home > archive > 2019 > this article


And now a word from our sponsor about “toxic masculinity”

By Greg Strange
web posted January 28, 2019

Remember not so long ago when companies, with their advertisements and television commercials, just wanted to sell you some laundry detergent, or some aspirin, or a car, or any of a multitude of various and sundry products which most Americans needed or simply wanted?  Oftentimes they would employ humor or even (gasp!) pretty girls to help sell the product.  They generally steered clear of controversy and it was all pretty tame and boring.

What they didn’t do was try and sell you a “social justice” bill of goods.  What they didn’t do was tell you, in not so many words, that if you didn’t go along with the current, radical left-wing orthodoxy, you were basically scum deserving of all the opprobrium that could be heaped upon you by your more enlightened betters.  They didn’t do those things because it would have been harebrained to risk alienating half of their potential customer base.

Well, that was then and this is now.  Leftism is on the ascendancy and it is pretty much steamrolling over everything in its path with little or no resistance.  In such an atmosphere, left-leaning leaders of companies have little to worry about and feel perfectly comfortable to indulge in ideologically driven virtue signaling while pushing their products.

Take Nike, for instance.  They decided to take on the cop-hating, NFL ingrate, Colin Kaepernick, as the face of a new advertising campaign.  “Believe in something.  Even if it means sacrificing everything.”  Yeah, right, even though the premise for his narcissistic protest was a total lie.

And then there was Starbucks.  Remember when CEO Howard Shultz encouraged his baristas to discuss race relations with customers?  Sure, who doesn’t want a dollop of social justice talk with his overpriced cup o’ joe first thing in the morning?  (By the way, Shultz is currently mulling over running for president as an independent.)

And now there’s Gillette, the maker of razors and shaving cream.  Gillette has joined the leftist mob and gone full-on “social justice” with a commercial/propaganda short about “toxic masculinity.”

The commercial is not harsh or haranguing in its tone, but rather bathed in warm waves of artistic virtue signaling and gushy sentimentality about “the best that a man can get.”  But there’s no mistaking that can only happen after society’s collective “toxic masculinity” has been jettisoned.

So what, exactly, is “toxic masculinity?”  Well . . . it’s just masculinity, period.  According to the American Psychological Association, “the main thrust of the . . . research is that traditional masculinity – marked by stoicism, competitiveness, dominance and aggression – is, on the whole, harmful.”

And there you have it, another brilliant insight from one of the vaunted social sciences that is busily replacing the transcendence and moral certainty of Judeo-Christian religious values with warmed over psychobabble.

“Toxic masculinity” is yet another in a long list of things that the left believes leads to intolerable oppression and therefore has to be stamped out.  But one can’t help wondering why it’s recently become such a huge deal when, in actuality, there’s never been less of it in all of human history.  It’s like every other thing that the radical left perceives as a problem: there’s never been less of it (at least in modern Western countries), but they irrationally act as if there’s never been more.

Just go down the list.  Oppression of blacks: never been less; institutional racism totally dismantled; diversity preached like the gospel; just had a two-term black president.  Mistreatment of women: they’ve never had more freedom or more presence at every level of society and government.  Mistreatment of homosexuals: the West absolutely loves you, homosexuals, you’re totally fabulous, you can do no wrong – and heteronormativity has been declared dead, just for you!

But according to the left, all these various forms of oppression and mistreatment are so stifling and out of control that the only solution involves the total transformation of human society, if not humans themselves (hint: the transgendering attempt to wipe out all sex and gender distinctions, contrary to biology, a well-known science).  The psychological delusions that fuel the destructive actions of the left are colossal and yet, the profession of psychology itself, whose purpose is supposed to be to help assuage delusional thinking, is totally down with most of it, including “toxic masculinity.”
Look, you want to talk about “toxic masculinity?”  Let’s talk, but without all the critical theory psychobabble which reduces all human interactions to oppressors vs. oppressed.  Let’s not even argue with the legitimacy of “toxic masculinity” as a concept, but instead, ask the left if it wants more of it.  What do I mean?  Follow me here.

Question for the left:  Where do you think there is more “toxic masculinity,” in modern, highly developed Western countries like ours, o-o-o-r-r-r . . .  Or in underdeveloped, backwards, poverty-ridden Third World countries, like the ones in the Middle East or Latin America, for instance?  If you said the latter, you are correct (not that political correctness would ever allow you to say it out loud, but you know it’s true).  But ironically, paradoxically and insanely, the same people railing about “toxic masculinity” want to import endless hordes of unvetted people from those places where said “toxic masculinity” is the most endemic.  And then, on top of that, the “migrants” won’t be asked to assimilate since one culture is just as good as any other and so to demand assimilation would be on a par with racism or, at the very least, cultural insensitivity, most especially if we’re importing “people of color,” which is all the left wants since it despises white people and their civilizational achievements (even though without those achievements they’d be nothing).

So, the left has a major intersectionality problem on its hands.  On the one hand, “people of color” – no matter how poor, backward or inconveniently shot through with “toxic masculinity” – are the greatest thing ever and we need all we can get to pour in and swamp the white privilege patriarchy.  But on the other hand, women are still a brutally oppressed group who are daily victimized by “toxic masculinity.”

So what will the left do?  Worry about it later, of course!

In the meantime, the left will continue trying to turn all white men into basically something like “pajama boy” in the old Obamacare ads: an emasculated, probably overeducated, almost certainly nonreligious, social justice-loving, possibly gender fluid young man whose adolescence will stretch deep into middle age and who may never marry but if he does, it might be to another man, but if he marries a woman, he won’t have children because they would only further damage an impossibly fragile planet.

Getting back to the Gillette commercial, interestingly, there are two separate scenes in the commercial where a young black guy steps in and prevents a young white guy from disrespecting or hitting on a chick who was otherwise minding her own business.  “Bro, not cool, not cool,” said one black guy as he blocked the path of a white guy who was about to follow an attractive young woman down the sidewalk.

You can’t help but wonder if a message about the toxicity of whiteness was being thrown into the commercial about “toxic masculinity” just for good measure.  Of course, Gillette would never tackle the toxicity of the blatantly misogynistic hip hop/rap culture.  Or the toxicity of the epidemic of black male sexual irresponsibility and fatherless homes that has devastated black communities everywhere.  Or the toxicity of the violent crime rate of black males, to which that of white males pales (no pun intended) in comparison.

Don’t expect to see that commercial anytime soon.

The bottom line is that leftism is a virulent cancer that is ravaging Western civilization like there’s no tomorrow.  “Toxic masculinity” is just one more in a long list of leftist delusions that has to be taken care of in order to usher in the long awaited utopia that secular humanists actually believe is possible.  Unfortunately, each success for the left brings us one step closer to societal anarchy, if not outright civilizational collapse.  But then to avert that, you can bet that an all powerful, authoritarian leftist government will be required to hold it all together.  Will it be “Brave New World” or “1984?”  Pick your poison.

Or better yet, resist, now, before it’s too late.  At the very least, you can refuse to give your money to companies that openly push cultural Marxism.  It’s the only thing that might, possibly, perchance influence them to potentially, conceivably think twice about trampling over your values, maybe.  Why would anyone with traditional conservative values ever buy a Gillette product again as long as he lived?  Or a Nike product?  Or watch an NFL game?  Or pay money to go see a movie made by an America-hating Hollywood leftist?  Withholding money from the left, to the extent that it’s possible, is the least any of us can do and getting to the point where it’s inexcusable not to.

We can either resist or we can go meekly into the night. ESR

Greg Strange can be reached at gpstrange30341@yahoo.com. (c) 2019 Greg Strange.





Site Map

E-mail ESR



© 1996-2019, Enter Stage Right and/or its creators. All rights reserved.