Glad you're back,
@Horrorble. Some of your posts used to challenge me when reading (whether I responded or just lurked) and nice to see you haven't lost that knack. Challenge is good.
Practically, I don't suppose there is much difference to me personally in terms of whether I am considered a 'feminist' or a 'pro-feminist' or a 'feminist-ally'. In any of those cases, I would be trying to slowly educate myself on feminism, and (to be honest) selfishly focus more attention on aspects of feminism more likely to directly affect my family than aspects which are less likely to. I don't suggest this is the right way to go about it, but looking at the feminist issues I have worked hardest at educating myself on, and I can clearly see a correlation between self-interest as a father/husband and choice of issues.
I wouldn't for a second think I would ever be in a point to ever offer any sort of leadership to the feminist movement. It just seems a ridiculous notion. However, I think there should be (at least theoretically) an allowance that some sort of leadership positions could be held by males. I wouldn't see this as being anything other than a tiny minority, and I wouldn't see it as even being likely. To draw a parallel, there have been non-indigenous people involved in leadership on indigenous issues here in Australia. In many cases, this doesn't help, as their perspective is skewed almost unavoidably. However, there are particular positions or practical need which are simply filled by the best person for the job. This is particularly true around the areas of business skills, planning, infrastructure, etc, where the issues are practical, and not directly linked to ideology.
So, speaking as a feminist-ally, if you will, I'd suggest only that it's worth keeping some decisions pragmatic. Ideology is one thing, but leadership within a cohesive, large-scale movement is not limited to ideology alone if it's to be effective. Men shouldn't lead feminism, per se. That seems a contradiction to me. But personally I would see value in not completely disregarding the capacity of men to potentially provide leadership and decision making in certain areas of a large scale movement, dependent on what is required and the individuals involved/available.