Before I get to the two reasons. I'm going split this post into two parts.

Part 1. The Build up:

It's kind of silly once you realize that feminists would only take away the misogyny in conservative and red pill spaces. And would like it if everything else remains the same for the most part. Meaning they wouldn't change anything in those spaces outside the misogyny. So in a way they think everything outside misogyny in conservative or red pill spaces are fine. Let that sink in guys. Technically toxic masculinity isn't necessarily about how men are harm. It's mostly about hostile sexism against women.

Even the men should open up more and show emotions BS isn't for men. It's still about how men can show external emotions like being happy and empathetic for others. And putting other people emotions first. This is a man loving his family, wife, or girlfriend. This is what most women mean when they say men should open up more. It's about the men expressing positive emotions that relate to them, whether this is romance or being empathetic towards women/children. Anything outside those positive emotions, are negative emotions that are considered emotional labor and trauma dumping. And if toxic masculinity does benefit women it's considered benevolent sexism at worst (even though the benevolent sexism is considered something good to them).

And let's talk about the elephant in the room here. Even I'm afraid to bring this up lol. It's open secret that a lot of progressive women won't admit that are attracted to the "alpha male" types. The only problem with men in the red pill and in conservative places is that they are misogynistic or hostile sexists. Not the cool kind of sexists that are benevolent sexists.

if these men weren't misogynistic, feminists would be 1000 percent fine with their behavior. They wouldn't change anything about them. Doesn't matter how much toxic masculinity they had, just as long as it's not affecting women, these men would be fine by their standards. After all most male feminists or male allies are just reformed dudebros or traditional men. It's the misogyny that's the problem to them.

Someone on this sub actually said that most of the men on the Menslib sub come off as "reformed dude bros". Meaning they are the perfect balance of progressive values and traditional masculinity. This is pretty much the streamer Hasan in a nutshell. Again it's never the traditional masculinity that's an issue to them Since they love the traditional masculinity. This is contradiction to the phase "Feminism is for men too" because they traditional masculinity expectations play a major role in men issues. I will get to this in part 2.

So if men like Andrew Tate or Myron (Fresh and Fit) weren't hostile sexist. They would actually be considered healthy forms of masculinity in society LMAO. Because they are tall, successful, have status, good looking, muscular, etc. For example Logan isn't a great person at all, but he is still popular among women. Again it's never about traditional masculinity being an issue, it's always the misogyny that's an issue. The comedian Matt Rife is a perfect example here. He was loved by women, until he start making jokes about women. And then he was call out for being misogynistic.

I mentioned all of this because society likes to play this silly game where they portray misogynistic men as incels, creeps, or insecure losers in the media (news, movies, and shows). But we all know dam well that attractive men can be misogynistic too. And my point in this post, is once you remove the misogyny from these men, and don't change anything else. Society will still love these men, and or even love these men way more ones the misogynistic aspects of their personality are gone. I'm going to repeat this again, it's never the traditional masculinity that's the issue for them, it's always the misogyny that's an issue for them.

Part 2. The Two Reasons:

Like the title says. You are probably wondering why I'm I pointing out women not liking misogyny. Since this is obvious. So of course women wouldn't like misogyny because it's not good for women.

Here are my two reasons.

Reason 1: What's point of saying the phase "feminism Is for men too" if you are only focused on women issues.

Reason 2: You are still perpetuating men issues by encouraging people to uphold the aspects of toxic masculinity that harms men (I.E. traditional masculinity).

For reason 1 it's actually ok for feminists to be indifferent or neutral to men issues. It's understandable by why they would only focused on women issues. The movement was made to help women in the first place. So this should be obvious. The only problem is when they pretend to care about men issues.

And for reason 2, it's way more worse when feminists considered men issues "positive masculinity" or benevolent sexism. Meaning they have no motivation to help fix men issues, because men issues benefit women. Like I mentioned with using men like Andrew Tate, Matt Rife, and Logan Paul as examples. These men could have any attitude that is harmful towards men. And a lot of feminists would still be cool with it, since it doesn't harm women, and keeps men in check when it comes to forcing men to adhere to traditional masculinity.

And at best when you do bring this up. They are going to hide behind the phase "yeah by other men" as way to deflect from them perpetuating issues.

In conclusion. These two main reasons are why I don't take the phase "feminism is for men too" seriously.