If we put these two phrases in Google Scholar, we will find that scholars speak about men and masculinities and don’t speak about women and femininities:

“men and masculinities” – 48 200

“women and femininities” – 809

Scholars in men’s studies study men in conjuction with masculinity. They probably study androgynous and feminine men too, but the men’s social status is judged by the position of masculine men. Masculine men dominate in governmental structures means men in general are dominate in governmental structures. Feminine men are bullied doesn’t mean men in general are bullied. If you respect only feminine women, you’ll be called misogynist (for a reason). But if you respect only masculine men, you will not be called misandrist.

(Sometimes the endorsement of masculinity even is considered an argument of non-existence of misandry. As if men in general are masculine. In fact men in general are not masculine but diverse in their preferred gender expressions. And if you respect only masculine men, you don’t respect men in general, just the same with respecting only feminine women).

In my opinion, we should break the association between men and masculinity. We will never achieve gender equality until we speak as if women are diverse in their preferred gender expressions but men are masculine.

I don’t say we shouldn’t study masculinity. But studying masculinity is quite different with studying men. You can’t be an expert in men’s issues if you study only masculine men.