We (myself and peers) were brought up to see a man who hit a women (a boy who hit a girl) as a coward and a bully. Did we lose this message along the way somewhere? Is that message also part of toxic masculinity?
When I was much younger I knew some men who absolutely lived for violence. Every conversation was about fighting and every night out ended with a ruck of some kind. Most of them ended up doing quite a bit of time but it didn't seem to change them much, if anything it made them worse. Everyone was terrified of them, but if you wanted to drink in certain pubs and clubs you kind of had to negotiate a relationship with them of sorts. But within that scene violence towards women was absolutely taboo. If word got round someone had hit their partner they would be beaten up and wouldn't be able to drink in town anymore.
Now I often wondered how much this held up behind closed doors given the hair trigger tempers a lot of them had but it was certainly a prevailing attitude that men being violent to women (or kids) was something that should not be tolerated by other men. Yet these men were the epitomy of toxic masculinity, and part of that was that it was men's duty to protect 'their' women from other men's violence (and that for a man to hit a woman was 'soft' or unmanly in some way).
I don't think it was universal. I can think of a similar social scene, with a similar bunch of violent men strutting about at the helm for who violence towards women was completely normalised, although perhaps the difference was these men were more criminal in other areas, they ran the drugs, money was involved and violence was directed at anyone, male or female who got in the way of that. But I do think the first example was more commonplace, a lot of men who were involved in what was largely recreational violence, they enjoyed it, had a code of a sort that they didn't pick on women, kids, older people, or those who were physically weaker.
I do wonder if that has changed, if the rise of the female action hero, and more depictions of women being successfully and heroically violent in popular culture, often fighting men, has diminished the taboo against male violence towards women, or risks diminishing it. But then what's the answer, that women only ever be portrayed as defenceless and in need of male protection as has traditionally been the case in culture? Does equality mean women are now expected to endure being thrust into the sphere of what was traditionally seen as male on male type violence as well as male on female violence that often happens out of sight? Is the answer to male violence women becoming more proficient at violence? Is that the best deal on offer under patriarchal capitalism? There's some real tensions here that only further point to the need to dismantle the entire system and the violence it requires to maintain it.