I think parent commenter is using "men" in a manner similar to mensch, as in "a person of integrity and honor" [1]. In other words, "look around and notice nobody is taking responsibility, and choose to be the person who lifts others up." Or something.
It's a weird way to phrase it, in my opinion, especially in this era where we are generally avoiding ambiguously gendered collective nouns... but I'm pretty sure that's the gist. Or, at least, it's how I read it.
"Men" is colloquially used here to mean "decent people", "strong people", "principled people", etc. It's a generic positive description ("Be a man", "Man up").
Younger generations might bristle at this use of the word, and that's fine, but try to give the benefit of the doubt (in fact, it's a rule on HN).
As an older generation man, I've tried to understand the touchiness here. This is dangerous territory, so I hope you try to read my intent here, even if the packaging is not as strong as I want it to be.
The best analogy I can come up with is the smurf village: Every smurf has an identity, describing a bunch of mannerism. Baker smurf, strong smurf, joke smurf ... The smurfette is both the only adult female and a separate identity. Her existence in a children's story serves to demonstrate to young humans how the female identity is supposed to work.
I think the smurf village echos a deep human archetype. A man is someone who can choose his identity. He is unbound. A woman is a man with an already fixed identity. She can't choose to be e.g. a baker as primary identity, her choice is made already.
While simplified, there is some truth in this worldview, and people, especially woman, are correct to protest teaching this archetype to new generations.
In the same way, the poster above uses 'Be a man' to probably mean something like: 'Be brave enough to choose a new identity'. Which is a valid message, but needs an implied ([*] woman are also men here) when this archetype is considered.
Thanks for the well written response. It should be pointed out that Smurfs reproduce in the manner of spores and their gender is just a matter of children’s entertainment.
Extremely online people find the sweet contention in everything and act accordingly.
As for the [*] I did assume that the target was male because of the content of the writing. But if they were female they are presumably going to be no more or less able to discern the value.
Giving the benefit of the doubt can only come after one understands what was said. Case in point, asking someone to clarify should be assumed to be a good faith question that comes from a place of ignorance. (And to your credit you did indeed provide an explanation.)
What exactly does this mean?