Are men toxic? A person-centered investigation into the prevalence of different types of masculinity in a large sample of New Zealand men.

Abstract

Despite being frequently discussed in both mainstream discourse and academic scholarship, little empirical work defines “toxic masculinity.” We address this oversight by estimating the prevalence of men’s distinct response patterns to eight indicators of problematic masculinity: gender identity centrality, sexual prejudice, disagreeableness, narcissism, hostile sexism, benevolent sexism, opposition to domestic violence prevention initiatives, and social dominance orientation. Latent profile analysis of a nationwide random sample of heterosexual men from New Zealand (N = 15,808) identified five profiles. The largest profile (35.4%), “Atoxics,” scored low across all focal measures, whereas two other profiles (totaling 53.8%) expressed low-to-moderate support across indicators. The remaining two profiles reflected distinct forms of problematic masculinity marked by contrasting forms of sexism: “Benevolent Toxics” (7.6%) and “Hostile Toxics” (3.2%). Notably, gender identity centrality was only a weakly informative indicator of problematic masculinity. We thus demonstrate the need to separate problematic masculinity from other constructive forms of masculinity. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved) In an analysis of a nationwide random sample of heterosexual men, we show that most men express low-to-moderate levels of distinct dimensions of toxic masculinity including sexism, narcissism, and sexual prejudice. Only a small proportion of men displayed traditional forms of toxic masculinity. Notably, gender was only slightly more central to the identity of those with response patterns characteristic of toxic masculinity. Thus, men can be “manly” without being toxic. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved)