If you are to speak in front of a wide public audience of varied cultural backgrounds on men's issues, you are likely to receive a very harsh backlash from a great majority, that is unless you blame "toxic masculinity" for those male problems.

What I find here an interest nuance is that, a great deal of the backlash actually comes from men.

Feminists would have you believe that they are a niche group; a marginalized outcast that preaches incredibly controversial claims, but is that really the case?

If we are being reductionist for the sake of simplicity of thought: human populations can be broken down into two groups: conservative and progressive. The gynocentricity of progressives is straightforward "men abused women for millenniums, we must unroot systemic misogyny".

Conservatives actually do have their pro-woman tone, where chivalry and traditionalism prioritize women under the belief of women being helpless angels who ought to be protected from the evils of the world.

Misogyny exists, but I'm not buying the common assumption that conservatism is completely opposed to feminism.

With that in mind, we can see here that progressive men and conservative ones can be gynocentric, which essentially places the possibilities of men being anti-MRA as the majority of cases.

Beyond the theoretical outlines I just made, we can reach for our own past experiences: are MRA topics well received by the vast majority of men? I don't think so, progressives will call you misogynistic, while conservatives will call you weak.

The gynocentricity is prevalent in both ideological camps, and here I want to express my disappointment and condemnation towards a great deal of men who are willing to play a male-feminist character to appeal to a women audience: female-validation is the greatest booster of the male ego; there is a clear selfish incentive for men to be feminist, and that is by throwing other well-meaning men under the bus, they can feel like heroes to the innocent female princesses.