SOCIETY, PARTICULARLY IN MEDIA HAS BECOME ALL TO COMFORTABLE WITH THE BROAD-SWEEPING TOXIC MASCULINITY LABEL.

The question of whether masculinity is toxic has become a dominant narrative in cultural conversations about gender, power, and social dynamics. The feminist movement has long critiqued masculinity, particularly its association with dominance, aggression, and emotional detachment, often framing these traits as tools of oppression in patriarchal systems. There is a belief that behind the stoic man is a person who has also been victimized by patriarchy. In some ways this is an accurate critique.

For decades, men have held power in most of the world’s major political, social, and economic institutions, and by proximity, they have been seen as holding the capacity to oppress. Feminist critiques of patriarchy have effectively challenged the gender imbalances within these systems, focusing on how power structures have marginalized women and other gender minorities. These critiques are essential to understanding gender inequality, but fail to account for the lived experiences of men, particularly those from lower socioeconomic backgrounds who have not equally benefited from patriarchy’s power structures. Many men feel they have been lumped into the category of “oppressor” while experiencing little of the privilege and power that upper-class, elite men have enjoyed for generations.

SINCE THE LATE 1980S THERE HAS BEEN A CULTURAL SHIFT TO REFRAME TRADITIONAL MALE BEHAVIORS. THIS CULTURAL SHIFT DISRUPTED THE CONVENTIONAL RITES OF PASSAGE FOR BOYS, SUCH AS PHYSICAL PLAY AND COMPETITION, THAT HAD ONCE BEEN SEEN AS NATURAL PARTS OF GROWING UP.

As a result, boys were expected to suppress these traits to align with a more "feminized" ideal of behavior. Christina Hoff Sommers (2015), in her book The War Against Boys: How Misguided Policies are Harming Our Young Men, articulates that educational environments shifted to prioritize traits more common in girls, such as compliance and calmness, over those traditionally associated with boys. She writes, “The widespread belief that boys need to be broken to fit the feminist model of correct behavior denies them their natural tendencies and deprives them of role models that celebrate male strength and virtues” (p. 11).

This pushback against traditionally male behavior might be part of our primal instincts, inherited from hunter-gatherer ancestors. Assertiveness, exploration, and challenging boundaries were once essential for survival, helping boys learn to navigate social hierarchies. Today, however, these behaviors are often pathologized, with energetic boys frequently diagnosed with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) or other behavioral disorders. In some cases, these labels create a belief that there is something inherently wrong with being a boy, rather than recognizing that boys might simply need different outlets for their energy.

“Traditional male roles are being questioned, redefined, or sometimes dismissed entirely. But where does that leave those of us who have long identified with these roles? When did it become wrong to be a man?”

Another significant aspect of the masculinity crisis is the changing role of work in men's lives. Historically, men’s work—particularly in craftsmanship, trades, and manual labor—provided a clear sense of purpose and identity. These roles were not only economically essential but also tied to traditional notions of masculinity, where physical strength, skill, and the ability to provide for one’s family were key indicators of success. However, as society has shifted toward a more service-oriented and technological economy, these roles have become less valued, leaving many men, particularly those from working-class backgrounds, feeling disconnected from their identities. As Matthew B. Crawford (2009) argues in Shop Class as Soulcraft, the decline of vocational training and the disappearance of hands-on skills have left many men without the tools they need to feel empowered or useful. He writes, “The disappearance of tools from our common education is the first step toward a wider ignorance of the world of artifacts we inhabit” (p. 23).

The shift in economic priorities, coupled with changing societal expectations of masculinity, has left many men with fewer opportunities to feel empowered or valued in modern society. Susan Faludi (1999), in her seminal work Stiffed: The Betrayal of the American Man, explores how men—particularly those from the working class—feel betrayed by the very culture that promised them power. She argues that while men historically held positions of authority, many men without access to higher levels of economic or political power have not benefited from the structures of patriarchy. “The very culture that promised them power—the culture of manhood—left them powerless” (p. 13). Faludi highlights that many working-class men, who once relied on their physical labor and trades for a sense of purpose, now feel emasculated and marginalized in a rapidly changing economy.

“Men have been cast adrift by the same society that once relied on their toil and their silent suffering to build it up. Now, they are left with no role, no script, and no respect””

— Susan Faludi. Stiffed: The Betrayal of the American Man

PSYCHOLOGIST SHEPHERD BLISS COINED THE TERM "TOXIC MASCULINITY" IN THE 1980S TO DESCRIBE HARMFUL MALE TRAITS LIKE MISOGYNY, HOMOPHOBIA, AND VIOLENCE.

He contrasted these with positive masculine traits and likened toxic masculinity to a sickness requiring treatment. The concept emerged from the mythopoetic men's movement, which sought to help men express their masculinity in modern society, by preventing chauvinism or aggression.

While there are certainly aspects of traditional masculinity that can be problematic—such as aggression, emotional detachment, and a reluctance to seek help when needed—it is essential to distinguish between toxic behaviors and masculinity itself. Liz Plank (2019), in her book For the Love of Men, explores the confusion many men feel as they are encouraged to be strong and stoic but then criticized for being unemotional or detached. She writes, “Men are told to be tough but are shamed when they don't show their emotions, creating a cycle of self-silencing and isolation” (p. 15). This dissonance between societal expectations leaves men unsure of how to express their masculinity in ways that are seen as acceptable.

The Mythopoetic Men’s Movement empowers men to participate in a deeper re-mythologizing or "re-storying" of their lives. They argued that to reconnect with their true feelings—and their mature masculinity—men must move inward and down, rather than seeking outward spiritual ascension. This inward journey takes men deep into their souls, where they learn to express grief, joy, and everything in between.

However, Jack Donovan (2012), in The Way of Men, argues that masculinity itself is not toxic at all; rather, it is the suppression of masculine virtues that creates confusion and frustration in men. Donovan suggests that traits such as strength, honor, and courage are essential to male identity and should not be vilified. Donovan’s perspective, while controversial, highlights an important point: in many ways masculinity has been redefined in ways that often alienate men from their natural instincts, leaving them without clear models for how to navigate modern life.

FEMINISM HAS PLAYED A CRUCIAL ROLE IN CHALLENGING HARMFUL ASPECTS OF TRADITIONAL MASCULINITY, PARTICULARLY THE ASSOCIATION OF POWER AND DOMINANCE WITH BEING MALE.

However, the feminist critique of patriarchy, while necessary, has sometimes overlooked the ways in which men themselves are harmed by rigid gender roles. Bell hooks (2004), in her book The Will to Change: Men, Masculinity, and Love, argues that patriarchy harms both men and women by denying men the ability to fully express their emotions and vulnerability. She writes, “The first act of violence that patriarchy demands of males is not violence toward women. Instead, patriarchy demands of all males that they engage in acts of psychic self-mutilation, that they kill off the emotional parts of themselves” (p. 66).

Hooks’ analysis suggests that while patriarchy offers men certain privileges, it also traps them in emotionally stifling roles. Feminism’s efforts to dismantle these harmful roles have opened new possibilities for men to embrace vulnerability and emotional openness, but they have also left many men feeling as though their traditional strengths—such as physicality, leadership, and stoicism—are no longer valued. This tension between dismantling patriarchy and redefining masculinity is at the heart of the current debate over whether masculinity itself is toxic.

As society continues to redefine gender roles, it is essential to recognize that masculinity is not inherently toxic. Rather, the way masculinity is expressed and understood is in transition. Traits such as strength, courage, and leadership—qualities traditionally associated with men—are not inherently harmful but need to be channeled in ways that foster equality, empathy, and respect. Encouraging men to find new ways to express their masculinity without erasing the core traits that have defined them for generations is essential for helping men navigate the changing landscape of gender roles.

The question is not whether masculinity is toxic, but rather how we can redefine masculinity in a way that honors both its strengths and vulnerabilities. Feminism has rightly challenged many of the harmful aspects of traditional masculinity, but it has also opened new possibilities for men to express their full humanity. By fostering a more inclusive conversation around masculinity, we can move beyond the narrative of toxicity and toward a more nuanced understanding of what it means to be a man in the modern world.

References

1. Crawford, M. B. (2009). Shop Class as Soulcraft: An Inquiry into the Value of Work. Penguin Press.
2. Donovan, J. (2012). The Way of Men. Dissonant Hum.
3. Faludi, S. (1999). Stiffed: The Betrayal of the American Man. HarperCollins.
4. Paglia, C. (2017). Free Women, Free Men: Sex, Gender, Feminism. Pantheon.
5. Plank, L. (2019). For the Love of Men: A New Vision for Mindful Masculinity. St. Martin's Press.
6. Sommers, C. H. (2015). The War Against Boys: How Misguided Policies Are Harming Our Young Men. Simon & Schuster.