Yes, "not all men" can be a cop-out, or a distraction, or an attempt to derail or control a conversation. It can also be a legitimate challenge to the premises of an argument.
Here’s why women have turned the “not all men” objection into a meme
In the past few weeks the use of “not all men” has skyrocketed. Here’s what the meme means.
This will become a meme.
As you suggest, one way to avoid hearing the “not all men” response is to use more precise language that does not imply a universal claim about all men. But it seems to me that criticizing someone who says “not all men” for being part of the problem has much in common with the “check your privilege” comment that made the news recently. Both have the conversational effect of putting the male or privileged respondent on the back foot in a way that is effectively a red herring (or perhaps ad hominem, as some have suggested), and I think they thereby tend to shut down real argument or engagement.
@DaveN – I think “not all men” can be used as an accurate description of a passive-aggressive derailing attack. It can also be used, as you say, to shut down argument. Ditto for the “privilege” thing. I try to remember (and note, where germane) that my perspective is not universal, as much as I know the universe actually revolves around me. Telling me I can’t discuss women’s matters because I’m a man is dumb; reminding me that, being a man, I may lack some perspective that a woman does, is probably worth being reminded of if it seems I’ve forgotten.
Thanks for posting this. Not all men are familiar with this meme.
I have been called to task for not inserting the magical word “some” into statements that are clearly generalizations. Is there no instance in which the reader is called upon to assume certain knowledge about the world, such as “Nothing is always, everything is sometimes”? Or “If the glove does not fit, she isn’t talking about you”?
The feminist objection to “Not All Men” derives from its use to derail observations based on experience. It goes like this: Dudebro goes full-misogynist on some woman. She calls him on it and recounts numerous instances where she has been subjected to this crap. Suddenly the comment thread fills up with guys with hurt feelings, saying “Hey! What about me? I don’t do stuff like that!” expecting a pat on the head for being good little allies. She wonders why they don’t direct their ire at the offending dudebro.
@George – In the circumstance you describe, yes, the hurtfeels guys are not being helpful, nor are they being accused by broad generalization (and if they aren’t condemning dudebro, they are seriously not contributing to the cause.
My consideration is when the woman objecting to dudebro and other dudebros she knows of actually implies or states that all men are like (or are tacitly supportive of) such dudebros. I suspect that such women would object to similar anecdotal blanket references to how “women” are.
Overuse of “some” or caveats that “YMMV” can be tedious, and there are probably cases where it doesn’t apply. But when it hits personally or can be seen as an attack, it’s worth doing. It’s one reason I really try to catch myself before I just talk about “Republicans”. Sometimes generalizations are okay, but over time they can have an insidious effect.
It is a nasty, sexist meme. It states “These group of people are hateful, people who disagree are part of that group.”
All Americans are in favour of invading other countries, suppressing any religion that doesn’t match their own narrow definition of Christianity. They are homophobic, regularly voting against gay rights, as well as suppressing the rights of other minorities.
Perhaps someone should tell the writer this.
Or how about someone show her the US Crime statistics. Ergo Black men are criminals.
There are documented cases of false rape accusations. Women therefore must lie about rapes.
No complaints – You don’t want to be the ‘Not all…” person!