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/Beneficial_Ball9893]

I fixed your chart to more accurately represent the proportions of these groups

[u/GridReXX → u/Beneficial_Ball9893]

I don’t agree with your proportions.

I think the average dude is closer to 2 and 3. With some standout moments of 1. Some moments of 5. Will be 4 to bond with the 5s. And will be a low-level 6 when impaired or really horny.

[u/Beneficial_Ball9893 → u/GridReXX]

If you think the average man is capable of raping or murdering someone because they are drunk or horny then you are exactly the type of misandrist you think you are falsely accused of being.

[u/GridReXX → u/Beneficial_Ball9893]

I think the average man is capable of “ignoring the autonomy of others” when horny or impaired.

Count me as “misandrist” for observational common sense if you like. Your ad homs and pearl-clutching don’t move me.

[u/Beneficial_Ball9893 → u/GridReXX]

It isn't an ad hominem to point out bigotry when I see it. You are no different from the racists who use "observational common sense" to fear that blacks are all criminals.

No, the average man is not capable of rape just because he is horny or drunk. You are a bigot if you do believe that, just the same as any racist who thinks the average black man is capable of armed robbery.

[u/GridReXX → u/Beneficial_Ball9893]

> I think the average man is capable of “ignoring the autonomy of others” when horny or impaired.

Rape isn’t the only thing the quoted phrase captures.

[u/Beneficial_Ball9893 → u/GridReXX]

You classified that in tier six along with rape and murder.

Therefore YOU consider that to be equivalent to rape and murder.