That is a perfect example of the patriarchy hurting men. Assuming men are the sole and primary earners in the family can lead to discriminatory decisions like this:

Stephen Wiesenfeld and Paula Polatschek were married in 1970. Polatschek had worked as a teacher for the five years prior to their marriage and continued teaching after they were married. Her salary was the principle source of the couple’s income, and social security contributions were regularly deducted from her salary. In 1972, Polatschek died in childbirth, which left Wiesenfeld with the care of their newborn son. Wiesenfeld applied for social security benefits for himself and his son, and was told that his son could receive them but that he could not. Social Security Act provides benefits based on the earnings of a deceased husband and father that are available to both the children and the widow. The benefits for a deceased wife and mother, however, are only available to the children.

In 1973, Wiesenfeld sued on behalf of himself and similarly situated widowers. He claimed that the relevant section of the Social Security Act unfairly discriminated on the basis of sex and sought summary judgment. A three-judge panel of the district court granted Wiesenfeld’s motion for summary judgment

Thanks for bringing it up!!

Everyone should have the same rights regardless of sex/gender.

Exactly. And for that we have a broader field of antisexism, comprised of feminism and masculism (and also fight against discrimination of nonbinary people - I'm not sure if it has an established name yet).

We don't need to cram men's rights issues into the movement that wasn't created with them in mind. We can have a more organized alternative, one that doesn't compete with feminism but organically adds to it in the broader antisexist perspective. This ensures everyone's voices are heard, and no conversation is skipped or hijacked.

And with a broader antisexism umbrella, it must be remembered that feminism and masculism are just two angles for the same problem, with a common end goal. Not to mention, gendered issues are also highly interconnected, requiring us to untangle them from all sides. It's worth supporting the antisexist goals as a whole, and then dip into specific problematic as needed.

Now, I know, the term "masculism" was often tainted by MRA activists, who have nothing to do with equality and promoted patriarchy. But in principle, masculism is simply about the fight against discrimination of men, same as feminism goes against discrimination of women. And just as there are TERFs on the side of feminists, there's unfortunately their counterpart in the form of MRA. Neither define feminism or masculism as a whole.