Almost 50 years ago, the APA removed homosexuality from the list of mental disorders. Today? "The main thrust of the subsequent research is that traditional masculinity—marked by stoicism, competitiveness, dominance and aggression—is, on the whole, harmful." https://www.apa.org/monitor/2019/01/ce-corner.aspx

Our genes show these things are on the spectrum and can go either way - be like chimps or be like bonobos. What the culture nurtures is another thing altogether

On the whole - the disproportionate spending of many cultures around the world on weapons - is bad. That we can objectively prove. And why many cultures are spending disproportionate on weapons as opposed to health or education - have gendered explanations

Broadly agree. But the disproportionate spending on war I think has a power explanation rather than a gendered one. Research on states/kingdoms headed by a woman has found that they are more likely to go to war, e.g. whereas ordinary women are more likely to oppose it.

Queens

The fact that many more political organisations have been headed by men than women is also gendered. And definitions of what power means as a concept and what that looks like in the real world are also gendered

The way humans have organised themselves increasingly in hierarchical societies are also gender. The university is gendered. Knowledge production is gendered

This is your wheelhouse and I defer to your knowledge but Im still somewhat skeptical. I do agree with it being gendered but I suspect not in the same way you do. That is, men tend to be more interested in power hence political orgs and other hierarchies are headed by men. Women's interests tend to be elsewhere. When women choose to pursue power e.g. they...

... do just as well as men.

The assumption that there is only one kind of 'man', and that there can only be one way to be a 'man' is precisely the point. There are many ways of performing masculinity. The typology 'toxic' is only one.

And for sure, humans born with a vagina need to perform masculinity in order to advance in masculine social structures, for example, in a university. Exhibit A - me.

Not all men tend to be interested in power. Not all women tend not to be interested in power. Without gender studies, we can't come to this conclusion

Yes. We're taking about stats, not individuals. The 'average' man or woman (if there is such a thing). I find it interesting though that you refer to the university hierarchy as 'masculine'. Is it necessarily masculine? I dont think it is.

Nothing needs to be necessarily anything. Institutions are byproducts. For now, the academia that I know - from my experiences across four different countries and interactions with academics from around the world - masculine coded attributes are the norm. This is obvious in conferences, job hiring, classroom policies, etc.

Therefore I must pummel you to submission Jego. And convince you of my authority