How should men react to blanket generalizations about their gender? Most men respond in one of three ways. Some say nothing. Some men may apologize for their gender. Some may try to persuade the generalizer that ``not all men" are bad. The phrase #notallmen has been subjected to much mockery since 2013. In 2014, a comic by Matt Lubchansky described Mr. Notallmen as a caricature MRA. The vast majority of MRAs would argue that Mr. Notallmen serves a good purpose, since he reminds everyone of the fact that there are good men. I belong to the minority who do not find him helpful -- explanation follows. Most people understand that a racist who blames all members of a minority for the crimes of the few is evil and reprehensible. Most child abuse is committed by women including mothers like Casey Anthony, or Raina Mersane who stabbed 8 children to death. Yet, anyone who tars non-abusive mothers with the same brush would be held in contempt. Blaming all men for the faults of the few is evil and reprehensible. This point should be obvious to any decent human. Someone who slanders all men is not misguided, or irrational, or emotional, or a snowflake. Someone who slanders all men is a slanderer and the enemy. Male bashing and man hating has been fashionable in Western Culture at least since 1990s. While many factors have contributed to this cultural shift, Mr. Notallmen's role should be analyzed. Negotiating with bigots and slanderers is as counterproductive as negotiating with terrorists. Many Liberals justifiably condemned some foreign wars conducted by USA, yet #notone of them asked what do they have to do in order to be considered good people by terrorists. There are Conservative members of minorities who support racists' freedom, yet #none of them would apologize to racists for belonging to a minority. We should be grateful to women who defend male victims of abuse and discrimination, yet #none of them would agree with a man who blames all women. When many real men like the comic character Mr. Notallmen ask bigots what they can do to be counted as good men by bigot's standards they are encouraging bigotry. One criticism of Mr. Notallmen is that he is making women's lived experiences about men -- thus we should take a look at the personal experiences of those who blame all men. Most women, like most men are good people. According to ``Differences in Frequency of Violence and Reported Injury Between Relationships With Reciprocal and Nonreciprocal Intimate Partner Violence" published in American Journal of Public Health, only 16% of women and 7% of men have been violent toward a nonviolent partner. It is unreasonable to assume that a random woman or man has experience of abusing their partner or children. Nevertheless, any person who uses abusive or bigoted language is more likely then not to be a perpetrator of child abuse and intimate partner abuse. Most abusers engage in more then one type of abuse. Thus, it should be assumed that any individual slandering all men has lived experience as an abuser. Mr. Notallmen is trying to prove that men have goodness by the standards of the slanderers and abusers who have no goodness themselves. In conclusion, men must understand that most of them are good -- but not by the standards of evil.
There are generalizations about men, and there are generalizations about women, and I believe most of these generalizations, even if they can on the surface appear bad, are actually a good thing and part of evolution or natural design. Why are there many women who seem attracted towards the "bad" male, even sometimes when that's up to the point of abuse? Some of this can be a blurry line between what gender traits are bad and what the opposite sex can be attracted to, or what can carry potential positive attributes in certain situations. Those statistics start getting a lot more interesting when broken down by race. In fact the overall statistics really can't be understood until you do that. African American women for example are eight times more likely to be abused and account for about half of all domestic abuse cases in the U.S. Once you start making generalizations about people by their gender, it's a slippery (possibly inevitable in some ways) slope before you start making generalizations about race too. It's opening up a can of worms. Which is why there are some Progressives on the Left who prefer to gloss over this entirely and pretend like gender differences don't exist at all. (or at least you get the theory that it's all social and not biological, that way you can still have an oppressed victim class)
Unfortunately many SJWs and feminists (#notallofthem) directly or indirectly claim that all men are responsible for crimes of a few men. Or that #allmen are guilty of some microaggressions.
Most men #notallmen are strong enough and smart enough to understand this is a topic made up by men who fear women and believe the "feminist" ideal is a threat to their masculinity, such as it is.
Well since feminists literally say masculinity id's toxic, that seems like a pretty obvious attack. Fyi, not all feminists are women and not all women are feminists.
Given that I have advocated for Gender Equality since 1996, I do not fear it. Any reasonable man should understand that misandry is a tremendous threat. Any reasonable man should hate misandrists. What I discuss in OP -- negative generalizations about men is not equality but misandry. Generalizations like all men are oppressors, all men are complicit in rape, "men are pigs", "men are scum".
Most men #notallmen are strong enough and smart enough to understand this is a topic made up by men who fear women and believe the "feminist" ideal is a threat to their masculinity, such as it is.
In reality weak men who fear women do not protest misandry. When I was a student in late 1990s I spoke up on behalf of male victims of abuse and discrimination.
I had never heard the term "Misandry" until just now so I decided to research it: "In a 2016 article, author and journalist Cathy Young described a "current cycle of misandry" in feminism.[26] This cycle, she explains, includes the use of the term "mansplaining" and other neologisms using "man" as a derogatory prefix.[26] The term "mansplaining", according to feminist writer Rebecca Solnit, was coined soon after the appearance in 2008 of her essay Men Explain Things to Me.[27] Paul Nathanson and Katherine K. Young argued that "ideological feminism" as opposed to "egalitarian feminism" has imposed misandry on culture.[21] Their 2001 book, Spreading Misandry, analyzed "pop cultural artifacts and productions from the 1990s" from movies to greeting cards for what they considered to be pervasive messages of hatred toward men.[22] Legalizing Misandry (2005), the second in the series, gave similar attention to laws in North America.[23] " I am a reasonable man who recognizes the term was created as an opposition to misogyny and a rather recent addition to lexicon now championed by the men I refer to.
Many Liberals and Feminists (#notall) are more then willing to use your support, but they still would treat you as a privileged oppressor. It's hard to respect Liberal men, when those whom they serve are calling them this.
I don’t believe for one second that you avocated for gender equality Any man who was involved couldn’t make such a stupid generalization. Please don’t Insult our intelligence thinking we believe you
Male bashing is a sure sign of a looney and therefor you can safely disregard anything they have to say..
All Humans are Created Equal -- at least since 1776. Hatred toward any birth group should be socially condemned.
All 6 of them? That seems like a silly thing to get worked up over. But hey, whatever floats yer boat.
Any acceptable hate is a serious problem for Society. How would you feel if your partner assaulted you and the Police considered you the primary aggressor?
I react by saying how I do not really care. I am a man and proud of it. It is a part of who I am so why should I care what some idiot thinks about "gender"?
I am not the one bashing the educating,..YOU ARE , saying silly things like they’re “champagne socialists” ..I respect the educated, unlike trump who brags about how he loves the uneducated because they believe his lies and are dumb enough to defend them. I don’t hate the uneducated, I feel sorry for them because they can’t think for themselves .I am not referring to actual education, I am referring to people who do not educate themselves
Well, by this very post, you - once again - further prove my point; You ate a Champagne Socialist. What the hell has Trump got to do with anything? What exactly does "educate themselves" mean?
