Yes, I understand that the technical proposal is to rename the article, but I also appreciate that names matter.  It's also worth noting that this is the longest rename discussion I've ever seen at WP.  Apparently, I'm not the only one who thinks the name of this article matters more than usual.  

I may be missing some very notable exceptions, as I have not been involved in the dispute until now, but I see no unbiased editors.  I see editors who either support the concept of men's rights or feminists.  That is to say, without belaboring the topic, I see two diametrically opposed ways of viewing the world.  One way says men of every society in every corner of the world developed abusive and patriarchal social structures that oppressed women.  The other way says that gender roles evolved by men and women working together in accordance with biological imperatives like survival.  That these gender roles limited, benefited and oppressed both sexes in different ways by forcing them to conform to the roles that society dictated.  Feminist patriarchy theory has a fundamental need to attach male malice in the way gender relations evolved and inculcate guilt in modern-day males for the supposed sins of their male predecessors.  Tangential rant aside, if we can appreciate that there are two opposing sides here we can achieve a much better and balanced article.  But, instead, what we have on one side are a bunch of feminist editors, armed with all the sources that 30 of feminist dominated academia can churn out disingenuously feigning to be unbiased, disinterested editors who are merely trying to apply WP policy to produce the best article possible.  On the other side, we have the men's rights activists.  "Men's Rights" are, essentially, what men's rights activists say they are.  If the article, "men's rights," doesn't have at least 50% of its content from sources that point to "men rights activists" (a term that I see used pretty pejoratively on the "Men's Rights" talk page) then the article is hopelessly biased.  All feminist sources regarding men's rights are, essentially, sources that respond to the arguments and/or actions of men's rights activists (male or female.)  To base more than 50% of the article on the feminist response to the article's topic is a poor way to write an article.  Such an article can easily occur here if we try to stick to the best WP:RS without including both sides (because we have failed to acknowledge that there are, in fact, two sides here,) as we will end up with an article that amounts to "Men's Rights according to Feminists."  The reason for which being that the men's rights activist source may be from some small publisher or self-published but the women's studies text will be published from Oxford Press.