As a man, I support #metoo as a way for women to make clear that incidents of sexual harassment are pervasive. Often unreported, at least broadly. It has been very important in raising awareness and forcing us to have conversations.
But, let’s not fool ourselves that #metoo has not also been commandeered by some misandrist people, which has then resulted in a misogynous backlash like #notallmen. It is not that they don’t “get it”.
Upon reading this I’m not sure where the author falls.
The #notallmen tag is as stupid as the #alllivesmatter tag. Both are attempts to reshape the conversation into one of taking sides, that the well-intentioned people also get sucked into. In both cases we need to move towards getting everyone on the same side, not creating a new issue to drive us apart. Both movements started well and got hijacked.
I thought this article was going to be about bringing people together, even though the title is telling us people don’t “get it”. Not generally not the best way to start a persuasive conversation. I was disappointed. Let’s take the first analogy:
“Funny, that if men are robbed,
we don’t ask if they’ve ever
given away money, if
you know what I mean…”
Actually, I don’t know what you mean. If a woman is robbed we don’t ask her if she was giving money away either. If the author wants to make a point about victim-blaming, why is the analogy with men getting robbed necessary? Is this about wrongs to women or about the advantages men have? This is reframing.
(Men, by the way, are also afraid of other men and are assaulted more than women are. I’m not saying this to defend men. I wondering why the subtle slight against men is used. Who is starting the comparisons debate? When men raise issues like workplace accidents, they don’t generally bring up how women have it so much better and the unfairness of it all)?
The cookie analogy is another example. So if one of the cookies is poison, what do we do? Obviously we have to throw away the whole lot and treat every cookie like it is poison. I don’t think the statistics bear out that one in twelve men is a sexual predator.
Essentially, the author is advising women to treat all men as if they were sexual predators. What a sad and inappropriate response and not what #metoo intended. Of course, women should be cautious. They have known that for thousands of years, but they don’t have to toss all the cookies. So, why are we surprised when we see a reaction to this rhetoric like #notallmen.
A more accurate analogy is that in the entire food supply there are some things that could make you sick. Check expiry dates, wash your fruit and take precautions, but unfortunately, some people will get sick. We need to minimize that. It is not a men vs women thing.
The author says men should listen and this isn’t about men. I wholeheartedly agree, but then why does this article reference men so much. Are men supposed to just listen and agree and never speak unless to say “yes dear”? Is that what #metoo is about?
So, in the final analysis, I’m not sure if this is a case of the author twisting the #metoo movement to be men vs women or the author is just a poor writer unable to clearly make the point about what men and some women don’t get about #metoo. Perhaps she is just a member of the group she is writing about.
I’m expecting the usual vitriolic reaction as a man who dares to say anything on this issue that isn’t 100 percent affirming. So if you’re about to post something inane like, “you’re exactly like the men the author is talking about” please don’t waste our time. Feel free to disagree, however, and I’m happy to listen and discuss.