The idea that marginalized men are somehow void of gender that intersects with their marginalization in a meaningful way because "man = uncomplicated, intrinsic, systemic, patriarchal power always" and is therefore unworthy of analysis or understanding in feminist discussions IS radical feminist dogma.
That's like, textbook radical feminism that goes back to the original Radical Feminist pamphlet written by Ti-Grace Atkinson in 1969.
You are doing nothing meaningful by trying to cling onto that idea and forcing it into a bastardized idea of intersectionality. Like, I'm sorry but marginalized manhood is a construct you have to engage with in feminist discussions in a meaningful, nondismissive manner if we're actually goal oriented towards dismantling patriarchal power.
Otherwise you're just deluding yourself into the radfem lie of an all woman utopia. The fascist lie of "if we can just remove the people not like us from our discussions and communities we'll be fine and safe". There's a reason why radfems and white supremacists are besties. Identity based in-groups will not save you in the face of systemic oppression because identity based in-groups are literally the foundation for systemic oppression.
If you cannot grasp the fact that you might be engaging with dogshit rhetoric, maybe go back and relearn your feminist history.
