Gary, I think the fundamental problem goes something like this:
1. For centuries, there was a double-standard in adultery law and custom: a woman couldn't be raped by her husband, nor could she complain of his adultery, whereas a man could complain of his wife's adultery and even engage in violence to deter her. The technical legality of this no doubt varied with time and space, but the fact is that: for hundreds if not thousands of years in virtually every culture known, men had a license to bully women.
2. Related to (1), a woman who was not under the protection of a man (i.e., did not have a husband or elder male relative to look after her), was even more vulnerable because she was potentially easy prey to even strangers.
3. Both of these historical realities must be tempered with reality, notions of chivalry, etiquette and gentility were also prevalent in some cultures and it is quite clear form history, literature and the arts that the pre-modern era was NOT one of veritable slavery in which a majority sadistic, much less universally sadistic male/man population oppressed, tortured and raped women. Dido was not "in resolve"
because Aeneas was a brutal fuck. She was in resolve because she loved him and he was departing, perhaps never to return. In sum, the pre-feminist era was not the universally stark hell for females and feminine types which it seems many leftists would like to imagine it was. Certainly a woman who found herself the unlucky subject of a sicko father/male relative custodian/father could find her self in deep, agonizing, lifetime trouble; but even there, women had some recourse, the myriad details of which across the full gamut of human cultural diversity are far too broad for this thread, much less this post . . .
None of this is said in defense of patriarchy. It is good that patriarchy is dying if not "dead." But raising up matriarchy in its place is not the solution and neither is some form of androgynous, gender-nullified intellectual totalitarianism in which neither femininity nor masculinity are permissible.
4. It would seem that much if not all of the disadvantages of historical patriarchy have been reversed by this time, and yet, now certain "reversals" have replaced them:
a. Rather than a woman who claims rape or other sexual infraction by a man being blamed and shunned, any woman who makes such a claim is now regarded automatically as incapable of falsehood and her word is taken as sufficient proof that the accused is considered guilty until proven innocent. In sum, the burden of proof for any woman's claim of oppressive behavior by a male has been lowered to the point of absurdity. Rather than simply taking such claims "seriously" and investigating assiduously, such claims are automatically considered to be factual.
b. People who lie about such things face little or no consequence for such lying.
c. Well-intentioned, but intellectuall feeble demagogues and witch-hunters defend these conditions of broken justice on the grounds that any correction of these deficiencies would threaten a return to the imbalanced patriarchal past.
d. Any who question these current imbalances in jurisprudence is automatically labeled with the derogatory labels of sexist, misogynist and rapist.
In sum, what began some ~100 years ago as a movement to shift the status of females and women in society to equality with men has swung toward the domination, oppression and persecution of males and men and even any who would protest and call for more moderation.