It’s a bit diminutive and almost as near sighted as ‘masculinity is meat eating’ to equate masculinity to boner strength and frequency.
I think the idea is it’s a counterfactual. “if we buy into this traditional masculinity, then why is eating meat at odds with traditional male sexual performance”
My understanding of masculinity is that it is the characteristics by which other men rate a perceived level of attraction from females through which they determine a competitive standing. Men often think big muscles brings all the ladies to the yard, for example, so that is one possible display of masculinity, leaving “weaklings” to feel inadequate and of a lower standing.
My impression is that men generally believe showing off boners in public scares away the females, so it does not seem like a good candidate for being a display of masculinity. But if we assume that showing off boners is something men believe woos the women, is the aforementioned difference noticeable in practice? Science can reveal a lot of things that nobody would ever realize living out regular day-to-day life.
This is a pretty narrow version of masculinity that I don’t think anyone would agree with. Or even find useful.
You don’t show off a boner in public to show masculinity. However if you cannot please a woman with PiV sex via a big and hard penis, yes, this would challenge your sense of masculinity.
Does it make a man feel masculine to have a big bank account? Even if no one knows his salary or net worth? What about underwear? If no one sees your pink underwear in public would it challenge someone’s masculinity to wear it?
I mean really, consider what you just said.
