> Maybe it would be better to call specific behaviours "toxic stoicism", "toxic domineering", "toxic aggression", or things like that. That might have a better

> Maybe it would be better to call specific behaviours "toxic stoicism", "toxic domineering", "toxic aggression", or things like that. That might have a better reception, but unfortunately it changes the messaging. > So the terminology itself paradoxically leans on stereotypes of which toxic behaviours are associated with masculinity, even while encouraging men to move away from those behaviours and stop perceiving them as an essential part of being a man. It's not paradoxical, because the term is specifically talking about the negative associations with the stereotypes for masculinity. That's why it's so important to keep the messaging. Masculinity as such isn't a biological reality (in so far that "masculine traits" differ between cultures/historical periods and aren't necessarily present), it's a social construct. "Toxic masculinity" refers to the toxic parts of this construct in regards to the culture in which it is used. If the stereotype changes, the meaning of toxic masculinity changes.