The urban elite has never espoused an ideal of masculinity that has any resemblance to a Paul Bunyan "manly man," and, generally, the elite male has always been an experiment in effeminacy. To have other work for one's own sustenance and to live in a world of subtle cues and marks of status requires a male that is not at all vigorous.
I've often found it curious that the left today is forced into using the bare fact of disparities in income or general outcome in life as evidence of discrimination (such as blacks must be discriminated against because they have less income, power & etc.) And yet, one certainly couldn't apply that to homosexuals, who as a group are largely members of the urban elite and make more money and have more education than straights.