Still, I'm glad that you have created your own thread, because derailing threads about other gender issues really doesn't help. Perhaps that's why you didn't find much sympathy with the domestic violence thing.
The problem is that those issues only seem to be brought up when the discussion is about how women are discriminated against in some way.
The irony here is that it goes both ways, and there's even a relatively typical argument form for turning a discussion on a men's issue into one about women's issues, sometimes called the argument from primal misogyny.
It goes like this: Your men's issue is really about separating men from women, or is less serious than this thematically related women's issue. Therefore, fixing this women's issue will magically make that men's issue go away because reasons. Therefore, this is really about a women's issue, so why are you trying to derail it by talking about a men's issue?
There was a thread on R&P not all that long ago that started out being about circumscicion. By the end of the thread it was about how circumcicion was irrelevant and FGM was the important issue. We even had a certain forum user who has identified as feminist and has a gender studies degree declare that it wasn't "really" a bodily autonomy issue, but rather men arguing about what kind of penis is the "best" penis. Seriously.
Bodily autonomy -- it's a central human right, if you are female. If you be male it is at best vanity.
I would ask how any of the problems mentioned in the OP were caused by feminism but, honestly, why bother?
To be fair, feminism does have a stranglehold on public discussion of gender, to the point that men's issues rarely get discussed outside of certain places online unless there is someone initiating the discussion who identifies as some kind of feminist academic -- such as the "Is Forced Fatherhood Fair?" article published recently. There isn't really anything *new* in that article, it's just being said by feminist academic mouthpieces, which suddenly makes it worthy of print.
It's rather like how the trolling of #TellAFeministThankYou was seens as this serious problem and proof of misogyny on the internet and how misogynists can't let women have any platform on which to speak, while the trolling of #INeedMasculism literally the previous week went under a lot of radars.
You Can said:
Many where mentioned by the OP but I feel he missed a big one Child Custody. I can state as a fact that, where I live at least, it doesn't matter if the mother is certifiably insane, she will still get custody of the kids.
There was a case in my state in which a man got his wife being abusive to their kids on film, stepping in once she appeared to be moving from verbal to physical abuse. He didn't turn the camera off when he was grabbing his things to leave with the kids, so there's also audio of her jumping on the vehicle, screaming at him, etc, etc, etc. The recording itself was ruled to be at least as abusive as the acts recorded because reasons. Literally, he suspected he wouldn't be believed if he accused her of abuse because female-bias, so he got hard proof, which was deemed to be at least as bad as the abuse itself.
Amir Kondori said:
"For example imagine a 33 year old male teacher having an affair with a 16 year old female student. You intellectually want to string the creep up by his toes don't you? Good, that's the way it's suppose to be...Yet switching the genders, a 33 year old female teacher having an affair with a 16 year old male student will get a different reaction completely..."
Only from idiots.
To make it even better, said 16 yeard old male student is responsible for child support if the teacher got pregnant, too, since he isn't a sufficiently innocent party.
Given the reality of the statistics involved versus the questionable concerns of the OP (unless they are asserting that either female abusers of men go free or that the statistics are wrong), then if they want equal allotment of funds for dissimilar numbers of men vs. women abused, then that is by definition sexist (treating men and women differently).
1. Female abusers of men frequently do go free. It's also shockingly common for men to call the cops regarding an abusive partner and then get arrested when the police arrive.
2. What kind of division do you think there is in need for services? The first set of numbers I could find for men's shelters was for England and Wales, and worked out to 0.79% of shelter spaces being available to men. In the US, you can only receive government funding for a shelter if it serves women, and domestic violence programs of all stripes are given special permission to discriminate with respect to actual or perceived gender. There's one lovely image of the webpage for a domestic violence program in Australia that has a hotline for women to call to get help with their victimization, and a separate one for men, to get help so that they don't become perpetrators. In Canada fairly recently a men's shelter closed due to lack of funding (no government funds, not enough private donors to cover all the costs, and his personal funds ran dry) - the man who ran it hung himself in its garage.
Give us pay based on our performance, not on whether we have dangley bits between our legs.
This basically happens now, so congratulations - http://consad.com/index.php?page=an-analysis-of-reasons-for-the-disparity-in-wages-between-men-and-women
Everyone should hold doors open for everyone.
Where I'm from, this is exactly what happens. It's one of those things that's taught as basic courtesy.
No one should use physical violence against anyone, but if it does happen; equal punishment for both genders.
Equal time for eqal crime, huh? Never see folks who identify as feminists demand that. I suspect this has something to do with being male increasing punishment almost as much as being black does (more for certain crimes).
Rape? Men can very easily be raped. Woman: "Honey, you in the mood?" Man: "No." Woman: "Oh, well, I can fix that." It's not hard to arouse a man, nevermind if he wants to be or not.
By the logic used to get most rape statistics, that isn't "rape." If you look at the NISVS numbers and combine the numbers for "rape" and "made to penetrate" (what it's counted as if a woman decides to perform oral sex on or have PIV intercourse with a man without his consent), the previous twelve month numbers (which are the ones that best describe current rates of occurence) are virtually identical for male and female victims.