Catching up on a few things:
Here are my suggestions for this accommodation. Eliminate "mandated sexual equality".
I'm not sure I know what this is intended to mean. There are many areas of life where gender should make exactly zero difference.
Get the government out of our sex relations with the same vigor that conservatives want them out of our economic relations. Our families are now being teared apart mostly by women. They are initiating divorce at a 70% rate and it correlates with increased economic independence.
Yes, which is something I find interesting. Men are becoming aware that whilst there exists a prevailing myth that women are the family minded ones, their idea of family is generally "me and my kids in a secure environment". Replace the father "protector/provider" role in a relationship that has passed the romance phase and the man is readily seen as redundant. Bizarrely, he may even be seen as a failure due to his forced redundancy. Society expresses a strange sort of multiple personality syndrome when it comes to its view of the role of men as parents. It will uphold their role stridently when there's some sort of responsibility involved on his behalf. But in circumstances where the only thing on offer is his own soul as a father, it amounts to not much at all a lot of the time. His parenting is seen within very limited parameters both by his wife and society. I don't think mothers or society even see men's relationship to their children as being a natural thing, as it is with women. Men "play" at being dads; women are natural mothers. There's actually a bit of truth to this, but the problem arises wherein parenting is judged almost exclusively through the filter of female parenting and nurturance. Male parenting and nurturance is basically judged by this female parenting template, which is stupid as men and women parent differently.
The qualifier to the above observations which ought not go unmentioned is that part of the problem here is that men can sometimes themselves exhibit the aforementioned multiple personality syndrome with respect to their own status as parent. This makes taking their protests about how they are treated as parents slightly more difficult. But then men always seem to have to defend and justify their role through the female filter and template. The solution, really, if for society to wake to to the nature of male parenting and nurturance and see its value.
The trouble is the divorce and custody laws are based on a by gone era of the male's earning power.
It's not just that, of course, it's also the idea of women as the natural and rightful and best parent. Now that women and indeed couples dump their kids in childcare for most of their childhood it's hard to make that argument anymore.
With women now making more money than men and with them owning 55% of the wealth and it climbing fast, we need a new legal paradigm in custody and divorce to balance things better and encourage stable families.
Sure, but the best way to encourage stable families is to encourage sanity, before and after marriage, but preferably before.
My suggestion is assumption of father's custody to replace our present assumption of mother's custody.
Well, see, that's a problem. Part of how feminism plied its trade was by characterising itself as a remedy for injustices. Turns out in many cases it simply replaced a perceived injustice with another one. I don't think it's a sound response for men to just do the same. Personally I think the spouse that initiates divorce (wherein a relationship has simply broken down without other serious considerations) should be the one to move out and custody arrangements made from there.
This will make women think twice before filing for divorce and if they do, they will get their just deserts...visitation with the kids and non custodial parenthood.
Seems rather punitive and vengeful to me. I think this is exactly the sort of thing we should be trying to avoid. Isn't this the sort of mentality that makes divorces messy and bad for children? If there are no extenuating circumstances the non-initiator should get custody, if only to allow the children to remain in their home environment. I do not believe people should remain in bad marriages because of swords hanging over their heads.
Other solutions I have suggested are converting the welfare system into a "manfare" system that guarantees a stipend to men to do with whatever they want.
That could actually be quite beneficial to society but it won't happen in our lifetime.
This would be funded by a higher income tax on women.
I think you just got punitive and vengeful again!
The money could be used to supplement family income or bankroll learning how to be Buddha or Jesus thereby encouraging a spiritual life for men that will also buttress our helping professions.
That will never happen in our lifetime either. Most people view the genuine spiritual life as harmful, not helpful
Men also need to organize politically for male specific interests.
I don't think I agree with that unless those interests benefit society generally, which one would imagine would be one of men's interests. Unless you mean redressing feminist injustices, in which case I'd agree, but I would think that falls within the parameters of what I just said.
It's ridiculous having this huge exclusive and ideologically driven female advocacy and none for men.
The problem you have there is much of it is driven by men and their own false thinking and ideations. It's men giving women what they cry out for, as per usual.
That is why things are so unfair to men and why there is now huge injustices to them and it's increasing exponentially as time goes on.
This can only change if men change their own thinking. Let's start there, shall we.