Female contestants on ITV’s Love Island have been caught up in a ‘toxic femininity’ squabble over ‘manipulative’ and ‘gaslighting’ behaviour. Viewers have complained to broadcasting regulator Ofcom after emotional scenes on the dating game show in which a man was left in tears after his on-screen partner ran off with another contestant.
ManKind Initiative, a domestic violence charity, has called on the producers of the program to ensure that male contestants are treated the same as female islanders. But the truth is that the entire Love Island set-up is toxically feminine, with secret power plays wrapped in smiles and “support.” Watching Love Island is like being trapped in the subconscious of a sixth grader from the movie Mean Girls, whose characters are constantly engaged in psychological warfare with each other.
The series is so compelling because it shows in miniature how far we all seem to live in such a world now.
The real “toxic femininity” is more than just pretty girls on a reality TV show, distorting facts and disguising bullying as supportive. It is a widespread campaign to reset social norms from those more suitable for men to those most comfortable for women. And nowhere is this more egregious than in the diversity industry.
This is a side effect of a social change most of us celebrate: the mass entry of women into the workplace. The fact is, however, that female employment is not evenly distributed. While men still dominate at the top and bottom of the workplace scale, women reign in the middle.
Female contestants on ITV’s Love Island have been caught up in a ‘toxic femininity’ squabble over ‘manipulative’ and ‘gaslighting’ behaviour. In the photo: Shaq Muhammad in tears
Pictured: Contestant Tanya Manhenga cheating on Shaq in the show’s Casa Amor
Such sectors are education (75 percent female), charity work (73 percent female), and human resources (71 percent female). And what they all have in common is a moral dimension. For example, shaping school discipline or drawing up the rules of good behavior in the office.
As I argue in my new book, Feminism Against Progress, which was excerpted in last week’s Daily Mail, this is, in a way, business as usual.
Middle-class women have traditionally played a central role in shaping what is and is not publicly acceptable. For example, in the 19th century, women were the driving force behind the Temperance movement.
But what has changed is the kind of values that are being promoted. Today’s progressive women use their moral clout for much more self-interest.
This is especially evident in the ‘diversity, equality and inclusion’ industry – a scam whose goal is not to promote diversity, equality or inclusion, but to institutionalize typically female social norms at every level of public life.
This is often justified with a pet peeve that has arisen among second-wave feminists: that “gender” is a “social construct.” That is, what we like and how we behave are just stereotypes, with no basis in our body.
This, in turn, means that men can – and should – be “educated” in masculine behavior. However, such beliefs are flawed – some of the differences between men and women are really ingrained. Studies repeatedly show that traits such as aggression, or a preference for working with people, stubbornness are more common in one sex or the other. Biologists argue that these traits have a basis in evolution.
For example, according to evolutionary biologist Joyce Benenson, male primates evolved to thrive in groups with a defined hierarchy, and to settle quarrels through confrontation. In contrast, female primates tend to be physically smaller and have dependent babies.
Thus, women have evolved to focus more on cooperation and be less directly confrontational. But women are still as competitive as men. It’s just that women don’t (usually) compete directly. Instead, a more typical female strategy is to knock a rival down by pushing for “equality,” or get friends to team up with her.
ManKind Initiative, a domestic violence charity, has called on the producers of the program to ensure that male contestants are treated the same as female islanders. Pictured: Contestants in the current season
As a last resort, women can organize a whispering campaign that banishes an enemy.
The diversity, equity and inclusion industry increasingly entrenches these social patterns. “Diversity Officers” try to discourage open competition in favor of inclusiveness. Meanwhile, the prevailing “cancellation culture” is just a scaled-up version of what the mean girls do when they cut someone from the group.
Indeed, I have often wondered how often diversity in the workplace serves as a cover for office politics. How many cancellations have had the happy side effect of freeing up a coveted promotion?
If it’s harder to describe toxic femininity than toxic masculinity, it’s simply because toxic femininity simply means hidden female aggression. Supported by the diversity, equity and inclusion industry, more and more of public life is female by default – while those who try to stick to the male mode are labeled as toxic.
Tragically, this trend also thrives at the expense of poorer women. Take the favorite issue of the day: trans rights. Polls show that the biggest fans for letting everyone identify as they please are always middle and upper class women.
And no wonder. If your work is done behind a computer and you don’t want to be treated any differently than your male colleagues, you probably support measures to combat gender segregation. That logically includes treating everyone the same way – even someone who was born male but now identifies as female.
But it is clearly dangerous nonsense to pretend that someone who is born a man and identifies as a woman is the same as a woman in every way.
It’s no surprise that toxic femininity is so visible in Love Island. The show is a TV version of the world most younger people of both sexes now live in.
While everyone is obsessed with their looks, men and women alike are rewarded for embracing a grotesque, mean-girl stereotype: picked, hydrated, manipulative, faithless tabloid press fixated on petty drama and their own self-image.
Compelling: Enchanting Love Island contestant Tanya Manhenga
Of course, the guys look miserable under their fake tan, because surviving on Planet Mean Girls is more natural for the mean girls.
But the real triumph of toxic femininity isn’t the mascaras and profiled catchphrases of reality TV, it’s the diversity, justice, and inclusion industry’s stranglehold on public life. In a world where toxic femininity reigns supreme, there is no attempt to balance the interests of both men and women. It’s one where the crybabies don’t just win – they cancel you, because you notice the game is rigged.
Don’t let anyone confuse me, I’m not saying women shouldn’t work, or set public morality. But it’s high time for sensible women to take back the moral power from the diversity, justice and inclusion industry Mean Girls, and use it again in the public interest.
Mary Harrington is an editor at UnHerd and author of Feminism Against Progress.
