4 ms·

This is a pretty good explanation of a large aspect of what falls under the concept dubbed "toxic masculinity."

by malcolmgreaves 7y ago

monksy 7y ago
Which that term is used to describe someone. I'm talking about the expectations that others re-enforce on to people.
- delecti 7y ago
  Those cultural expectations and societies reinforcement of them also fall under that term.
belorn 7y ago
With that definition we are saying that women have toxic masculinity if/when they culturally expect men to not worry or be anxious. Which is not how I have seen anyone use the term. People who want to talk about harmful gender stereotyping and gender expectations tend to use the term "gender stereotyping" and "gender expectations". "toxic masculinity" in contrast get used when a person want to express a negative connotation targeting at men exclusively, usually with a hostile generalization of men as a demographic.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
username90 7y ago
Demanding men to not get offended over the term "toxic masculinity" is toxic masculinity.
marvin 7y ago
I think this illustrates quite clearly why "toxic masculinity", even when applied in a well-intentioned manner, is such a problematic term. Because the main part of the problem you're trying to describe (at least in your case) is in fact located _outside_ of the persons that appear to be described by the term. I.e. is it the state of acting assertive, confident and not showing weakness, uncertainty or sorrow that is toxic masculinity? Because many do it mostly because they otherwise (legitimately) fear to be rejected or judged by others for it, often by heterosexual women. But the term sounds like it's a judgement on the man holding these traits, perhaps destructively. Not the world around them that expects or demands this behavior. (Not to mention that it's very easy to conflate some of these traits with personality traits that most would consider to be good or at the very least empirically useful, regardless of gender. E.g. confidence, non-agreeableness, the ability to think on your feet and look after your own interests in a negotiation, physical strength and so on). Wouldn't "destructive gendered behavior expectations" or something like that be both more accurate, useful and palatable?

This is a pretty good explanation of a large aspect of what falls under the concept dubbed "toxic masculinity."

monksy 7y ago

Which that term is used to describe someone. I'm talking about the expectations that others re-enforce on to people.

delecti 7y ago
Those cultural expectations and societies reinforcement of them also fall under that term.

belorn 7y ago

With that definition we are saying that women have toxic masculinity if/when they culturally expect men to not worry or be anxious. Which is not how I have seen anyone use the term. People who want to talk about harmful gender stereotyping and gender expectations tend to use the term "gender stereotyping" and "gender expectations". "toxic masculinity" in contrast get used when a person want to express a negative connotation targeting at men exclusively, usually with a hostile generalization of men as a demographic.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

username90 7y ago

Demanding men to not get offended over the term "toxic masculinity" is toxic masculinity.

marvin 7y ago

I think this illustrates quite clearly why "toxic masculinity", even when applied in a well-intentioned manner, is such a problematic term. Because the main part of the problem you're trying to describe (at least in your case) is in fact located _outside_ of the persons that appear to be described by the term. I.e. is it the state of acting assertive, confident and not showing weakness, uncertainty or sorrow that is toxic masculinity? Because many do it mostly because they otherwise (legitimately) fear to be rejected or judged by others for it, often by heterosexual women. But the term sounds like it's a judgement on the man holding these traits, perhaps destructively. Not the world around them that expects or demands this behavior. (Not to mention that it's very easy to conflate some of these traits with personality traits that most would consider to be good or at the very least empirically useful, regardless of gender. E.g. confidence, non-agreeableness, the ability to think on your feet and look after your own interests in a negotiation, physical strength and so on). Wouldn't "destructive gendered behavior expectations" or something like that be both more accurate, useful and palatable?