I like this article, thank you for writing it. It inspires me to word salad here what I hope is a productive contribution to the conversation, a paraphrasing of what you’ve said to affirm/solidify/echo the good points you make. The idea that men are injured by patriarchy — while accurate — isn’t a necessary impetus to tearing it down; men shouldn’t want to tear down patriarchy solely due to their own injuries, (for all that some metrics of value consider harm to an other to be harm to the self, and that would make any action in the name of another human a selfish action) but because another person is hurt. Black Lives Matter because black bodies are being hurt — feminism matters because women are being hurt.
Opposition to patriarchy can exist that acknowledges the damage done to men — whether the damage is direct, in that it destroys their lives or injures their bodies, or indirect in that it creates dysfunctional men who injure others, primarily women — without centering it, or appropriating a label that is associated with female liberation. I need feminism because I want my sister and mother to live in a world that values and respects them. I need feminism because I want to learn to be a person that respects women, despite being socialized as a man. The fact that men are injured by patriarchy, and that feminism is a solution to patriarchy should not be the driving force for allegiance to feminism.
I do wonder at the term and its appropriation — if I consider feminism to be a philosophy, a toolset I try to use/adhere to in my opposition to kyriarchy, does anyone know a better word to use for a position that describes beliefs about women’s liberation as they fit into opposition to white/cis/male power?