Government Launches Initiative to Counter ‘Toxic-Masculinity’

Too much screen time is depriving young boys of the opportunity to develop real world skills, and interpersonal skills. (Thomas Park/Unsplash)

The Albanese government has outlined plans for an initiative to promote “healthy masculinity” across Australia.

The initiative will comprise a three-year trial project aimed at suppressing the influence of what it deems to be harmful messages on social media.

The ‘healthy masculinities trial project’ will receive $3.5 million to conduct presentations at schools, sporting clubs, and other community organisations to ostensibly educate adolescent boys on forming respectable relationships with both the opposite gender and their male peers.

The project is part of the overarching aims of the government to counteract violence against women. It falls under the $11.9 million First Action Plan Priorities Fund that is part of the National Plan to End Violence Against Women and Children 2022-32.

Minister for Families and Social Services Amanda Rishworth outlined the motives behind the healthy masculinity trial program on ABC Radio on Oct. 25.

“It’s actually been reported that 25 percent of teenage boys in Australia are looking up to social media personalities who do perpetuate harmful gender stereotypes, often promoting aggression towards women but also aggression towards each other,” she said.

Related Stories

Australian Parliament Votes for More Fatherless Children

10/24/2023

GOP Debate: Ramaswamy Praised For Bringing Up ‘Epidemic of Fatherlessness’

8/24/2023

“This program is going to be a bit of a combination program. It is going to look at promoting good high-profile role models and pushing those onto social media. Role models that are promoting healthy relationships between young men but also towards women.”

Ms. Rishworth singled out a particular online personality.

“There are a lot of very high-profile people out there that actually can put forward an alternative to the likes of Andrew Tate.”

Andrew Tate is an Anglo-American influencer who rose to prominence in mid-2022 after disseminating self-help-style content aimed at young men on various social media platforms.

Mr. Tate made global headlines in December 2022 when he and his brother Tristan were arrested by Romanian authorities under suspicions of human trafficking. In June, the brothers were charged with rape and human trafficking, charges they deny.

Mr. Tate’s rapid rise to fame, along with many other influencers enjoying newfound prominence in the “manosphere,” has granted him ideological sway over a considerable amount of young men.

A survey conducted in January 2023 by The Man Cave—a charity dedicated to improving the wellbeing of young men—found that out of 1,300 plus respondents, 25 percent looked up to Mr. Tate whilst 35 percent found him “relatable.”

Social commentator Bettina Arndt has criticised the government’s trial program, claiming it will result in additional online censorship.

“The notion that feminists are going to be given even more power to control social media is most alarming,” Ms. Arndt told the Epoch Times.

Ms. Arndt also articulated her belief that what constitutes ‘toxic masculinity’ is contentious.

“Many of the characteristics being criticised as “toxic” are personality traits that have allowed men to do the hard work to keep our society together—like the courage to run into burning buildings. Or the stoicism that allows tough men to battle through tiny caves to rescue trapped children, or cope with the physical stress required to do really hard physical jobs like mining or construction,” she said.

Changes to Family Law

The government’s announcement of the initiative follows Parliament’s recent passing of Labor’s Family Law Amendment Bill on Oct. 19. The bill constitutes another significant change to Australia’s family law system that will make it more difficult for fathers to retain equal custody of their children following a divorce.

As part of the change, the words “presumption of equal shared parental responsibility” will be removed from the act. This means that the court is no longer legally obliged to apply the presumption that it is in the best interests of a child for their parents to have equal shared responsibility for them.

This presumption did not apply if there were reasonable grounds to believe that the parent of the child engaged in abuse or family violence. The court was also previously left with the discretion to rebut the presumption if it was deemed that sharing an equal time with both parents was not in the child’s best interests.

This presumption should not be conflated with the notion that both parents had a right to equal amounts of time with their children.

The amendments will now provide that in allocating respective amounts of responsibility to either parent in a custody dispute, a court order may provide for a parent to have either sole decision-making capabilities and responsibilities or joint decision-making capabilities and responsibilities, whichever it deems appropriate.

In essence, it is no longer legally presumed that it is inherently in the best interests of a child to share equal time or be subject to equal decision-making or parental responsibilities between both parents.

Any allocation of parental responsibilities surrounding a child will be left to what the court deems to be in the best interests of that child.

A research paper conducted by two academics at Cornell University and the University of Minnesota and published by the U.S. National Institute of Health (NIH) concluded that living with two biological married parents is generally conducive to the positive wellbeing of children.