Warbler said:
yhwx said:
Warbler said:
TV’s Frink said:
moviefreakedmind said:
EDIT: If you think that saying “Not All Men” is sexist or even problematic in any way whatsoever, then you’re absolutely crazy. You’re an absolute lunatic if you think that reminding people not to generalize and blame an entire 50% of the population for the actions of a few is something that we shouldn’t do.
https://www.bustle.com/articles/171595-6-reasons-not-all-men-misses-the-point-because-its-derailing-important-conversations
I agree with a few things the that article says, but some of it is bs. I agree “Not All Men” should never be used to silence women or to derail conversations or to justify any sexists or argue that women shouldn’t feel uncomfortable in certain situations. But it is true that not all men are sexist pigs. Not all men are rapists. There is nothing wrong with saying the truth at the right time.
I think the article is trying to say that there isn’t a right time.
If so, the article is wrong.
Ok.
Point number #2 and point #4 are sometimes untrue.
When?
There are times we when feminists are attacking men and not just Patriarchy. There are times when it does seem like it is men vs. women.
Like… when?
When they are untrue, imo, it becomes valid to bring up “Not All Men”. Point #5 shows this. Point #5 basically argues that there are no “good guys”.
Well, I mean, it is true. Every human being on this Earth is susceptible to bad behavior. It’s in our DNA. It’s why we have civilization. You, me, and every man on Earth are susceptible to objectifying women and giving in to bad social constructs.
I agree no one is perfect, but there are some humans worse than others. Being susceptible is not the same as being guilty and it doesn’t mean you aren’t a “good guy”. Also women are also susceptible.
True. I’m not sure what you’re arguing against here.
I disagree with your framing that there are no “good guys,” as you put it,
I didn’t put it that way, the article did.
because there are good people in the world. There’s good men in the world. But every good person is susceptible to evil, just as all evil people are susceptible to good.
read what I wrote above.
I did.
Should it really be all that surprising that I would take that as an attack on all men and view it in a men vs. women kind of way??? The same is true for point #6. I especially can’t stand the attitude at the end of point #6, that is all about men vs. women and attacking men.
How so?
point #5 was basically looked like it was attacking all men and saying there weren’t any good ones. That sure seems like an attack on all men.
After reading the article a second time, I think I get your point now.
I think the author takes liberties with the phrase “good guy.” At that moment, I think that that phrase is being used rhetorically, not literally. I’m sure the author believes that there are good men out there, but she used the phrase “good guy” to illustrate what many men want to present themselves to the world as in these conversations.
I just don’t like the attitude in point #6. It stereotypes about the male ego and it refers to men as “privileged people” to justify putting all men into this one negative group.
Men are privileged. Men are sexually harassed less than women, and there’s a lot more men in many fields of work than women.
Men should of course listen to what women have to say, but this doesn’t mean we shouldn’t defend ourselves when attacked.
Let’s say that men were, in some way, unprivileged in some way. Would you appreciate a woman going “well, actually” to you and undermining your points? No. In this theoretical situation, it’s the women’s place to listen, not talk.
This isn’t about defending my damaged ego, this is about fairness. It is not fair assume guilty due to group.
I think some part of your ego is hurt. Why are you defending this so voraciously?
You shouldn’t feel alone in this, I’ve felt like it before. But you have to introspect and think about your actions and your words.
Also it talks about the opportunity to learn about another group’s experience, which “nobody owes them”. I am pretty writer does want men to know and understand about the experiences of women, but I and other men are mind readers. How would we learn what the writer would want us to learn without such opportunities?
Read? Listen?
Maybe you don’t owe us, but if you want us to understand the lesson, you better teach it. Deciding not to teach the lesson because “nobody owes them” benefits no one.
You’re correct, that is a little weird.
But I will admit that “Not All Men” shouldn’t be used to excuse you when you are part of the problem. Finally of course the article has to bring up privilege. There is some truth to it, but I think the “privilege” some think white people and men have is exaggerated.
You are a white man. I bet that might distort your viewpoint.
no more than being black or a women would distort your viewpoint.
Not untrue, but I think you’re missing the point.
This is a conversation about women. Their views are the main object of this discussion.
Also forgotten is the very slight minor privilege women and black people have: They don’t get blamed for the acts of a few.
I’m sure that many times, women and minorities are blamed for the acts of a few.
When they are, the blamers are called sexist and racist and their complaints are ignored as such(and probably should be).
There are still millions of people in America that have regressive viewpoints, just like there are millions of people in America that eat DiGiorno Pizza.
They don’t get blamed for acts that happened years before they were born. They don’t get articles like this written about them telling not bring up completely true facts like “Not All Men”.
As I said before, I’m sure these articles are being written. Maybe we just don’t read or see them, but I bet these sorts of views are held by many people.
Again, those that hold those view points about black people and women are called sexists and racists.
See above.
I guess I grew up with a character flaw: I don’t think people are guilty due to their sex or race. I guess I listened to MLK’s I have a dream speech too many times. I was taught that stereotyping is wrong. Sorry.
There’s no need to be sorry. I think you get the wrong point from the article.
It is how the article comes across to me.
Well, there’s not much I can do about that.
Btw, if “Not All Men” is wrong to say, doesn’t it also make it wrong to say “Not All Muslims”? I don’t think it is wrong to say “Not All Muslims”, but I think you see my point.
That’s a point I can’t really generate a response to. A better debater would probably challenge you better here, but I’ll stay out of this.
ok.
Ok.