I think it's simpler than that. I think the men profiled in this article have chosen to regard their setbacks through a lens of emasculation.

Frontline did a great piece fifteen years ago about homophobia, homosexuality and hate crime. They cited plenty of research demonstrating a direct correlation between repressed homosexual feelings and homophobia. I don't know if anyone has done similar research on misogyny but there's a pretty big leap from "bad things happened to me" to "bad things happened to me because of women."

I know three men who have positively horrific tales associated with parenthood, custody and the courts. It's very easy to draw the conclusion that family courts are heavily biased towards mothers. None of these men, however, have signed up for the vast feminist conspiracy. All of them recognize their hardship as an unfortunate side effect of a judicial system attempting to balance out some of the financial bias against women in our society. It sucks, yeah, but it's not because women are out to get them it's because historically, divorced women get the shaft. That may no longer be the case (and isn't in their cases) but they don't draw any overarching conclusions from it.

To make a big leap to an entire gender there has to be something deep driving the perspective to absurd heights. The whole concept of a "red pill" speaks to near cult-like self-delusion. This isn't The Matrix, the vagina is not out to get you and while your relationship with someone 60 lbs lighter than you might not be perfect I think we all know who opens the jars.