On the other hand, having spent many years at IBM, the Loudest Person In The Room is rarely a woman. And, having been part of a fair number of woman-led organizations, including those that were straight up empire building, hyper-competitiveness tends not to be a problem; they have other pathologies.

Even every non physical competitive sport in the world is male dominated to an absurd degree. Chess, esports, poker, you name it. Hyper competitive environments are associated with masculinity for valid reasons.

Not in nature, no. But in socialization and culturally trained roles, yes.

But there is a masculine (in the sense of gender roles that a person assumes for themselves) way to do it, and that is what is typically expressed in these settings. And it is typically more harmful for more people on average than the feminine expressions of same.

>typically more harmful for more people on average than the feminine expressions of same

The equivalent feminine expression of the same kind of dominance is a reputation war.

Reputation wars can destroy lives and relationships. If I have to choose one, I for one much prefer to deal with people winning at how awesome they are (and how lame I am) than a reputation war.

Civilized places have cracked down on violence, so male dominance contests almost never end up with a face punched anymore. Toning down the violence made them much safer.

Female dominance contests are still as deadly as they have always been.

Tell me, what do you consider "toxic masculinity"? You're not really presenting a frame for us to discuss this in.

>And it is typically more harmful for more people on average than the feminine expressions of same.

Yeah, no. This is borderline sexist. It's one thing to argue "the workplace only allows masculinity in its toxic form". It's another entirely to go "feminine better".

I'm saying "masculine worse", yes, because it is. Any assertion to the contrary is deliberately ignoring the decades of research into aggressive tendencies and the (inverse) correlation to wellbeing globally. Anybody who speaks on this, having not informed themselves of the research, is acting in bad faith. By this point in global human connectivity, you really have to be trying in order to stay in a tiny little filter bubble that doesn't acknowledge this.

Nobody appreciates people who speak without knowing about what they speak!

Not to mention that any argument whose central point starts with "I would prefer..." cannot be taken seriously. Your opinions have no bearing on material realities, or, put another way, facts don't care about your feelings.