When the left talk about toxic and destructive masculinity and suggest policy to address it then that is using clear language and decisive action about a structural issue in society.
We could be making sensible policies based on each individuals own merit and it would be great. No more women vs men, immigrant vs nationalist, white vs black. It is the future I would like to have but what I am getting is the choice between two ideologies who each ascribing negative traits to their own set of races and gender, with policies to match.
Equality of this kind is a topic that could create common ground between liberal left and libertarian right, with policies and laws that focus on the individual and human behavior rather than groups. It would mean giving up having a group that each side can point at and blame for all faults in society, and the cynical in me would say that this means its political impossible, but it would make for a better world and possible push people to towards each other rather than apart.
Good for you. Any ideas about how to get people talking about "toxic masculinity" and "evil whiteness" day and night on board? How about people that call for "white genocide"?
> I would consider anyone espousing such ideology to be racist/sexist by definition.
OK. But would the consequences of this definition for someone publicly talking about "toxic masculinity" as something common to most/all males be the same as being an open misogynist, for example? And if not, do you think it's wrong and how would you propose to change it?
> I'm sure the majority of Clinton voters feel similarly as I do.
Do they? How comes somebody like Farrakhan is still very much welcome to the polite society on the left?
That is the very definition of racism. You're ascribing negative traits to specific races/ethnicities/countries, and using that as justification for discriminating against all individuals from that demographic.
If you want to advocate for racist policies as being pragmatic and in the public interests, go ahead and make that argument. But at least have the honesty to call it what it is.
FWIW, I don't think racism and stereotypes make for good public policy, no matter how "true" they may seem. This was the same logic used to discriminate against Irish, Italian and Eastern-European immigrants, and I don't think it's worth going down that same road once again. We can build a sensible immigration policy based on individual merit, without debasing ourselves into racist ideologies.