Well we've had this discussion before, and I tend to come down on @Kettricken's side on this with respect to questioning the presumption that a clearly defined male/female dichotomy is operational. There is, among other problems, an issue of selection bias - we just don't have a large enough sample from which to make these inferences. For another, it's easy to say one wants "masculinism" as a theoretical proposition, without experiencing it empirically. One sees among certain religious orthodoxies, for example, a bright-line separation between XX and XY, but it hardly meets my test of desirability.
I wonder, too, that one encounters hereabouts so much discussion of what is/is not a signifier of Manly Assurance, yet the silence with respect to the other - Acceptable Womanliness - is deafening. A bit of the old gender bias there, methinks.
