I largely agree with what you're saying. There is something about this demographic and it's getting largely worse, not better. I think most of this is enough feedback that we need to tailor our approach (as in almost put it in 180 from what we have been doing).
The issue with "toxic masculinity" is that only non-toxic men can define it. and everyone has different definitions of what a non-toxic man is.
If i were to suggest what an "ideal role model" is for young men, it would be someone who doesn't drink, who is physically strong, boxes, labours, is capable of causing harm, but chooses not to, and one who isn't prone to loosing it if a girl rejects him.
Others would read my description and recoil in disgust, because they think the ideal man should be one who is romantic and perhaps a writer, and should drop their coat so ladies can walk over puddles, and be well versed in different types of whiskeys, who is incapable of causing harm, but perhaps wants to.
These are really the two ends of what young men have to try and model themselves as, and they do a botched job of it and get called a creep and loser for being a creepy loser. drinking to excess because that's the only socially acceptable thing to do when in large groups.
Perhaps the one thing that we need to train boys in is how to handle rejection properly, maybe that's the missing piece here.
Perhaps society should not encourage the archetype of "incapable of causing harm but wants to" and instead encourage "is able to cause harm, but won't" - like their forefathers were into adventure and war stories of strong heroes, etc.
(these are just thoughts at this point, going from what I know of being a man myself, and what I had to do to grow up.)
Who's to say. Good chat none-the-less. :)