I can understand why MOST of the men who responded were insulted and MOST of the women who responded were applauding. The lack of qualifiers makes it assume you are talking about ALL men. Especially when the title of the article seems to be a negation of the phrase “not all men.”
(Not) All Men
Why women want to believe Our Dudes are the exception
In the entire article, there is only one qualifier: “We must know some of these dudes.” It’s the only phrase that doesn’t throw all men under the bus. But it only hints at that possibility, so I won’t assume anything here.
Nona, it would be nice if you could qualify your statement. Are you saying anecdotally that every man you have ever come in contact with is a misogynist? Or are you extrapolating from your experience to claim that all men are misogynists? Or do you have data proving conclusively that all men are misogynists? Or did you mean to write that you should confront every individual within the subgroup of men you know who are misogynists?
The second problem with your article is using the term misogynist and blurring the lines between behavior that could be defined as rude (interruptions, bragging, not listening) sexist (and you might not agree with her definitions) and criminal (assault, child molestation, rape, indecent exposure). If you view all those behaviors as the same thing, then you group all men with the sub group who are criminals.
The third problem with the article are statements that will be interpreted differently by men and women because of differing world views and communication styles, the result of research done by linguist Deborah Tannen, Ph.D.
“Because if James Deen is a rapist, what does that say about the guys he reminds us of?”
“I know I didn’t ask for any details.”
“I would rather die than ask him about it.”
Women can empathize with the emotions you feel during these experiences. But men see you as being completely irrational; you equate a rapist with all the guys who seem similar, then make no effort to actually determine the innocence or guilt of your friend.
Finally, the idea about the playful peer “crossing the line” is one more terrible example of poor communication and completely different expectations. I am in no way condoning a guy who invites a girl to sleep in his bed and offers her drugs and booze — his intentions are clear. What I have a problem with is the lack of ground rules set up during the “playful updates on our lives.” Does the guy think she’s flirting? Is he hoping they have a relationship? Why doesn’t she say she is not coming to New York to have a relationship with the guy? If there’s any doubt about the man’s expectations, why stay with him? This is not blaming the victim; it is simply drawing a line in the sand so the man and the public know if a crime is being committed.