A thorough enough paper but… An almost wilful misinterpretation of their own data?

There’s the obvious thing, only ~35% of the sample was defined by the researchers as not toxic.

Even if we are benevolent and say that the portion who are lgbt-tolerant and moderately toxic aren’t… Toxic… Then that leaves ~40% of the sample falling under toxic masculinity. Which would agree with their headline but is still like. Staggering? Forty Percent? When we are reasonably generous with the definitions in favour of not classifying as toxic, we still get 40? Thats pretty much every other man you meet!

Even if we do take their findings as they present them, that “only” 11% of men are toxic - that’s 1 in 10? 1 in 10 men being irrefutably “toxic masculinity” examples is a lot still, man! Think about how many men one must interact with to engage in daily life, and 11% of those are irrefutably “toxic men”? And the proposed conclusion is “uh, actually the issue is overblown”

Image