Ask Lemmygrad

Class analysis has to be slightly stretched to account for how class interacts with the colonizer and the colonized. Like Fanon says: "The economic infrastructure is also a superstructure. The cause is effect: You are rich because you are white, you are white because you are rich." You get white workers who still side with bosses against their fellow indigenous or migrant or other minority workers, and they are rewarded for it with wages and benefits even if they don't ever actually change their class status. That's not just false consciousness, they materially benefit from their privileged caste in the colonial situation.

Reading Class Struggle by Losurdo gives you a good framework for doing class analysis. Class Struggle is the motor of history, and, as mentioned in Fanon, our "basic" understanding of Class must be stretched to accommodate some historical events and outcomes. Losurdo uses the example of Engels referring to women's oppression as "the first class oppression", to show this stretching at play even in M&E's work. Class can cover coherent social groups and formations that end up in shared economic circumstances and positions of social recognition (like women not having the vote historically, denial of access to property for colonised and racialised groups etc.).

There are examples of weird masculine bullshit in plenty of cultures predating capitalism. Now whether you want to argue in those cultures that their own class structure was feeding in or fed from the masculinity shit idk that's for you to decide, but I think there's a wealth of evidence to dispel the notion that simply fixing class issues would automatically fix patriarchy somehow.

What has been called class reductionism is really Economic class reductionism. It is ignoring that identity imparts class and class imparts identity. Sticking to material and historical dialectics will help you see the class antagonisms while not over simplifying.

Toxic masculinity is the expression of the contradictions of patriarchy, (which is a system the ruling class perpetuates to divide and rule) The form of masculinity needed for patriarchy to perpetuate itself builds up toxicity over time causing the entire system to become unbalanced. The Incel phenomenon is the metastasized form of toxic masculinity. How the system adapts to the overload in toxicity remains to be seen but I would guess it will either lead to class consciousness and a rejection of patriarchy as a whole and bring people closer to revolution or it will be weaponized by fascists into a new form of hyper patriarchy where the personhood of women will be completely denied.

So it isn't "just capitalism" or "a class issue" even if those are the primary drivers of the system at the moment. You will not end toxic masculinity without first ending patriarchy and before that capitalism. The negation of capitalism does not mean patriarchy will be abolished automatically as patriarchy survived the fall of feudalism.