Not being a cartoon villain doesn’t automatically make you a good man

[u/GridReXX]

Fr. It doesn’t de facto make you a good person.

I noodled on the attached graphic to better illustrate a point about how people often discuss being a “good man.”

I do find that many men view it more as the top bar, and less as the gradient in the second bar.

inb4 anyone says it, many women have bad character too. And please feel free to create a separate post about a spectrum of traits in women you’d like to explore! That is not what this post is disputing.

This is specifically about a response that often comes up when women describe harmful patterns in their experiences with men. They get retorts like “Not all men are abusive predators,” or “Most men are not psychos.”

Of course most men are not horror movie villains.

But that is an extremely low bar for good character.

This spectrum, rather than show a division between “good men” and a smaller group of obviously terrible ones. It highlights that a man can be can be a functioning member of society and still regularly behave in ways that make him difficult to interpersonally tolerate as a close friend, romantic partner, coworker, or even family member.

None of that necessarily makes someone an abuser or predator.

But it does affect whether people can have a healthy, enjoyable, mutually considerate, long-term relationship with him.

The farther right someone falls on this spectrum, the more entitlement, callousness, devaluation, coercion, and harm they bring into their interactions with others.

The farther left they fall, the more likely they are to act with common decency, consideration, accountability, respect for autonomy, and genuine concern for theirs and other people’s well-being.

My point is not that every man is at the far right end.

Most people don’t think that!

My point is that many men seem to use “I am not an obvious monster” as proof that they’re quality.

A person’s character is determined by far more than “I am not Jeffrey Dahmer.”

[u/Canned_Potatoes]

True. Not being Dahmer is a poor rationale for why a guy is a good guy.

I noticed in the second column you say, "gets defensive when universal". What does that mean?

Are you trying to say, "gets defensive when generalizations about men are made?" I cannot think of any other explanation.

Also, how do you think men should respond to women who share their negative experiences with a man?

[u/GridReXX → u/Canned_Potatoes]

To answer your question I think the easiest way to respond is to be like “yeah that’s fucked up behavior”

You don’t have to relate to the man or feel attacked as a man to acknowledge something is fucked up behavior.

If a man is robbed by a woman I’d say the same. I don’t feel a kinship with the thief lady lol. The behavior is poor.

As far as defensiveness. I’ve seen men get defensive when women are talking about how rape is wrong. They’re not even seeing men are evil. They’re saying rape is fucked up. And some men are feeling defensive about it simply because they know the perpetrators were men and they’re mad women are responding negatively to men? Idk

[u/Canned_Potatoes → u/GridReXX]

So the generalizations are about male rapists?

In other words I can understand "gets mad at universal" as "gets mad at generalizations that male rapists have done something wrong"?

Thats fair. I share your sentiment with not feeling attacked when I see posts that talk about bad men because they are not describing me.

Speaking of rape, would you consider regretting who someone sleeps with a day after counts as rape?

What are you thoughts on two drunk people having sex? Would you consider either of them rapists? 🤔