Toxic Masculine Standards

You’ve heard it many times before: “It’s sooo hard to be a woman!” (followed by a laundry-list of drawbacks on being female). No offense to all the feminist rhetoric out there, but I’d say it’s just as hard, if not harder to be a MAN. And no, I’m not just being contrarian, but rather vouching for something I really believe in; the drawbacks of being a man in this world aren’t discussed as widely and vocally, since males are expected to ‘suck it up and take it’ – no matter how unfair, unrealistic, or downright ridiculous that “it” may be. So… let’s cut men some slack and give them an equal platform, shall we? Today, I’m going to share some of the toxic masculine expectations that exists today - standards that not only women use to vet on a man’s dateability or desirability, but also what society uses to (superficially) measure a man’s “worth” or “manliness” or whatever idiotic man-o-meter that exists today.

1. Be TALL. STRONG. MUSCULAR. WELL-BUILT. In other words, be physically imposing. Why is this toxic? Because it reduces guys into pieces of meat (LOL no pun intended). Let’s be real here; women always complain about being objectified or judged by appearance, but how is vetting on a man’s physical impressiveness / prowess any different? How ridiculous is it that society is (still) hardwired to correlate a man’s SIZE and STRENGTH to his status / worth / manliness? Why are shorter, smaller guys automatically deemed as undesirable? Folks, this ain’t stone age; men no longer hunt for food, build homes with their bare hands, or fight in tribal wars. In fact, physicality rarely comes into use in our everyday lives; it simply isn’t an essential trait. That being said, the only guys who need to be tall are basketball players and fashion models. The only guys who need to be physically strong are firefighters, professional movers, linebackers, or Olympic weightlifters (you get my point). Unless you are John Cena, or have a job that requires physicality, no guy needs to be tall, muscular, or well-built… any more than a girl needs to have a 'beautiful face'. ( It is also my observation that 9 out of 10 girls who insists on dating a physically impressive guy are not physically impressive themselves. Hilarious!)

2. You’d better have a high-paying job. To the modern (and absurdly picky) female, a man with just any job won’t do. Nope! Not good enough! A man’s gotta have a high-earning, high-status job which disproportionately leads to white-collar professionals like doctors, lawyers, engineers, accountants, CEOs, financiers, and anything that screams “occupational prestige”. Why? Because high-earner = more dollars = (perceived) better provider = woman: whoopee! I-can-quit-my-job! (followed by imaginary fantasies of white-picket houses and shopping sprees) The problem here? It is logically impossible for every man (well, everyone) in society to have a high-paying job. Never mind that not every guy has a “professional pedigree” nor is he suitable for high-end careers, but there are simply not enough of them to go around; if someone has a high-paying job, then someone needs to take a low-paying job! For every doctors and lawyers, we also need warehouse workers and store clerks! Folks, that’s how society works; a few earn a lot, while most earn average-to-low. I find it unfair that society is quick to judge a man based on so-called “status markers”, as if man’s identity = his occupation, man’s worth = his income. Seriously, are men only good as the wealth they bring in? And notice that women don’t have this pressure? (well, not as much) No wonder suicide rates are higher among men!

3. …and if you don’t have your “own place” by mid-twenties, forget ever getting laid. (translation: no parents, no roommates, no communal-living whatsoever) Society’s indicator of ‘reaching manhood’: did he move out of his parents’ abode like an independent, self-sufficient chap? What? He’s got roommates? You mean he’s not well- endowed to get his own pad? (Gasp) What an undesirable, undateable incel! (followed by a left swipe). Does this sound familiar to you? A man instantly losing brownie points upon revealing his living arrangement? I for one, find this incredibly ridiculous and unrealistic. Why is there so much stigma towards men who live with roommates or even parents? Of all the superficial criteria to vet on a man, now we got to include his living arrangements? (eye roll) Ladies, lean in for a reality check: there simply isn’t enough affordable housing to go around for all men (well, everyone really) to have their “own place”. The average guy is bound to have roommates and housemates, especially in more expensive cities like NYC, D.C. Bay Area, etc. It’s no-brainer that cost of living has considerably gone up everywhere, which means for most singletons, having one’s own place is a luxury that fewer people can afford each year. So ladies, if having roommates is a dating deal-breaker, then prepare to be single forever!

4. You wanna be a ‘Real Man’? Then be an unpaid bodyguard! Yea yea, we’ve all heard it before… “real men protect women”. I for one, believe it is a phrase stained with toxic masculinity. Why? Because it encourages benevolent sexism. Assuming that women need to be protected at all times brands women as weak and powerless; yet another way of saying men are more capable and superior, and women’s wellbeing and safety depends on them. That being said, one of irrational female psyche is the desire for a man to ‘protect’ her from physical danger. This has got to be the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard; first of all, if you’re a chick who needs constant ‘protecting’, then you are either attracting trouble, or surrounding yourself with the wrong people / places. Second, I don’t care how many movies you’ve seen, but NO guy can jump in front of a bullet, or an assailant, or an oncoming car to ‘shield’ you from danger. The average guy is NOT a trained fighter, nor EMT, nor does he carry around a concealed weapon. Expecting him to be some kind of personal hero ‘rescue-ready’ at all times is not only incredibly selfish, but laughable as well. Ladies, what makes you so important for a guy to risk himself for you? (if anything, he’s just as helpless in a hostile or dangerous situation!) The point is, no man is “supposed to” be your unpaid bodyguard just ‘cause you are biologically a female!

5. …and if you have a “girly” job, then you are doomed to eternal shame. When a man becomes a grade school teacher, secretary, nurse, or a fashion designer he is often met with raised eyebrows followed by “why do you do that?”. Any hints of female-centric interests or pursuits – be it careers like nursing to generally ‘feminine’ endeavors like ballet - are often judged as ‘emasculating’, ‘effeminate’, or most snidely – ‘gay’, as if he is somehow lacking in the bulge. Notice that women don’t have this stigma? Let’s face it; no one lambasts a woman as “unfeminine” or “gay” if she becomes an engineer, surgeon, mechanic, or a pilot. If anything, she will get lauded and inundated with kudos for being “in a man’s world”. So what explains this unfair double-standard? It’s because of a particular ideal that has existed in human societies for thousands of years… called MISOGYNY. Basically, if a woman has manly pursuits, it's commendable and impressive, whereas if a man has feminine pursuits, it’s considered ‘regressing down’ to an inferior state (eyeroll). Does anyone else feel kind of wrong? Why can’t we give male preschool teachers the same respect as female drill sergeants? Why is gender diversity only acceptable one-way? Folks, it’s time for society to combat this misogynist mentality, so that men can pursue whatever-the-fuck they want without judgement, labels, and stigmas!

...irrational, unrealistic, and idiotic standards that dudes need to put up with!