Toxic Masculinity; Now What?

We’re still talking about the problem, when will we start talking about the solution?

Photo by Matheus Ferrero on Unsplash

I am tired of men hurting women, each other, and themselves — Carlos Andrés Gomez.

Hegemonic Masculinity, and the more widely talked about Toxic Masculinity, represent one of the largest, most destructive, systemic issues of the modern era Western Culture faces. Its sinister influence is felt across our country, affecting politics, consumable media (film, television, advertisements etc..), national sports, corporations, the economy, the internet and much more.

It is an oppressive issue, we as a nation and people, are called to deal with. How we will deal with it as a nation is our biggest challenge. From the simple family unit, to the large scale repetition of toxic masculine diatribes in our television news media, there has yet to arise a single solution. A solution to engage with all the permutations of Hegemonic, and its inclusory: Toxic, Masculinity. In this discussion we will attempt to cover the three most prompted views on the most feasible solution to the problem at hand.

Hegemonic & Toxic masculinity affects everyone you know. It is a poison that has filtered down generation after generation, bearing down on men and women alike, sapping our integrity, intuitiveness, individuality to feed itself in a deepening cycle.

Hegemonic Masculinity refers to the oppressive characteristic of masculinity boys and men must assume and perform to be considered a “real man”. Examples of culturally appropriate characteristics include

1. Dominance over women and other men
2. Drive to provide
3. Being heterosexual, even to the point of homophobia
4. Demonstrations of caring through action
5. Performing aggression
6. Self-reliance
7. Exerting control and toughness
8. Courage
9. Being emotionally restrictive
10. Risk-taking
11. Displaying misogyny.

Toxic Masculinity is the labeled reserved for the characteristics of Hegemonic Masculinity that are deemed detrimental to the person and society at large, but psychologists and scholars disagree on the necessity of the subset as the oppressive nature of Hegemonic Masculinity, as a whole, is a toxic manifestation of the gender construct. [V. M. Marasco (2018): Addressing Hegemonic Masculinity With Adolescent Boys Within the Counseling Relationship, Journal of Child and Adolescent Counseling]

Globally, a man dies every minute by suicide. About twenty (20) per minute are physically abused by an intimate partner in the United States alone. One-in-three-women and one-in-for-men in will experience some form of sexual assault or violence in their lifetime. These are facts from the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence (NCADV), and a reality for the more than 325 million Americans living today. Toxic Masculine attitudes, and beliefs can be traced to the roots of many of these horrifying and tragic incidents. And with the number of occurrences so relatively high, you or someone you know is likely to experience the first hand cruelty Hegemonic & Toxic Masculinity is capable of.

This discussion is not about the credibility or merit-worthiness of Hegemonic & Toxic Masculinity, no, this is an attempt to break down in simplest terms the solutions proposed so far to engage with and dismantle those systems. As members of society, it’s our social responsibility to make cultural changes as a whole, and within ourselves, to provide a better future for generations to come. That means addressing detrimental systemic issues; including Hegemonic & Toxic masculinity (HM & TM). Do we make the change with our dollars behind large scale corporations that have the power to change culture with long term market shifts away from the incumbent attitudes to more progressive ones? Should we double down on counseling for men and boys on a personal level by intersecting with their spots and hobbies? Or do we push our elementary, middle and high schools to the front line of this debate by implementing Social Emotional Learning (SEL) curriculum nationwide? A complicated issue with no quick solution, to say the least, we need to explore every possible avenue in order to right this continued wrong.

Where do we begin with such a complex, monumental task? Let’s start with the first large-scale cultural shift away from HM & TM in the 21st century. 2017 saw the rise of both the trending topic and subsequent feminist organization of the movement #metoo. What started as a simple hashtag by sexual assault survivor Tarana Burke, blossomed when female celebrity activist Alyssa Milano called for women everywhere to share their #metoo stories. It quickly gained international media coverage as millions upon millions of women and men began sharing their stories.

It is in this vein where our first solution lies. As the sparking movement found its voice through a large-scale corporate social media conglomerate, Twitter, I present the first method we’ll be talking about.

The Economics of Masculinity

Do we make the change with our dollars behind large scale corporations that have the power to change culture with long term market shifts away from the incumbent attitudes to more progressive ones?

In the wake of the #metoo movement’s rise in awareness, companies by and large were not immune from being exposed by members abound of their workforces and communities. This radical awakening led many companies move to immediately pull an about-face in the functionings of their day-to-day operations and rise to the call-to-action of the #metoo movement.

One such example is the case of Gillette. On February 3rd 2019, Gillette premiered an ad during the 53rd Super Bowl. Titled We Believe: The Best Men Can Be, the minute long ad took an aggressive stance, calling out toxic masculinity and defying generations of their own advertising positions on men, authority, bullying and more. Pankaj Bhalla, Gillette brand director for North America, explains: “This is an important conversation happening, and as a company that encourages men to be their best, we feel compelled to both address it and take action of our own,”[1]. While it received backlash from men, feminists, publications and other media outlets, the company saw a 10% rise in product sales, the highest rise in quarterly sales in 5 years. In her article about Gillette’s take on TM, Senior Reporter for the Wall St Journal’s digital media publication The Hub, Alexandra Bruell writes: “P&G is among the companies that in recent years have used advertising as a platform to promote their stance on topics such as gender equality, immigration and gun control”[1].

Super Bowl LIII had a recorded 98.2 million televised live viewers. That 1:42 minute Gillette ad was shown to just about 30% of the entire United States population. Just like that, 3 in 10 Americans were suddenly thrust into a conversation we all needed to be having. And with the subsequent media blitz for the week after the shortened ad premiered on national television (outside of the super bowl), that number skyrocketed. Its aggressive stance sparked widespread debate on social media forums and dinner tables around the country. That kind of power to spark social discourse of that magnitude is not easily attainable. And thus we enter into the territory of the first solution. Imagine for a moment, that the NFL decided to take on the same anti-TM stance as Gillette? And then Tesla, Pepsi, Google, Tiffany’s, GOOP, Heckler & Koch? Corporations big and small have a huge impact on our daily lives in America. Advertising and marketing messages are impossible to escape. And a trillion dollar shift in these huge conglomerates all talking about the same issue, the pressure would be incredible! But is it ethical for a for-profit company to push for such a social solution when it’s goal is ultimately to make money? What about the social ramifications to that kind of pressure? Is it healthy to replace one oppressive system for another even if the goal of one is far more holistic and healthy than the other? As the original ad seemingly backfired and alienated the buyers of Gillette, would anti-TM messaging from corporations ultimately cause more controversy than it would solve?

Let us now turn to another proposed solution while we ponder on those questions. In the opposite direction of mass media, and big corporate bucks, there is a large consensus of therapists, psychologists, and counselors that believe our collective healing from TM comes not from buying into it, but conversing about it one-to-one.

Masculinity, Sports, and the Therapist’s Couch

Psychologists, like R.W. Connell have been talking about Masculinity and its impact since the late 80’s and the conversation hasn’t slowed down since the revelations of #metoo and its subsequent follow up movement #timesup. The proposition is simple: engage in one-on-one conversations with men and boys and court TM on a personal impression level to overcome it. The new trick for this old dog is where these conversations are happening. Moving away from the therapist’s couch and sterile office, mental health advocates are pushing to open these conversations up on the football field, baseball dugout, and in many other sport and hobby arenas of men and boys.

Little league (and other youth sports) is a staple of HM for boys and young men growing up in America. Be it the cliché of tossing a ball with their fathers, learning a sport through extracurriculars at school, summer camps, community leagues or even just engaging with the televised collegiate & professional leagues; sports play a big role in the lives of budding young men. Elissa Strauss, culture essayist for CNN has a lot to say about the unorthodox “curriculum of masculinity” boys are being taught. “Often a crash course in machismo, [sports] teaches boys to suppress vulnerability, and harness aggression and dominance. Winning is everything”[2]. With this quality of sportsmanship beginning at such a young age, it is no wonder, large scale organizations like the NFL are riddled with claims of TM in players, coaches, and management of all levels. The video of Ray Rice assaulting his fiancé in an elevator, Tom Brady deflating footballs, and Roger Goodell manipulating facts and information surrounding Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy are only a handful of examples of the detrimental system at play. Yet with such prominence in the lives of our children, it’s potential power cannot be underestimated. Strauss interviewed Dan Blitstein, a volunteer youth soccer coach and coach advisor in Wyncote Philadelphia who’s own approach to youth sports is changing the conversation. “[He] tries to make sure the boys he coaches have a decent emotional vocabulary to avoid the jumble of rage and confusion he felt as a child”[2]. Strauss also got a statement from Ruben Nieves, the National Director of Training at the Positive Coaching Alliance that says “Such an attitude is increasingly common among youth coaches, but not yet the norm…one of PCA’s key messages is that coaches should value player growth over winning, and a big part of helping children grow as athletes — and people — is by listening to them”[2].

Vincent Marasco, PhD, LPC, NCC, and Assistant Professor of Clinical Mental Health Counseling at Purdue Northwest School of Education and Counseling warns caution in exploring therapy spaces within sports. “Organized sports [are] another example of a school sanctioned activity that promotes hegemonic masculinity… organized sports present adolescent boys in a literal arena in which to perform toxic aspects of HM in a socially acceptable and celebrated manner”[3]. He also advises specifically “Counselors working with adolescent boys need to take into consideration these social influences, their impact on the counseling relationship, and the unique ways adolescent boys perform masculinity”[3].

While the one-on-one approach might take the greatest effect, it is also the realm of the educated. It is admirable to take on the responsibility of wanting to help the young men and boys on a team you coach, or a league you oversee, as in the case of Dan Blitstein, but it is fraught with difficulty. As HM can inform, and alter the environment in which one counsels against HM, it needs a special awareness to make sure one isn’t participating in HM while counseling against it, as Marasco warns.

With the ethics of business tackling masculinity presenting its own issue, and the overwhelming nature of one-on-one counseling being a difficult venture to engage in without specialized education, where are we to turn to now? Our third potential solution may have the answer we are seeking.

Masculinity and the Public School System

Social Emotional Learning, or SEL, is “the process through which children and adults understand and manage emotions, set and achieve positive goals, feel and show empathy for others, establish and maintain positive relationships, and make responsible decisions”[4].

It’s school-programming curriculum that elementary, middle and high schools take as full classes to learn emotional and social skills. These skills focus on 5 core competencies (in no particular order):

• Self awareness: the ability to accurately recognize one’s emotions and thoughts and their influence on behavior
• Self-management: the ability to regulate one’s emotions, thought, and behaviors effectively in different situations
• Social Awareness: the ability to take the perspective of and empathize with others from diverse backgrounds and cultures, to understand social and ethical norms for behavior, and to recognize family, school, and community resources and supports
• Relationship Skills: the ability to establish and maintain healthy and rewarding relationships with diverse individuals and groups
• Responsible Decision-Making: the ability to make constructive and respectful choices about personal behavior and social interactions based on consideration of ethical standards, safety concerns, social norms, the realistic evaluation of consequences of various actions, and the well-being of self and others.[4]

These core competencies inform the curriculum CASEL gives to the more than 20% of schools in America that voluntarily engage with SEL classes. Study after study shows decreased dropout rates, school and classroom behavior issues, drug use, teen pregnancy, mental health problems and criminal behavior [4]. Sara Miller Llana, Bureau Chief of Latin America for the Christian Science Monitor since 2006, reports on how schools around the world are trying to prevent the root of sexism taking hold by teaching children as young as 2 years old. “‘These kids are growing up with an awareness that there is an imbalance of power in our society, and they’re being challenged to unpack that and break it down,’ says Joshua Forehand, principal at Nestor Munro Community School, an elementary school in Wisconsin that has introduced discussion on gender and identity into the school plan”[4]. Wisconsin, and many other states join a large coalition of nations around the world like Iceland and Israel, where social emotional learning is being impressed upon children from pre-k to high school ages in order to help directly address sexism, traditionalist mindset views about gender & gender roles, bullying and more.

Educators also must consider, as the culture changes to recognize equality and equity among genders, the influence of TM in past educational works and materials. As question to consider: is it ethical to continue to teach, read, and otherwise explore works written by men who have been implicated by the #metoo movement? Emma Goldberg, Researcher and Journalist for the New York Times explores the worries that educators have about the complex nature of changing curriculum and censorship. She says “some argue that tossing out works by men accused of abuse creates an opportunity to break up the ‘old white guys club’ that for too long defined school reading lists”[5]. This question is part of a larger question raised by the #metoo movement and its subsidiary movements, most namely the enactment of “Cancel Culture”. Goldberg asks “Should [the works] be canceled — banished from public engagement like some of their creators? Or should they continue to be studied, only with frank discussions about abuse and harassment?

Two Steps Forward, One Step Back

Hegemonic & Toxic Masculinity are pervasive, invasive, and expansive subjects that have no clear answers on the immediate horizon.

Despite that fact, it is still our social responsibility to continue to discuss the implications of both and strive to find ways to overcome and eradicate this systematic oppression.

Do we make the change with our dollars behind large scale corporations that have the power to change culture with long term market shifts away from the incumbent attitudes to more progressive ones? Should we double down on counseling for men and boys on a personal level by intersecting with their spots and hobbies? Or do we push our elementary, middle and high schools to the front line of this debate by implementing Social Emotional Learning (SEL) curriculum nationwide?

I personally believe the answer lies in the power of Social Emotional Learning. But not just in classrooms. While tackling this issue for the next generation is important to stem the tide of it spreading further and further, there is much we can do about it here and now. Large corporations are creating their own movements to incite personal discussion, like the men behind Australia’s Men’s Health and Awareness movement Movember and Dr. Robert Glover with his book No More Mr. Nice Guy and the thousands of seminars he has taught to men around the world. Social Emotional Learning is something we can all experience and engage with, from the elderly to the youth. Encouraging corporations, with our buying power, to enact social emotional learning programs into their corporate culture; Electing political candidates that endorse Social Emotional Learning programs in public schools and advocate for more accessible mental health programs for all; Requiring youth athletic coaches in private and public programs to take courses in SEL coaching as well as yearly continuing education; New parents can be offered SEL classes alongside birthing and newborn classes to help them navigate their child’s first few years.

There are endless ways to incorporate social emotional learning into our everyday life, not one among us wouldn’t benefit from learning how to navigate our own emotions better and learning tools to enhance the quality of our relationships and strengthen our own personal boundaries. Communication reduces anxiety, and learning how to more effectively communicate our internal narrative can only help us in overcoming long standing systemic oppression in HM & TM, patriarchy, misogyny and heteronormative colonialism.

Empowering us as a society to recognize the flaw is what ultimately matters. Over punishing perpetrators, and even protecting victims. If we can overtly see the failure in HM & TM we can do better. Then perpetrators can be educated and helped instead of shamed and isolated, victims can be given justice and respect instead of being re-triggered or mocked.

Supporting Materials

1. Bruell, A. (2019, Jan 15). Gillette urges men to shave ‘toxic masculinity’ in new ad. Wall Street Journal Retrieved from https://explore-proquest-com.libprox1.slcc.edu/sirsissuesresearcher/document/2266068070?accountid=28671
2. Strauss, E. (2020, Feb 11). Why sports can be so toxic to boys and how we unravel that culture. CNN Wire Service Retrieved from https://explore-proquest-com.libprox1.slcc.edu/sirsissuesresearcher/document/2384321825?accountid=28671
3. CASEL (2020, Jan 1) What is SEL? Retrieved from https://CASEL.org/what-is-SEL/
4. Llana, S. M. (2018, Feb 28). Can schools help rid the world of sexual harassers and abusers? Christian Science Monitor Retrieved from https://explore-proquest-com.libprox1.slcc.edu/sirsissuesresearcher/document/2262647603?accountid=28671
5. Goldberg, E. (2019, Oct 07). Do works by men implicated by #MeToo belong in the classroom? New York Times (Online) Retrieved from https://explore-proquest-com.libprox1.slcc.edu/sirsissuesresearcher/document/2307704384?accountid=28671#undefined