Toxic masculinity is the term the Left uses to lump all men in with abusers, rapists and murderers. But a real man is as non-toxic as a person can be. He represents a much larger group in the population, and Progressives don’t want you to see him.
Alfonzo Rachel and Bill Whittle analyze the undercurrents of ethics that drive our news and politics. They’re able to create two new episodes of The Virtue Signal each week thanks to our Members who fund it. Membership also opens access to a great community of like-minded conservatives on the Member blog, forums and comments. Join the team of producers today, and help spread these messages to a world starved for truth.
Video below hosted at Rumble.
12 replies on “Non-Toxic Masculinity: Who a Real Man Is, and Why Progressives Don’t Want You To See Him”
I think what most conservatives enunciate is that it is BETTER for the government to fear the people than the people to fear the government. But I agree the government response is to exert control.
Women are not attracted to weak men no one is attracted to weakness. Weak men are the wolves, strong men are the sheepdogs. Lumping the two together is perilous to the sheep.
There’s more to this, as with most things. This began as a social phenomena after WWII.
A lot of men did and saw a lot of very, very ugly things in that war. When they came home they were “dangerous”. Not necessarily to the country or those around them. Heck, I wasn’t even born until well after WWII but I’m a well trained ex-military man myself and I’ve seen some stuff that wasn’t anywhere near the ballpark of “nice”. I’m dangerous as hell but … I’m not dangerous to people who are not dangerous to me or mine and neither were the vast, vast majority of those WWII vets.
Dangerous people are scary to those who don’t understand. I never thought about that much, knowing that I’m not dangerous except in very specific circumstances, until my first wife pointed it out to me. It just hadn’t occurred to me that people would think I’m dangerous but she was right. I’m a lot more dangerous than someone who never joined a combat team in combat arms in a military famous for prowess in combat.
Just like a gun is dangerous. It’s only dangerous when its wielded and the danger is due to the hand that holds it, for good or evil, but it’s dangerous. A lot more dangerous than say, a rubber glove. (And I can fashion a pretty fair weapon from those too, if I need to.)
So an effort was made post WWII to portray “dad” who came home from the war as a lovable, benign, harmless person. The Dick Van Dyke Show is a great example that springs to mind. Who would think of Dick Van Dyke as anything but a loveable, harmless goof? But he tried to enlist several times, was turned down for being underweight, eventually accepted into the Army Air Corps (the predecessor to the USAF) and wanted to become a pilot. He actually became an Armed Services radio announcer but still …
So think about all the entertainment from back then that portrayed loveable, harmless men as a character. Remember Bob Keeshan? No? If you’re my age you knew him as Captain Kangaroo. He did a tour in the Marines right after Okinawa. He didn’t see any combat but he was a U.S. Marine. Or James Doohan? Yeah, Scotty was a Canadian artilleryman who led troops in the Normandy invasion. He was shot six times by one of his own men, by mistake, and lost a finger in the process. Pudgy ol’ Scotty was a Class A Badass. Don Knotts served in the Army during WWII. Don Rickles was in the U.S. Navy. Jimmy Stewart flew a lead bomber in daylight bombing missions in 1943 and participated in a bombing mission over Viet Nam. Mel Brooks was an Army sapper and fought in the Battle of the Bulge. Charles Bronson manned a tail gun in a B-29 during WWII.
Granted, not all of them play loveable goofballs but you get the idea.
Iliza Schlesinger has a great comedy routine about this called “Confirmed Kills” where she very lightheartedly talks about her “Peepop” or Grandpa being a grumpy old curmudgeon that no one pays much heed to, at their peril. Because Peepop has several confirmed kills …
There was a general, unorganized effort after WWII to “defang” the image of the American Fighting Man who chewed nails and spit bullets — Then came home and became a harmless nice guy. People who didn’t fight did this to people who did because the people who fought were scary. And rightly so, American men were not always the most polished of troops but they were death to the enemy.
The Left scooped this up and slapped a fresh coat of paint on it because they saw it as an opportunity to not only tame down that fighting man image, but to actually emasculate and neuter men in general. Because real men like James Doohan and Jimmy Stewart were never, ever going to let them get away with what they wanted to do.
In strategy your spiritual bearing must not be any different from normal. Both in fighting and in everyday life you should be determined though calm.- Miyamoto Musashi
Great discussion, gentlemen.
I had an slightly older gent at church ask me the other night if black people in this country feel part of America and are patriotic. Yes, people are that isolated. The people he see on his TV are not.
These discussions were the first ones to which I sent him. Also the Hodge Twins and Candace Owens.
I am sorry to say, guys, he had never heard of either of you. Your Q scores are just not that high with left leaning, older white men.
But I think he will actually watch some of these. Zo will be a revelation to him.
Absolutely awesome! I love these. Please keep them coming.
Wow. Another great episode, chock full of insights, excellent comments, and all done off the cuff. I love this series. Its a tour-de-force of solid thinking and articulate presentation.
And please make the young Mexican-American female cashier an honorary member of BillWhittle.com. Great story. What a courageous woman!
Over the decade or so I earned my living building and painting scenery, we’d get a parade of new guys passing through the shop. A number of times the exact same scenario would play out: When I’d see incompetent new guy attempt something stupid and dangerous with a power tool, there was no possible way I could stop them. No matter what I said or did, I watched their minds almost instantly slam shut because they were no longer hearing, they were resenting me challenge their masculinity. Now the way I see it, choosing to operate dangerous equipment without training means the consequences are all on you; I wasn’t trying to prove anything, I was just trying to save myself the unpleasant experience of having to pick their severed body parts up off the shop floor. So, I’d find the biggest – competent – guy available, and after a very few words from them, problem solved.
Two things I thought of. My brain sometimes doesn’t just go outside of the box, but says “What box?” 1 ) Murder and rape are mainly the dominion of men but not exclusively. Women murder too. And yes, they can, and some have, raped men. Not seduced, raped. Rare, but it happens. 2) The superman pic shows not just willing submission and calm, but control. He’s so strong, one little twitch, and the handcuffs break. He had to learn control early and well, or else his life would be accompanied by dead and/or injured bodies and property damage.
So what about ‘toxic femininity’?
No woman wants a wimp.
i respectfully disagree. many women (i would argue a MUCH bigger number than some would assume) glom onto wimpy men for an array of reasons.
now i would agree with the statement: ‘no good women wants a wimp’ and would add my own ‘no good man wants a feminist’.
i believe both are empirical and i am willing to discuss my assertions.
‘no good man wants a feminist’. depends on your definition of feminist. No one wants a Femi-Nazi, per Rush L. But a valid or real feminist is one who understands the physical and biological (and thus psychological) differences between the sexes, and is simply demanding equal pay if/when they do the same kind and amount of work, and equal respect for having the same responsibility and authority as a man did/does. And a confident man is very willing to provide or accept that, especially since that woman might well be his mother, sister, spouse, daughter, cousin, friend, etc.
Men want to be respected and admired by any of the women they encounter in life, but especially those who are potentially candidates for mating. The lust instinct* is always bubbling below the surface, and restrained by socialization to being pursued only if the time, place, and person are suitable. But almost any (adult) woman might become his partner if the circumstances are “right”. Thus the desire for a positive acceptance “no matter what”. And sometimes some men exhibit boorish or unsuitable behavior out of a fear of being (legitimately) rejected (whether sex ends up being involved or not), in an attempt to salve their damaged ego.
*Somewhere I read that men have something like a billion more neurons in their brain than women. When I heard that, I said, “that makes sense: 10% of those cells to manage a larger body and the remaining 90% dedicated to lust”. But if we are thinking in terms of “lizard brain” core vs. frontal cortex, perhaps this analysis breaks down. 🙂