*In a medical setting, if women are "birth-givers" or "vagina-havers" then yes, men could be called "penis-havers".
However... the point of this thread seems to be to cause division. I know no man who in real life would use those terms to describe women - bitch, slut, slag, cunt, and plenty more - but never "birth-giver".
All I want to say is that seeking to create divisions usually doesn't end positively. If we want to provoke men to backlash against the progress women are making, by all means keep putting them down. If we want men to call us names, by all means call them names. If we want them to not have any respect for us, by all means don't show them any respect. No doubt someone will copy and paste this paragraph and say "but men are already doing those things." Yes, some are, an most don't stand up against it. But the way to persuade men to take a stand is not to put them down. Stirring up division and hatred against men will only serve to stir greater hatred towards women.
It's bad now, let's not deliberately make things worse.*
I think you a\re confused. No one is saying bad things about men, we are saying things about language use and the insistence on obfuscating biological reality in order to support the 'rights' of a small minority of people who grew up with male privilege over the rights of 50% of the population who did not.
My OH is a biological male and has found this thread hilarious.
His suggestion is - the betesticled.