Toxic Masculinity Is Wrong And Must Be Stopped (Unless You Are A Woman)

I woke this morning to find an email in my inbox from the Law Society Gazette Jobs linking to the July 2022 edition, which featured a headline article about a very topical issue.

Entitled “Stop, imposter! Imposter syndrome in the legal profession” and written by an “International coaching federation-accredited coach, trainer and coach mentor”, the article commences as such:

“Imposter syndrome (IS) is not a new phenomenon. I recall feeling exactly that as a female Asian lawyer. I was the first in my family to attend university, after which I trained as a solicitor at a city firm.

It doesn’t seem too much has changed since then: in 2019, the Junior Lawyers Division reported that over 80% of young solicitors have at some point suffered from IS. Females below the age of 34 also appear to experience IS at work more than men.”

It was within this specific context, namely one in which I was alive to the apparent prevalence of Imposter Syndrome and how damaging the intimidation of women within the workplace might be, that I later watched in a state of near shock as two work colleagues spoke in a café.

What I appeared to be witnessing was an intense clash between them which might have started on the subject of work related matters but was rapidly becoming personal. Too personal.

Although I was tempted to turn away, I simply could not bring myself to – because of the sheer level of needless and unproductive aggression on display.

Things were turning toxic and in that moment I can honestly say that this display of Toxic Masculinity made me deeply uncomfortable.

I could tell that this was not the first time that this had happened. This sort of communication really sounded to me like bullying.

I tried to zone out but I caught fragments of the conversation.

“You look like a giddy fucking schoolgirl!”

I could not believe my ears. How rude. How unprofessional. And, as I can imagine you all thinking, how sexist! In all likelihood landfills could be plenished with the number of complaints about how textbook an example this is of the sort of sexism women face at work, on an almost daily basis.

It is precisely in anticipation of this fervent Western public interest that I took the some might argue invasive but others would say quite necessary step of taking a picture of the colleagues in order to name and shame the abuser.

The abuse continued.

“What the fuck are you talking about? You’re leaving because you’re weak but don’t project that shit onto me!”

Ladies and gentlemen, here is that picture.

Needless to say that if anyone does recognise the abuser in this photograph, they should pass this information onto the police as a matter of urgency.

If you feel you might also have further relevant information about the suspect, perhaps not just related to the many and varied atrocities he has committed during his alleged acting career, you might be in for a shock of an altogether different sort however.

The abuser in this case is not the character played by Bruce Willis in the offensively vacuous film Midnight In The Switchgrass but the film’s female protagonist (and perhaps anti-hero) played by the not so mysteriously ever evergreen Megan Fox.

The self-evident contradiction that this example, which is broadly representative of the flavour of the month in Western film, leads us to makes casualties of common sense, moral consistency and (perhaps inevitably) of men and women.

To return to the article whose mention topped this one, we are faced with another contradiction which its narrative thrust cannot afford to mention. A contradiction which mirrors the one found in Midnight In The Switchgrass.

As a matter of statistical fact, at the time of writing, almost two thirds of all UK law applicants are female – a fact which predictably translates into women making up the majority of trainees at law firms.

How do we reconcile these statistics with the author’s claim that “It doesn’t seem too much has changed”?

One wonders how far this trend will have to continue before the Western Liberal Capitalist narrative begins to call for equality of opportunity for men (as well as women).

When we are told that “Females below the age of 34 also appear to experience IS at work more than men”, is it morally legitimate to ask why this is in 2022 and also point out that the concept of Imposter Syndrome depends upon subjective reporting of feelings?

Can we not honestly conceive of other incentives for women to stick with this narrative in a context in which they are beginning to secure notoriously competitive training contracts with law firms at the expense of men?

This article forms part of a collection of loosely related ones which deal with some of these contradictions in an attempt to inject more honesty into the current Western mainstream narrative around gender issues.

One writer who has shown the courage to perform the same task is Douglas Murray, who makes a worthwhile point about why the current state of affairs is so confusing.

It was precisely at the point in history at which women almost seemed to have secured all of the rights demanded by Feminism, that the goal posts shifted completely and we began to be told, quite suddenly, that women were further away from this result than ever.

The reasons as to what the real purpose of this unwelcome act of magic was do demand some consideration because if the past decade or so of Social Justice Warrior culture have demonstrated anything, it is that nobody likes a hypocrite. In the end perhaps that was the true objective of this hidden agenda all along.

An article from “The End of Boys and Girls”, a collection of essays about gender in the 21st Century West.