I'll try to explain the phrase regarding "easy mode." But, first there needs to be done context.
What you are likely seeing is a result of what happens when feminists persistently close off literally all avenues of civil dialogue in discussions about gender. By this I mean, feminism in theory is not feminism generally in practice. Also because feminists are largely not self-reflective, nor willing to engage introspection, most feminist operate on a system of presuppositions which as far as most are concerned is the beginning and end of any, and all discussion.
The unimpeachable infallibility model they assign themselves as women isn't tolerant of anything that suggest something different than the reductionist narrative and absolutism feminist typically apply to define all aspects of the world, human relationships, and male identity.
And assign is really at the heart of modern mainstream feminist ideology in practice. Were significant charge occur in the world indicating, even suggesting positive male contribution, feminists are very likely to acknowledge, notice or recognize those changes. There's simply to much social currency in the man= bad, woman= good paradigm.
When most men attempt to communicate any aspect of men's lived experiences, those men are immediately assigned, "misogynist, incel, sexist, immature, and a whole history of derogatory labels serving to affirm their entire biography remains in lockstep with the one dimensional narrative whose framework firmly reduces feminist definitions of men and straight male identity to only rapist, oppressor and abuser. Whatever else those men may be that can be considered laudatory, simply never emerges within any feminist discourse.
So when finally, slowly but surely men turn to each other to do what feminist refuse to do, which is examine topics make experiences and men's issues, rather than default to what feminist now unilaterally practice which is judgement and indictment of men, what those discussions will appear to the feminist as is incomprehensible because those discussions introduce complexity and nuance as a major part of men's lived experiences, some of which ceased being afraid of feminist judgement.
After all, since it's already a given the feminist position already has assigned demonization as the only response, at a certain point, it's already known "misogynist" and sub-human characterizations will certainly be the long and short of any feminist reaction along with racist, homophobe and sexual predator.
Where feminist capable of perceiving complexity within the context of men's lives, perhaps a scant few might discover most aspects about men is essentially completely unknown to most women.
So unknown in fact, that after decades of mocking male physical and psychological suffering, sometimes at the hands of women encouraged by feminism in the name of female empowerment. Feminist have practically alienated men in general from any balanced, objective examination of male female dynamics, culture, or the expansive diversity and contrast within men in general.
One result is, ironically men holding their own council, creating a few forums where men can share their experiences, open up to each other about their trials and tribulations, triumphs and tragedies without the cold damning judgement of feminists. And as these forums and dialogues shape a common language among those men, analogies like "easy mode" emerge. And yes, in general women in the west definitely have it on easy mode. But why won't feminist see this?
It's simple, as mentioned before, feminists have already set the narrative and limited all mainstream discourse on the "patriarchy" so called narrative, the wholesale hyphenating of "toxic" to any portion of straight male identity not wholly deferential to maximum personal feminization, and if course the feminist habit of pathologizing literally every expression and aspect of straight male sexuality. So, if things have changed dramatically in society where women's overall lives, opportunities, access to economic, educational, and massive government programs not available to men, no feminist would ever notice or believe it. And if those gains arrived at the expense of many men's wellbeing, it's not likely feminists will abandon negative judgement and automatic sentences of guilt to men overall with the blanket guilty verdict called "patriarchy."
So, as an increasing portion of men share their experiences which are unknown and unconsidered by feminists, most men quietly don't bother dialoguing with feminists since indifference, apathy and ridicule is guaranteed to be the typical response. And so as "easy mode" is used to characterize the gulf between objective men's experiences and the easily observed female entitlement and hyper-privileged, these discussions are not centered in seeking validation or acceptance of this observation from feminists. Most who have become too used to defining for men, what men's lived experiences are, more than the men they know almost nothing about objectively, who live their experiences.
Now at this point the charge of "Mansplaining, misogyny and the label of incel is expected.