GeniesLoki

Mostly I think the manosphere defines itself as in opposition to feminism rather than in cooperation with it, lacks a psychologically healthy foundation, and contains a lot of toxic subcultures (such as PUA) that poison the whole pool.

Like I think a better starting point would basically be "Cool, feminism has done a lot of great work for analysing the societal consequences of gender norms, but it's written mostly by women so lacks an understanding of men's lived experience, can we fix that?"

It's going to be impossible to build the cooperation that a masculinism would want as long as feminists refuse to grapple with this. Mainstream iterations of feminism see men as emotionless (ergo, experienceless) creatures, therefore there is no lived experience to study.

I think you're making the mistake of conflating a movement with its worst members though. I've rarely had trouble talking about this with individual feminists one on one - there's definitely a large core of feminists who are perfectly open to this.

and I mean granted that's a "rarely" that is heavily selected for only talking to reasonable people, but there's more than enough such people to have productive discussions.

Also, build it and they will come. Feminism is allowed to be the only game in town, and everything else tries to situate itself in relation to its body of research. That shouldn’t be the case

Build something totally new, but try to avoid the positivistic sciences feminism is built on. Those are its weak points (really what all that’s annoying about it follows from)

I'm not sure it makes sense to build something entirely new without reference to feminism - it both ignores a lot of good work and also leaves you open to easy criticism of not having engaged with prior art..