I get what you’re saying and while you’ve got a great point there’s something to be said for the way you’ve quoted there too.
Consider a monarchistic kingdom. The king enforces the system but the people uphold it by going along. If they gathered together they could easily topple the kingdom but without that effort it persists.
But in modern patriarchy that kingdom exists because of a combination of tradition and a few voices being given a lot of extra credence.
At the same time it all comes with assumptions about the participation level of men at large. That’s difficult to discern because of how much of it is internalized. Removed from all of that would they choose to continue oppressive behavior, fight against it, or somewhere in between?
I think for a lot of men it’s unconscious. They participate without considering. We often have to fight against deeply held beliefs being wrong, so if we know we’re good people and *ism is bad we must not be. So someone saying we are must have a reason for trying to make us think we are.
Often that reason is because we are and we need to improve but that’s not always easy to hear.
It is undeniable, however, that there are men at the top who stand to gain from its continuance and work to see that happen.
All in all I do both agree and disagree with you. None of this is meant to be upsetting or anything of the like. I could just see an alternative point of view that was both men at the top enforcing and non-enforcing men still hurting each other through the enforced system and wanted to make sure you had the opportunity to consider it.