You keep changing your mind about what your point is and refusing to recognize that male is not a synonym for masculinity - because as I've already stated about 12 times, masculinity is a highly variable social construct. If someone feels attacked because we talk about the artificial tiny box of acceptable characteristics that males are shoe-horned into, the "Act Like a Man Box (which is it's full name)" and point out the ways that those norms and rules hurt them, I can't do much for somebody that fragile and that attached to sex and gender being the same thing - which they quite obviously are not. Ergo, I'm not speaking to those guys.

Even things like hormones don’t have the definitive impact that we’ve often been taught that they do. Many, many factors have an impact - including socialization and gender indoctrination.

But also, within some species — including our own, as this chapter fleshes out some more — neither sex has the monopoly on characteristics like competitiveness, promiscuity, choosiness, and parental care. The particular pattern, as we saw, depends on the animal’s ecological, material, and social situation. This suggests that, even within a particular species, the effect of the genetic and hormonal facets of sex on brain and behavior must not inflexibly inscribe or “hardwire” particular behavioral profiles or predispositions into the brain; not even those more common in one sex than the other. Instead, they are drawn out to a greater or lesser degree, as circumstances dictate.

Fine, Cordelia. Testosterone Rex: Myths of Sex, Science, and Society (p. 87). W. W. Norton & Company. Kindle Edition.

If some men don't want to recognize that, they need to get with the scientific program. You are inventing problems that either don't exist or that I have zero capacity to impact. 🤷‍♀️