If we are calling out ‘toxic masculinity’ as a society, then why do public responses to softer versions of masculinity shift between curiosity, irony and judgment?
Intro:
Across TikTok and university campuses, young men are rewriting what masculinity looks like today, sometimes with matcha lattes, Labubus, film cameras and thrifted tote bags.
At Toronto Metropolitan University, a “performative male” contest recently drew a sizeable crowd by poking fun at this new TikTok archetype of masculinity. The “performative man” is a new Gen Z term describing young men who deliberately craft a soft, sensitive, emotionally aware aesthetic, signalling the rejection of “toxic masculinity.”
At “performative male” contests, participants compete for laughs and for women’s attention by reciting poetry, showing off thrifted fashion or handing out feminine hygiene products to show they’re one of the “good” guys.
Similar events have been held from San Francisco to London, capturing a wider shift in how Gen Z navigates gender. Research shows that young men are experimenting with gender online, but audiences often respond with humour or skepticism.
This raises an important question: in a moment when “toxic masculinity” is being called out, why do public responses to softer versions of masculinity shift between curiosity, irony and judgment?
Framing the issue as toxic masculinity misses the real problem, which is toxic behavior itself. Anyone can perform harm or manipulation regardless of gender identity, and reducing it to a male issue reinforces the same stereotypes we claim to challenge.
If society truly wants progress, we should stop policing how masculinity looks and start holding all people accountable for toxic actions, not their gender.
I think there may be a misunderstanding, or multiple interpretations, of what ‘toxic masculinity’ refers to.
In the contexts where I’ve heard it, the term wasn’t being used to say that masculinity is toxic /that it should look a certain way / that this is something that’s up to men to change. Rather, it refers to the subset of toxic behaviour that is associated with ‘masculinity’, as a way of organizing discussion. The term isn’t meant to ignore or minimize other types of toxic behaviour, it’s there when referring to any patterns or solutions that might be in common for that subset of toxicity.
For example, the term “men’s mental health” organizes discussion around mental health challenges that men deal with. It doesn’t mean that only men deal with mental health issues, nor does it mean that men’s mental health issues are more important to deal with than those of other groups.
Isn’t the first part exactly what ‘toxic masculinity’ discussions are about, that rigid and harmful gender expectations harm everyone, regardless of where it comes from (men or otherwise)?
As for the second part, I don’t think anyone is saying otherwise. We SHOULD hold everyone accountable for toxic actions.
Attention capture tactics push toxic masculinity a lot more than, toxicity is my point.
But good back and forth.