There seems to be 2 parts to the author's premise in this article:
1) There is historical evidence that a "crisis of masculinity" is a recurring cyclical charade using poorly defined criteria and that masculinity falls into a bucket of, "I know it when I see it."
2) In order to prevent this cycle from repeating and from masculinity being weaponized as damaging propaganda we need more researchers focusing on defining masculinity in every conceivable context in order to develop deep and meaningful frameworks to measure and confirm or refute this kind of manipulative propaganda.
I don't necessarily agree or disagree with these two premises, just trying to provide a summary and see if I understand their point...
It's the same for women becoming pundits in male sports such as football.
They stand there talking about it and going through the motions, acting like they belong but they don't.
I must have have kicked the Field Goal to win the Super Bowl a million times in my dreams, over and over again, ever since the age of 5 or so.
The girl chosen for the broadcast for sure didn't. It's a job like any other for her.