Short answer: no. But one should define terms, especially with legal implications.
“Hate Speech” always sounded a bit Orwellian to me. Just like “Homeland Security”. People should be allowed to speak about what they hate, even if it’s bigoted, racist, sexist, etc. if free thought and inquiry are valuable human rights.
In general, I believe the jurisprudence of free speech in our country (USA) essentially says beyond, libel, slander, inciting violence, or sedition, the government can’t imprison you for expression or forcibly silence you in a public forum.
Private organizations and companies can regulate speech within their domains and property to the extent that they don’t violate other laws or rights of other parties within and without their said domains and property.
I think that’s pretty fair.
They perceive men to be threats, nuisances, duplicitous, and generally contemptible, so it’s primarily out of fear.
Whether that fear is justified, conditioned, misplaced, or outright misandry is hotly debated, but it’s my opinion that the root of it is a very human epigenetic, prehistoric, and primal fear of the “other”; in this case, the “other” is a man.