Some people don't really see it as threatening to the other gender at all. There is definitely a strong tradition of grooming boys into men throughout human history. It's not really that serious.
I personally did not have a father, so I had to learn many of these on my own--tieing a tie, women, shaving, etc. I don't think the blog's intention is to say that all men need to follow this.
It's not about it being a threat to the other gender (women?) or anything, this dialogue "men do this, men do that" - is manipulative and meaningless. Who decides when a boy turns into a man? Isn't the criteria different for every person? Why bother trying to meet anyone else's definition of a man, other than your own? At that point, why even create this archetype of a man in the first place? It's just a sinkhole I'd rather not see other people fall into.
Not to get all sappy, but I didn't have a dad around either for most of my childhood, and I turned out great. There is nothing he could have taught me that I couldn't have learned from my mother or from my own person experiences, the only special thing about him was that he was my father, not that he was a man.
I don't think there is anything wrong with the blog in the first link, and it has some very solid advice - I just think it's dangerous to fall into the 'what is a man' argument, which happens sooooo damn often when these sorts of discussions occur. Why not forget that entirely made-up narrative and just focus on being a healthy, happy, well rounded person - your gender being something entirely personal.
Oh my god.
It's not that serious.
On a scale from 1 to 10, how serious is this thread, and how serious should the responses be?