Is Stoicism Representative of “Toxic Masculinity?”
Has the logic and efficacy of the system endured?
Stoicism, a system for bearing fortune and fate, is remarkably relevant to life’s modern strife and struggles. Its ancient logic is repeated time and time in the modern self-help industry but it is well worth checking in with the original and arguably superior, unsurpassed form.
However, the American Psychological Association labelled it as “toxic masculinity” in 2019 and many others endeavour to call it toxic claiming it stifles emotions. Most critics recognise that it is the modern interpretations that have become troublesome or gimmicky. The originators from Zeno through to Seneca, Epictetus, and Marcus Aurelius and their writings are generally held in high esteem:
Hyper-exaggerated, toxic masculinity may well include under-developed emotions, but to associate that condition with an ancient wisdom tradition designed to free men and women from suffering is a mistake. Living in a state of emotional equilibrium, not being tossed about by our unnecessary reactions to the people and events of our day, sounds to me like a pretty nice place to be.
Tutor to the Emperor Nero, Seneca accepts life is short in a letter to a friend. He warns that “while we wait, life passes” and asserts we could get more out of it by being more discerning in our activities. He recommends looking to past philosophy for wisdom, surrounding yourself with wise philosophical friends, and preparing for a good death.
Is a life considered, truly the key to well-being though? It’s certainly interesting but many of us can end up unhappier through our delving into the often pessimistic realm of realism. How can those suffering with little to no agency grab the most out of life? Being lost in distraction can provide a welcome relief for many.
A second essay is addressed to his mother, offering consolations for the many losses and pains of her life. Ultimately he is explaining why his being on a remote island in exile isn’t so bad because many choose to migrate anyway, some to this very island. As such, he hopes to reduce her grief regarding his banishment.
Tranquility of the mind is the goal in another of his writings. His friend has admitted mixed feelings of ambition, selfishness, jealousy et al. Surround yourself with quality friends and worthy enterprise says Seneca. Also do not overestimate your realistic capabilities:
“Inborn dispositions do not respond well to compulsion, and we labour in vain against nature’s opposition.”
Be willing to lose everything, Seneca posits, live modestly, and live with death in mind. Much is made of having an honourable end. Seneca himself of course lived in a time where death was always around the corner on the whims of a capricious leader. He eventually goes to his personal instructed doom with the resigned calmness that he espoused.
He insists that we should accept the harshness of nature and fate that is intrinsic to all our lives and thus adjust smoothly to hardships when they inevitably occur. It is better we laugh at life’s misfortunes rather than cry:
We are all held in the same captivity, and those who have bound others are themselves in bonds — unless you think perhaps that the left-hand chain is lighter. One man is bound by high office, another by wealth; good birth weighs down some, and a humble origin others; some bow under the rule of other men and some under their own; some are restricted to one place by exile, others by priesthoods: all life is a servitude.
As regards personal behaviour, Seneca advocated a moderate approach to all things. Expecting the worst, we should plow our furrow while taking a balanced approach between solitude and crowds, leisure and higher activities, etc.
Born a slave Epictetus was no fan of complicated speech, he wanted his work to be accessible to all. He focused on two key questions; how do we lead a happy and fulfilling life and how can we be good people? Happiness and virtue go hand in hand here. Future emperor and fellow stoic Marcus Aurelius was his student.
Though light-hearted and humble, he urged that we take matters of ethics and wisdom very seriously. He lived modestly in a hut and eschewed fame, riches, and power. An ascetic mentality that runs counter to our materialistic, consumerist, and status-hungry society.
Epictetus wanted ordinary people to have the tools to cope with the everyday challenges of life. Loss, disappointments, and grief come to us all inevitably. He didn’t expect perfection but in good humour nursed us to improve and live according to our ideals. He was no god figure, nor was his goal the impressing of others. This wisdom was available to the everyman and not only the clerical elite.
Nor was there any naval-gazing here, just the idea of being in harmony in the good life: mastering desires, performing our noble duties, and thinking clearly about ourselves and others.
Still as sharp as any contemporary philosophy, the serenity prayer could well have been taken from his work. He urged us to realise what we can and can’t control:
What would you be? Then do what you have to do.
Many have turned to Eastern wisdom to lighten our burdens but the West had a similar self-help system already available; albeit a neglected one now that we rarely teach the classics and the APA et al warns against stoicism. Slurred as overly rational and cerebral, it does however continue to match Buddhism and Taoism with its philosophy of inner freedom and tranquility.
So, what of the criticisms? The American Psychological Association famously stated that stoicism constitutes toxic masculinity and others have supported this angle, often making allusions to non-sequiturs such as race, sex, and age. Most critics, however, accept the difference between classical wisdom and the modern misconceptions:
A crisis of identity definitely qualifies, and deserves the kind rationality of the Stoic, rather than the harsh austerity of the traditional man. In the current world wrecked by social/political confusion, climate insecurity, and a pandemic — perhaps a philosophy that prizes individual questioning, virtue, community, and ethics above all is a necessary balm. That is, as long as the philosophy comes straight from the mouth of philosophers, rather than Internet forums.
The Roman sense of virtue and duty is certainly hard to square with our modern society, however. Who nowadays would give their life for whichever globalised, economic region they dwell within? Who currently feels a brave sense of duty to their state?
Ours is an American-centric, social media-led world of toxic positivity and optimism, where many expect that all they pray for or order from the cosmos will guarantee the outcome to which they are entitled. Such thinkers will be blindsided by inevitable pain and stoicism as such clearly has many lessons to teach us.
When anything, from the meanest thing upwards, is attractive or serviceable or an object of affection, remember always to say to yourself, “What is its nature?” If you are fond of a jug, say you are fond of a jug; then you will not be disturbed if it be broken. If you kiss your child or your wife, say to yourself that you are kissing a human being, for then if death strikes it you will not be disturbed.
— Epictetus
Living by nature would include being concerned with the lives of others and their opinions of us, being heavily involved in protecting “mortal loved ones” due to our instincts for surviving within a tribe. So much of life is therefore attempting to overcome and cope with the hard knocks, once we’re here.
Also, little is under our control in choosing how to act. We are each a mess of genetic propensities, hormones, and the fixed drives of our organism. Not to say it can’t be useful to temper our predicament with such a practice.
Aurelius famously stated that “we suffer more in imagination than reality”, nonetheless the suffering we create in our imagination still constitutes pain. Stoicism, should you encounter it and enact it adequately can certainly be a coping strategy that suits some dispositions.
However, as the Buddha stated, “life is suffering” and we should ultimately think twice before creating new beings into existence. These hypothetical victims are thrown to fate and will each require their coping strategies.
I will leave the final word to Ivan Gromov, an inpatient within Anton Chekhov’s Ward №6:
A doctrine which advocates indifference to wealth and to the comforts of life, and a contempt for suffering and death [the Stoics’] is quite unintelligible to the vast majority of men, since that majority has never known wealth or the comforts of life; and to despise suffering would mean to despise life itself, since the whole existence of man is made up of the sensations of hunger, cold, injury, loss, and a Hamlet-like dread of death.
