given religion role in defining gender roles. Opium of the people and all that jazz.
  - krapp 8y ago
    >Or maybe "toxic masculinity" is an expression of religion, given religion role in defining gender roles. Opium of the people and all that jazz. I think it's more that toxic masculinity is an expression of culture as informed by religion. Many of the negative archetypes around women in the west (woman as deceiver, woman as seductress) derive from Genesis, and beliefs that women should naturally be subservient to men (literally, that woman is to man as man is to God) derive from the New Testament. Political conflicts and power struggles between the Church and Crown denied women rights as an attempt to control property rights and inheritance, codifying gender prejudice into law and social strata. Traditional gender roles and expectations in this case evolved from these status and class roles and the Christian ideals they were based on, which viewed women as property, viewed womens' bodies as inherently sinful and womens' sexuality as being taboo unless it served men. These attitudes persisted with the secularization of the west and manifested through media and pop culture by way of the male gaze[0] and rape culture[1] which normalize the portrayal of women as sex objects, and of sexual aggression and violence against women as a healthy expression of manhood and signal of virility and status, or else blames women for their own victimhood. ...all of which just describes toxic masculinity in different terms. [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Male_gaze https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Male_gaze [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_culture https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_culture
    - belorn 8y ago
      If we look at the Abrahamic religions we see a lot of support of violence, hate and general unpleasantness. If we wanted to support the idea that everything that is wrong with the world is caused by Muslims we only need to pick some quotes from the Quran that shows a belief that violence is acceptable against non-believers. It all describes toxic Muslim faith but in different terms. In the end through, talking about terrorism by framing it as part of Muslim faith is not an effective method to bring civil discussion and progress in eliminating terrorism. All it does it nourishing hate and polarization in society which in turn result in increased risk of terrorism. It forces people, Muslims in the case of toxic Muslim faith, to defend themselves regardless if they are terrorists or not and distance themselves with those who work against terrorism. If one want to actually eliminate terrorism it is better to avoid associating Muslim faith with terrorism and instead focus fully on the individuals that do the act of terrorism. We could be standing all day long talking about how a secularization of the middle east has normalized the idea that a healthy expression of Muslim faith is to slit the throat of unbelievers and blowing up bombs, or blame the west for their own victimhood. With the full knowledge that this will not help in reducing terrorism and only hurt those that identify as a Muslim and are not terrorist, why continue with such narrative? Why cause harm?

by belorn 8y ago

krapp 8y ago

Fair enough, and I don't want to even attempt to open the can of worms about whether "toxic Islam" exists and whether it is an expression of toxic masculinity, given the patriarchal nature of Islamic cultures and the gender roles enforced by Abrahamic religions, so on and so forth. But the objections here still aren't to the premise, but the term. Meanwhile, women just want to live in a society that doesn't demean them, deny them agency over their bodies or which uses violence against them as social currency. It seems petty that the only response many men seem to have is that it's mean and hurts their feelings. Call it what you want, call it something else, it's still a real thing.

belorn 8y ago
What we heard primarily from people favoring restrictions against Muslims such as the travel ban, is the need for security against the bad behavior which is associated with the targeted demographic. It was not petty when Muslims only response to the travel ban was to get their feelings hurt. They can not accept the framing of the narrative that all Muslims are responsible for terrorism any more than men can accept that all men are responsible for sexism. It is impossible to have a civil discussion with such starting point and thus what we get is a singular response of objection to the narrative rather than a civil debate about the real down to earth problems that society has and how to fix them. Only by removing the framing around the demographic and focusing on the individual can any real progress be had. > whether "toxic Islam" exists and whether it is an expression of toxic masculinity Or maybe "toxic masculinity" is an expression of religion, given religion role in defining gender roles. Opium of the people and all that jazz.
- krapp 8y ago
  >Or maybe "toxic masculinity" is an expression of religion, given religion role in defining gender roles. Opium of the people and all that jazz. I think it's more that toxic masculinity is an expression of culture as informed by religion. Many of the negative archetypes around women in the west (woman as deceiver, woman as seductress) derive from Genesis, and beliefs that women should naturally be subservient to men (literally, that woman is to man as man is to God) derive from the New Testament. Political conflicts and power struggles between the Church and Crown denied women rights as an attempt to control property rights and inheritance, codifying gender prejudice into law and social strata. Traditional gender roles and expectations in this case evolved from these status and class roles and the Christian ideals they were based on, which viewed women as property, viewed womens' bodies as inherently sinful and womens' sexuality as being taboo unless it served men. These attitudes persisted with the secularization of the west and manifested through media and pop culture by way of the male gaze[0] and rape culture[1] which normalize the portrayal of women as sex objects, and of sexual aggression and violence against women as a healthy expression of manhood and signal of virility and status, or else blames women for their own victimhood. ...all of which just describes toxic masculinity in different terms. [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Male_gaze https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Male_gaze [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_culture https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_culture
  - belorn 8y ago
    If we look at the Abrahamic religions we see a lot of support of violence, hate and general unpleasantness. If we wanted to support the idea that everything that is wrong with the world is caused by Muslims we only need to pick some quotes from the Quran that shows a belief that violence is acceptable against non-believers. It all describes toxic Muslim faith but in different terms. In the end through, talking about terrorism by framing it as part of Muslim faith is not an effective method to bring civil discussion and progress in eliminating terrorism. All it does it nourishing hate and polarization in society which in turn result in increased risk of terrorism. It forces people, Muslims in the case of toxic Muslim faith, to defend themselves regardless if they are terrorists or not and distance themselves with those who work against terrorism. If one want to actually eliminate terrorism it is better to avoid associating Muslim faith with terrorism and instead focus fully on the individuals that do the act of terrorism. We could be standing all day long talking about how a secularization of the middle east has normalized the idea that a healthy expression of Muslim faith is to slit the throat of unbelievers and blowing up bombs, or blame the west for their own victimhood. With the full knowledge that this will not help in reducing terrorism and only hurt those that identify as a Muslim and are not terrorist, why continue with such narrative? Why cause harm?