What the actual fuck does that even mean?
He thinks that incels are only angry at not getting laid due to toxic masculinity. He believes that if society were changed such that a man's status is not dependent on his success with women, and masculine norms are removed, then incels would be happy the way they are and not feel a need to get laid.
He completely misses the point though, for many reasons.
1. His solution essentially requires reforming all of society. Any solution that requires everyone else to change is not a realistic one, and comes straight from delusion. Now, he has never worked a day in his life and admittedly calls himself a market socialist, so I'm not really surprised at how delusional he is.
2. He thinks biological impulses can be wished away through social conditioning. I've seen his threads about incels, and any time an argument comes up appealing to nature, he calls it "biological prescriptivism" (Which means nothing, it's not a real term but makes him sound smart), and says that women's standards on height and appearance can change based on society and culture.
Which ultimately gets to his main point, that through changing society, he believes that women will unmasculine men as attractive. He partially does this to appeal to his market audience of mostly trans people.
He's either the most delusional person ever, or he's incredibly smart by carving a niche for himself in the leftism-trans market in order to make money. This guy literally makes thousands of dollars by appealing to trans and lonely leftists, who fork out their parent's credit cards everytime he "Owns the chuds".