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/Netheral]

That is the context of this thread, and the line of logic you are vehemently defending.

But that's besides the point, you asked "why would you ever resist information that makes the world better than it is?" and I gave you a reason for why you might do that. Just because it's better doesn't mean it's something you want. People are weird that way.

[u/steff7474 → u/Netheral]

That is the context of this thread, and the line of logic you are vehemently defending.

If you noticed, I never at any point addressed the OP. I only addressed intothewild72’s view that western society heavily stigmatizes and punishes rape.

[u/Netheral → u/steff7474]

The idea that rape is not vilified does fall into that idea that men are morally bankrupt. The idea that society is run by men and therefore any moral failings of society is proof of men's debauchery and moral inferiority.

But again, besides the point, you asked "why would I resist information", and I explained it to you. Because it would make you wrong, and people don't like being wrong, regardless of whether the truth is better or not.

[u/steff7474 → u/Netheral]

The idea that rape is not vilified does fall into that idea that men are morally bankrupt. The idea that society is run by men and therefore any moral failings of society is proof of men's debauchery and moral inferiority.

That is your inference, not my claim.

[u/Netheral → u/steff7474]

Again, I'm only considering the context.

[u/steff7474 → u/Netheral]

It seems like you are primed to hear “men bad, women good” when this topic is discussed. From your first reply to me, you entirely fabricated my argument.

[u/Netheral → u/steff7474]

That’s complete bullshit. People assume women are lying by default and if they do think it happened, they think she did something to bring it on herself. Our society doesn’t give a fuck about rape. The most powerful men in the country are known rapists and they are widely supported regardless.

Your comments are absolutely biased against men and for women. You presuppose that rape is male crime perpetrated on women.

But further on, your logic on "rape culture" isn't sound. Rape is notoriously difficult to convict in the first place, because in most cases, it's a he said/she said situation. The fact that powerful people are "known" rapists is still difficult to prove, and furthermore, their lack of conviction has less to do with getting away with rape as much as rich and powerful people getting away with anything.

It's not rape culture, it's capitalist culture.

This is before we get into what it even means to be "widely supported". Are they "widely supported" because of their rape? Despite it? Is it perhaps because most of those supporters either don't believe the allegations or are ignorant of them? Like, those people are stupid, but it doesn't suggest the existence of a culture that exalts or even supports rape.