DOLOR, Theo Exequiel B.

POLSCI - 160
2019 – 46235 JANUARY 8, 2021
The Emergence of Toxic Masculinity

Toxic masculinity is a term used not to describe that men are toxic for being men but a critique
about the expectations and demands of society from men. An article form The New York Times
stated that “Toxic masculinity is what can come of teaching boys that they can’t express emotion
openly; that they have to be “tough all the time”; that anything other than that makes them
“feminine” or weak.” (Salam, 2019). It means that men should always act based on a criterion
forcing them to be dominant and powerful such as real men do not show any emotions, real men
do not cry, and the list goes on. It is a mindset created to rigorously oppress men who are critical
of the patriarchal society and denies free thinking men from creating a difference. These set of
standards imposed by society is encapsulating men to act in a certain way that should always be
socially acceptable, it encourages a culture of hatred and anger. The institutionalized ideology
that men should always act strong and brave is a social stigma that is relevant in our society
today.

Looking at this issue through Durkheim’s social paradigm, He stated that “In these conditions,
not only are all the members of the group individually attracted to one-another because they
resemble one-another, but also because they are joined to that which is the condition of existence
of this collective type: that is to say, to the society that they form by their union.” (Durkheim, 1972).
We are able to see that the collectivist attitude of society has solidified the belief that men should
always act strong, this ideology did not just come from one person but from the consensus that
was drawn from the functions of society and that is men should always follow societal norms and
values because they are the future heads of the family, they are the providers and should not be
seen weak. The individuals within the society come to a consensus on what collective forms of
values and beliefs should and ought to be. We can also look at toxic masculinity being
strengthened by the mechanical solidarity, Durkheim (1972) stated “In societies where this type
of solidarity is highly developed, the individual is not his own master, as we shall see later;
solidarity is, literally something which the society possesses. Thus, in these types of society,
personal rights are not yet distinguished from real rights.” He describes it as a society that will
repeat its process and restore itself from any disruption through a collective conscience that is
innate within every member of society that dictates them to cooperate, if a man is to deviate from
the imposed criteria for their actions, society will always find a way to shape them back to what is
perceived as normal by the majority and thus resulting to men suppressing their emotion and
always showing a tough nature.
 Interpreting this phenomenon through Durkheim’s structural functionalist theory which implies
that when a society is seen to operate and function normally wherein there is absolutely no chaos,
it is functioning well and should not be disrupted. “The most successful male homo sapiens were
those who could fight and hunt. In those times, the most desirable traits would likely have included
aggression, ruthlessness, and physical strength.” (Toxic masculinity: Definition, common issues,
and how to fight it, 2020). Passing down that belief wherein society viewed as a successful
practice led to the institutionalization of men always being seen as strong figures, these social
facts that are external to us became the context and conditions for thinking and action which
constrain and pressure us to act in a predictable way, it exerts power over our beliefs and
behavior. It has already been existent long ago that society does not see any mistake from it
because it functions well resulting to that belief being passed from generation to generation aiming
to reinforce it.

The family’s exercise of power over their children can also be the reason of the emergence of
toxic masculinity. The family, being the main social institution that guides every individual from
conception to birth, is given the opportunity to mold the minds of their children, in the modern-day
world, it is evident that parents conform to the norms that is set by society and that is a male
should act manly just as a female should act feminine. Lukes’ third dimension of power deals with
the manipulation of thought process relating this to the power relations of parents to their children,
infants are born as clean slates and learn to show emotions after a few weeks or months. So now
imagine learning some emotions and then as you grow up, you are being pressurized to unlearn
that whole thing because it does not go along with the concept of your assigned gender role,
manipulating the minds of their children and show it as something that is “correct” to be able to
maintain the instilled belief as they grow up.

The dangers of toxic masculinity pose a big threat in our society, Sheppard (2020) stated that
“When those beliefs are based on unproven biases that we, as both individuals and a society,
perpetuate, boys and men are taught to falsely believe them or to try to measure up to them,
ultimately harming themselves and others in the process.” The criteria that were set by society
towards men resulted to the belief that strongmen should be chosen as leaders for the betterment
and safety of his constituents; people assumed that they are given protection when these types
of people are chosen as leaders of our society, people who are not afraid to use violence for their
goals and who can ensure that everyone is protected under his rule. President Rodrigo Duterte
is a great example, coming from Davao city, he made sure that the city would reflect his
capabilities as a leader, he has established an identity of a strongman in the city proving that he
is able to protect his constituents and reduce crime rates as much as possible even creating
private armies to be able to deal with criminals, his actions show that he maintains an image of a
strong person so that people will eventually begin to perceive him as a great leader. The
interactions of people led to the conclusion that electing and choosing strongmen as leaders of
our nation would be the answers to the problems we face, once again the rationalization of society
led to this social fact that pressured the people to act upon the belief of men who are perceived
as strong and can protect others possess the affinity of a great leader without properly assessing
the possible outcomes of their collective decisions.

However, why did the term toxic masculinity suddenly hover over modern-day society’s radar?
What urged people to suddenly talk about and act upon this phenomenon? We can analyze this
through Georg Simmel’s social paradigm, Simmel did not believe in the concept of society as a
structure, but he paid attention on the interactions of people and how people connect with each
other that makes a society. “What is useful to the species and the group, the argument runs, and
what the group, therefore, requests of its members for the sake of its own maintenance, is
gradually bred into the individual as an instinct. He thus comes to contain it in himself, as his own,
autonomous feeling, in addition to his personal feelings properly speaking, and thus often contrast
to them” (Simmel and Wolff, 1950). According to him society must constantly be remade and that
social forms do not stay the same all the time, the common practices, and norms that men should
retain their images as what society’s criteria imposes led to them being a broken and sick
byproduct of rage, emotional immaturity, and shame. People began to realize that the criteria set
by society something must change through their constant interaction that later on affected other
people in society towards men, dictating their lives, is not necessary and only resulted in conflicts.
Our society came to a rational that not being given the basic right to even feel the most humanly
thing that comes to everyone without gender, which is emotion, is unjust leading to a new
definition of manhood. Now, society is gradually transitioning towards a new mindset on
pressurizing the actions of men, teaching everyone, especially the older generation, that males
should not be dictated by society to always show a strong nature and to conform to old beliefs.

Even though our world is changing now, there is still a lot of it out there so let us all know that
today in this world not only women, but men also suffer a lot and only few talks about their issues.
In our society we see that a girl being followed and stalked by men is alarming but when the same
situation is experienced by men people will not consider it as a problem and sometimes even take
it as a compliment, we should not forget that regardless of gender we are all humans and should
always be treated fairly to avoid and erase discrimination in our society and uphold equality at all
times. The fact that this toxicity is not only fed by men to other men but also mothers, friends, or
society in general, everyone wants men to man up be macho and women to be submissive and
feminine, it is not something that came from one person, but rather an age-old thing coming from
people around.

References

Durkheim, E. (1972). Forms of social solidarity. In A. Giddens (Ed.), Emile

Durkheim: Selected Writings (pp. 123-140). Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511628085.007
Lukes, S. (1974). Power: A radical view. London: Macmillan.
Medicalnewstoday.com. 2020. Toxic Masculinity: Definition, Common Issues, And
How To Fight It. [online] Available at:
<https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/toxic-masculinity#origins>
[Accessed 18 December 2020].
Salam, M., 2020. What Is Toxic Masculinity? (Published 2019). [online]
Nytimes.com. Available at: <https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/22/us/toxic-
masculinity.html> [Accessed 18 December 2020].
Sheppard, S., 2020. The Dangers Of Toxic Masculinity. [online] Verywell Mind.
Available at: <https://www.verywellmind.com/the-dangerous-mental-health-
effects-of-toxic-masculinity-5073957> [Accessed 19 December 2020].
Simmel, G. and Wolff, K., 1950. The Sociology Of Georg Simmel. Glencoe, Illinois:
Free Press, pp.96-121.