In a sane world, it would not be necessary to write a serious article about such a foolish topic. But in a world where good is bad and bad is good, where right is wrong and wrong is right, where strength is ridiculed and weakness is praised – in our inverted world, I find myself compelled to write about the most absurd topics. In Pennsylvania a group of men have formed the “Men’s Therapeutic Cuddle Group” in order to end “toxic masculinity.” The unanalyzed assumption, of course, is that such a thing as toxic masculinity exists. In my opinion, it doesn’t. There may be personality traits of the typical male in the Western world that are problematic, just as there are personality traits of females that are problematic. The perfect human being does not exist. But to brand modern masculinity as toxic is downright absurd. Teaching young boys to cuddle may suppress some of their aggressiveness, but it will never eliminate it. Furthermore, I don’t necessarily see aggressiveness as negative. Just let me say at the outset that I am glad that our boys weren’t “cuddling” when they landed on Omaha Beach during the Invasion of Normandy. And Western Europe was glad as well. The courage and valor of our troops brought the end of the horrific Nazi regime. But now I am getting ahead of myself. Who came up with this crazy idea of toxic masculinity in the first place? Why would anyone want to criticize outward strength and perseverance and attempt to replace these traditional virtues with outward vulnerability and submissiveness?
Perhaps you have already guessed the source of this lunacy. It is a product of the identity politics group. Under the sway of French deconstructionism (Michel Foucault, Jacques Derrida and others), the radical liberals became convinced that they could change reality by creating new words. So they coined the phrase “toxic masculinity” in an attempt to transform masculinity into “something poisonous” that has infected the males of our society.
The precursor of “toxic masculinity” was “hegemonic masculinity” (dominating masculinity) – an idea popularized by the Australian transgender professor Robert (today Raewyn) Connell. In his (her) book Gender and Power (1987), Connell maintains that current forms of masculinity are detrimental because they encourage domination over women and enforce the subordination of non-conforming men. Connell was visiting professor at Harvard during the 1990s where he (she) propagated the idea of hegemonic masculinity which eventually morphed into “toxic masculinity” with predictable embellishments. Since the time of Aristotle, the traditional virtues of Western societies were: temperance, justice, wisdom and courage, whereby courage was stressed as both a physical and mental virtue. Apparently, Connell and others of the “identity club” feel intimidated by the idea of real courage, but this virtue has been essential to the development of Western Civilization. I am sure that the “identity club” members would be more comfortable if all of us were like them, but this is an unrealistic expectation and would be disastrous for our society. A brief survey of history will confirm that societies disintegrate under the influence of weak leaders.
One of the frequent criticisms of masculinity is that men suppress their feelings and are loath to express themselves in outward manifestations such as crying. I concede the point that men probably need to cry more often; it’s a good tension release. But let me ask Connell, the Pennsylvania Club and others of the identity club this question: How do you know whether or not men cry within their most intimate relationships? And regarding feelings, I ask the same question: How do you know that the majority of men don’t talk to their wives about feelings? In my estimation, there is a time and a place for expressing the emotional side of one’s personality. Knowing when it is appropriate and when it is not – that is a matter a good judgment, traditionally called wisdom. The ability of men to control their emotions was the necessary condition for developing symbolic logic, quantum physics, medical science etc. I see nothing “toxic” in this ability.
In sum, I see the term “toxic masculinity” as another attempt of the radical liberals to transform our culture into something that fits their ideology. Can you imagine the uproar if I were to coin the phrase “poisonous femininity” or “toxic transsexuality”? But men have the ability to suppress such childish urges, to analyze situations logically and to exercise patience with the nonsense of others. As a historian and philosopher, I still have high regard for the virtues of temperance, justice, wisdom and courage.
Villager Jack E. Brush is a frequent contributor to Villages-News.com
