GRSJ224/toxic masculinity
Toxic masculinity describes a manifestation of masculinity that perpetuates aggressive behaviour, suppressed emotions, violence towards others, and an anti-intellectualism approach towards gender studies. The term has gained popularity in the recent years due to an increased awareness of the general public towards the harmful consequences of it. Activists have taken up to scrutinize it despite facing significant backlash, and programs for healthy masculinity have increased across college campuses and workplaces, and corporations have also taken it up as a form of marketing.
Etymology
“In contemporary American and European culture, [hegemonic masculinity] serves as the standard upon which the "real man" is defined. According to [R. W.] Connell, contemporary hegemonic masculinity is built on two legs, domination of women and a hierarchy of intermale dominance. It is also shaped to a significant extent by the stigmatization of homosexuality. Hegemonic masculinity is the stereotypic notion of masculinity that shapes the socialization and aspirations of young males. Today’s hegemonic masculinity in the United States of America and Europe includes a high degree of ruthless competition, an inability to express emotions other than anger, an unwillingness to admit weakness or dependency, devaluation of women and all feminine attributes in men, homophobia, and so forth."[1]
Toxic masculinity is the colloquial term for hegemonic masculinity, a term coined by Australian sociologist R. W. Connell. The term toxic was adopted to describe the inhibiting characteristics of hegemonic masculinity such as physical violence and expectations for men to be dominant and aggressive, and for them to suppress their emotions. The word hegemony means leadership and dominance, and has been used in sociology by Italian Marxist philosopher Gramsci to describe the struggle between class relations. This application facilitated a seamless transfer over to gender relations. Connell defines hegemonic masculinity as a practice that legitimizes powerful men’s dominant positions in society and justifies the subordination of women, other men, and other marginalized ways of being a man[2]. It not only seeks to legitimize itself, but also proposes an explanation for why powerful men maintain dominance over women and non-binary gender identities. From this definition, we understand that this masculinity is not only harmful for women, but men as well. It is highly discriminatory towards all but powerful men at the top. Thus, the fight to curb hegemonic masculinity is one that should be fought for by men and women alike. [3]
Social Effects
Crime
The prevailing conformity to toxic masculinity affects every part of a man's life. It is used to rationalize and excuse toxic behaviour in the early stages, such as bullying amongst school-aged boys. The rhetoric of, “boys will be boys”, serves to undermine the pertinent issues which cause the toxic behaviour exhibited in the early school days. It is first used to excuse bullying and mild physical violence, and grows into excusing sexual assault and rape culture, facilitating crimes against women. This toxic upbringing also makes men more prone to committing crimes overall. Furthermore, when studied in isolation, toxic masculinity has been found to have a relationship with specific crimes committed by men such as rape, murder, assault, and white collar crimes.[4] An interesting discovery that was made regarding the relationship between criminals and positions of power, was that often times crime was linked to men who were seeking positions of power, not men who were already in those positions.[5]
Health
Toxic masculinity negatively affects the sexual, mental, and physical health of men. It encourages men to seek sex with multiple partners[6], and the values of stoicism and emotionlessness debilitate mens’ willingness to seek help for mental illnesses.[7] A recognition of a weak mental state often make men feel emasculated, which results in more anger, the only acceptable emotion for them to exhibit.
Victims
The biggest victims of toxic masculinity are women. Toxic masculinity oppresses women and seeks to keep them subjugated so men can continue to garner power by dominating over them. Toxic masculinity supports rape culture, especially in fraternities, facilitated by "locker room talk", a colloquial term used for informal exchanges between men, often sexually charged, regarding their often non-consensual sexual triumphs and plans to sexually harass and/or assault. The problematic nature of locker room talk is undermined when it's dismissed as boys joking around. Campus movements by fraternities, parading with signs stating, “No means yes” are consequences of allowing boys, “to be boys”. The existence of such blatant and direct violations against the bodily autonomies of women and the necessity of consent illustrate just the extent to which hegemonic masculinity is toxic. Women ought to be subjected, by any means necessary, even violence. The political success of both Donald Trump and Brett Kavanaugh despite their sexual assault allegations are perfect examples which illustrate how a masculinity that focuses on violence, domination, power, and devalues compassion and kindness exploits women.
Representation
Sports
Commercial sports embodies the epitome of toxic masculinity. It not only represents, but also enables, perpetuates, and celebrates it. Body-contact confrontational sports in particular are the poster children of how toxic masculinity prevails in sports, as they exhibit its violent and aggressive nature. American football highlights these characteristics in particular: Emotionlessness, invulnerability, toughness, and risk-taking are all hallmarks of the sport, and have normalized injuries within football as something to be expected. “It is noble to play in pain, nobler to play in agony, and noblest if one never exhibits any sign of pain at all”[8]
Media
Magazines, television, advertisements, and films, all play a role in perpetuating toxic masculinity. The media’s notions of the ideal male are violent, macho, and alpha. These icons include physically powerful football players, stoic military figures, and hard-edged bikers. The existence of these archetypes enables capitalism to profit off of the insecurities of men.There has been a rapid increase in advertisement for products aimed at helping men build muscles and develop the ideal, macho physique. [9] These products exploit mens’ feelings of inadequacy compared to the tropes of what a real man is as portrayed by the media. The music industry also plays a role in the perpetuation of toxic masculinity by setting norms of misogyny, violence, and crime across multiple genres such as hip hop, pop, country, and heavy metal.
Case Study
We Believe: The Best a Man Can Be
“We Believe: The Best Men Can Be” is an advertisement by the razor company Gillette. The film sought to illustrate the current state of toxic masculinity, and urged men to reject the status quo, and take accountability for their actions. The slogan for Gillette is, “The best a man can get”, and the purpose of this short was to challenge what that truly means. The short opens with scenes of bullying, normalized sexual harassment on television, sexism in the work place, and scenes of young boys fighting with each other. At the mid point of the video, the narrator states, “…we believe in the best in men.” The video, following that, shows scenes of a father empowering her daughter, men breaking up fights and bullying, and men building each other up. The purpose of the video was to show a contrast between what is currently normalized as acceptable behaviour from men, and what the best a man can get truly is.
Response
The ad sparked an outrage amongst men, who quickly came to criticize it for caving into the demands of feminists, for being condescending, for generalizing that all men are bad, and for believing that men need to be changed. Many men who claim to be lifetime supporters of the brand have claimed to have boycotted it, criticizing it for alienating its consumer base. The men who’ve quickly jumped to defend their masculinity is a direct consequence of toxic masculinity. They have been conditioned to view their masculinity as something integral to their identity, and to defend it against any and all which threaten it, even a two minute ad which only sought to promote kindness amongst men. The backlash that Gillette has received is tone-deaf in that it stems from the very notion the video attempts to criticize. The brand received support from feminists and those who understand the nuances of the difference between toxic and healthy masculinity. It should be noted, however, that despite significant support, the commercial nature of the ad has been scrutinized, many devaluing the ad for leveraging social issues for a profit boost.
References
- ↑ Kupers, Terry A. "Toxic Masculinity as a Barrier to Mental Health Treatment in Prison." Journal of Clinical Psychology 61, no. 6 (2005): 713-24. doi:10.1002/jclp.20105.
- ↑ Connell, R. W. (2007). Masculinities. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
- ↑ Kupers, Terry A (2005). "Toxic Masculinity as a Barrier to Mental Health Treatment in Prison". Journal of Clinical Psychology. 6: 713–24.
- ↑ Newburn, Tim; Stanko, Elizabeth A (2006). Just Boys Doing Business?: Men, Masculinities and Crime. London: Routeledge.
- ↑ Bufkin, Jana L (1999). "Bias Crime as Gendered Behavior". Social Justice. 1 (75): 155–176 – via JSTOR.
- ↑ Sabo, Donald F; Gordon, David (1995). Mens Health and Illness: Gender, Power, and the Body. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
- ↑ Addis, Michael E; Mahalik R, James (2003). "Men, Masculinity, and the Contexts of Help Seeking". American Psychologist. 58, no.1: 5–14.
- ↑ Nelson, Mariah Burton (1996). The Stronger Women Get, the More Men Love Football: Sexism and the Culture of Sport. London: Womens.
- ↑ Montiel, Aminée Vega (2014). Media and Gender a Scholarly Agenda for the Global Alliance on Media and Gender. Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization.