Interesting anecdote. Mahalik's "conformity to masculine norms inventory" is the one used by the APA in their new treatment guidelines that deem "traditional masculinity" to be "on the whole, harmful".

Guess how that inventory is described? It is an inventory of masculine norms imposed on all men by culturally dominant men (that is, white men). How was it developed? Mahalik took 5 women, two white men and one non-white man and did some brainstorming.

Previous inventories had contained a mixed bag of positive and negative traits, but this focus group were all like, "well, women can be brave too, so that's not a masculine thing. It's a human thing."

They basically de-sexed all the traits that are positive *expectations* of masculinity. They said, "women *can* be those things, and even if they're not *expected or required* to be those things, it's not fair to women to code them as masculine."

And interestingly, in his paper on how he developed this inventory, he cites a book on masculinity. This book revealed that a mere 1% of men surveyed felt their masculinity relied on their ability to score with women. In contrast, being a faithful partner and being nurturing were vital to the masculinity of the majority of men surveyed. 

Being a playboy made it into the inventory, despite it representing just 1% of the sample. Being faithful and being nurturing did not. 

And this is fundamental to straight, white masculinity according to the 5 women, one man of color and two white men they asked.

When Mahalik decided to create a conformity to feminine norms inventory, his focus group was comprised entirely of women.