And attacked. And the net sum of that might be slightly in favor of being harassed. For example: Anita Sarkeesian. According you, since she spoke about misogyny in video games, she was praised. But she also got harassed. To the point of being threatened with gunshots if she went to a university to speak. She had to cancel that speech. That wasn't considered "a big deal"

On the other hand, "return of the kings" have no problem saying things like "women belong in the kitchen" or that "women shouldn't vote" or that "women should go to university" or even that rape should be legal.

By the way, what exactly do you call "speak against men"? Because if you call "speaking against abuse or violence" speaking against men, I would plainly say that you are the one speaking against men, since I don't think abuse and violence are part of what make someone a men. Is not inherent to men and I do expect better of men.

Also, sexism is not inherent to men, you don't need to be sexist to be a men or "manly". So speaking against sexism is not speaking against men. And in the medium long term, they would benefit from that. To put a simple example: consent. Holding men accountable when they don't respect consent protect men from their consent being violated. Yet,many people consider that holding the man who doesn't respect consent accountable is an attack "on all men". It is quite telling.