Why is Lord of The Flies seen as an example of "toxic masculinity"?

[William]

Having spent plenty of time reading this book I was surprised to hear that people viewed it as toxic masculinity. Knowing this, I read each chapter a little slower, trying to find good examples of this, but they seem to have escaped me.
The book is centered around the idea that when left on their own, people will revert back to primal instincts and violence. That civilization is a set of rules that we need so instincts do not rule us.
Knowing as well that it reflects Golding's work in an all boys school, and seeing how high school aged children interact with other and their environment, I just can't seem to see it as toxic masculinity.
Any opinions you have on it would be much appreciated.

[Marko]

The first step has to be finding a clear definition of "Toxic masculinity" which is a convenient phrase that probably means different things to different people.

Interesting article on its definition here: https://www.tolerance.org/magazine/wh...

also a link to a good Ted Talk on the subject in that article.

If you define it as primarily as violence, status and aggression, there are certainly corollaries in Lord of the Flies. (although sex is usually involved in the definition as well).

Gender identity and norms could have been explored if there had been girls on the island. I've begun a writing project (TV series) that uses and examines these ideas in deeper ways.

[Stephen]

I agree with you, William, I read it the same way, though one could well argue that "toxic masculinity" defines the "primal violence" displayed by the boys. Another way of looking at it, apart from whether or not the characters are exhibiting "t.m.", is how an audience of today might indict their behavior as gender-specific, whereas that notion would not have occurred to an audience of 1954, where what was "male" was given as the "universal."

Not to say that brutality isn't in fact a universal human trait (a tip of the hat to Gillian Flynn here!). In fact, I think an all-female redo of LotF would be fabulous.

Interested in hearing more about your writing project, Marko.

[Monty J]

William wrote: "Having spent plenty of time reading this book I was surprised to hear that people viewed it as toxic masculinity. Knowing this, I read each chapter a little slower, trying to find good examples of ..."

The term "toxic masculinity" is in itself a toxic, sexist attack on manhood, for it assigns traits such as violence, sex, status and aggression as male and emotional vulnerability as female. Nothing could be more false. In my experience, women are just as capable as men of violence, sex and aggression and men are just as emotionally vulnerable as women--they just manifest it differently.

Anyone who believes the "sugar and spice and everything nice" definition of femaleness is a fool. And the same goes with "snails and shells and puppy dog tails."

If the characters of LOTF had been female, the results would have been the same. Women are just as capable of men of animalistic behavior.

[Marko]

Hmmm. Women do seem to start fewer wars though.

[Monty J]

Marko wrote: "Hmmm. Women do seem to start fewer wars though."

Only because there've been fewer female major heads of state in recent modernity. We have some stellar examples of war-mongering females in Queen Victoria (Indian Rebellion of 1857, the Boer Wars and Opium Wars, and others). Queen Elizabeth and Margaret Thatcher seemed eager to go to war with Argentina over the Falkland/Malivinas Islands. And Catherine The Great (Russo-Turkish War of 1768–74).

One would hope, though, that humankind has learned from our mistakes when it comes to war.

[Marko]

You are incorrect if you think there are not basic psychological differences between the sexes... as far as war and leadership... look to New Zealand, Germany, the U.K... those female leaders just seem better equipped to lead then many of the men who preceded them.

[Monty J]

Marko wrote: "You are incorrect if you think there are not basic psychological differences between the sexes... as far as war and leadership... look to New Zealand, Germany, the U.K... those female leaders just ..."

It's nice to have theories, but a solid base of empirical data is what conclusions are based on.

I'm not saying there aren't differences that could affect leadership methods. There's room for hope, but the jury is still out. A few isolated instances are not enough. In a decade or so we should have enough data to draw some valid conclusions, with all the women now running for office and getting elected.

[Marko]

Say the guy who gave "a few isolated instances of war-mongering females"...Here is empirical data on gender differences and aggression based on scientific studies.

https://homepages.rpi.edu/~verwyc/oh1...

It states men are much more likely to engage in physical aggression.
In 'Lord of the Flies,' getting back to the subject at hand, the young boys would be more likely to engage in violence than if the story had featured young girls...thus disproving your hypothesis (which you based on your 'own experience' which is anecdotal).

You wrote: "If the characters of LOTF had been female, the results would have been the same. Women are just as capable of men of animalistic behavior."

This seems not quite factual.
The results would have been different probably...but it is a work of fiction either way.

I do think the phrase, "toxic masculinity" is both repulsive and inane...people do enjoy their political catch-phrases though.

[Monty J]

Marko wrote: "In 'Lord of the Flies,' getting back to the subject at hand, the young boys would be more likely to engage in violence than if the story had featured young girls...thus disproving your hypothesis (which you based on your 'own experience' which is anecdotal)."

LOTF was written by Golding as a rebuttal to an earlier novel, Coral Island, which he felt was puffery playing up to British egoes. LOTF's characters are based on boys he had actually taught in his job at a boarding school. The book had to come out the way it did to illustrate his point, that under certain conditions people are capable of savagery. Male or female, the result would have been the same.

Human behavior becomes unpredictable under extreme conditions, which Golding chose as the setting in LOTF. When people feel isolated and afraid, ration falls victim to the animal instinct of self preservation, as the novel so brilliantly illustrates. Under such conditions, who is more rational becomes the issue.

Hitler was insane, but he triggered global warfare that ended the lives of 80 million people over five-years. How did an insane person become head of state? An insane woman would have been capable of the same insanity.

[Marko]

BOYS he had taught...

[Monty J]

Marko wrote: "It states men are much more likely to engage in physical aggression."

That's a sweeping generality. Mental aggression can be just as deadly if not more so, as in the case of poisoning. In reality, what matters is which men and which women and under what circumstances.

In the following article it says...

Historically, women have comprised about 75 percent of all diagnosed cases of borderline personality disorder, and that percentage hasn’t shown much variation over the years.

This per:https://www.bridgestorecovery.com/bor...

Symptoms of BDP include:

...typically the following:

Inappropriate or extreme emotional reactions
Highly impulsive behaviors
A history of unstable relationships
Intense mood swings, impulsive behaviors, and extreme reactions can make it difficult for people with borderline personality disorder to complete schooling, maintain stable jobs and have long-lasting, healthy relationships.

This per: https://www.psycom.net/depression.cen...

The 75 percent diagnosis rate of BPD suggests that these antisocial traits are more common among women. But even if BPD is equally prevalent among genders, the implication is that we dare not lean too heavily on gender when choosing leaders.

Look deeply into the candidate, not their gender.

[Stephen]

Monty J wrote: "Hitler was insane, but he triggered global warfare that ended the lives of 80 million people over five-years."

... Not sure it's a fact that Hitler was insane. The sane are perfectly capable of perpetrating evil, and calling his sanity into question rather lets him off the hook as far as his responsibility for his actions (IMO). But I get your point otherwise.

[Monty J]

Stephen wrote: "Monty J wrote: " Not sure it's a fact that Hitler was insane. The sane are perfectly capable..."

Agreed. A diagnosis of insanity would be too generous.

Lots of theories, but no consensus. Yet there were so many signs of antisocial behavior, and still he got into office.

And now we have The Donald.


However, Hitler was apparently diagnosed more than once with Histeria:

" Kroner confirmed in particular that Forster had examined Hitler and that he had diagnosed him with "hysteria"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychop...

[Mae]

Monty J wrote: "William wrote: "Having spent plenty of time reading this book I was surprised to hear that people viewed it as toxic masculinity. Knowing this, I read each chapter a little slower, trying to find g..."

There are inherently feminine and masculine traits. Men and women possess a combination of the two. when someone says a typically masculine trait is dominance or assertiveness that does not mean that all men are those things, just that we have historically associated those characteristics with the male species.

toxic masculinity is when men internalise masculine characteristics to an extent where it damages themselves, other men and women. Our society has fed the narrative that to be a man is to be aggressive and a provider and to not show any weakness. we are told these things from birth ; boys are told not to cry, to 'man up', that 'boys will be boys' ; fed both a sense of superiority and underlying insecurity because they are constantly trying to prove their manliness.

This creates men who only know how to express their emotions through anger and aggression. Men who are ashamed to show any form of weakness out of fear they will be seen as less manly for it. Men who are depressed but feel they can't reach out. It perpetuates rape culture, creates men who believe they are entitled and should get anything they want. Men who subconsciously begin to resent women, or other men who may be in touch with their feminine side, because it's been drilled into them so many times that those feminine qualities are weak and undesirable.

Its not an attack on manhood at all, and neither is it sexist. its perpetuated by both men and women, and negatively effects all of us.

I also think it's very present in Lord of the flies, and that the outcome would not have been the same had they been young girls.

that's because the boys on that island were a product of these damaging teachings about what it is to be a man, and of growing up in the war. not only had they been desensitised to violence due to the war, they had also been taught that they were superior simply because they were boys and because they were British.

I've already written a lot so I won't start quoting a load of sections, but a very easy one is the last few pages of the book.

when the boys start breaking down in tears, their actions and experiences finally dawning on them, the officer who rescues them turns away embarrassed and ashamed. he doesn't want to see these boys ( all under the age of 13 who are deeply traumatised now ) cry because he doesn't believe that's how men should be.

[Davis]

Mae wrote: "Monty J wrote: "it's very present in Lord of the flies, and that the outcome would not have been the same had they been young girls."

Golding's work portrays the instinctive evil of humankind, not men, and therefore it's silly to think he would change his outlook on humankind (and therefore the broader themes/outcome of his story) if the plane had been filled entirely with girls instead of boys. You're making a claim for the book's theme instead of analyzing what the book's theme is.

Next,

Mae wrote: "he doesn't want to see these boys ( all under the age of 13 who are deeply traumatised now ) cry because he doesn't believe that's how men should be."

Again you're stating your interpretation of the book as events that actually took place in the story. Golding does not elaborate why the navy officer turns away from the boys, which could be explained as his disappointment in them as Britons (a point you elaborated on in your post), which does not relate to toxic masculinity, seeing how the idea of a 'civilized' person seen through the lens of British way of life was no doubt expected for both men and women.

I appreciate your attempt to answer the OP's question, but it, in no way, adequately provides text evidence nor interpretive evidence which would demonstrate Lord of the Flies being an example of toxic masculinity. More debate on this is certainly welcome, but it seems the criteria anyone could use to label this book "toxic" in its masculinity would be nothing more than it being written by a man more than sixty years ago. Another common example of performative wokeness that has virtually no serious presence in the world of literary analysis.

[Gabrielle]

Golding wanted to accentuate the enormities dealt with men who were liberated from society and this message was portrayed by the characters in the story. If toxic masculinity is defined by gender, then I would disagree with that example as it is apparent that this is a matter of the beast that resides in humankind. We are all capable of doing evil but the extent to it depends on one's dispositions and reason. Suppose if it were women, the outcome would most likely end similarly, though the process of ending where it would be might be different.

Regarding toxic masculinity in the definition of harmful cultural norms to society, then yes, it is a perfect example. Golding inherited the idea of this novel through his experience in World War II as he saw the ugliness in humanity.