Toxic Femininity and Why I love Alpha Males

All I have heard lately is commercial after commercial, and celebrity after celebrity, coming out against this idea of "toxic masculinity".


(This being the most famous example as of late....prepare to upchuck if you aren't into bullshit identity politics.)

Better yet, watch this video, it will make you feel better:

"Toxic masculinity is one of the ways in which Patriarchy is harmful to men. It refers to the socially-constructed attitudes that describe the masculine gender role as violent, unemotional, sexually aggressive, and so forth."

Before I go into the topic at hand here, I want to dissect this definition just a skosh.

First of all, what is a patriarchy?

Well, its old-school definition looked like this:

"a system of society or government in which the father or eldest male is head of the family and descent is traced through the male line."

Now, it looks more like this:

"a system of society or government in which men hold the power and women are largely excluded from it."

And this is a VERY generous definition if you take into account how rabidly many feminists describe it.

Let's look at the first definition though.

Really, this makes a lot of sense. This is the way things have been run for millennia in the human species. The matriarch and the patriarch both had their contributions in society, and the first definition was the patriarch's. Somehow, this morphed into men holding all power over women who are so meek and frail that they never stepped foot into the process of decision making, like ever, in the history of our society. (I am speaking about the USA more specifically here.) Even though we know this to not be true and that even if women were not physically present for decision-making. This line of thinking is insulting to women throughout history who have been of great importance in their specific fields of thought.

There doesn't seem to be anything terribly toxic yet, to me, about lineage traveling through the male line, and the male being the head of the household. (I can get more into why I think that's the way things should be in a little bit.)

So since we have explored the definition of Patriarchy a bit, let's move right along to the next part of "toxic masculinity."

"It refers to the socially-constructed attitudes that describe the masculine gender role as violent, unemotional, sexually aggressive and so forth."

First and foremost...wut?

This isn't just "socially constructed" bullshit..this is just kind of the way that men are wired. Society doesn't make them this way....science does. As much as we long to separate ourselves from our lovely hairy ancestors...we can't. There is still so much of the genome that we can't possibly comprehend and human nature is a mystery that lies among those genes that make us do the things we do, and act the way we act to a large degree.

Men are more violent than women. Study after study proves this...incarceration rates prove this...sheer body size, testosterone levels...they all add up to men being more violent and aggressive than women. This makes a lot of biological sense considering how long males have been the protectors while females have been the nurturers.

The bit about being unemotional is questionable. Plenty of men are emotional...in their own way. While women may seek friends to sob to about their recent breakup, men may prefer to seek solitude at the gym and sweat it out...or blow the brains out of some zombies on their PS3. We are inherently different genders and therefore cannot possibly be expected to have the same reactions to similar feelings of emotion.

(Granted this is just anecdotal, but I appreciate men that can kind of "keep it together". That doesn't mean I expect a man to be stone cold, but crying at every sunset and cute puppy they see, is a way major turnoff. I tend to prefer Alpha males and that couldn't be further from Alpha Male behavior.)

And while I am on the topic of Alpha Males, I will just touch on the little bit about sexual aggression. I don't condone rape or unwanted contact in any way, shape or form, but if a man has my permission to touch me whenever he'd like, I would prefer him to take the lead, and be aggressive. It's not a turn-on for me to have to take the sexual lead, and believe me, I am not alone. Granted I don't hold the sole voice for women everywhere, but by golly, I highly doubt a trashy book series and now movie series would have done quite so well with the Suburban mom niche, if women everywhere weren't getting their jollies off by imagining a man completely dominating them. It's found nearly everywhere in nature and should not be considered particularly appalling or well, bad.

Hollywood also keeps pumping out men that look like this:


(Woo, it's getting kind of hot in here.)

And this:

And my personal favorite:

If you'll excuse me for a moment....I have to go....fold some laundry...in my bedroom....by myself...

Ahem.

Anyway, I'm sure it's because women want them to be super sappy though, and it has nothing to do with their manly features and glistening pecs, and the undeniable fantasy women have of men just sweeping them off their feet and taking control.

So what does all of this have to do with Toxic Femininity?

Well, I believe that while Toxic Masculinity is kind of a bullshit, machination of the tragically ill left, I think that Toxic Femininity is a real force that is seeking to hurt males. But more importantly, Toxic Femininity also hurts females, which kind of defeats the whole purpose to begin with, amirite?

Here's the deal. Even if Toxic Masculinity was a real thing, it is evident that even in the harshest of its definitions, that men are not necessarily even aware in what they are engaging in. It is not a deliberate attempt to hurt women, but at worst a potential ignorance on not being quite 2019 enough and so forth and so on.

This is opposite of what I believe Toxic Femininity is. TF is dutifully seeking out every possible loophole and flaw to be found in the male gender to exploit it and make men pay for it. New Age Feminism (or Toxic Femininity) is fabulous at achieving zero self reflection and complete and utter deflection as everything terrible that happens to women is by proxy the fault of men. This is because NA Feminists believe that women have zero power in this patriarchy of ours, and that nothing is fair and it is all the fault of men. (Bonus points if you are a straight white man. Then just fuck you man.)

I can't even begin to explain how utterly toxic and devastating this is to women as a whole.

Perhaps women have had to work their way up in society to achieve the same levels as their male counterparts, but then again everything has had its trade-offs.

For instance, men have always had voting rights. Even black males could vote before white women could. But on the flipside, men were the only ones expected to show up in active duty military situations. It was the men who died to protect their families, the men who have typically delved into dangerous jobs and occupations to support their families, and men who continue to do so, even though women have achieved the same status in society.

Women are not statistically the ones risking their lives in their jobs: they are not typically firemen, linemen, coal workers or Marines. These are all jobs which are insanely dangerous and risky, but that women don't really want to traverse into. Yet, women stand out in large numbers, shouting about pay gaps, even though THEY KNOW that is also bullshit and correlates directly to what kinds of jobs women prefer to have.

Kindergarten teachers are not going to be paid the same as electrical linemen. It just ain't ever gonna happen...and it shouldn't. One is blatantly more dangerous and deserving of higher pay. (As difficult as herding little hellions can be :) )

This is just one of many examples of just how fucked the outlook of many NA Feminists are though. They will skew and twist and lie until it resembles an ugly, unrecognizable version of the actual truth, so long as it supports their cause and complaints about how hard it is to be a woman.

The bottom line is: men aren't out to get us. Men need women as much as women need men. And while I'm no "get in the kitchen and make me a sammich, 1950s wife-beater supporter", I do think we have complicated the living hell out of our gender roles by muddying the waters on what that all even means. And in this way, life has become SO MUCH HARDER for women in general.

Sure, women can work now, or have kids, or both, or stay single or stay at home. It's all up to us now. Two women can have a baby without a man, one woman can have a baby with the federal government at its baby daddy, the sky is the fucking limit...but from every woman I speak to (again anecdotal, but do a GD Google search if you don't believe me) women ARE MISERABLE. Toxic Feminism thinks that it is achieving more for women, but it is just saddling more responsibility onto their backs. Working, motherhood, family-life, cooking, cleaning, house keep-up, child-rearing, sex Goddess, accountant, it's too much. Women are more depressed than they have ever been and are one more antidepressants than ever before, and this is somehow progress?

I would love to be able to stay home and raise my kids without feeling inherently responsible for everything else in life as well, including bringing home the bacon.

So, for the sake of God and all that is holy, if I have to do EVERYTHING that males were once happy to do: feminists, back the shit off what men do in the bedroom. At least give us ladies that one last Alpha trait just barely hanging on by a thread.

xx - Beth

Sort:  

Sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo..... I have a lot of thoughts about this.

Part of me just wants the world to admit that some people are jerks and some people are not; regardless of any other characteristic they may possess..... that said, in my experience I've had to rescue female friends from dudes so many times at bars. When we were like 24, it was a couple of times a night to be honest.

Working in IT, there's definitely a boys club that is almost impossible to break into. I'm not sure if it's toxic masculinity as such, because everyone outside the club is excluded from promotions/opportunities, etc... but in my experience, that boys club is almost always white men in their late forties/early fifties. My closest female friend was romantically pursued by her boss for 2 years, even though he was married and she had a boyfriend, but because of the power dynamic she couldn't do much about it. Another friend was pursued by a partner at her firm even though she was married, she did all the right things via HR, and still the whole organisation turned on her until she left, including her female boss. In my experience, the boys club needs to go... it's not good for the organisation to have all the senior management identical people with identical ideas who are nothing like their customers, and I just hear story after story after story of managers abusing their power... and those managers are overwhelmingly white males... but as you said, I'm not sure if that's because of 'the patriarchy' or if lots of managers are awful and I just work in a very male dominated field.

I think the TF has come about because the proper channels of resolution get subverted. My friend is getting paid less than her direct report, because he's in the boys club with her managers... that's super not fair... and every time she tries to address, his mates suppress it. So now she has to take legal action... so I understand the reasons for trying to find loopholes. If one group is amazing at using technicalities to help their cause, I totally get that everyone else then investigates further to find their own technicalities to even the playing field.

As a white male... it's hard not to think that we probably should have a really hard time coming up in the next few hundred years to make up for the hard time we gave everyone else for the last few hundred years. It's hard, none of it is my fault, but it's probably me and my peers that'll need to pay the price.

Well I am just a huge non-fan of punishing the majority for the actions of a few. Or rather even, punishing the present for the follies of the past. I don't believe in reparations and I think we tend to live in our past, rather than learn from it and move forward.

I have heard instances of women being paid less for the same job as a male, though there are other factors to sadly take into consideration that seem sexist, but from a philosophical standpoint are perfectly reasonable. I don't know anything about the female friend you speak of, but I do know that many male employers will often choose not to invest in women for fear they will leave for motherhood. Women can certainly try to do both, but the reality is that it is typically the mother that is expected to leave work in an emergency, a mother is breastfeeding or pumping, a mother who has to tend to her offspring. Men don't have this "handicap" and therefore are often trusted above females as far as promotions and raises. It's not fair on the surface, but it kind of makes some sense when you dig a little deeper.

Now there is no doubt that there is nepotism and favoritism, but it can also swing both ways. I have male friends who have lost out to females in teaching jobs, over and over, despite the severe lack of men in education and the desperate need for teachers in general. I suppose it is an unfair supposition that females make better teachers and are better with children. (Though this is highly debatable and in many cases outright false but that's another discussion for another day.)

Here's the thing. I am typically a "think the worst" type. I kind of expect the worst out of people and find I am no longer disappointed in humanity because I just don't expect much from them. That being said, I would like to think that the country isn't just made up of evil white men laughing on the top of their money piles saying "fuck you women, just because you have vaginas!!!"

Perhaps the evil white men are sitting on their money, but I would wager a guess that the reason women are paid less in a job, if that even happens to be the case, is because they pose a liability. Women of baby-making age could inevitably cost a company hundreds of thousands in the long-run, especially if they are with the company for a few years, and the company has to either retrain another individual, pay-out hefty maternity leave plus what an intern would cost, and then the intermittent absences of a woman once they have children.

Granted there will be plenty of women who don't have kids, but it's damn near impossible to know for sure.

So besides the fact that women typically work jobs that pay less than them (social work, teaching, nurses vs their male doctor counterparts) I think that is what mainly makes up this idea of a wage gap, rather than just clusters of good ole boys...

From my viewpoint, punishment might not be the exact right word... I mainly meant that white males may have to deal with less opportunities in the future in order for companies to achieve an equilibrium/balance of demographics in their senior management teams. This might cause some heartache, especially since white males tend to be more qualified due to education/opportunities, but that will be the cost to get everyone else up to speed.

Of course, that completely depends on the industry... if you make products that have a huge multicultural appeal, then yes, for the good of the company, the senior management team should be multicultural.

I don't know if it's true or not, but there's a saying going around that there are more CEOs named John in the Fortune 500 than female CEOs.... and yes, clearly all those Johns have been successful so far, but that might not mean that they're still the best going forward.

My friend has 2 kids, is super smart, very educated, super driven and a crazy good hard worker. I don't know her subordinate at all but she says he's frustratingly lazy. She's not supposed to know what he earns because companies always try to ensure secrecy/privacy, but she's also in charge of the budgets for her area and can see he's making more than her.

I actually quite like working for young parents, male or female... they work hard during the day and they're the ones who leave at a proper time because there's better things to do than be at work. Almost everyone else faffs around during the day and then are in the office till late all trying to be seen to be the last ones there. It's super annoying.

We do have friends on both sides... friends who are managers trying to fill positions left by maternity leave... it's really hard because who wants a job for a complicated role just short term... and friends that have been shafted around by companies because of their mat leave.

I personally think that the main reason that women are paid less is because companies mostly have enterprise agreements... which means that you and I might do the same job, but we have to individually negotiate our own salaries. I think this is a bit evil. It's a way for companies to underpay people. If companies all had to be transparent about everyone's wages... I think the wage gap would be significantly smaller. I do think dudes tend to be more confident in their wage negotiating. Not all dudes, for sure, but I think the data backs this up.

Hahahaha, the imagery of dudes on piles of money screaming at vaginas is amazing.
I've definitely seen the boys club look after it's own time and time again.

Super interesting our very different experiences in different industries. My partner's family is very teacher-heavy, I wonder if gender plays a role in Australia. I'm keen to find out.

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.26
TRX 0.11
JST 0.033
BTC 64014.44
ETH 3064.06
USDT 1.00
SBD 3.86