to one gender.

before we get to the problems with the "gender" part, lets look at the behaviors.
Violence? Aggression? Stoicism? Sexual entitlement? Etc, etc, etc.

Well, problem is, almost none of these "toxic" behaviors are universally toxic. Or even universal, lol.
They're contextual.
Stoicism/emotional regulation is a big part of appropriate conflict resolution.
Aggression is a problem until it's time to protect yourself, or pursuit a career goal. Or even approach a woman/man that you're attracted to.
Sexual entitlement is *this* far away from a healthy sense of sexual self-awareness/self-possession.

Etc, etc, etc....if we can't cleary define the "toxic" beyond "we know it when we see it", it's another pointless ass term that we love to toss around to sound smart.

Also re: toxic - the idea that *behaviors* is due to gender or any itrinsic factor doesn't make any sense. People are products of environment. "Maleness" isn't an environmental factor, it's a biological reality. So if we gonna talk about the problems of TM in "gang culture", is the maleness the problem, or the socio-economic shit that put all those pieces in place? PTSD? Poverty? Gentrification?

And to me THAT is the danger of this kind of gender theory...it dsimisses material reality that we KNOW affects people, and replaces it with a murkily definded form of quasi-morality that isn't actionable or consistent or proven to be real.

People aren't "triggered" by the term. People just don't think it makes sense.

I mean look in this discussion, lol
The name calling, dismissals and murky responses, ain't coming from the people who question TM, lol.

If we want to call it machismo, okay, cool...but all the same problems apply.