The term "toxic individualism" doesn't mean that individualism is inherently toxic, like "toxic masculinity" doesn't mean that about masculinity in the general case. These terms mean the over-expression of their worst aspects.

▲

snackerblues 7 hours ago | parent [-]

In practice, both do mean exactly that. "Nontoxic individualism" is collectivism, "nontoxic masculinity" is femininity. You're not slick, everyone gets the language games at this point

▲

mplanchard 7 hours ago | parent | next [-]

This comment seems to be both reductive and in bad faith.

Of course there is an idea of non-toxic masculinity that doesn't just equate to !masculinity. People love to bring up examples of non-toxic masculinity in media. Someone on reddit has even compiled a megalist of examples of non-toxic masculinity in film: https://www.reddit.com/r/MensLib/comments/eb0ir1/a_megalist_...

▲

Peritract 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

That's simply untrue; you're deliberately misinterpreting terms to grind a tired axe.

It is perfectly possible to be both masculine and non-toxic without being feminine. Refusing to allow that is toxic in itself.

	▲	SkyeCA 6 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> you're deliberately misinterpreting terms Using the term "toxic" to describe things is an issue because people have an immediate negative reaction to it and go on the defence. Wording matters a lot and I'm unsure why there's such an insistence on calling things "toxic" when other words would both better describe issues and cause a less visceral reaction.