Masculine

A while back a new term popped into existence. I instantly knew what it meant, and found it a useful tool in describing certain negative characteristics and behaviour within our culture.

I also found it strange that there was an almost immediate backlash against it.

Seriously, what the hell is wrong with some men.

In my life I have been a victim of toxic masculinity. As a kid, I got picked on and bullied once in a while. I bet you can guess which gender every single one of my tormentors was?

Picked on by a girl, or made fun of by a girl? I suppose it would have been theoretically possible, but it never happened. Not even once.

Well, maybe I’m just some kind of weak, victim kinda guy. After all, my military service, and time working in a shipyard, and 38 year marriage, 30 years as a student and teacher of Shotokan Karate, and my 8 years training in Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu are probably all indicators of my lack of toughness, and therefore my lack of qualification to speak out about toxic masculinity.

Maybe you should say that to my face.

But I digress.

The argument that the term is somehow an attack on men is absurd. I am a man, and do not feel it attacks me. Does it point a questioning finger at some otherwise unquestioned behaviours and attitudes that I might have? I think it does.

Look at my argument where I listed some of my most masculine life experiences, and where I finished with what was clearly a chest-thumping expression of challenge.

What a ridiculous way to express an idea in a typed essay on behaviors that are both masculine and unacceptable.

Why would it matter if I am tough, or if I’m not, or if even if I’m male or not? However, I’m willing to accept that to a number of readers about this topic it does matter.

And therein lies part of the problem.

Not a problem with masculinity if we just do a little simple mental sorting. If I am correct in stating that there is a category of masculinity that should be labeled toxic, would that also not automatically require that there be another which should be known as non-toxic masculinity.

Let’s take a seemingly harmless example.

You are approaching a door at a mall at about the same time as a woman. You pull open the door and hold it open for her, with a smile. She smiles back and says, “No, after you.”

Do you hold your smile, accept that your attempt at courtesy has been courteously declined, and enter the doorway first, or do you insist that she pass the door ahead of you?

To have insisted would mean that you think you have the right to decide when a total stranger should have to pass through a doorway, and when they shouldn’t. They clearly stated that they didn’t want to pass before you, and yet it was more important to you that they honour your attempt to be nice than their right as an autonomous individual to move about freely.

You may well disagree that this is not what it means, but it certainly could to the woman in question, and for you to decide that it’s really all about you means that you are what many of us would choose to call an asshole. I agree that you would only be a minor asshole, but certainly one never-the-less.

How about if in the example, you try and insist, and she continues to refuse. Do you eventually give up, after several rounds of, “no, after you,” or do you finally get mad and display anger? Now you are a major asshole, of the first order; a Darth Vader of assholes.

I contend that you are now a glowing example of toxic masculinity.

If the confrontation had ended at her first decline, it would have been a fine example of non-toxic masculine behaviour.

How about another from the current news cycle?

An Irish UFC fighter, who acts like a douce towards other fighters, and fans, and people in general, and who is frequently in trouble with the law over it, goes into a bar.

We don’t know exactly what happens in the next part, but some older, grey-haired gentleman seems to have not been impressed. Perhaps words were exchanged. Somebody starts videoing. The older gentleman is no longer engaging with the young fighter, and is sitting at the bar with his back turned. The fighter approaches, and tries to pour the older gentleman a drink from a bottle of booze. It would seem that the gent refuses the drink, likely based on the athlete’s reputation as an asshole.

The fighter, who seems to have just been trying to mend fences and build bridges then proceeds to punch the older gentleman in the head, and is dragged away by bystanders.

A veritable shit-storm of behaviour that is clearly masculine, and is also totally toxic. Can you even imagine this same story sounding real if it were a female fighter involved?

And it isn’t simply that the character involved is an asshole, which he clearly is. He has been an asshole for a long time; at least for his entire public career. Society has applauded his antics, and egged him on. Not only has he gotten away with it, but has been rewarded with both adoration and applause.

Do we dare to be shocked when it turns out that he is actually exactly as advertised?

Why does it hurt anybody to call this guy an example of toxic masculinity?

Let’s keep the story equally masculine, and remove the toxicity. The fighter offers to pour the guy a drink, and when he is refused immediately returns to his own table and leaves the old guy in peace.

This new term is a great one as a descriptor for this kind of behaviour; much more accurate than the mere asshole label.

Turns out, that many of the men that feel attacked by the label react by denouncing it as a feminist attack on men. The implication is that radical, man-hating women are out to vent their hatred.

Nothing could be farther from the truth. The people that first started using this label, and others like it, were men. Does that matter? It shouldn’t, but it seems that it does.

The label arose from the work of a number of males reacting against the societal forces that promote and reinforce particular negative behaviours that western society labels as masculine ones.

Were these men also feminists? Who cares? Were they man haters? I seriously doubt it.

But let’s forget all of that for a minute, and focus on a few aspects of masculinity that are less than endearing.

If you flip back to my resume of manliness, you many notice that three of the five items listed carry a common thread. Military service, Karate training, and Jiu-Jitsu all are closely related to violence. Do you think that to be just a random fluke?

Why wouldn’t I have listed any of my other major life experiences? The answer is simple; I chose to use those that are the most masculine at a gut-reaction level. I have also attended university, taught history at a high school, and like to travel. While those things are not particularly female, they are not characteristically masculine either.

In both of my examples of toxic behaviour, violence is either implied (the angry door holder), or direct (hitting the elderly man).

Certainly, non-masculine individuals can be violent, just as they can serve in the Army, or be Karateka, or excel at Jiu-Jitsu.

I think a critical self-examination by men is long overdue, and it has nothing to do with feminism, or male-bashing, or hurt feelings.

Between 2003 until 2012 in the USA 88% of murders were committed by men. If you are a man and think that doesn’t matter to you, think again. 78.7% of murder victims worldwide are male, as are approximately half the victims of assault.

The evidence would also indicate that the problem isn’t one of genetics. It is societal.

Being assertive is considered a positive masculine characteristic. The meaner brother of assertiveness is aggression, and it is the first-cousin is violence. Men are often praised for being unwilling to take no for an answer. What an unpleasant characteristic? It is toxic.

People who are masculine are also expected to control their emotions. You shouldn’t ever show any emotion, but if you do, the only one that won’t get you shamed is anger. This is toxic.

If you don’t like the term toxic masculinity for behaviours such as these how about a somewhat less evocative label such as, “toxic behaviours that are not exclusive to individuals who self-identify as masculine, or present in all individuals who self-identify as masculine, but statistically more likely to be detectable in individuals who self-identify as masculine.”

I like the term toxic masculinity just fine, and understood instantly what it referred to when I heard it for the first time.

It isn’t an attack on me.