Because it's specific types of strength that are part of traditional masculinity, not any and all types.

These things are mostly arbitrary, right? There doesn't have to be some simple, overarching principle. Masculinity can be any combination of things, no matter how difficult it is to summarise them.

I also think though that there's a real desire amongst progressives to find "contradictions" to "prove" that is bullshit. So they imagine that this guy who said that something is not manly is "afraid of his own shadow" when they have no reason to believe that. He's probably incredibly confident in his masculinity but he also believes that masculinity is something worth "enforcing".

We haven't seen him worry that he might not meet the standard, only be part of enforcing it. It's pretty silly to think that the latter implies the former