Best described as a backlash against the ongoing and concerted attempt to emasculate men, toxic masculinity is simply unashamed celebration of the male psyche. Thanks to an egregious drive toward affirmative action and also something to do with estrogen in the water turning frogs gay, TM™ is gaining ground as an insult. It is regularly banded around among the disenfranchised who essentially despise alpha males. Over the past several centuries, society has reduced its' reliance on men at arms or what could be termed 'berserkers'. Those who are purely of the warrior caste pretty much brought this on themselves. However there are many who are capable of tapping into the physical confrontation mentality without being defined by it. Most focus on alternative skills and often distinguish themselves in other fields. This success comes undoubtedly as a result of their mindset being quite radically different to that normally encountered in these fields.
Unfortunately the existence of this demographic is considered a threat to the Aspirational Beta-Plus community. Due to the previously mentioned exploitation of affirmative action, vast swathes of government and other systems of authority are almost exclusively populated by ABP's. These people are (generally speaking) quite hopelessly ineffective, consequently they suffer from elevated levels of insecurity. This vulnerability is highly compatible with occupations considered unnecessarily bureaucratic by those labelled with the derogatory smear of TM™. Their ability to exhibit adaptive improvisation (thinking on your feet) is critically impaired due to the confines of the bureaucratic mindset. At no point do their managers want them to show initiative or pursue anything remotely innovative. Creativity is not compatible with the apparatchik mentality. Line management actively suppress thinking outside of the box by subordinates because any credit or acclaim must surely be directed toward line management. Credit should quite specifically not be received by those who have yet to make the sacrifices required to gain promotion. Invariably said sacrifices have nothing to do with professionalism or even output. They are simply methods of leverage for the next layer of line management to wield over their subordinates.
Alpha's exist across the so called gender spectrum. However due to humanity's historical reliance on conflict, heterosexual men with high compensating mechanisms have been represented more in leadership than any other gender. There is undoubtedly a systemic campaign being rolled out to reduce humanity's reliance on conflict. This would generally be considered a good thing. However any change management gives scope for frankly sickening levels of corruption and co-opting. At some point, certain interest groups associated a legacy of male leadership with the proliferation of conflict. This is the source of such divisive terminology as;
Male dominated patriarchy
Cis-gender privilege
and of course;
Toxic masculinity
The interest groups espousing such claptrap are highly ideological. They believe wholeheartedly in the subjugation of everyone on Earth. As far as they are concerned it's all about having their turn to tell everyone else what to do. The fact that their ranks do not produce particularly effective leadership is somehow considered to be the fault of the legacy of male leadership. There is no way to rationalise this mindset and even attempting to comprehend it is a feat comparable with gaining the mindset of a scorpion, coyote, opossum or other form of primitive fauna. Such dismissal by pragmatic minds simply pours petrol on the fire. APB's are (by their nature) motivated by ego almost as much as material gain. When their ideological thinking (or lack of therein) is openly challenged, the pejorative lexicon is hastily invoked to provide the required label based, argumentum ad hominem.
Much of this ideology is obfuscated within the copious folds of the feminism umbrella. However the average feminist lacks the initiative to research the origins of the movement. The mainstream narrative asserts that after the second world war, women had proven that they could handle the workload of jobs normally done by men. This apparently empowered women all over the world to free themselves from the shackles of domestic servitude and stride forth into the professional world. While this narrative serves the subsequent emasculation philosophy well, it actually represents little more than a contrived and nonsensical brain fart. The reality is that feminism was hopelessly co-opted from the ground up. The forming of campaigns such as the suffragette movement and the Womens temperance movement was targeted very early on by industrialists such as JP Morgan and Thomas Edison. As shocking as it may seem, neither of these men were overly concerned with the plight of women. They were actually much more closely aligned with the accused chauvinistic principles of so called TM™. As industrialists, they were quick to capitalise on the fact that women would work hard to prove themselves capable and work for less, for much the same reason.
The gender pay gap has been a bone of contention ever since, yet somehow in over a century the feminist movement hasn't managed to obtain a unilateral victory in this regard. It's not a masterpiece of egalitarian thinking to imagine that if feminism demanded all women leave the workplace immediately, society would have no choice but to acquiesce to the demands of equal pay. Clearly it would, yet still somehow this has never happened. Such a glaringly obvious philosophical inconsistency reveals a relevant causality. As has been comprehensively defined by the science of human psychology, generally speaking men are more concerned with doing what's right and women are more concerned with everyone getting along. As a result women are more prepared to suffer conditions they find to be incompatible with their needs and desires. In figurative terms, chicks don't like rocking the big boats in open water but they want to be seen to steer the dinghies in the harbour.
Furthermore, the co-opting of this mindset has given rise to an unstoppable ideology within the LGBT (etc.) community. This out of control fanaticism has itself been horrifically co-opted by the clandestine community. In previous articles it is detailed exactly how offensive perception management within the the nuclear family has resulted in a profoundly distorted interpretation of the Depopulation agenda being deployed all across the first world. Entire generations are having their futures irrevocably altered to suit the entirely fabricated 'over population' crisis. The science behind this highly malevolent bandwagon is fundamentally flawed. It is no more valid than the science quoted in regards to Peak Oil or the ludicrous Covid-19 psyop. In addition, the fact that it has gained considerable momentum reflects just how attractive it is for the clandestine community.
Ultimately the continued activity by proponents of such terminology has produced backlashes in the form of the Red Pill movement, Fathers for Justice and the so called Good Men. The awful irony being that the backlash flies in the face of anything approximating equality. For those who rely on ongoing conflict and disparity this is good news. It seems no coincidence that the clandestine community are heavily invested in the eradication of so called TM™.