It depends what lens you use, I guess. I rather imagine extremely few books* have looked at manhood in Buddhism… as is the implication of your comment, it is so ‘taken as a given’ it has completely (as far as can tell, although I must admit to not having looked) avoided examination.
Not a worry, just a short reply to a previous comment so as to note the fact that there are boarder, more nuanced views in the mix.
Likewise. All the same that needn’t negate the point that there are invariably multiple approaches to how to balance imbalances. My view is that exploring the specifics of manhood may be one tool that could redress the scales a little.
The purpose of the thread wasn’t actually set out, however, naturally I don’t want to sidetrack from the main task as given. So will promptly wrap up with a quick thanks for your reply.
Added:
* I did just now remember there had at least one thread considering men has been posted to the forum. I guess it fits here, too, as the thread includes gender in its focus: