actually, i think that feminism - which i define as the abolition of patriarchy - is also the emancipation of men.

feminism also means that men don't have the responsibility to take care of women any more. this is usually articulated in terms of women being autonomous, but these statements are equivalent, because it's the relation that is the enslavement: patriarchy enslaves men and women equally in a bond of dominance and servitude to produce offspring to be taxed by the lords.

i don't fit into either side of this equation. i once told the only partner that i've ever had that i didn't own her and didn't want to own her, and she took it as an insult. she came to me to talk about a life decision once, expecting me to make it for her, and i just refused to do it - i told her she had to make that decision herself. i mean, we talked it through and stuff, but i made it clear that it wasn't my choice, and i didn't want it to be my choice. she just looked at me like i was hopelessly queer, which is what i told her from the start and what she'd spent the last two years denying - she wanted an alpha male to make decisions for her, and was just turned off when i refused to be that. but, broadly speaking, i haven't spent my life within or trying to escape from this relation, but just avoiding it altogether.

regardless, i think this discussion is often lost. men aren't losing control, so much as they're gaining the freedom of escaping from the role of being the controller. and, when you really understand that, you don't need to talk about "male allies to feminism", you can understand that they're being equally emancipated and equally benefiting from the collapse of the relation.

it's typical of capitalism to set everything up as a zero sum game. but, if that's how you're seeing gender equality, you're not really grasping it properly - and maybe you're not truly accepting it.