Hacker News Reader

Comment by underseacables | Hacker News Reader

It is interesting that with how much the phrase toxic masculinity is thrown around, that children with both parents, especially those with fathers, do better than those without. Masculinity was so toxic than children raised without fathers should be better.

View on HN

You seem to misunderstand how the adjective "toxic" is functioning in that phrase. Toxic masculinity describes a particular type of masculinity in the same way that "electric car" describes a type, or subset, of cars. Not all cars are electric just like not all masculinity is toxic. Hope that helps!

They really should change phrases like this that causes a lot of confusion and misunderstandings before changing stuff like "whitelist".

Sounds like a dog whistle to me.

If someone talked constantly about, say, "toxic women", would you really believe they were only talking about a subset?

Well, people do talk about Karens, shrews, bitches, etc. which all seem to be different kinds of toxic women. Maybe there are just more named subsets for toxic women than for men?

There are academic articles on karens, shrews and bitches? You're claiming that the worst used in 4chan, reddit, and popular magazines carry the same societal weight as academic articles in policy and sociology journals. They don't.

...isn't using the word "bitches" widely considered a dog whistle for hating all women?

Seems like you're agreeing with me.

I doubt there's any confusion. The purported meaning of the phrase is clear. But its usage in practice is often (but not always) quite punishing toward masculinity in general.

You're technically right, but then please note how the phrase "not all men…" is handled by social media.

Toxic masculinity as commonly used outside academia is very amorphous concept. It's more like a "green" car than an electric one. We all more or less agree that some cars are environmentally friendly and some aren't, but not where the dividing line is.

If toxic masculinity encompasses a big chunk of masculinity, if there's no clear definition of non-toxic masculinity that's actually masculine, and if toxic femininity isn't ever discussed, it can seem like masculinity is considered to be an overall toxic trait while femininity isn't.

I think the GP was responding to the broader idea that masculinity is especially toxic in comparison to everything else, rather than the narrow "some men light themselves on fire to prove they're macho and get hurt, and that's bad" defensible academic usage.

The dads that stick around and help raise their kids aren’t the ones that are toxic. It’s the ones who don’t, which as the article points out, is a growing number.

I think we need a lot more context before judging a person's actions with their children.

This is about statistics rather than a case by case basis, isn’t it?

Do you have statistics to support that fathers leave due to "toxic masculinity"? Only statistics I'm aware of is that divorce rates are up and the #1 divorce rate are due to financial issues.regardless, "someone who X is Y" is not a statistic, it's a stereotype (which may or may not have statistical support).

I don't know of much literature that looks into single mother's and why they are single.

> #1 divorce rate are due to financial issues

Stands to reason. For what other purpose would you get divorced? When it comes to social division you can simply part ways. The only reason you would initiate divorce is to get help sorting out the financial aspects of the relationship.

I believe #2 is infidelity.

Looking it up: https://www.forbes.com/advisor/legal/divorce/common-causes-d...

I was slightly incorrect. Financial reasons was the #1 reason to get married. Apparently the #1 reason for divorce was "lack of family support". Which I suppose can still come down to financial issues in some way.

Though, it does seem to shift depending on the stage of marriage. First year divorces happen mostly due to incompatibility, whereas long term (8+ years) happens due to infidelity.

It seems that is actually focused on the relationship breakdown and conflating it with divorce. Like, if infidelity lead you to never want to look at the other person again, you could just carry out the rest of your life pretending they don't exist. You don't need to go to the lengths of divorce for that division. But if you want to sort out the financial separation of the relationship and cannot reach agreeable terms without an intermediary, then divorce may become necessary.

It has many different breakdowns, including why they marry, why they break up, and what they feel could have saved the relationship. It's more comprehensive than just divorce.

>Like, if infidelity lead you to never want to look at the other person again, you could just carry out the rest of your life pretending they don't exist.

Sure, not all infidelity leads to divorce, some stay together for the kids, others forgive or drop it, others "get even" and then forgive/drop it. Infidelity also isn't illegal and open relationships are a thing, so you can indeed remain legally married and proceed to date aroind as if you are single.

But general societal pressure dictate that if you want to properly separate you divorce. Which is probably why the top two reason come from not being a good partner (i.e. Being unable or unwilling to take care of the family or not being faithful).

Polygamy is also a problem: because while there's no real punishment for it in society for engaging in polygamy, you are legally not allowed to have multiple spouses. If you ever imagine re-marrying you want to get that divorce over with ASAP. And the process can take a while.

> But general societal pressure dictate that if you want to properly separate you divorce.

But isn't that still directly related to finances? The article kind of touches on the same point, where women are "giving up on men" who are not in a good financial position. Not having your finances sorted out with a former partner would also question one's financial position. If one wants to explore other partners after a relationship breakdown, there is social pressure to get one's finances in order.

> If you ever imagine re-marrying

But circling back, you pointed out that the most common reason people get married is for financial reasons. So it seems the reason for divorce, in order to prepare for another marriage, is still for financial reasons.

Which makes sense as the modern marriage contract doesn't cover anything other than financial attributes. Maybe there was an earlier age where there was more to it, but we don't uphold those values anymore.

"Toxic masculinity" does not mean "all masculinity is toxic."

It's also interesting how little discussion there is about "toxic femininity". I dislike both, to be clear, but if we're going to tackle the harm caused by men being violent, cold, disloyal, absent, etc then we also have to be frank about the role of women in the creation of broken homes by selecting such awful husbands and fathers.

anything toxic really. it is interesting which toxins are focused on though.

Talk is cheap. Just let the results of your actions in the response to the zeitgeist speak for itself.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com