In the book Feminism Is for Everybody, the author describes 3 types of domestic violence: male violence against women, same-sex violence, and adult violence against children.
There is something lacking from this list that should be pretty obvious though, which is female violence against men. And this pattern of denial around male victimization, and female perpetration (or more broadly: female agency) is a fundamental flaw with feminist ideology that is caused by their belief in the patriarchy.
Under such a framework, men are said to use violence against women as a method of control to keep them in line. The idea that women might use violence as a form of control is therefore absent. As is the idea that violence might not have anything to do with control at all. And as a result, all forms of female violence are framed in terms of "self-defense" (or occasionally as "punching up"). Male violence, by contrast, is framed in terms of men abusing power that is given to them by the patriarchy. And this includes even when men use violence in self-defense against women.
However, the above understanding of domestic violence is deeply flawed. Women assault men for various reasons, including to control a man's behavior. It happens quite frequently, and far more often than feminist theory predicts. And we've known all of this for well over 40 years now. The feminist framework of domestic violence is antiquated, regressive, and is not in line with the modern academic scholarship on this topic. Some domestic violence researchers have even called into question the validity of patriarchy theory because of this.
But have feminists bothered to throw away their belief in the patriarchy, or at least modify it to account for what we know about domestic violence? No, in fact they have done the opposite. They have ignored facts and evidence on this topic and have become champions of anti-science denialism in an effort to rescue their precious theory from the criticism it deserves. In some cases, they have even engaged in violence themselves in an effort to sequester researchers who dared question their narrative.
Other issues that men face in society are also ignored by feminists. These include things like homelessness, incarceration, police violence, life expectancy, work-life balance, suicide, divorce, child custody, and a plethora of other issues. And their excuse for ignoring those problems lies with a second flaw with feminism: the idea that men's issues are caused by the negative effects of the patriarchy. So while feminists may give lip service to these issues, they never do anything about it. Instead, they hide behind things like "toxic masculinity", "men harming men", and "the patriarchy harming men" as an excuse to brush these issues aside.
In some cases (like when it comes to child custody and divorce law reform), they have even fought against men's rights groups who are responsible for advancing positive social change around those issues. Feminist lobbying groups are therefore an active, socially regressive force against the march of progress that men's right's advocates have made in these areas.
The idea that men can be victims, in general, and for reasons outside of "the patriarchy", is simply not something that feminist theory can allow for. And the existence of male victimization pretty much anywhere in society is a fundamental threat to the message that feminists want everyone to believe.
This is why male victims suffer so much. It's why they're not heard. It's why they don't receive help or attention for their suffering. And ultimately, it's why we need a men's rights movement.
Men are being silenced and their problems are being ignored. And feminists will not, and indeed cannot, help them. Feminist ideologies and beliefs about gender are fundamentally flawed and cannot be used to solve these problems. In fact, I would argue that their beliefs are no longer useful in the modern world at all. I do not think that they are helping anyone, not even the women whom they claim to support. Their views are socially regressive, dangerous, sexist, and unscientific. And after 40 years of stubborn denialism, these views need to be thrown away.