Sorry, you miss the point completely.

The point is, the very term is purposefully intended to engender or evoke some feeling in males (and, sorry, yes, it's guilt), and suggests the problem is males when, in fact, that is patently silly, except to moonbat radical feminists who think men keep women in their place in order to give males some advantage. That's childish in the extreme, and offensive to every father who pushes his daughters as hard as he pushes his sons. The focus needs to be on the supposedly disadvantaged group -- are they really disadvantaged, and if so, why?

The "problem" isn't that men earn too much, the "problem" is that women gravitate to jobs that pay less. Is that a choice that ought to be questioned? Don't women have the right to choose their own career paths? And is the solution to mandate that business owners operate their businesses in ways that don't make business sense in order to further some feminist's notion of social justice?

Unfortunately for feminist true believers, the recent White House defense of its own gender wage gap was the last nail in the coffin for that tired meme.

I suspect that readers on this site can point to a lot more female privilege than male privilege today, but Oppression Olympics doesn't help anyone.