in your 'women & ad d'lo yada' post you said "Most hold the reason for this [women not being obligated] is simply because it would be a serious breach of tznius if women would get shiker". why isn't it a breach of tznius for men to get shiker?
Chazal speak very harshly against those who become drunk during the rest of the year. In the Mishna Berura the Mechaber also writes that upstanding people, especially mechanchim [teachers/etc], should be very careful in their actions as to always give a good example to “young influential minds” [i.e children/youths].
The Gemorah in Kesuvos already states than when a woman becomes drunk she’s degrading herself. The same thing can also certainly be said of a man (see the Mechaber); therefore, that kind of shiker (i.e excessive drinking) is for sure a breach in tznius and a grave aveirah for a man as well. However -while the opinions might differ as to why and how much- men are obligated to drink on Purim [1] [2]. But even those who hold a man should become drunk (shiker) at the Purim Seuda he is still forbidden to do so if it would cause him to become lax in any kind of mitzvah observance.
We hold that from here we see that “becoming drunk for men” does not mean excessive drinking, for that could possibly lead him c”v to serious Torah transgressions and that kind of drunken behavior is certainly not like a Talmid Chochom should behave (call it ‘not tznius’*). Those poskim saying it is a breach of tznius for women to get drunk doesn’t mean to say they hold it’s not a breach of “tznius*” for men to get drunk in front women (i.e at Purim Seudos) because of aforementioned reasons.
_________*For men they usually don’t use terms as tznius/tzanua. Mostly it’s used in the context of women (both dress and behavior). Note i’m not talking about technicalities and about whether it’s right or wrong, just about how it’s used in the frum world.