Do We Live in a Post-Toxic-Masculinity World?
In the very-online cultural discussion around masculinity, the toxic/tonic masculinity divide seems to be getting us absolutely nowhere.
I really thought that perhaps the Tim Walz-ian “tonic masculinity” upswell would have a major influence on America’s body politic…offering a sort of “reset” on the kinds of discussions we have around “how to be a man”.
Seems that amounted to a hill of beans. The “manosphere” won, and the bro vote kept right on bro’ing.
Maybe they’re right! Maybe it’s time to retire toxic/tonic masculinity. But not because the bros are awesome, because they most certainly are not. However, I wonder if we simply need to elevate the conversation past “gender norms” entirely.
As a person who has wrestled with performative masculinity their whole life—and I’m currently working on an entire blog series about my history in this space—I must admit I’m just a wee bit sick of measuring who’s angrier today: men who hate women, or women who hate men.
Somehow I think it’s entirely possible to be a good human and exhibit good qualities regardless of assigned #gender at birth. Can’t we find a way to talk about how to demonstrate humility, compassion, and resolve, how to be one of the “helpers” (as Fred Rogers would say), without “gender” having anything to do with it? Even when well-meaning men talk about what they hope are good qualities of a “man”, I can’t help but wonder why those aren’t equally good qualities of a woman. By the same token, I can’t help but wonder why good qualities of a “woman” can’t also be exhibited by a man. Men can’t be sensitive caregivers? Women can’t chop wood?
And the more I think about it, the more I find the “tonic masculinity” of Tim Walz always rang hollow for me. It’s not his fault! But here’s the thing: I have zero interest in many of the things people were joking about when they were meme-posting about him. I’m not about to fix up rare jalopies or dress in buffalo check on a wilderness expedition. Why is any of that considered “manly” in the first place?
I forget exactly where I heard this, but it was a revelation for me: as a man, whatever you do is what men do. In other words, if I identify as a man (and that’s a whole other question if I do any longer…), then “manly things” are the things I do.
At the end of the day, performative expressions of socially-expected gender norms in order make other people feel comfortable at your own expense sucks, plain and simple. My wish is we could spend less time talking about “what women should be like” or “what men should be like” and simply talk about “what humans should be like”. And that list really shouldn’t be very prescriptive at all, other than to define universal qualities such as egalitarianism, altruism, strength of character, and so forth.
