9 PM Curfew For Toxic Masculinity
Posted by BroadBlogs
Years ago when Israel faced a rape epidemic someone suggested putting women under curfew until the country was safe again.
Prime Minister Golda Meir thought better: Men are committing the rapes. Let them be put under curfew.
I thought of that when Danielle Muscato wondered on Twitter,
What would you do if all men had a 9 pm curfew?
The thought experiment was not a serious proposal, but plenty of men didn’t get that. And one of my male readers fretted about dismissing male victims and placing all men in the same box. “I’d feel a whole lot safer if all men (except me) were under curfew,” he mused.
So I’ll rephrase: If toxic masculinity were put under 9 PM curfew, what would you do?
I was struck by how safe I suddenly felt with all that poison safely contained. I could go anywhere, anytime and feel safe.
(Unfortunately, the most dangerous place for most women is actually in their homes because too many women are in relationships with men who are filled with that toxicity.)
Toxic masculinity isn’t all men
Many confuse “toxic masculinity” with “men.” They aren’t the same thing. Toxicity arises when men behave in ways that hurt others because of the way we socially construct masculinity. How masculinity is understood actually varies from place to place. And how men fit these roles also varies, with some good and some hurtful.
Here in the United States masculinity is commonly associated with four characteristics, with varying degrees of harm:
- Men must always there to support others. That’s a positive human trait and not part of toxic masculinity, unless a man feels like he can’t seek any support himself.
- Men must achieve status through power, money, and sex. Not necessarily bad. But because this is such a heavy part of the male role in America, men who fall short may put others down (often including emotional and physical abuse), diminishing those they hurt in hopes of raising themselves up by comparison. Toxic.
- Men can’t be sissies leaves men out of touch with their softer side. They can’t be compassionate or express feelings other than anger. “No sissy stuff” is not a healthy attitude toward the feminine side of human nature (held by women and men, alike).
- Men must be tough, proving masculinity by scaring people, gang rapes, dangerous deeds to “prove” fearlessness and superiority. It creates hell on Earth. The definition of toxic.
It sure would be great to put toxic masculinity on 9 pm curfew. Better yet, ban it completely.
- Does Provocative Dress Ever Cause Rape?
- Ritual Degradation & Male “Superiority”
- Mind of a Rapist: Trying to Bridge a Gap between a Small Self and a Big Man
About BroadBlogsI have a Ph.D. from UCLA in sociology (emphasis: gender, social psych). I currently teach sociology and women's studies at Foothill College in Los Altos Hills, CA. I have also lectured at San Jose State. And I have blogged for Feminispire, Ms. Magazine, The Good Men Project and Daily Kos. Also been picked up by The Alternet.
Posted on October 22, 2018, in men, rape and sexual assault, violence against women and tagged 9 PM Curfew For Men, social construction of masculinity, Toxic Masculinity, violence against women. Bookmark the permalink. 166 Comments.
Society plays a major role in what attributes to toxic masculinity. Obviously, I believe that has society improved in reducing the impact of toxic masculinity in the world today, although it is still prevalent. Looking at the four characteristics of masculinity in the United States, I think all four traits are still prevalent in society and cause toxic masculinity. The first trait is an exception because it typically does not induce toxic masculinity. Although for the second one, society encourages men to gain status and as a result of how patriarchal things are, it creates a power dynamic and encourages toxic masculinity. The last two traits are pretty similar, which is very prevalent in American society, as it encourages men to not be empathetic and further encourages toxic masculinity. Recently, toxic masculinity has been pushed back, although it still has a lot more room for improvement, if women want to feel more in our society.
Assumptions and generalization are one of the main causes of false accusations. Saying all men are toxic and mixing together the idea of a whole gender to a term such as toxic masculinity causes several disruptions. Upon the curfew topic, it could be an interesting experiment for sure but as mentioned most abuse is within the homes. Maybe it is time to consider that toxic behaviours start within the “home” of the individual. It is learned and conditioned by false expectations and lack of support. Asking a child to act like a man when they express feelings can start a shelter within the person. This can lead the individual to build a barrier from self-growth and emotional intelligence. Saying 9 pm curfew can stop women from horrific events is toxic. The reason is that the curfew is a limitation on the person and their freedom. Pushing them to hide it does not stop the abuse. It is also shifting the root reason of the abuse. Saying women should stay in is insinuating that the woman is responsible for the rape which is absolutely incorrect. The topic of men staying because they might rape and women should stay because they might get raped is two different discussions. In no way am I suggesting that the two are comparable on the same scale.
Yeah, men and “toxic masculinity“ are two different things. So you would only want the curfew for toxic masculinity, not men.
The home is a huge influence on how we end up. Some homes encourage toxic masculinity and some don’t. Cultures are also huge factors in the spread of toxic masculinity with some cultures that’s more likely to spread it than others.
Human beans are all a mix of a personality we are born with, social experiences, and cultures. So you find cultural patterns and individual differences.
It’s ridiculous to believe women should have a curfew due to rapist actions. The same way it’s ridiculous and nearly impossible for men to have a curfew. This is a very interesting post which we can all relate to in some way. We definitely need to come up with a solution to toxic masculinity. One way we can improve it is by teaching the youth respect, equality, and guidance to develop positive traits. Another way, we can reduce toxic masculinity is by educating the youth about mental health and therapy. We have to put an end to toxic masculinity before or even after it begins affecting our well being. Prime Minister Golda Meir made quite an astonishing statement by saying “men are the ones committing the rapes and they should be put to curfew”. Obviously, this is impossible. But it would be quite an interesting experiment. Women and men dealing with toxic masculinity at home look at these traits as normal but they’re not. As a couple in a relationship, you should feel comfortable enough to speak up about these toxic traits and what can be done to help improve the relationship and turn those toxic masculinity traits into positive traits. Some people who speak up tend to deal with toxic responses such as beatings or verbal abuse for speaking up about their opinion. In this case, I would suggest removing yourself from the situation as soon as possible.
Good thoughts. And of course it’s all a thought experiment. Including Golda Meir.
Reading this article gave me flashbacks of many of my experiences on my college campus. As a freshman, I made a point to purchase a bottle of pepper spray along with a friend of mine just in case I was ever in a situation where I may need it. Even though I never had to use it, something about that bottle gave me a sense of freedom and power. Whenever I had to walk back to my dorm alone at night I took it with me and it somehow made the walk incredibly less stressful, and to be honest less scary. I don’t know if men realize how truly terrifying they can be. While I was never one to put myself in unreasonably uncomfortable situations it is almost impossible to avoid things like going out at night (particularly when you are in college). If it were somehow possible to create a curfew for toxic masculinity I think that a lot of people, women in particular, would gain a sense of confidence, freedom, and power that currently only comes in the form of a weapon or small pepper-spray bottle.
How sad that in today’s world, a large desire is for people to feel safe, to not worry about being assaulted, raped or even murdered. Have we lost all decency? Have we stopped treating others the way we want to be treated? My guess is that many of these toxic masculine men would have strong negative reactions if someone treated their loved ones the way they treat people. Something to think about: what if the police — who are ultimately in charge of enforcing this curfew — are toxic masculine men themselves? Then what? This idea of a curfew is such an interesting theory. I do think it could potentially help curve some of these crimes but it does not address the crimes that happen before the curfew goes into effect. This would be a helpful program if it also came with a stipulation that these toxic masculine men attended therapy or sought some sort of treatment and rehabilitation.
This is a very interesting article, especially because masculino toxic existe everywhere and is good to have some information to keep our eyes open. I really like that the description of the different masculino toxic, because i think that is important to know, that not all men are toxic, however, learn to detect the symptoms of such as toxicities could save many women. i think that 9 PM Curfew for toxic mascining should be implemented in any country that noticed aggressiveness, bad behavior in men.I remembered when i was a child in my native country the government had used the 9PM Curfew a few time when things were getting out control, and especial because there was a civil war. For example some men were not using there timewise,instead they were drinking at night in groups in the streets and stay there until late attacking people that were coming from work. So this method was used to control this issue and actually did work well, the country was very safe for a while, unfortunately,this method is not use anymore which is bad because i feel that with that the country would be in a much better position by now.
I found this blog post extremely interesting and made me think a lot about this question “what would you do if all men had a 9pm curfew?”. I remember seeing a tweet that asked “what would you do if there were no men on earth for a day?”, some of the women’s responses were saying that they would wear whatever they wanted and they would not be afraid to walk alone at night. While a part of me thinks that having a 9pm curfew for men would be nice to some extent because I would definitely feel more comfortable walking alone at night and doing other things, I know it would be wrong. First of all, not all men are dangerous or assault women and I would not be able to go out with my guy friends who are all nice people that have no intentions of hurting anyone. I think the issue we need to deal with is toxic masculinity and how to help those who are hurting women rather than saying all men have a curfew because first of all, that would be extremely hard to put in place and that is unfair to men who are not harmful to women and others. Trying to get rid of the issues with toxic masculinity would not only help women but men because they do not have to follow these stereotypes of not showing emotion, having to be strong and muscular and have to be powerful and following all these roles that have been put into place in our society.
Thought experiments can be pretty revealing.
Good comparison. I agree.
This is an interesting thought experiment, applying a 9 pm curfew to toxic masculinity. I’m curious why the time “9 pm” was used in this experiment? Why not 11pm or midnight? Or even earlier? Perhaps 5pm? I would love to see if there was some thought into a 9pm curfew, or that was an arbitrary time which isn’t as important than the idea of putting a curfew on toxic masculinity. If I may add my two cents here, I would be interested to see how society reacts to a curfew like this. Do you think businesses would be open longer? Since people (men and women alike) feel safer walking the streets or being out and about well knowing that the people around them are like-minded individuals who Respect and love each other. Taking this a bit further, what if the curfew was a success and we started creating legislation to ban toxic masculinity altogether? Would/could there be a direct correlation between toxic masculinity and the propensity of committing a crime? Something to think about, but this was a good thought experiment to ponder on. Thank you!
Don’t know why they originally chosen 9 PM curfew. After dark is scarier and anytime of year it tends to be dark at 9 PM?
Would be interesting to see if business is stayed open longer, etc.
Question: Would you be fantasizing about male curfews in Japan where the rape rate is 1 per 100,000, rather than the 27.3 per 100,000 of the United States?
I don’t want a curfew on men. I want a curfew on toxic masculinity. If that were put into place then no Japanese men would be under curfew but their toxic expressions would be.
There’s already a curfew on illegal behaviour. Yes you were fantasizing about a male curfew, even if you weren’t entirely serious I would like you to answer the question.
At this point I can’t remember what the original question was.
Toxic masculinity is a huge problem in our society but I do not feel like this problem would be solved by putting a curfew on all men. It would not be fair to all of the males because they do no possess the same traits as one another. Instead of limiting their time in the outside world, I feel as though we should teach them to change their mindset. Setting a curfew would only make males more agitated and angry at everyone. Their activities would be limited and there is no way to tell if this would limit the number of sexual assaults that happen to women. They would not be an effective way to deal with the violence that is occurring against women. Not all men have the ill wish to harm women. Men should be taught to protect women from harm and respect their wishes and body, not be subjugated to a curfew.
I agree. We need a never-ending curfew on toxic masculinity, not on men.
I have a very strong opinion on this topic and I think people should pay more attention to this. In the blog, it explained that when Israel faced a rape someone suggested putting women under curfew but why women? Why not men? Women are more likely to be assaulted by men so why not put a curfew for men so that they should not get out at night and make women feel unsafe. In this case, someone suggested to put a curfew for women but why? If women are more likely to be the victims in this case. So what someone suggested was almost like saying that it would be safer to put the victim in a box so that no one can touch it. Why not put the offender in a box so that it cannot get out and victimized women. If women get to be treated as weak and as if they should stay at home to be safer, they will never feel safe when they go out alone.
I really enjoyed reading your take on how we should address toxic masculinity by using a 9 pm curfew. Although I recognize the significance of setting a curfew for toxic men since this has the potential of allowing women to feel safer, when it comes to dealing with rape offenders, I don’t believe that this is an adequate way to deal with toxic masculinity. Since, according to your article, toxic masculinity can lead to “gang rape”, in this response post, I will be discussing what the current and future consequences should be for rape offenders. In Hunter College Women’s and Gender Studies Collective’s Women’s Realities, Women’s Choices, the textbook lists what the mental and physical consequences are for those who get raped. The textbook suggests that rape can expose victims to sexually transmitted diseases or cause them to develop a post-traumatic stress disorder. Unfortunately, unlike rape victims, it is less likely for rape offenders to have to suffer negative consequences. According to statistics from the Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network, out of every 1000 rapes, 995 perpetrators walk free. In Jaydip Sarkar’s Mental Health Assessment of Rape Offenders, Sarkar’s extensive research suggests “that several mental health issues underlie sexual violence and offending, particularly rape”. Therefore, although most rape offenders are able to walk free, we can assume that their minds cause their suffering. The National Alliance on Mental Illness addresses what the consequences of rape should be in an article titled Jailing People with Mental Illness. The article suggests that by jailing people with mental illness, this causes many rape offenders to become more “at risk of victimization” and develop even worse “mental health conditions”. Therefore, when discussing toxic masculinity, it is important to recognize how this toxicity can relate to mental illness. When dealing with the repercussions of sexual violence, we must treat offenders by establishing adequate mental health care.
Yeah, we really need a complete stop to toxic masculinity.
This is an interesting post because a part of me thinks this is a great idea because I’m imagining all the things I could do by myself at night that I normally wouldn’t do because I’m scared to walk down the street at night because if a guy were to see me and try to take advantage. In a way this is how society has grown women to think because we live in such a male dominated society that as women we feel like we never have control of our surroundings when we are in public. However, I try to put myself in men shoes as well and it can be quite frustrating for men who aren’t toxic and are labeled as toxic because of how society expects them to act. Like you stated men aren’t allowed by society to show emotions or express compassion because then they are viewed as weak and are judged as less masculine. I think that what should change in society should be how we view women and men and completely ban expectations and let everyone act freely for who they are and let everyone decide what is appropriate for themselves not for society.
Dominatrix: the woman is both worshipped and objectified at the same time. I do want to give more thought to that one. Let me know if you have any, yourself.”
Well I did share my thoughts, it was quite a bit. But I want to know what you thought of the post I wrote that has the video on it? I explained the difference with dominatrix and how I’m surprised men don’t have a female to male rape fantasy. And dominatrix isn’t the same as it’s gendered like I said which I found interesting and less about forceful ravaging, which a female raping male fantasy would be. How basically female dominance is even differentiated often between men. If you can skim through it and tell me what you think or I’ll shorten it if you need me to.
Yeah, I got your message. I just want to spend a little time thinking about it. It’s an interesting point.
I’m curious about what your thoughts are after you’ve thought about it for a bit
You will soon find out. I’m planning to post what you wrote ASAP with my thoughts too.
In the current cultural environment, wouldn’t a curfew on men lead to men just identifying as women? And I thought it was de rigueur to say there are no biological differences between men and women anyway, so what is the point?
I’m not suggesting putting a curfew on men. I’m suggesting putting a curfew on toxic masculinity. Fortunately all the men I know personally, who are friends of mine, don’t embody toxic masculinity. They are more evolved than that. Toxic masculinity is not biological.
Question: Do these 2 news articles describe toxic femininity? If not, why not? If so, why is nobody ever talking about toxic femininity?
Actually these are not. They are examples of horrible things that one person does to another but they are not based on how women are raised to be women. Women are raised to be women in the following ways (They are all part of the female role) examples: The man should be more of the leader, women should be relatively submissive, Women should be relatively passive, women should be relatively dependent … what part of female socialization do you see as being relevant to these two crimes u linked to?
Sometimes bad things just happen.
But when you look at male violence it tends to be a pattern that is tied to power. The male role says that men should be powerful but they often don’t feel powerful so they try to bridge the gap by having power over others, whether by abusing them physically or emotionally. Creating a sense of superiority by berating someone or putting them down. Since you see a pattern of behavior where men are both taught that they are supposed to be powerful, often don’t feel powerful, and then try to lord it over others, it’s a pattern of the male role. And because it is toxic behavior is toxic masculinity. But it is not behavior that all men do. So men don’t have to express toxic masculinity.
So… boys are by and large raised by women yet… they are “raised” into violence? And you want to pin this on men?
How come then that women are more violent and more controlling than men?
“Women are more likely than men to be aggressive and controlling towards their partner, according to a study. The research found that women showed controlling behaviour along with serious levels of threats, intimidation and physical violence when in a relationship more often than men.”
So you ask me the question, what part of socialization is relevant to these two crimes? The answer should be obvious, boys are raised not to hit girls!!! Girls are raised in the belief they can do anything they like and not suffer repercussions!
Click to access Bates_HiddenVictims.pdf
“Society doesn’t tolerate violence against women. Originating at early age where boys
don’t hit girls. Women have no such inhibitions as there are few social sanctions to
Furthermore, men are taught that they won’t be believed. “Many men commented that
perceptions of their experiences are either not taken seriously or not believed; for some it was a reflection of the fact society constructs them as abusers, rather than victims, because they are men:”
Click to access Impact%20and%20perceptions%20paper%20final.pdf
Now if all these false narratives were being perpetrated against… oh say people of color, or muslims, there would be an outcry. But because it’s men, it’s considered fair game.
I’ve very concerned that this blog is oppressing a minority… men. The real victims in intimate partner violence are men, both numerically, and also by the fact society offers them no belief, no support, only condemnation. And with your fake “patriarchy” mythology, you are helping perpetuate it. Furthermore a major cause of it is that women are taught they can do no wrong. #BelieveAllWomen. This is toxic femininity. When are you going to call it out? The two articles above ^^^ show you what the results are. When are you going to take violence against men seriously, and the toxic femininity that causes it?
The problem with this study is that it is an outlier and that the methodology was as follows: “The questionnaire was distributed online utilising social media and through organisations that are known to work with male victims of IPV.”
Of course you’re going to get the result with that methodology.
PS, I took out the first link because something with faulty with it but people can Google, as I did, to get the original piece.
No you’re wrong, it wasn’t conducted through social media, Dr Bates gave a total of 1104 students (706 women and 398 men) questionnaires. And don’t just say it’s an outlier without citing your own data. Nobody is studying this question because it’s taboo.
“Analysis showed that women were more likely to be physically aggressive to their partners than men and that men were more likely to be physically aggressive to their same-sex others.
Furthermore, women engaged in significantly higher levels of controlling behaviour than men, which significantly predicted physical aggression in both sexes.
Dr Elizabeth Bates explained: “This was an interesting finding. Previous studies have sought to explain male violence towards women as rising from patriarchal values, which motivate men to seek to control women’s behaviour, using violence if necessary.
“This study found that women demonstrated a desire to control their partners and were more likely to use physical aggression than men. This suggests that IPV may not be motivated by patriarchal values and needs to be studied within the context of other forms of aggression, which has potential implications for interventions.”
It is an outlier. And people were recruited this way: through organisations that are known to work with male victims of IPV.
You’re looking at a completely different study, albeit one by the same researcher. So you’re wrong, they were not “recruited through organisations that are known to work with male victims of IPV.”. They were from a population of students, which is relatively representative.
Secondly, I’ve cited data, you haven’t. Assertions given without evidence can be dismissed without evidence, and you’ve cited nothing.
All I can say is that it’s best to get research from a variety of places and this is an outlier. The rest of the research is more consistent.
If that were true, you could cite at least 2 studies to beat this one. But no. Since this is like almost at the core of the fake feminist narrative, you’d think the proof of toxic masculinity would be at your fingertips. I put it to you that it’s just a narrative, and has no basis in serious research.
The article you cited mentioned that there were other studies. But you can also look at victimization surveys where the DOJ contacts people and asks what sorts of crimes they have been subjected to. Women are much more likely to talk about violence against them.
“the DOJ contacts people and asks what sorts of crimes they have been subjected to. Women are much more likely to talk about violence against them.”
DOJ stats for being a violent victim in 2016 is 19.6 per thousand for males and 19.7 per thousand for females. Serious violent victimhood is 6.6 per thousand for males and 6.6 per thousand for females.
Perhaps you had some other stat in mind, but I have to reiterate, considering that this is the core of the feminist muh victimhood narrative, you’d think you’d be able to cite one thing in favor of this religion, but nope.
I’m not sure what your point is but the victimizers are almost always Humans who have been socialized to be masculine in our society. And unfortunately much of the way we socialize men to be masculine involves things like cutting off their emotions, feeling they can’t get help because they have to be completely self-sufficient, turning so-called weak emotions into so-called strong emotions like anger, etc. That causes a lot of pain both for boys and men and for anyone victimized as a result of this sort of upbringing.
Because we are all a mix of the culture we are born into, social interactions we have been exposed to, and the personality we are born with you find social patterns – like men being much more likely to be violent – and individual variations: most men are good while some men go wacko under pressure.
After reading this article, I have mixed feelings. On one hand, I do think it would be safer for women if a curfew were imposed upon men. On the other hand, however, my father works graveyard shift at his job; a curfew would affect his working hours, or possibly cost him his job. My father is not a bad man, and I think he should be able to work to support my family, regardless of any curfew imposed.
Regarding how I feel about the issue of toxic masculinity, I think it should be banned altogether, rather than simply being limited, so that women can feel safe outside. Still, I do think that the home can be just as dangerous as the outside world. It is very unfortunate that men’s need for power often leads them to bully others, and I think that all people, not just women, should express compassion and empathy for other people. Being emotional and empathetic should not lead to being called a sissy. Instead, it should lead to being considered a kind, good person.
Well, I’m not recommending a curfew for men. I’m recommending a curfew for toxic masculinity. Unfortunately toxic masculinity and men are two different things.
Oooh, goody. Before what time will curfew be when I will be free to express my toxic masculinity?
Ideally the curfew on toxic masculinity would be never-ending.
First off, I am absolutely baffled that “someone” would suggest that since women are being raped, that they are automatically the problem and that they should be punished for it by having a curfew…My initial question was: Did that happened to be the bright suggestion of a male? Having said that, I applaud the fact that a man was able to note that such solution would not be a solution at all and if anyone should be punished, it should be the perpetrators. So what if toxic masculinity did have a curfew? Would men automatically learn to behave themselves? Probably not. Does sending criminals to prison end all crime? Certainly not, therefore this thought experiment would more than likely not work. However, its an interesting suggestion and I love that the idea behind it is to make toxic men accountable for their actions.I do wonder what society would be like if men did in fact have to remain indoors if they were considered toxic..and who would get to agree or disagree that they indeed were toxic? Either way, toxic masculinity is a real thing and I love that more and more females are becoming aware of such signs.
I hadn’t thought before that the women were being blamed for the rapes but I guess in a sense they are when they are put under curfew. “For their own good and protection” is probably what they would be told but they are also being blamed and punished for the violence inflicted on them when such curfews are enforced.
I had a response in this one too I thought, I’ll probably see it after making this post
I’ll plan on responding later this evening. Or at least by tomorrow!
ok cool. Yeah it’s a little longer as you can see, but I think I make interesting points about female dominantion, with how it’s gendered. You brought up dominatrix, but I feel that’s often gendered too or internalized from a male fetish gaze perspective often. But how media shows that men do like a sexually aggressive woman or it seem flattering. But yet not reported for a fantasy of woman raping man even though ads play it up at times or sexualize it. So it makes it seem that would be a fairly common male fantasy. I had the video shown as a example, but the downside of female sexual aggression seen as hot or harmless too and the double standard there as well.
Dominatrix: the woman is both worshipped and objectified at the same time. I do want to give more thought to that one. Let me know if you have any, yourself.
The idea of placing a curfew on women seemed ludicrous. Instead of punishing men for their behavior and enforcing stricter rules of conduct, we are overprotecting women. Such action would shift the focus from toxic masculinity towards women’s weakness. So if any curfew at all should exist, it should be against the perpetrators, the males. However, I don’t think that in our democratic society with such a strong focus on individual freedoms, a curfew would be a viable option or a law that could even pass. But toxic masculinity, those unhealthy behaviors that are culturally associated with the traditional males, should be recognized as the problem. Social change is slow. The feminist movement has contributed to shifting the dialog towards discussions of toxic masculinity which have now become common in social media. Being male does not equate to being toxic and males need role models of a healthier type of masculinity.
Our society does socialize eroticize Male dominance. But you do see a turnaround with a dominatrix. And quite a few men do seem to have that fantasy.”
True, but interesting enough it makes me think that even that female dominance is “gendered” too. What I mean is and why I don’t like that typical female dominance is that it’s very “male subservient”. I’m balanced so like to dominate and be in control, but a woman dominant and in control is fun to me too, But despite me having a submissive side, I like see no appeal in the typical female dominance that the view is like. In order for a man to be submissive, he has to be the female domme’s dog mat pretty much. It’s interesting, so it like says that women can’t dominate a man just from sex, but have to mentally dominate a man in order to dominate him sexually.
Obviously women can’t or most can’t literally dominate a man like a guy can to a woman for the main fact of men being stronger and bigger, so a man will obviously be able to rag doll a woman and much easier than vice versa. But a woman can still fuck a guy hard and rough and still be forceful. But that dominatrix stuff more often is like I said, the male being a servant that worships the ground of the female domme or her female sex appeal and seduction that has him in the this control to do what she wants him to do or what she wants to do to him, But as you see, gendered, because women are sex objects and sexualized so there is plays in despite supposedly being role reversed. But yet many things still quite the same.
Like that rape fantasy stuff doesn’t play into dominatrix stuff or ravaging generally, which is why I find it interesting it’s not a common fantasy for men or in articles. Men love beautiful women being horny and I would think ultra flattering for it to be lustfully aggressive and ravaging, yet dominatrix stuff isn’t like that. But here’s an example that shows how it shows that it must be in men’s fantasy somewhere for the fact of commercials like this.
That looks like a female to male rape fantasy played out in this commercial ha. But unfortunately this stuff is also why it’s so hard for male rape victims to be believed though. Women are so insatiable that they are desired even if when ultra aggressive, when you know this would not be such a cute, funny , sexy commercial if reversed. It wouldn’t be shown and would be highly disturbing even if the woman smiles at the end and seems to like the male aggression like the guy like the female sexual aggression.
Interestingly once you get an idea you can turn it around. A study of Montréal adults found that men and women were pretty equally likely to be interested in the submissive side, with women more so.
I also surveyed my own students. Only 30 of them so a small sample, but just over half had low interest in being submissive, 1/5 had moderate interest and a quarter had high interest.”
To add to that. I believe the woman who initially wrote about a man being forceful in the heat of the moment, didn’t mean like passionate, consensual sex, like fred took it. That’s a problem too with his misunderstand. The women telling him that, that’s a fantasy, a domination one. But one where they are passionate and he takes control and she enjoys his man handling of her. Fred said “he man handles the situation and the woman acts a a rag doll going along with that.
A woman going along with it, doesn’t seem less rapey. If a woman is going a long with it, it can more likely be her trying to handle the aggression and realizing she can’t fight off the man’s aggression. A woman enjoying a man’s dominance, that wants it and consents to it, doesn’t “go along with it”. She immerses her enjoyment in it and wants it and this man handling comes from a clear understanding of the consent to which the aggression male dominance comes. Like you said with the clear consent thing. Like couples who respect each other and have rough sex, have safe words for that very reason. Because they enjoy it but also respect and care for each other’s enjoyment and each other so much that they want to make sure they don’t get too aggressive and someone gets hurt or doesn’t enjoy. So a way to make things clear with communication if things get a big to aggressive for one or the other. Therefore, neither is “just going along with the rag dolling” but mutually coordination together or synced.
I’m wondering if she’s talking about a relationship where they do role-playing or where there is enough trust that she knows he won’t really hurt her?
In other surveys a larger proportion of women have had fantasies about that sort of thing then actually want to do it. But then they are controlling everything in their heads. But they don’t want to do it in real life because then they lose that control.
There is a danger to all this because then a man can come to think that women want this and then end up hurting someone.
True but the way Fred was talking about it and women going along with it, sounded like he didn’t get it or missed the point. Women may be turned on or like to have a man they trust and attracted to, to sexually ravage them. But if she’s enjoying it which is what women obviously want is to enjoy the sex.
She’ll not be “going along with it when rag dolled” but like I said emersr herself into the passion and really enjoy and passionately be into it. Not “ going along with it” which sounds a lot more like obligatory than pure enjoyment which is not good. Any man that cares and has a clue should want his woman excited and enjoying the dominance sex instead of Luke warm obligatory “going along with it” because the man is stronger and the sex just goes that way.
You know what I find interesting is role reverse female to male rape fantasies are not a top male fantasy or never on list for men’s top fantasies. I mean I’ve seen axe body spray commercials eroticize “aggressive female hornyness” where the dude has a bunch of beautiful women ripping at his clothes like he’s part of the Beatles band at their peak in the 60s. Guys don’t get that feeling and I think could see how it could be erotic and flattering for a beautiful woman to be so lustful at a man she passionate forces herself on him and ready to sexually ravage the guy. But you always hear of rape fantasies as far as toward women but not reversed when you’d think it would be more recognized on fantasy lists .
I would think passionate responses is best for everyone!
Our society does socialize eroticize Male dominance. But you do see a turnaround with a dominatrix. And quite a few men do seem to have that fantasy.
I understand the theoretical distinction you are trying to make between women who are “just going along with it” and women who are actually playing out their inner nature in the way that suits them best. However, from a man’s point of view, these 2 things look exactly the same. From the point of view of men, this is how most women behave, and this is how they appear to respond to men. So when we behave this way, it’s because this is how women have conditioned us to behave.
I would also put forward the theory that “just going along” and positively playing out their submissive nature, are just slightly different manifestations of the same thing: women are submissive, it’s what they are, it’s how they are comfortable being. Despite all the equality talk pushed out by feminists, women still expect men to make the first move, and generally be the instigator in the relationship.
When I read the first part of this post, I thought to myself, “why should women have a curfew for men’s actions?”. After further reading, other people have wondered the same thing. But then, as the author kept writing about men being toxic, I didn’t necessarily thought that was true, not every man is toxic. Some men are in need of help but that doesn’t mean all men should get the consequence. Personally, I have had some bad experiences with guys but I have also had some great times with them, and reading someone bashing an individual gender is disgusting. Actions do not define who someone is, so let them be who they want to be. Society keeps placing expectations on each gender when everyone should be feel comfortable to do what makes them happy.
Yeah, and if you kept reading you would see that I didn’t say all men are toxic. That’s why I suggest a curfew for toxic masculinity – which is different from men.
Got it? 🙂
Yes, put men on a curfew to spread awareness that rape will not be tolerated. The curfew may or may not work, but there are steps to take to show women have a say in this. Women The women surrounded in toxic masculinity are brought up to think it’s okay if a man displays some possessive traits because it shows that they care. A man being forceful in the heat of the moment is alright because it’s the man thing to do. Inflicting pain on women feeds their power trips. For rape to have gone epidemic, men mirroring each others behaviors because anything less is unmasculine and it’s the norm in their society to think women are at their disposal. Why not for a change make men feel when strict rules are implemented to tackle their sexual deviant behaviors. I’ve know women who deal with toxic masculinity and just go with it because they don’t know or seen better. They think it’s all part of being a “machismo” man.
Well, I think it’s important to put toxic masculinity on a curfew. Most men are actually pretty safe, thankfully.
“A man being forceful in the heat of the moment is alright because it’s the man thing to do. ”
Most of the girlfriends I’ve had have been very explicit and open about the fact that they like it when a man is “forceful in the heat of the moment”.
If men are getting this idea, I can only assume women are teaching them that. When I was first told that by my girlfriend I was a bit puzzled, but I came to accept it.
I’m wondering what forceful means. I’m assuming the man has consent, meaning the two of them want to have sex and that Consent is clear.
When Unconsensual sex is forced on women it makes sex repulsive. It also causes all sorts of emotional and physical damage, including post-traumatic stress.
I believe forceful means the man manhandles the situation, and the woman acts like a rag doll going along with it. This is what most women seem to want. Yes, they have told me that directly, but not in the heat of the moment.
We do live in a culture that eroticizes male domination.
Interestingly once you get an idea you can turn it around. A study of Montréal adults found that men and women were pretty equally likely to be interested in the submissive side, with women more so.
I also surveyed my own students. Only 30 of them so a small sample, but just over half had low interest in being submissive, 1/5 had moderate interest and a quarter had high interest.
3/12 update: btw, I decided to write a blog post on this and found a larger sample of my students, including men’s beliefs about women’s desires vs women’s actual desires. Will be publishing on this soon.
“We do live in a culture….”
Yet again when you are given a dose of reality you fall back to the old and tired mantra that it’s just about the culture. Never mind that in every single culture and every mammalian species the males are more dominant.
“A study of Montréal adults found that men and women were pretty equally likely to be interested in the submissive side”
In that study there was still a decent gap between the genders. For example 10.8% of women reported fantasies about forcing someone to have sex compared to 22% of men. But I don’t think abstractly ticking off fantasies you’ve had is as significant as more concrete analysis of what you are thinking about. When asked to write down fantasies in the same study, 18.8% of women wrote a fantasy that was focused on submissive behavior compared to 5.2% of men.
And then we have 50 shades of grey, a book that is 80% purchased by women. There’s no equivalent book on the horizon about rich female executive tying up a man. If there was money in that spin off, you can believe we’d have it already. $1 billion in movie money, not including book money in indulging the idea of tying up women. Nothing for the opposite.
Maybe men don’t read as much – ha ha! There are plenty of dominatrixes around.
But I wouldn’t be surprised if women are indeed more likely to have submissive fantasies since our culture is filled with that sort of thing: men dominant, women submissive. And then everyone internalizes that.
The plural of anecdote is not data.
Of course not.
when consider how much male dominance is eroticized though and culturally accepted, that difference is fairly close. Considering all of that, I would’ve expected it to be quite lopsided. So it doesn’t seem inherent and makes one wonder male domination wasn’t so eroticized and just everything neutral, how things would probably be closer.
The data doesn’t say how often. A woman having a fantasy once in her life counts the same as a man having it every day. The data is pretty useless really.
Even having the fantasy once tells you something.
I really like and agree with the author’s idea that men aren’t the problem and we should focus instead on dealing with toxic masculinity. It’s easy to think linearly and isolate a singular group or idea to blame. That line of thinking fails to address the complexity of the issue. This article reminded me of a minor part of the issue of toxic masculinity that I have personally experienced. Through a combination of family and hobby (martial arts) I have come to know quite a few police officers. Right now police are in a tough situation arising from racial tensions and police shootings. Based on living in California, police are generally viewed as the bad guys. Police have a brutal work schedule that makes a normal social very difficult to maintain. As such they spend a significant amount of time with their police buddies, people they already share a deeper bond with because of their naturally stressful work. I think the hate towards police is unproductive towards solving the issues of profiling and brutality. Police have to deal with the public every time they work and when the public dislikes them they’ll confide in their social support of fellow officers. Through my martial arts instructor I’ve had the opportunity to volunteer and help train police defensive tactics instructors who ultimately train police recruits. The way police act when they are comfortable and feel like the are amongst their friends is jarring. It’s hyper-masculine and extremely intense. The police humor I’ve observed that they often laugh about would unsettle the public. It has been statistically proven that spousal abuse is more common in policemen. I attribute that to police being socially isolated and living in a hyper-masculine culture. I think police suffer from several mental health problems that fail to be addressed because they are trapped in an echo chamber of toxic masculinity. That’s why I think it’s important to focus on the idea of toxic masculinity instead of solely associating it with men. If at all possible we should be able to discuss the issue without trying to delegate blame like Prime Minister Meir did when suggesting curfews for men.
I’m glad someone has said something about toxic masculinity. In our world today, men are perceived to have to follow the norm of what a “man” should be. For me, as being a male, I never understood why men have had to be or feel like they are in control especially when it is over a female. Putting a curfew for men hypothetically would not do any justice in my opinion but it would just make more of a controversial scene. Yes, mostly all rapes are done by men but not all men should be punished in this way. We should all be treated as equal and the best way to prevent rape is to educate people and show them how wrong it really is. I believe the best kind of people is the ones who can be both masculine and feminine at certain times depending on the situation at hand. There is absolutely nothing wrong with a man who is strong and powerful yet has a side to them that expresses feelings and pain.
This blog was very interesting. First of all, I agree with the prime minister. Why are women being punished? In this scenario, the perpetrator is being rewarded. Women have to have a curfew while the perpetrator gets to be free. It seems like women have to be accommodating to men. I had a friend in college who was raped but her uncle when she was in high school. When she told her parents the situation, her parents blamed her. Her mother told her she shouldn’t have been wearing such provocative clothes. Her parents wouldn’t let her go out alone. They became very strict with her. She was not allowed to wear certain clothes. She was not allowed to visit friends. How is this fair to her? One, she was blamed for the situation. Two, her uncle was just not allowed to come to their home, but was not shamed. They did not report him with the police. However, she was shamed and was punished. On other note. A curfew for toxic masculinity would be great. However, I agree with the blog, most women have the toxic masculinity at home. I have met many women that are in this situation, where there is no curfew.
It was interesting when faced by this issue, the Prime Minister of Israel suggested placing a curfew on women not facing the reality that men were also victims of violence. Toxic masculinity produced by societal norms imposed on men perpetuates violence against others including men and women. Socially constructed, masculinity and the beliefs placed on men create an environment where toxicity surfaces as men fail to meet the expectations. These societal norms may vary, but the pressure to conform to this framework of what it means to be masculine is high. When the pressure becomes too intense and men fail the meet the expectations, they put others down to make themselves feel better sometimes resulting in emotional and physical abuse. Women might feel safer by the curfew, but the societal issue of toxic masculinity would not be resolved. As a society we have imparted what it means to be masculine and feminine on children from a very young age; men are strong more aggressive, and women are weak and fragile. The curfew puts a band aide on the issue society has created and until we examine the beliefs and values instilled in our children the opportunity for toxic masculinity to exist will continue.
Well, actually the Prime Minister of Israel suggested placing a curfew on men, not women, after others suggested placing a curfew on women to protect them. But the female prime minister said that if anyone should be under curfew it should be the people who are doing the sexual assaults, which is usually men.
I thought that this blog post was very interesting regarding rape and a curfew. As a girl, I can understand that seeing a man all alone at night time is something I want to avoid. I feel as though us women can not be comfortable in these types of situations. All over the news, there are always stories of a rape that occurred or a stalking or kidnapping. All of these stories flood our brain with worry, thus making us more cautious when we are around men. I do not think that this is a bad characteristic to have, because at the end of the day, our instinct could be what is keeping us safe and alive. Regarding the curfew, I think that many women would be out at night much more with less worry, because they will not have to be on constant look out for creeps or pedophiles. However, I think that this would be going a bit too extreme. There are many laws that are passed to keep the citizens safe, but people always find a way around it without getting caught. Rather than a curfew, men should learn to appear less as a threat to women. If we do not get a bad vibe constantly from men around us, we will be able to enjoy our time much more, and even interact with men much more.
Thinking about how different life would be if men had a 9pm curfew is quite interesting. Personally, I feel like life would feel so much safer if this was a real thing, but only safer after 9pm. I also feel like this would be completely useless because before 9pm men would still be out and not much would change. This idea is also putting a whole group of male’s into a bubble to classify them all as dangerous people, when in reality that isn’t the case. Toxic masculinity can be found and seen ANYWHERE, even in your own home. The four characteristics that degree with with harm also correlate with this 9pm curfew. Having people who haven’t done harm put into a whole group isn’t fair.
Well, this is meant as a thought experiment, not a literal idea.
I personally do not like toxic masculinity and have always thought that it is pointless. Now don’t get me wrong that masculinity in general is cool, not to the point of it physically and emotionally hurting other people. I do not think having masculinity have a curfew at 9 is necessarily a bad idea, but if women are most vulnerable at home with the guy that is toxic doesn’t that make it harder for her to not be in that situation? Also for toxic masculinity, I’ve always there have been other ways to expressing masculinity without it even being toxic. Crying for starters is NOT soft, it’s a normal emotion. You can be there for your friends with out supporting the wrong thing. Be the better friend and not let them get in that kind of situation in the first place. Lastly you do not need to knock down other people to raise yourself, just out work them
I think there are other parts about toxic masculinity. While the first characteristic is men must always be there to support others, I’ve heard many cases where mothers and wives are unable to talk to their husbands on certain personal issues. Also that they are unable to rely on their husband to take care of children. In this case, men rely on women for domestic affairs such as setting doctor appointments, cooking meals, cleaning the house, doing laundry, etc. In the third characteristic of how men can’t be sissies, there’s also how differently men express their emotions. I’ve heard and even seen cases of men being angry, they yell, they throw punches, they hit, they stamp their feet, and they blame others. Similar to how a toddler or a child expresses their anger. This shows that the emotional development of most, I’m putting emphasis on most, men stops at a young age. They aren’t taught how to properly express different emotions, instead they are forced to bottle it up and eventually express it in a selfish manner. These are experiences that I’ve had and heard from others and I’m open to hear what anyone else has experienced also.
Yeah, these hurtful qualities are all examples of the most toxic sides: no sissy stuff and give them hell.
Toxic masculinity is a problem, however i don’t think that putting all men under a curfew would make a huge difference to our society, because most men are decent human beings, hard working fathers, we should not label all men as toxic, man are taught to be superior, and show their superiority by using harsh words beating and rape, this reaction is based on how boys have been raise boys are taught not to cry, not to express their feelings, to constantly be tough. It might be easier to put a curfew on a teen boys and young adults anything under 18 years. knowing where your son is, been involve in their lives, having serious consequences for bad actions and bad behavior. showing affection towards them and teaching them to express them selves in a peaceful way with out hurting others specially love once. Raising our children to be decent human beings might work better, then putting them on a curfew later in life.
And the thing is that yes, most men are good men. The problem is that you don’t know which ones are the bad ones.
I used to feel insulted, when I was a little girl, that birds were afraid of me. I wanted to pet them. And while most people won’t hurt birds some will, and so the birds are afraid of everyone, Even though almost everyone would be kind to them. But that’s what you do to survive.
I’d make the argument that most men aren’t good men. I’d argue most men are okay at best. I have a male friend that is single, and when I told him of another single friend he asked for a good word. I said she’s too good for him, mostly joking…we have the relationship where we talk smack to one another, he responded by saying “I’m a good man, I won’t hit her and I won’t cheat.” I told him that is a real low bar, because it is. I think in the face of so many truly vicious men, the okay ones start to look good. He didn’t say he would be emotionally supportive and listen to her, he just wouldn’t hit or cheat. He never talked about an equitable division of household chores, but he wouldn’t hit or cheat. I get called a good father just for taking my daughter to the grocery store, I doubt her mom gets that treatment. It is so laughably easy to be considered a “good” man in american society. He has a job, is clean, he doesn’t hit me, and doesn’t cheat…he’s a good man. Personally, my male friend is a good man…but not because he doesn’t hit and cheat, but because he listens. He cares and he tried…and also because he doesn’t hit or cheat. I’m so averse to men who have any shred of toxic masculinity I can count how many male friends I’ve made in the past 7 years on one hand. I’ve made a ton of female friends, though. Women are socialized to care, and those are the friends I want. That’s what it means to be a good person in my book, you have to care, and men just aren’t socialized to care about how they feel, how others feel, how they make others feel. If it doesn’t express itself in violent crimes it reers it’s head in how he doesn’t listen to others, how he doesn’t help you clean the house, or ask how you’re doing. The goodness of men falls on a bell curve in my humble opinion, and most of them are okay.
While I do think that women are socialized to be kinder and more caring among my personal acquaintances almost all the men I know our good men. And you seem to be a good man too. But for sure not all men are good, just like not all women are good either.
If Toxic masculinity is constructed from how society teaches its children, especially boys, then by putting a curfew on toxic masculinity, you essentially change society to a non-gender conforming society in which everyone expresses themselves the way they want to express themselves. Most of the time, the children who are taught these expectations are the ones usually enforcing it. Many men act a certain way not because they truly act a certain way, but because men want to seek approval by other men. Toxic masculinity is the result of groupthink in which a group of people think the same way in order to be part of the “in-group”, but it is at the cost of individuality. By removing toxic masculinity at night, you are essentially removing the need to seek approval by other people and promote individuality. We would see a large variety of personalities in not only men, but also women as this limit is removed. People would be able to act the way they want to act without being looked down upon by society. Society would greatly benefit as individualism would grow and we would see a movement similar to the Romantic or Transcendentalist era as the individual would focused rather than society.
Interesting. Interesting as a thought experiment. I see things a little differently. Boys are taught from a young age to act in certain ways, unfortunately many of which are hurtful, but it is unconsciously internalized and feels natural and normal to the grown man who acts it out. If we didn’t raise boys with the idea of no sissy stuff and give them hell then men would be disinclined to drive dangerously, drink dangerously, rape, batter, Terrorism, mass killings… And they would be more in touch with their positive emotions and more willing to seek support Instead of feeling that they always have to be the support. Well, I could go on…
I have felt knee jerk reactions from other men if a question is phrased that in a sort general appeal. Typically, they are used to set some of barrier between them and other men or to state that not every man applies. I think there is a conversation to have about male victims of sexual assault, however the question to me is a thought experiment designed at expressing frustration with a particular common brand of victim blaming aimed at women. I think that comes down to how I would answer the question of what would you do? Is that as a man I am shielded from the concept to a point where I have almost no answer. I believe that response is the core of the question, in not having a frame of reference you realize just how much privilege you have. In defending the innocence of men, you miss the point of the question entirely by making it about yourself, instead of interacting with it. I don’t think there is always animosity the latter response just a failure to recognize how one interacts with toxic masculinity(or that as a man it effects you negatively aswell).
I appreciate your taking the time to really think this through and not just have a quick reaction that misses the point.
I had not really heard of toxic masculinity up until a few years ago. I mean, I knew of these behaviors and that they were not good but I hadn’t really known what to call them or that there was a name for them. I think these hypothetical situations such as men having a curfew or toxic masculinity having a curfew stir up interesting dialogues that I think are ultimately positive. Each one I have witnessed has usually shed some light on how some behaviors may negatively affect others or even how a behavior has affected me. A lot of the ideas that culminate in toxic masculinity tend to be passed down, I think, and taught at a young age. However, this also means that it can be changed. I think that participating and learning in the dialogues on toxic masculinity can help minimize the prevalence of toxic masculinity. I know that discussions on the topic have certainly helped me to see how these behaviors may affect others and start to make changes to avoid some.
I appreciate your thoughtful response. So important to realize that because it is culturally constructed it is completely changeable. And the only way that any of us can improve is by seeing the ways we have been harmed, which can cause us to harm others, and doing something about it.
I saw this on Twitter and was struck by the fact that most women had the same answer for what they would do after 9pm – they would go outside. There were no wild plans for crazy nights out, it was just women wanting to take a walk in the park, enjoy the city lights, or ride the subway to a friend’s house without the fear of violence. Unfortunately, this tweet was responded to with quite a bit of negativity. Many many instantly screamed the “not all men” rhetoric that we are all so tired of hearing, even though this tweet focused on toxic masculinity, not men. Toxic masculinity can oftentimes affect men more than women, since it causes men to be forced to bottle up their emotions and only be able to show anger. When men aren’t allowed to cry or be soft in a society, this leads to outbursts of anger, which is the root of much violence that we see today.
It’s unsettling just how many things came to mind that I would be able to do with this 9:00 toxic masculinity curfew, and so quickly might I add. Of course, not all men, but as you put it, most men are taught this idea of ‘masculinity’ which without proper upbringing and psychological education, these seemingly innocuous traits have the potential to become toxic and dangerous to those around them, especially to women. Ironically enough, as masculinity emphasizes toughness, in my experience, there is nothing more fragile than masculinity itself. Being that in order for a man to be seen as successful by his male peers, he must embody this unemotional, strong, and sexually desirable essence, which contradicts human nature, it is very difficult for one to keep up this facade. The danger in this is in those men who are terrified of being exposed as an emotional being, as humans are, and therefore act out in ways to prove to mainly themselves their own masculinity, which more than often puts others around them in toxic and often dangerous situations.
This idea of toxic masculinity is a problem we all have faced throughout our lives at one point, and like how you mentioned, it impacts men and women. Putting a curfew on men, may not be the solution, like you said, but maybe the real problem is that we as society allow this by using social media and through television and movies. Through social media, where many pictures of men are always viral based on the masculinity traits of those males. If they for example, have a body of high amounts of muscle or they have large amounts of skin covered by tattoos. These images portray to many men, who seek to become like these males in the picture, thus causing a social obligation for men to act “manly” and thus increasing the toxic masculinity in our society. Televisions and movies do the same because most TV shows or new movies are mostly of males in great physical form who act tough, who “save the girl”, and who are ultimately portrayed as the ideal man that everyone else wants to follow. These images also create a social obligation for all men to act like these actors. With these social obligations, many males start to hold in their softer sides and can only contain it , until they release this built up frustration onto violence because in the male culture, this way of releasing frustration is the only way males are taught to. So going back to this idea of having a curfew for men, maybe we need to break down these social obligations in order to stop these toxic masculinity traits from increasing in our society, and hopefully this would benefit not only the safety of women from sexual assault, but help make the male culture more accepting.
I believe the idea of having a curfew for toxic masculinity brings a lot of topics into light that many forget to discuss when it comes to men being dangerous and needing a curfew and not women. Many men get defensive and say they are not like other men and use that as an excuse for nothing being done to protect women from being harassed or raped. This is as is mentioned very true, there are many men who do not have violent intentions when they see a woman walking alone, but there are also men who do have these intentions. This is what makes women feel unsafe, they do not know which men do and which men don’t have the intentions to harm them. I also believe that men do not stand up for women when they hear their friends talking about women like they are sex objects that they can do whatever they please to whenever they please. This to me is a problem and needs to be addressed. Many men who use the defense that they are not like other men actually know men who are like that. This to me is extremely unsettling and men need to realize that they too need to step up and stand up for women.
Well not all men are alike but we raise boys in a way that encourages toxic masculinity.
“Many men who use the defense that they are not like other men actually know men who are like that. This to me is extremely unsettling and men need to realize that they too need to step up and stand up for women.”
As Cain replied to God, “Am I my brother’s keeper?”
Yes, I know men who say rather harsh things about women. I do not permit such men to do this at my home or business.
Question: Do YOU challenge women who say ugly things about men? Women who also regard their fuck buddies as little more than sex objects to be shared with their other girlfriends? Do you care about such behavior on the part of women? How many do you know who stand up for men when we are abused and mistreated by women?
Please do not get “defensive” or cry misogynist blah blah blah.
If you truly want equality, then you have also call out the bullshit that women do to men. Right? Otherwise, why should I as a man unilaterally chastise men for their lousy behavior. When women in this country start calling out other women for their shitty behavior, then men will do the same for other men. Otherwise, why should men do so?
Maybe Andrea will respond to you but of course everyone should call out hurtful behavior, regardless of gender.
Huggy Bear, you most certainly are not your brother’s keeper, but if you wanted to be part of the solution as opposed to facilitating these disturbing behaviors calling out other men is an action you could take. I don’t think you are a bad person if you don’t,
I feel like the premise of your argument assumes that Andrea doesn’t call out men. Even if she didn’t though, the argument you are making is a common one. The “If you wanted equality you would do this” argument. While, as someone who presents as male and works in a predominately female field, I understand that some defense would be nice, but this argument ultimately side steps the argument at hand. This conversation isn’t about women talking negatively about men. It’s about the gender that is currently empowered, and how they need take responsibility for themselves. When a women talks smack about men, it’s hurtful, divisive, and rude. When men demean women it perpetuates a way of thought that condones sexual, physical, and emotional abuse. Both issues are problematic, both are hurtful, but as a medic does triage and attends to the most critically injured before those with survivable injuries, we as a society need to be able to have a conversation about things that do real damage to a large amount of people before we address the things that do relatively small damage to those who have the majority of the power in society already.
I hear a lot of frustration in your post. The “Please do not get “defensive” or cry misogynist blah blah blah.” tells me you’ve been called a misogynist or been responded to negatively for sharing your views before. I get the frustration. I think one of the hardest things about this is that all sides are frustrated. You end your post with an interesting question though.
“If you truly want equality, then you have also call out the bullshit that women do to men. Right? Otherwise, why should I as a man unilaterally chastise men for their lousy behavior. When women in this country start calling out other women for their shitty behavior, then men will do the same for other men. Otherwise, why should men do so?”
Men should do it for the same reason women should do it, because it is the right thing to do, and someone has to take the first step. If every one decided to wait for someone else to be the first one to help, then we would never move forward as a society.
Oh yes, what exactly isn’t being done to stop women being raped?
The culture needs to change more. The more sex equality there is the more women are respected and the less they are harmed.
A lot of these arguments against toxic masculinity are disingenuous. Anyone with half a brain can understand the distinction. (Sadly, between Russian bots and US-billionaire-funded alt-right hate groups, the willful ignorance, disinformation and general toxicity in social media have escalated to dystopian levels.)
Toxic masculinity is of course a problem, and it ties in with homophobia (open affection between men anywhere except the football field is strictly forbidden) and transphobia (men are not women! & v-v) – neither of which is a problem restricted to *men*. Gender critical feminists may claim to hate the patriarchy and gender stereotypes, but they seek to reinforce the division between the sexes, and are scathing about the appearance of trans women.
The problem is not intrinsically femininity or masculinity, but rather the restrictive social rules imposed on these – that a man must be outspoken and aggressive, and a woman quiet and passive, etc. – that makes these toxic.
Good to hear from you. Thanks for your thoughts.
“Gender critical feminists may claim to hate the patriarchy and gender stereotypes, but they seek to reinforce the division between the sexes, and are scathing about the appearance of trans women.”
IMO, being treated equally is not interchangeable with being treated the same. There should be some division between the sexes. Men and women are not the same. Men and women should not compete against each in most sports. Transgenderism and transracialism are problematic. Especially when it comes to self-identifying. Just like toxic masculinity, no one wants to talk about it. Also, it makes no sense to me how people can accept transgenderism but reject transracialism.
it’s true that there are biological differences so that I agree that there should be men’s teams and women’s teams. XX v XY makes a difference.
On the other hand, if someone feels like they were born in the wrong body because their mind doesn’t match social expectations for their biology, or whatever, I don’t have a problem with trans anything. But since both gender and race are social constructs I think people make too big a deal out of both.
So you believe transgender people shouldn’t compete in sports because XX v XY makes s difference?
Depends on the sport. Something like curling probably doesn’t make any difference. But with some sports it does. You see the genetic differences in gymnastics for instance. Man have more upper body strength and their events emphasize that with the high bar and rings, for instance. Women have more flexibility and better balance, so women do balance beam but men don’t.
We’re used to the idea of the man/woman binary, and so much of our history is predicated on it. But it’s not an absolute. We can make statements like, “Most/Many men are …,” and, “Most/Many women are …,” but as soon as we say, “All men/women are …,” we end up invalidating a subset of thinking breathing human beings who deserve better. Even XX and XY are not absolutes. We are far too complex and diverse for a binary division.
That’s true. A study was done to see if you could predict sex just by knowing certain things like a person‘s interests etc. The only thing you can strongly predict is who is stronger, with men notably more so. But with who likes poetry, who likes cats … Can’t accurately predict just by knowing the sex of the person.
“We are far too complex and diverse for a binary division.”
Can you explain binary division and how society would be changed if it was removed? I want to make sure my arguments are inline with your definitions.
Estrogen is also associated with aggression. When mice were bred so that they had no estrogen their aggression went away. Think about the mama bear protecting her young.”
Well I appreciate you trying to show how female hormones and aspect can be aggressive as well. But that aggression is “good aggression”, it’s altruistic aggression and nurturing aggression. It’s a protective aggression. If higher estrogen shown aggression as in violence not related to protection and simply tempers, than that would show the capacity for the hormone matching testosterone. If estrogen peaking showed females be aggressive just based out of anger or retaliation or territory not related to protection of themselves of their young, then that would show more ‘bad aggression”. Bad aggression is fighting because of tempers uncontrolled and wanting to exact punishment via violence. Or harming someone out of sadistic joy or control or power. Or impulse. Yes a majority of men don’t rape and kill and such. But unfortunately it seems like more decent men, while not criminals and not one’s who would harm a woman. Among many decent men, a decent amount I feel have been in bar fights, stupid fights at a stadium, etc. Yes women can get in physical fights at clubs and such, but guy fights way out number women’s in general. Alcohol can effect anybody, but for some reason dudes can be stupid and more likely to get in a brawls when drunk even if they wouldn’t rape someone or do bad things.
They can be otherwise decent men or criminals, but were in a bad mood than night and wanted to pick a fight with a guy or who knows. Look at road rage. Women can be aggressive drivers and swerve in front of someone out of anger or flip someone off. But like 98% of the time, road rage violence or death is men. Dudes pulling over just do they can duke it out, because they feel the need to take their life stresses out on each other. Interesting women don’t feel the impulse like men to try to cope with their anger and stress in life by beating someone up, because it’s like metaphorical anger release. Oh yeah this doesn’t harm anyone. but stupid harmful stunts. I’ve noticed that, like the show Jackass. I’ve seen so many clips on espn or bloopers of various stunts where someone does a stupid trick like jumping off a roof into a pool or with ski doo and they get hurt bad. You know what gender I see doing them like 99% of the time? Yep, it’s men lol. There are female dare devils, but I have to hand it to women being smart enough. Dudes on the other hand, I guess that aggression are quite the risk takers. And i think it’s why car insurance is higher on men too, because of more unsafe driving from men because of this aggressiveness.
It’s hard to untangle the effects of testosterone on aggression because women are more sensitive to the testosterone they have, even though they have less of it, women also have estrogen which is tied to aggression, and we have a society that encourages aggression much more in boys then in girls.
And if you go cross-culturally you find that in gender-equal societies men are much less violent towards everyone, at least in the in group.
But cross-culturally men are also taught to be more violent because they are the ones chosen to war and hunt, historically, partly because they have more muscular strength and partly because, in the small tribal societies where humans started, you don’t want to “waste“ women who bear children. (The bigger your tribe the more powerful you are.) Plus you don’t have birth control or bottles and it’s much easier for women to gather food with a baby on her back and then feed it as needed than to be out hunting or in war with the baby attached. That would be ridiculous. So that is our cultural history, and it’s been passed down from generation to generation, encouraging girls to be more nurturing caregivers and men to be more aggressive and violent.
I know it is wrong to say it would make me feel safer if all men had a curfew, but it would. Intellectually I also know that this isn’t all men, but in reality, more crimes against women are caused by men, not women against women. Not to contradict myself, I also would hate to cluster good men into the “all men” curfew. My boyfriend is a hard working perfect gentlemen, as are members of my family, my son etc. There’s no way this would ever happen, except in some kind of sci fi future where men went out of control. It is an interesting thought experiment, but it is kind of the same thing as putting a curfew on Muslims because of a handful of people who were terrorists, who happen to be Muslim. Punishing all for the crimes of a few isn’t fair. A curfew isn’t the answer. Consistent discipline and consistent consequences is the answer, as well as leaders who are willing to enact this consistency. Even though it would make me feel safer, I don’t think it would make me happier. It would very much so bother me because I know it would be an injustice to so many people.
And the problem isn’t men. The problem is the way we raise them that is damaging: remove have your humanity, give them hell, etc.
So a question for you. We have all of these definitions of what toxic masculinity is. Can you tell me what examples of masculinity are good? I think that is the reason why some men and women are quick to complain. It’s not that they don’t see a difference between masculinity and toxic masculinity, it’s that nobody even knows how to define what masculinity is anymore.
Well, both women and men have both a masculine and feminine side to their personalities. And the healthiest people have access to both sides, and are not restricted to only half of their humanity.
“Masculine” is what a society defines it as being, and the definition varies from place to place. For instance, America today values tough guys but our founding fathers sought to be gentlemen who valued grace, and wore ruffles and lace.
Looking at what our society today defines as masculine here are some of the positive qualities: strength, supportive, leader, assertive, adventurous, courage.
“There is a correlation between gender equality and lower levels of rape and crimes against women. The culture today it’s also more feminist than it was in 1980.”
YES!!! Much to the detriment of us men AND society. We have an entire generation of WEAK, EFFEMINATE, and LOST MEN.
What is so ironic is that the clear majority of women cannot stand these “new” men. The only time they want to engage them is for either purely platonic friendships or to use them for some cause or purpose. Most women certainly do NOT find these men to be sexually desirable.
“I’m completely confused as to why you find it offensive to point this out.”
Frankly I disagree with the entire premise of your argument. You constantly criticize the way boys are raised. Yet, you say most boys “turn out OK.” You are always attacking men with the patriarchy nonsense (except for Muslim men). Muslim men, the most patriarchal of all perhaps, get a free pass due to PC. Only Christians are singled out. But, I digress.
If most turn out OK, then why are we labeling men as toxic? Why are we even dealing with the issue?
People like you, leftist, liberals, and feminists simply want to subjugate men. You want to emasculate men.
There are evil and disgusting women who do nasty things to men. They are the minority. But, no one complains about these “toxic” women. Why? Because women have been socialize to think it is OK to exploit, use, and take advantage of men. Especially if they are offering him sex.
Most women do NOT even like most men! Yet, that is NOT the case when it comes to how we men perceive women. Don’t you find that problematic?
Why have the majority of women been socialized to dislike the majority of men? Clearly, this is not healthy for either human relations or society. But, no one goes around barking “toxic femininity.” Why is that I wonder?
I think further “debate” is utterly pointless. Like Hillary, you simply don’t get it.
Thanks for indulging me.
I’m not sure why so many men want to believe that toxic masculinity is inevitable. It isn’t.
Some cultures have low rates of murder, suicide, rape, sexual harassment. And the rates correlate with levels of toxic masculinity which derives from patriarchy.
Gender-equal societies are much more benevolent to both women and men.
Our Founding Fathers expressed positive masculinity. It’s not like men have no other choice.
What cultures have low rates of murder, suicide, rape, sexual harassment? Are they still around today?
Forager societies are still around today. They are on every continent and show the same pattern of gender equality and low rates of violence against women.
When Europeans first came to the American continent they were shocked by the gender equality and low rates of violence among the American Indians.
Historical evidence also suggest high rates of gender equality and low rates of violence against women among the Norse and the Celtic and pre-Celtic people of the British Isles.
There are also correlations in the modern world such as these:
Highly patriarchal cultures like north Vietnam have higher rates of wife battering. In a study of small villages every single village found at least half of women battered and some found all of the women’s battered. More moderate patriarchal cultures like ours have a far lower rate (about 15%).
And within the United States you see violence against women decreasing as gender equality increases.
Yeah, um.. the last time you appealed to the gender equal forager societies, I asked you to get specific. When I looked up one of these tribes you appealed to it turned out they were cannibals who warred with neighbouring tribes and took their women as booty. You handily ignored that.
Why don’t you send me a reference.
And read this: How Hunter-Gatherers Maintained Their Egalitarian Ways
During the twentieth century, anthropologists discovered and studied dozens of different hunter-gatherer societies, in various remote parts of the world, who had been nearly untouched by modern influences. Wherever they were found–in Africa, Asia, South America, or elsewhere; in deserts or in jungles–these societies had many characteristics in common. The people lived in small bands, of about 20 to 50 persons (including children) per band, who moved from camp to camp within a relatively circumscribed area to follow the available game and edible vegetation. The people had friends and relatives in neighboring bands and maintained peaceful relationships with neighboring bands. Warfare was unknown to most of these societies, and where it was known it was the result of interactions with warlike groups of people who were not hunter-gatherers. In each of these societies, the dominant cultural ethos was one that emphasized individual autonomy, non-directive childrearing methods, nonviolence, sharing, cooperation, and consensual decision-making. Their core value, which underlay all of the rest, was that of the equality of individuals.
In cultures with gender equality, as with American Indians on the east coast to the Americas before the Europeans re-socialized them, rape and battering were virtually nonexistent. So you see what’s possible when you have strong native men, but not toxic masculinity.”
Didn’t native americans fight other tribes though? I know the europeans were worse, but didn’t certain tribes scalp women and with the tribes that fought each other, they didn’t take over the tribe? Often in war and battle women are raped when a tribe, or country or whatever is taken over. Men of the following tribe or country killed and women raped. I know you’ve defended feminism which I understand, but do you see why other feminists not like you and others can rub people the wrong way even if they aren’t radical themselves?
Yes, here’s what American Indians (East coast of the Americas) have in common with Vikings: they could be violent towards those outside their group, and great warriors. But within the group women were treated well. Among the these American Indians rape and battering were virtually unknown. Viking men could rape slaves but not women of their communities, which was strongly punished when it occurred.
Yeah but unfortunately it doesn’t mean much really that men aren’t inherently worse than women. It means culture makes the violence worse of course and with a better culture less violence and rape. The women were treated well in such community of the native americans and vikings. It unfortunatley seems to still point that men are predisposed still to more aggression which can be violent or brought out with bad culture, personality and such. Because if such men in this cultures were as innocent as women, the slaves wouldn’t be killed or I believe the vikings did rape the women of countries they conquered. And I believe indian tribes weren’t too kind to the people of tribes they conquered. And most likely scalped them and raped the women there. Even though history has been white washed and it’s actually more often that europerans were the cruel ones to indians and killing and harming the women in the indian tribe.
There were times with settles and people living, where tribes who taken out the homes would kill the men and women I believe raped. So the peace might’ve been toward their own women, but showed rape still happened by same tribes when defeating other tribes. I understand some of the warrior aspects or war or some tribes were of survival and getting resources. But it points to what biologists have felt this aggression from men or more so than women, which come correlate to men even though a minority being more violent in sexually and non sexually. The fact that it wasn’t all eastern tribes says something too despite them not being influenced by european cultures or before they came along. I thought, i don’t know if I mixed them up. But I thought it was either the Iroquious or Algonquins who were an invading tribe and more barbaric compared to the other tribes. I don’t remember which ones though
Among Indians of the east coast of the Americas rape seems to be nonexistent whether for the in group or out group. Plus, the vast majority of men even in America today don’t rape. So it isn’t a necessary thing. And the level of rape, and violence against women generally, decreases as gender equality increases.
Estrogen is also associated with aggression. When mice were bred so that they had no estrogen their aggression went away. Think about the mama bear protecting her young.
Well it’s good you don’t feel that way. I don’t know how many feminists are like you. But you see, this is the reason why feminism gets a bad rap. That Danielle person who made the viral tweet is a social activist and feminist. And while not a radical man hating feminist. As you can see though, this person singled out men. You said toxic masculinity. “She” could have asked like in a general question. What would you do if most men had a 9pm curfew. “She” speficially wrote “ladies’ or to the ladies. Which completely minimized men as victims or naive thinking like men don’t get attacked or have fears and such. Yes women are more vulnerable and deal with rape fears and stuff more then men. But there are more male to male homicides too. I might not be raped, but I could have guys come up to me with a gun wanting to take my money and maybe they decide they don’t want me to be a witness anymore and shoot me and kill me.
And then which you pointed out and I already knew the stats, with women are more likely harmed by men they know than complete strangers.Yet this feminist still decided to generalize men and stranger men when it’s toxic men who women know that are more likely to hurt a woman. While I have empathy and was aware without this tweet of women’s fears and such culture to improve or men like that to clean up their act. This is why feminism often gives people a bad taste in their mouth even when they aren’t radical. The way that person tweeted it, rubbed me the wrong way even though I get that it was about empathy for women. Obviously women are in an inclusive club to this feminist, not men, even though this is not a rare thing for men to be male victims. I could see if it was, but like I said there are a ton of male to male homicides each year and these often happen from stranger me or from the streets at night.
I’ve been surprised at how often man seem to be quite toxic masculinity with masculinity. Boys are raised in a particular way that can lend it self to toxicity with give them hell, no sissy stuff in particular, but even the others. Luckily, most men are good men. And of course neither men nor women are perfect.
Thank you. No men or women are perfect, when you see tweets like that, even though I think for good reasons. And women, well yes it would be safer, but acting like it would be perfect because now they are around the perfect gender around them (women) right?
I get it and why, as yes I’d feel safer around more women than men too. But I’m not naive to think it will just be grand, utopian and with no care in the world like some women made it sound. Like skip to my lou, etc. I don’t know how it is with feminists, but how many attack or make sure to attack the culture, not the sex? That’s why I like this site, it changed my view. But it seems like there’s quite, a middle ground. I’m sure radical feminists are the minority. And people like this Danielle person aren’t radical nor bad, but I can see how they rub people the wrong way.I don’t mean like conservative men,and guys who are like some commenters here.
But even more independent and liberal people or open minded people can be rubbed the wrong way too. Yes I know it’s not new and it’s probably social media which is why it seems like more. I know its a minority, but it seems like one of the very rare things which are mass attacks or shootings or such are almost always done by men. It’s weird though, there seem to be mass attacks by women and I don’t recall that ever before. I know it’s an anomaly, but one was the youtube, crazy youtube woman that went to youtube head quarters to shoot the people there early in the summer and this recent messed up news from Florida very recently.
Girls armed with knives plotted attack at Florida middle school, police say
“Two students at Bartow Middle School, in Bartow, Florida, came to school with knives and planned to attack students Tuesday, according to the Bartow Police Department.”
“Staff asked the girl why she had a weapon, and she said she and the other girl were plotting to attack and kill as many students as they could, Hall said.
Police then searched the girls and found several more knives, including a butcher knife, Hall said.”
Luckily they caught things and stopped the attacks, but girls were planning at mass attack or mass murder, and very sick too, knives, butch knives, etc.
I don’t think the world would be perfect without toxic masculinity because human beings are just imperfect. You would still have both evil men and women. But you’d have less problems when boys aren’t raised in ways that make them more likely to murder, commit suicide, commit rape, sexual harassment…
None of those things come naturally to men. The problem is the way they’re taught. Fortunately our environments don’t determine who we are, so some men are more prone to negative outcome than others. And luckily most men still manage to be good decent human beings.
In cultures with gender equality, as with American Indians on the east coast to the Americas before the Europeans re-socialized them, rape and battering were virtually nonexistent. So you see what’s possible when you have strong native men, but not toxic masculinity.
“Boys are raised in a particular way that can lend it self to toxicity with give them hell, no sissy stuff in particular, but even the others.”
This is extremely upsetting to me as a man. It is FALSE!!
Here are facts…
Men commit 90% of ALL violent crime in the US. With that being said, less than 3% of ALL adult men are the culprits! Think about that for a moment. PLEASE. Of the violent crime perpetrated by these men, 85% is directed at other men. Not women.
No, there is no difference between “toxic masculinity” and masculinity.
It is a red herring created as a way of subjugating men. Just how a woman with a son, a brother, a father, could believe in this is beyond me.
Since the time of humans on earth there have been evil men (and women). The fact is that ALL violent crime is down by nearly 80% since 1980. Crimes against women (such as rapes, etc) are also down by 70%-80% depending on your source.
If there is such a thing as “toxic masculinity” then there MUST also be such a thing as “toxic femininity'” There are a LOT of evil, manipulative, and horrible women out here in America too. But, they get a free pass. Right? The harm they do to men is insignificant. Right? Most women like you flatly deny women even harm men, period.
Why do we need to toss 95% of the men under the bus due to the behavior of 5% of men? Is it OK for me to cast 90% of the women in America as lying and manipulative whores because of 10% of the female population are lying and manipulative whores?
I’ll quote you:
“The fact is that ALL violent crime is down by nearly 80% since 1980. Crimes against women (such as rapes, etc) are also down by 70%-80%”
There is a correlation between gender equality and lower levels of rape and crimes against women. The culture today it’s also more feminist than it was in 1980.
Of course women do evil things. Of course women do things that harm men, women, and themselves. But I’m curious as to how you think girls and women are socialized in their gender role such that they behave in ways that hurt others or express evil? They are socialized in their gender role in a way that harms themselves more than others, as with a lack of self-confidence and autonomy — learning to be more dependent, to give up more quickly.
I gave a number of examples of how men are socialized in ways that hurt themselves, other men, and women. How are women socialized in ways that create a pattern of women doing harm to others? I can think of one way: Women are taught to disempower themselves, which can leave them staying in abusive relationships, or leaves women more anxious and depressed. That hurts their children.
But yes, there is a difference between masculinity and toxic masculinity. Read my bullet points again in the post. I try to point out how men are socialized in masculinity and how sometimes it ends up being toxic and sometimes it doesn’t.
I’m afraid I don’t see the world in terms of “toxic masculinity” and “masculinity”. I see “toxic people” and “people”. “Toxic people” come in all genders, sexual orientations, races, religions, nationality, income categories, and so on.
It’s true that no one is perfect and that you can find toxic people in every grouping. At the same time we socialize boys and men in a particular way that lens itself to higher levels than usual of toxicity, which is why men commit most of the rapists, murderers, battery/beatings. It’s not that men are bad. But we don’t raise them well.
Take another look at examples I gave of how boys are socialized in ways that hurt them and other people. What sort of parallel can you draw to the way women are socialized or LGBT, etc.?
“But we don’t raise them well.”
Think about what you just stated….You just said most boys are not raised well. That is just another way of saying the parents of boys do not raise their boys properly. How dare you say such a thing?
Fortunately, despite the problematic way that we commonly raise boys most turn out fine.
But boys are harmed by the way we raise them:
Boys, don’t cry. Don’t show your feelings. Boys and men don’t need support — they are always the support. Boys and men are expected to prove that they are tough. Boys and men are under tremendous pressure to be successful and high status in a way that women are not. If a woman raises a family well she is fine. (And most kids do turn out fine.) Women aren’t expected to achieve the same by levels that man feel pressure to achieve. (That hurts women in some ways but relieves pressure too.) We have a much higher expectations for men. Boys and men are expected to prove that they are courageous by doing dangerous things. Boys and men are taught that they are superior and too often put down others as a way of experiencing their superiority, putting down others through things like gang bangs, Beating, battery, harsh words and insults.
As a result of this common way of raising boys it’s not surprising that men are much more likely than women to commit mass murder, any sort of murder, Commit suicide, rape, gang rape, sexually harass… men are more likely to die from heart attacks, and less likely to go to the doctor… I could go on.
As you can see both men and women are harmed from all this. That’s why women complain about the way boys are raised. It affects us. It harms us, just as it harms men.
And pointing out that “masculinity” is different from “toxic masculinity” makes the point that it’s not all men.
We are all the combination of:
the culture we live in + social interactions + the personality we are born with.
As a result you find social patterns and individual differences.
So social patterns arise based on the culture that raises boys in harmful ways. Hurt people hurt people.
It’s not that men are bad but as a culture we raise boys in ways that have unhealthy aspects, which can be downright poisonous.
I’m completely confused as to why you find it offensive to point this out.
Of the four characteristics of masculinity you mentioned above, the one I probably have the biggest problem with myself is the “No sissy stuff” one, as it’d require me to pretty much cut myself off from 50% of the world, which doesn’t sound like much fun at all. Indeed, it’s depressing how often I seem to come across definitions of masculinity that pretty much boil down to great, long lists of things a boy or man *isn’t* allowed to do. How crappy is that?!
I’ve long been able to appreciate the distinction between healthy masculinity and the toxic variety because I’ve had quite a bit of exposure to both (though thankfully much more of the former kind than the latter!). During the course of my life, I’ve been fortunate to meet many cool guys (some of a fairly traditionally masculine nature, others less so), but also a handful of… *others* that I have far less fond memories of. Mostly these are the creeps who have felt the urge to scream charming things like “Fucking faggot!” at me simply because of the way I’ve been dressed (or sometimes just for having the great misfortune to cross paths with them)[*] – in one memorably unpleasant incident, I actually had a couple chase me in a car (though I thankfully managed to get away from them without injury!). I’m sure it’s not just people like me they’ve targeted (and who would therefore have a problem with them), though. A lot of them, I’m sure, are the sort of yobbos one often encounters on a Friday or Saturday night: the people who go out looking for fights, and who, as I often like to put it, haven’t had a good night unless they’ve ruined someone else’s! If there’d be a way of enforcing a curfew on guys like *that*, I don’t think I (or many other people for that matter) would be too upset!
*Ironically, the big, tough, manly men in this category have usually screamed their abuse at me from the safety of a pack or a fast-moving car. Yeah, *real* brave and macho, I don’t think!
Thanks for sharing your experience with this.
Boys and men are at a disadvantage on “no sissy staff“ because, since we value masculinity over femininity, boys and men are seen as demeaning themselves when they cross over to the feminine – even though all human beings have a feminine side. In fact, what is considered masculine and feminine varies from culture to culture. But because we value masculinity girls aren’t forbidden from crossing over and doing masculine things. So girls end up benefiting even as they are hurt — by being put down — in that they can express their full human selves much more easily.
Wow, I am shocked with the comments you’ve received so far. It has certainly hit a nerve. Apparently the phrase “toxic masculinity” is triggering people. Obviously what you mean is masculinity that is TOXIC, not masculinity itself. Why do you think people are having such vitriolic responses?
Yes, I’m talking about masculinity that is toxic, not masculinity itself.
Fortunately, most men I know are not filled with toxic masculinity. They are a good men.
You ask a good question. Why do So many who have commented on my blog not see the distinction? I can only guess that they have internalized so much TM that toxic masculinity seems like masculinity. And so they don’t seem to see how they are hurting others and hurting themselves in ways that are actually completely avoidable. But you would have to do the work to heal.
Define toxic masculine behaviour. Good. Now tell me what you call the exact same behaviour when women do it. Now do you see the problem?
Read 1-4 again. Women are not expected to be a support for everyone else and not seek help themselves. Women don’t have the same pressure to be a big wheel. If a woman marries and has children she is considered perfectly fine. Women certainly aren’t told not to do sissy stuff Dash femininity is what’s called sissy stuff. And girls feel OK crossing over in doing boy-things So they are limited in the way that boys and men are. And girls aren’t taught to give them hell. That’s why it’s rarely girls or women who are committing rape, beatings, Murder… They are less likely to prove so-called superiority by things like driving recklessly.
Not all men are toxic. Not all masculinity is toxic. The problem is that we raise boys in ways that make it more likely that they will behave in ways that are hurtful to themselves and others.
I don’t think she is shocked by the comments.. I think she may have been shocked if she didn’t receive comments like the ones she is getting.
Well I was shocked so I think she was too. I’m shocked to find out that so many men think that masculinity is the same thing as toxic masculinity. Simply not true. There are many, many good men out there. From my experience, most men are good men.
Probably so. I guess I didn’t find it as provocative as others.
And I didn’t think you would be provocative at all. Surprise.
Ha! Thanks.😉 My comment wasn’t meant as a slight. I enjoyed the post, as I do your others. I meant it wasn’t ‘provocative’ in the sense that it didn’t shock nor offend me.
And that is exactly how I took it. Thanks for chiming in.
Oh good! You’re welcome.
What would you do if all men had a 9 pm curfew? If toxic masculinity were put under 9 PM curfew, what would you do? It’s the same question just worded differently or the effect would be the same. IMO, all men have displayed some type of toxic masculinity in their life time. So, all men would have a 9 pm curfew. If not all men, how do you apply the curfew? Also, what about trans people? If self-identifying is the only standard used then the question is moot. Most men would self-identify as a women after 9 pm.
Most businesses would close at 9 pm. Most businesses like strip clubs, bars, and night clubs, would go out of business. Stores that sell alcohol would become even more lucrative. The roads would be safer and the number of alcohol related accident’s would go down for the simple fact that there are less people on the road. The overall economy would suffer for a while but will bounce back. Where there is a will there is a way. People will figure out a way to make money in this situation. Depending on how “curfew” is defined, there would be more house parties and\or lock ins.
I don’t think it will have much effect on sexual assault. Violent sexual assault, meaning sexual assault involving force by a person not known to the victim, may go down a little depending on the penalties and enforcement of breaking curfew. One could argue that it would put women in more danger because there would be more individual interaction at someone home after 9pm compared to more of a group interaction at a bar or a club. I’m unsure if women would go out more after 9 because of the curfew. Most people go out after 9 to meet people for a romantic relationship.
I’m not saying that romantic relationships is the only reason why people go out. I’m saying most people will go out less if they know there is no possibility of a romantic relationship.
I have been talking about the possible effects of a 9pm curfew and I haven’t answered your question, what would I do. I really don’t know what I would do. The idea is so far-fetched I know it could never happen or there would be so many loopholes it would only be symbolic.
Why do you think that masculinity and toxic masculinity are the same thing?
They are not. I know plenty of men who are not filled with toxic masculinity. Thankfully! In fact I would say that most men are good men.
And I’m not sure how cis or trans is relevant. Either can take on toxic masculinity, or not.
“Why do you think that masculinity and toxic masculinity are the same thing?” They are the same thing because toxic masculinity is subjective at best. Would you call a man who can’t read and won’t ask anyone for help because he is ashamed of being illiterate, a good man or a man full of toxic masculinity or someplace in between? Would he be subject to the 9pm curfew?
I agree, most men are good but that doesn’t mean they don’t display some form of toxic masculinity.
Well I don’t think all men, or all women, are perfect. But I don’t think that all men have toxic masculinity in them.
“But I don’t think that all men have toxic masculinity in them.”
This may be true but I’m confident that most of those good men you talk about are guilty of at least one of your four examples in some way or another.
Since all men are socialized with those four points I’m sure that all men have some degree of being, or yearning to be, a sturdy oak, A big wheel, avoid sissy stuff, and give them hell. But not all men are going to reach toxic levels. A lot of men will work to be a big wheel but not hurt people in the process, like beat themselves up, or beat others up, if they don’t achieve it. Most men will avoid sissy stuff but there are more and less toxic ways of doing that. If you avoid wearing pink but allow yourself some emotion – there is a continuum to these things – you won’t necessarily be toxic.
“Toxicity arises when men behave in ways that hurt others because of the way we socially construct masculinity.”
I find it utterly absurd that women should have ANY say on what is deemed “good” masculinity. This whole idea of “toxic masculinity” is a farce created by feminism to subjugate men.
What about toxic femininity? Women certainly do engage in behavior that harm others including many men. Where are your critiques of female sinister and unhealthful behavior? Oh but it is always the men. Right? It is patriarchy. Right?
There is nothing you or other women can say that will convince me or many many other men that this whole “toxic masculinity” nonsense is merely an attempt to subjugate men. It is an attempt to control our behavior based on women’s terms. I say to hell with that!! Yet these same women scream “misogynist” to any man who dares to critique the bad behavior of women. But, you want equality. Right? I scoff at the notion.
What is good for the goose is good for the gander. But, what is BAD for the goose is also BAD for the gander. That is real equality. Not this one sided made up garbage called “toxic masculinity.”
Many women and men alike have been harmed by toxic Masculinity, as I described in the post. When you have been harmed you have every right to try to change things.
Fortunately, most men are not toxic.
And see what I said to Fred.
It’s amazing how the radical left feels free to persecute masculinity behind the thinly veiled excuse “oh, we don’t mean all men”. Would these same people be comfortable discussing toxic femininity, toxic homosexuality, toxic transexuality, or toxic blackness on the basis that “oh, we don’t mean all women, gays, transexuals or blacks, only the toxic part of those identities”, while going on to pigeon hole the state of being female, gay, transexual or black into 4 characteristics. “Oh, here are the 4 characteristics of being black, only -some- of which are actually toxic, so rest easy, we are not the bigots we appear to be”.
Of course men aren’t committing all the assaults, only a disproportionately high percentage of the assaults, leading you to casually throw out your male curfew thought experiment. How do you feel about a homosexual curfew thought experiment since a disproportionate percentage of the paedophilia crimes are by homosexuals? (by a ratio of 11:1). Is that still an amusing little thought experiment, pray tell? Or what if we amuse ourselves thinking about a black male curfew, since they are about 8x as likely as the average white man to commit a crime?
I’m wondering why you don’t want to see the difference between men and toxic masculinity. They are not the same thing. Men are also harmed by toxic masculinity. It has to do with the ways some men harm other people because of the way masculinity is socially constructed, in the ways I described. Those parts that some men hang onto. In fact I would say that your comments are often examples. You must be hurt in some way and deal with it by lashing out at Others instead of seeking help from Someone who could support you.
If you think there is such a thing as toxic femininity or toxic blackness or toxic LGBT etc, I’m curious as to what that would be. How it manifest? How would each of these identities be constructed such that they cause harm?
What might toxic blackness look like? Well do you think maybe there is negative stuff in black culture maybe? Black Gangsta culture? Black Gang culture? Black rap culture? Black single mother culture? Now how would it look like in your faculty if you starting running a class on “toxic blackness”? You’d be tossed out on your ear right? You’d be a pariah. So why should you get a free pass on being a bigot against men?
You say there are problems in black culture but the source isn’t how black people are socialized so much as poverty. Poverty meets toxic masculinity:
Working class white families are seeing the same family break down, now that the white working class is feeling squeezed financially and increasingly falling out of the middle class (due to an enormous redistribution of wealth from the middle class to the top 1%). Some white working-class people even talk about how their communities are beginning to resemble impoverished black communities. That’s because financial stress lies behind both.
The toxicity of what you call black culture is the toxicity you find in gang culture, which you commonly find among young men who are impoverished, regardless of race. Again, poverty lies behind this. Toxic masculinity also lies behind this. It’s the boys, not the girls, who are drawn to gangs. Young men are taught that they are supposed to be powerful. When they find themselves at the bottom of the hierarchy they act out and try to gain a sense of power by fighting with other gangs, tagging property as theirs, criminal activity, etc. and you find us in every ethnicity.
to put a curfew on men would be a very dangerous thing to do because not all men commit rapes and there are women who have committed sex crimes and men can be victims too and there are men who are out at night who are not that way inclined and who would be seeking damages if they were wrongly accused of crimes they never committed. after the rape and murder of up and coming comedian Eurydice Dixon, 22 there was talk of women never walking home alone at night but if somebody wants to walk alone at night it should be their choice they shouldn’t be dictated to about whether they should walk in pairs or groups because if a rapist is going to attack one person they will most often attack all in a group as has happened and to think that all men are toxic is wrong because there are some people who wouldn’t realize what they’re doing is toxic people are always too quick to judge and women are very good liars at making up rape stories because to me if somebody disclosed that to me I’d most likely say they were lying and would call for a lie detector test.
I hope you actually got that I make a distinction between men and toxic masculinity—which hurts everyone, men and women alike.