So you say, and yet, still no relevant data (which must contain a robust control)! It's a plausible hypothesis. I am happy to entertain it alongside other plausible hypotheses. I read everything and though it's vaguely consistent with the hypothesis, it's far from the only one, and the others weren't ruled out.

Here's another plausible hypothesis: people are happy when they are treated well. They become suicidal and depressed if bullied; but also, often, if they are emotionally worked-up enough to be the bully. The hegemonic masculinity ideals promote and provoke a lot of bullying, but the effects of bullying are consistent: you get suicide and depression. Girl-girl bullying, cancel culture bullying, act-like-andrew-tate bullying, etc., all resolve the same way. Here's some evidence mostly consistent with this alternative hypothesis: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3955573/ and https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/1840250.

Note that a test is plausible with existing but inaccessible data: if the it's-just-bullying hypothesis were true, even the most extreme Man Box quintile would have normal levels of suicidal ideation etc. in the subset who were neither bullied nor were engaged in bullying.

Narrative approaches can have more than no merit at all, but it's really hard to beat data when it comes to having ideas that reflect the reality of a situation.