It isn't viewed favorably, in part due to the caustic nature of some of its proponents.
It is absolutely an area worth studying and there is a vast array of knowledge to be gathered. But when it is reduced to its lowest soundbites - which even Dr. Curry does, occasionally, it basically ends up being anti-feminist arm flailing and losing its substance. I've even seen him post random charts showing that Black women have a higher employment rate, as proof that there is no patriarchy (undermining his far more nuanced and thoughtful writing in works like The Man-Not).
I think Frank B. Wilderson III actually does a good job of framing Black men as a group that exists as both racialized and gendered, in a way that doesn't discount one from the other, or engage in sloppy oppression Olympics.
The same for Sylvia Wynter and Saidiya Haartman. I definitely would love if more work was done in this area - I attend the National Black Male retreat and see a variety of ideologies and work being done on a macro-level there, which is why I retain my interest.
I think that Angela Davis also does a remarkable job of framing some of the underlying bases for Black Male Studies in her book Women, Race & Class which somehow ends up oft-ignored.