Unless you are a US puppet sending young men to death in a war instigated by NATO and oil consortiums, masculinity is toxic.

The author seems to go against the grain in saying manliness is not the thing other institutions would label toxic masculinity. He obviously hasn't learned of the true extent of what that term includes.

The idea of manly virtue has been discounted for many years now in our institutions of higher learning, frequently identified with “toxic masculinity” and other supposed threats to proper order. The caricature of manliness that our institutions now offer us is identified exclusively with barbarism and misogyny. In the film Fight Club, Tyler Durden’s choice is between being an Ikea furniture-buying denizen of 12-step programs and the Blonde Beast, as played by Brad Pitt. Faced with the choice between being a wimp and a barbarian, young men may default toward the latter. This caricature overlooks the fact that in the Western tradition, manliness was never identified with macho barbarism, but with its opposite: a balance of reason and passion, displaying courtesy, moderation, decency toward women, compassion for the oppressed, a love of higher learning and beauty, civic spiritedness in a just cause but never fanaticism, a restraint that displayed reserves of great strength. The classical standard for true manliness was still witnessed in modern democratic politics with leaders like Lincoln and Churchill.

Was Waller gargling Zelensky's balls while writing that?

Wrote that Zelensky's like Brad Pitt, Lincoln, Churchill, Ronald Reagan, Pericles, and Aristotle all rolled up into one package.