Current Events > Why isn't toxic femininity a thing

(+) Yeah! (+)

It does, just like the toxicity within the same race, but people don't want to talk about it.

---

Because the whole point of the ideology behind the people peddling these things is to have clear antagonistic forces at work for why the world is bad. Those with "less power" inherently cannot have problems or else it breaks their narrative.

Your question is irrelevant because nowhere did I imply or say that words are separated from meanings.

You recognize the distinction doesn't work outside of very specific linguistic discussions, and yet:

We aren't talking about meanings. We're talking about terms.

---

It is. We just didn't use the term.

BlueMage279 posted...

If you understand that two terms can have the same meaning but different connotations, then you understand my point perfectly.

Do you think I'm discussing the meaning of the term? Honestly?

It's weird that you think that you're -not-.

---

It is.

---

it is and im sure youve been told that at some point

---

BlueMage279 posted...

"I have an issue with slur, let's use a better word"
"explain how the word and meaning are separate"
"I'm not talking about the meaning of the word"
"oh but you are"

jfc dude you're done

Don't throw a fit, just examine your process. You can only interpret something as a slur based on meaning, correct?

---

Lorenzo_2003 posted...

Of course toxic femininity is a thing. But it does not fit the narrative. When all else fails, blame men. But you cant low key have that as your group ideology, while also acknowledging any flaws in femininity or feminism.

This.

---

BlueMage279 posted...

No. It's based on connotation. F** and gay both mean homosexual person. One is a slur, one is not because of the connotation. For all other inquiries, see post #51.

Connotation is a type of meaning.

Man, pedantry is annoying.

---

Okay, then don't.

---

why do men get so defensive when it comes to the subject of toxic masculinity

---

what should it be called then

---

The reason the term toxic femininity never became widespread was because feminism fought against negative behavioral norms expected of women before the term toxic masculinity was even so much as an idea in somebody's head.

Actually, that goes back to the real point I wanted to make but got sidetracked being a pedant on:

Lorenzo and his ilk want the term to be negative. They want it framed as a reason to blame feminism. He's been doing it throughout this whole topic.

If you know anyone in a mental health field, you might hear them sometimes complain of the "the new r word", because people keep finding reason to find the old one insensitive. It's a stupid problem, and one that's being pushed for "toxic masculinity."

---

Toxic masculinity does not mean all men are toxic and frequently refers to how men treat other men.

---

BlueMage279 posted...

Btw that article is written by a female psychotherapist. Idk why she's so sensitive about the subject of toxic masculinity.

There's no guarantee that people unwilling to understand the intended meaning of the term will do so after the term is changed. The same thing happened with climate change. Those who didn't believe global warming was a thing just used the change to say "look, they changed it because they were wrong."

mario2000 posted...

why do men get so defensive when it comes to the subject of toxic masculinity

Are you suggesting those men should man up?

---

BlueMage279 posted...

Harmful gender norms?
Toxic gender standards?
If it needs to be catchy, I'm sure we could think of something.

none of those cover the fact that it is specific to masculinity

---

Man, it's kinda sad to see how people avoid discussing the context of an issue by focusing on the semantics and acting like they're actually making an argument. "Toxic masculinity" is offensive to you? Fine, from now on it's the Fluffy Bunny Issue.

The concept of the Fluffy Bunny Issue is used in academic and media discussions of masculinity to refer to certain cultural norms that are associated with harm to society and to men themselves. Traditional stereotypes of men as socially dominant, along with related traits such as misogyny and homophobia, can be considered "toxic" due in part to their promotion of violence, including sexual assault and domestic violence. The socialization of boys often normalizes violence, such as in the saying "boys will be boys" with regard to bullying and aggression.

Self-reliance and emotional repression are correlated with increased psychological problems in men such as depression, increased stress, and substance abuse. Toxic masculine traits are characteristic of the unspoken code of behavior among men in American prisons, where they exist in part as a response to the harsh conditions of prison life.

Other traditionally masculine traits such as devotion to work, pride in excelling at sports, and providing for one's family, are not considered to be "toxic". The concept was originally used by authors associated with the mythopoetic men's movement such as Shepherd Bliss to contrast stereotypical notions of masculinity with a "real" or "deep" masculinity that they say men have lost touch with in modern society.

Is that better?

---

But it isn't specific to men. There are harmful gender norms for everyone. If you want to discuss only men, then just include the word men/male literally anywhere just once in your discussion and we'll get it.

Harmful male gender norms? Societal expectations for men? I'm sure if we put our heads together, we can think of something short and catchy though

i know, how about "toxic masculinity"

---

BlueMage279 posted...

But it isn't specific to men. There are harmful gender norms for everyone. If you want to discuss only men, then just include the word men/male literally anywhere just once in your discussion and we'll get it.

Harmful male gender norms? Societal expectations for men? I'm sure if we put our heads together, we can think of something short and catchy though.

Yea that's right. There's no guarantee. But climate change is more accurate term so we tend to use that now. Unless you're saying it might make it worse if we stop saying toxic masculinity? I don't see how that would happen.

Climate change and global warming both existed in tandem to describe related but distinct concepts. Climate change's replacement usage in the popular lexicon came about to attempt to appease people who keep saying "LOL BUT IT'S SO COLD HOW IS GLOBAL WARMING REAL"


---

BlueMage279 posted...

yea so you're just trolling. got it.

and right back to my original point

mario2000 posted...

why do men get so defensive when it comes to the subject of toxic masculinity

---

BlueMage279 posted...

But it isn't specific to men. There are harmful gender norms for everyone. If you want to discuss only men, then just include the word men/male literally anywhere just once in your discussion and we'll get it.

Harmful male gender norms? Societal expectations for men? I'm sure if we put our heads together, we can think of something short and catchy though.

Yea that's right. There's no guarantee. But climate change is more accurate term so we tend to use that now. Unless you're saying it might make it worse if we stop saying toxic masculinity? I don't see how that would happen.

My bigger point is that the problem is an unwillingness to understand the term. The confusion surrounding toxic masculinity isn't a product of the term itself, but the product of people who refuse to understand it spreading false information. And no, climate change is not a "more accurate" term. It is as accurate as global warming.

BlueMage279 posted...

I wouldn't say there's any confusion about the term. There are people here who choose to use it and people who think it's insulting. Elaborate on what false information is being spread.

The idea that toxic masculinity suggests that masculinity is toxic. It doesn't.

BlueMage279 posted...

Connotations exist. I cited a professional opinion to back this up. If you choose to ignore it, I can't help you.

I don't have to agree with someone's opinion just because they are a professional. Toxic masculinity does not suggest that masculinity is toxic. If someone thinks that it does, they misunderstand the term. There's no reason to take this term negatively, and refusing to be corrected on what the term implies is more worrisome than trying to come up with an alternative term.

BlueMage279 posted...

I don't have to agree with someone's opinion just because they are some random on the internet. Toxic masculinity does suggest that masculinity is toxic. If someone thinks that it doesn't, they misunderstand the connotations. There's no reason to take this term positively, and refusing to be corrected on what the term implies is more worrisome than continuing to prop it up.

Is this you admitting that you've given up trying to have an honest discussion about the term and what it means?

Toxic masculinity suggests that certain, outdated forms of masculinity are toxic. Basically anything that says that men can't show their feelings and emotions, or do anything that is considered feminine. It does not mean that all forms of masculinity are toxic.

---

BlueMage279 posted...

You're just asserting that you're right and that there's nothing wrong with the term. I've explained why it's problematic. Read the thread and take your fingers out of your ears.

And I've explained that the problem comes not from the term itself, but from those who misunderstand it.

BlueMage279 posted...

No, you just stated it.

When the term was made to point out that some masculine behaviorial expextations are negative, and then some took it to mean that all masculine behavior is toxic, what do you call that?

BlueMage279 posted...

Show me where I said that it implies that all forms of masculinity are bad? For the record, I didn't, and I know it doesn't mean that.

I didn't say you said that. And whether you said that or not was never the point.

BlueMage279 posted...

The idea, which has taken root in popular culture, originally started as a concept along the lines of what Olivia Petter once wrote in "The Independent": That toxic masculinity dictates that men should be stoic and strong, both emotionally and physically, and recognizing that as a problem provides men an opportunity to rethink what it means to be a man today, and what is generally expected of them by society.

This is why the term annoys me for sure.I don't see why being stoic and strong is a bad thing.

It's the means to that end that may be turned into something "toxic", but there's nothing wrong with promoting men being capable both emotionally and physically to deal with problems that impact their lives and the people around them, instead of breaking down and cowering in fear.

BlueMage279 posted...

Then you just inferred that I thought that, which is also incorrect.

Nothing I said has anything to do with what you specifically think regarding the meaning of the term.

Phewfus posted...

This is why the term annoys me for sure.I don't see why being stoic and strong is a bad thing.

It's the means to that end that may be turned into something "toxic", but there's nothing wrong with promoting men being capable both emotionally and physically to deal with problems that impact their lives and the people around them, instead of breaking down and cowering in fear.

Why does one have to mean the other? Showing your emotions doesn't mean "breaking down and cowering in fear." That's exactly what toxic masculinity is.

---