The title gets one standard response to this topic out the way: talking about toxic masculinity is not a claim that men are inherently toxic. That said, here’s another repost from my own blog.
In his essay The Power of the Powerless, Czech dissident Vaclav Havel argues persuasively that dictatorships do not crush dissent and dissidents because they’re about to lead a revolution. Where classic tyrants claimed the right to rule based on power or brute force, modern dictatorships claim their rule is justified because they know The Truth. That truth may be communism, fascism, apartheid, theocracy (that justification goes back centuries, of course) — what’s important is that because they supposedly embody that creed, they are entitled to rule. Because God wants it. Because they’re the vanguard of the world communist revolution. Because of the color of their skin.
That, Havel said, is why they fear dissent. To express different views is to imply there are alternative views, that the government does not have a monopoly on the truth. Modern tyrants take that as a direct attack on their legitimacy. Theocracy has always seen things that way.
A Dr. Nerdlove post on toxic masculinity argues male intolerance for guys who aren’t conventionally manly stems from the same root. When men whine about how society won’t let them be men, they invariably mean a very narrow definition of manhood. It runs along lines of men being violent, sexually aggressive, picking “bros before ho’s,” enjoying guy stuff (cigars, scotch, sports, porn) and not doing girly stuff. Definitely dominant over the women in their lives. And all guys are like that; if they’re not they’re either lying or they’re Not Real Men.
As Nerdlove says, establishing a narrow definition of manhood only works “as long as everyone agrees to play by the same rules. People who diverge from its dictates threaten to undermine the ‘truth’ in ‘biotruth’. Trans people challenge the idea that being a man is inherent in one’s genitalia or having a Y chromosome. Feminine acting or presenting gay men challenge male sexual roles. Passive, submissive or emotionally expressive men put paid to the idea that men must be aggressive and stoic. And because they challenge the status-quo, they must be forced back into compliance, whether through mockery and derision or through outright violence.”
The claim “feminists won’t let men be men” has always been bullshit, unless you mean “feminists won’t let us bring back 1950s-style patriarchy” or “prosecuting rape is an attack on men” (which is indeed, what some people believe). It ignores that men are much worse than feminists when it comes to policing male behavior. “Let men be men!” doesn’t apply if the men prefer theater or playing the violin to sports, prefer herbal tea to scotch, etc. In the eyes of toxic masculinists, such men are fair game.
If toxic masculinity acknowledged these guys were also real men, that would undercut the idea manhood is a narrow path and only the men who walk that path deserve respect. Alternatives have to be mocked, humiliated, bullied or dismissed — they’re beta males, they’re “white knighting,” their unmanly behavior is performative and underneath they’re no different from Real Men.
It’s an argument I see a lot when men write The Truth About Guys articles. The writer is firmly convinced he is a Real Guy; therefore all real guys must be like him. That may mean they see women as interchangeable sex objects, that they all like dumb raunchy comedies, that they’re total slobs who need a woman to shape them up, etc. Everybody’s doing it, or at least every guy! If a guy says he isn’t, he’s lying.
Of course some men lie when they perform masculinity for other men — to avoid ridicule, to impress their buddies, to stay one of the bros. That’s okay, though, because the performance affirms male stereotypes rather than questioning them.
Internet pundit Matt Walsh, for instance, held up the first responders working after Hurricane Harvey hit Texas in 2017 as Real Men, then went on to explain men like that are what women want, not some squishy liberal androgynous wimp. This is almost comical. Walsh’s manly accomplishments consist of things such as slut-shaming rape victims, lying about the supposed evil of trans people and claiming that real men only buy gifts for their wives at the last minute (“buying a Valentine’s Day gift for your wife a month early is the gayest thing you could do.”). If women only wanted heroic, first-responder types, he and I would both be single.
I see the same dynamic in Fox News’ Jesse Watters smirking that Texas Democrat James Talarico is a low-testosterone loser who doesn’t eat enough meat or know enough about football to be a real man. A life of jeering at people on Fox News hardly screams virile masculinity (to repeat myself, neither does my lifestyle) but Watters doubtless hopes shitting on other men proves he belongs in the He-Man Club.
Even if Watters and Walsh were the tough guys they’re posing as, that wouldn’t excuse their treatment of other men, or of women. Unfortunately toxic masculinity is very good at perpetuating itself this way.
Covers by Keith Pollard (top) and Rich Buckler
