This kind of argument kind of baffles me. Surely you're aware that women have suffered violence as a result of their lack of rights, aren't you? For large parts of history, domestic violence against women has been ignored or joked about, or in some places explicitly made legal. Until relatively recently, spousal rape wasn't even considered a crime.

I guess there's this notion that, pre-feminism, women had fewer rights but were otherwise left alone and unharmed, in peaceful domestic spaces. But that's really the wrong way of looking at it. Prisoners in solitary confinement are left and alone and not physically harmed, but no one would say they aren't suffering. The way women have historically been denied access to the public sphere and convinced of their inferiority is itself a kind of imprisonment, and it's a massive crime.

>For large parts of history, domestic violence against women has been ignored or joked about

And the same doesn't happen concerning DV towards males?

>or in some places explicitly made legal

Duluth model anyone?

>Do we base them on the same scale ?

I am not sure why we need to assign a badness rating to this kind of thing. And people should not need to equivocate based on some sliding scale of injustice. Anger does have a role to play in changing society. It just gets tricky when people base their whole world view and identify on a single issue. Feminist views are interesting and elucidating but need to be read with a critical eye. Of course a lot of the victims will have no choice in how profound these issues are to them so it is best to be forgiving.