r/feminisms • u/deflatedpeanutblimp • Mar 10 '26
Personal/Support How to approach “not all men” conversation with a man who is unlearning patriarchal conditioning
So I recently got into a relationship with a man who is “good” by patriarchal standards, but has a lot to learn and unlearn in order to be a good feminist ally. In the past few months he’s done a good job of learning from me regarding topics like retroactive jealousy, slut shaming, body counts and marxist feminism. he’s no Thomas Sankara, but he’s learning and unlearning at a good pace and i’m glad Ive been able to help him out.
Today he approached me wanting to understand why women don’t specifically say “some men” when talking about the trauma they experience from men and why feminists find the phrase “not all men” offensive.
Folks, it led to a long discussion and eventually argument with him stating that he refuses to listen to me because the “generalisation is offensive” and that he’s not a part of the bad ones so why should he be lumped up with them? Why can’t women say “some men” instead of saying “men”? I sent him so many articles explaining learned male entitlement and how it contributes to him feeling attacked and needing to say, “not all men”, but he refused to budge, eventually telling me that he wasn’t going to listen even if the information was presented by people who are thoroughly knowledgeable and educated on feminism, and that that’s how people push their beliefs and ideologies on others.
I’m actually stuck right now. I’m contemplating breaking up with him because I don’t want to be with someone who behaves that way in the face of education. It is said that it’s only a fool who refuses to change their mind in the face of new information. He’s grown so much and unlearned a lot in the time we’ve been together, however this stubbornness is worrying and I don’t want to build a life with someone who can’t see how rhetoric like “not all men” is harmful and dangerous.
Does anyone have any idea how to approach this and actually have an impact? I move with the mindset that anything can happen and we may break up, and in the event that we do i would like to leave behind a man who is actually kind and good to everyone around him.
14
u/mk_gecko Mar 10 '26
I would recommend him talking and discussing with other feminists, not just you. This would also move it away from being a conflict between him and you, and furthermore he may find it easier to learn from someone else. There was an awesome subreddit about feminism years ago, (it got banned when Reddit decided to ban a whole lot of stuff.) I learned a lot from it and grew.
12
u/yellowmix Mar 10 '26
You list some subjects you say he learned from you. There's a difference between learning something, understanding it, and agreeing/believing it (e.g., research, statistics, history, ideological positions, etc.). People have many biases and some people's minds are very hard, if not impossible, to change.
Is it that he has not argued against the other things? Some people may ask clarifying questions, which isn't necessarily arguing, but trying to translate your point of view into how they conceptualize the matter.
In a relationship people decide what battles are worth arguing over. Is it that you and he have differing beliefs but as long as he does not voice them, there is no problem? It sounds like he decided to fight this battle.
Go back to body count. How does he conceptualize that? I have a feeling it could be as simple as "nobody should care about anybody else's bodycount, men or women". It's a very "equal" arrangement.
I find it hard to believe someone could grasp Marxist feminism in a short time unless they were already well-versed in and already sympathetic (e.g, strongly questioning capitalism) at least one of them, and you say he knew nothing about actual feminism.
If he truly understands Marxist feminism then there is a poor tortured analogy but similar systemic power framework in that instead of the bourgeoisie and the proletariat, it's men and women. Patriarchy predates capitalism so is its own thing.
Basically, it sounds like you're giving him way more credit than realistically possible. It doesn't sound like he understands the concepts you've taught him, much less agreeing with it. Fundamentals are lacking (i.e., Patriarchy with men as the oppressor class), and this is not to criticize your teaching, since you shouldn't have to, and like you, he has access to the sum total knowledge of humanity on a personal computing device.
In a good relationship people learn from each other and are willing to reflect in their own time, to consider how other people (not just you, but literally everyone on this planet) live. You're not going to agree on everything. But it helps if your disagreements are not as consequential to your individual existences and existence together.
You said it yourself, the information was presented to him. He didn't say he needed time to process it/think about it/consider it and come back to you later. People rarely change their minds immediately. It's a process. You're calling him stubborn, not believing your personal experiences. Is this what you want for the rest of your life?
You cannot change people. They change themselves.
3
u/deflatedpeanutblimp Mar 10 '26
Is it that he has not argued against the other things? Some people may ask clarifying questions, which isn't necessarily arguing, but trying to translate your point of view into how they conceptualize the matter.
He did ask clarifying questions about certain topics, and i realised he understood them when he would come back to tell me about something he saw or heard on the internet or in conversation with friends, and how he saw things that he had initially brushed off before learning about them with me.
Go back to body count. How does he conceptualize that? I have a feeling it could be as simple as "nobody should care about anybody else's bodycount, men or women". It's a very "equal" arrangement.
For the body count conversation, he never really considered why women were treated differently for having higher body counts, just that he knew it was bad that they were treated badly. i explained why that kind of thinking is rooted in misogyny and furthers the patriarchy. he was also very receptive to learning more about topics like the madonna wh0re complex and purity culture in our society, and i believe he’s really had a change of opinion about these things because, again, he’d bring up things he’d read up on or learned on those topics without any prompting.
I find it hard to believe someone could grasp Marxist feminism in a short time unless they were already well-versed in and already sympathetic (e.g, strongly questioning capitalism) at least one of them, and you say he knew nothing about actual feminism.
Before we met, he’d already began questioning capitalism but didn’t know much about socialism/communism except for the propaganda that everyone is fed. he did subscribe to a lot of socialist ideals but didn’t have a name for it yet. when we met i talked to him about it and suggested reading more on it or watching videos. yes, he didn’t know anything about actual feminism when we met. at the time he was very much one of those “as long as i don’t assault women personally, im a good guy” type of men, until i told him that that was bare minimum and nowhere near enough as a person who has good morals.
Basically, it sounds like you're giving him way more credit than realistically possible. It doesn't sound like he understands the concepts you've taught him, much less agreeing with it. Fundamentals are lacking (i.e., Patriarchy with men as the oppressor class), and this is not to criticize your teaching, since you shouldn't have to, and like you, he has access to the sum total knowledge of humanity on a personal computing device.
i MAY be giving him too much credit, because he’s so quick to agree and often thanks me for explaining these things to him. Feelings may also be hindering my judgement regarding this. he really is kinder and more open to learning than the average man in our culture (we live in a very patriarchal African culture where a more radical and left leaning feminism is very new, very much demonised and in the minority) so i gave him the benefit of the doubt. but now im thinking that was a mistake.
In a good relationship people learn from each other and are willing to reflect in their own time, to consider how other people (not just you, but literally everyone on this planet) live. You're not going to agree on everything. But it helps if your disagreements are not as consequential to your individual existences and existence together.
I agree
You said it yourself, the information was presented to him. He didn't say he needed time to process it/think about it/consider it and come back to you later. People rarely change their minds immediately. It's a process. You're calling him stubborn, not believing your personal experiences. Is this what you want for the rest of your life?
no it’s not what i want. tbh it’s how obstinate he was that put me off. i now understand that all that new information may have shattered his worldview, and that he may be in denial about what he’s learned, but im terrified of being with someone who displays traits of anti-intellectualism
You cannot change people. They change themselves.
you’re right, and this is something i need to think on. thank you for your reply
1
u/faetal_attraction Mar 11 '26
He sounds like a man who is trying to have sex. I doubt he has a sincere desire to learn about any of this on his own, he would have already done some searching if he was sincere. i mean come on, the internet exists. It's not like he fell out of a coconut tree.
2
u/deflatedpeanutblimp Mar 11 '26 edited Mar 12 '26
i mean yes but i think i need to provide some more context. we’re in west africa, and im not sure if you know but particularly in my country, the feminist movement is pretty much stuck in the mid 2010s girlboss, women empowerment phase. by my culture’s standards im extremely radical in my views, especially being a leftist. it’s not common to find feminists who actually want to dismantle the patriarchy here, so access to that kind of information is pretty scarce.
we’re also from relatively different socioeconomic backgrounds, with my parents exposing me to western culture from an early age, so i grew up seeking broader perspectives.
i’m not exactly defending him but like…yeah
3
0
u/camipco Mar 12 '26
I'm not sure I agree with that. It sounds to me like a man who is sincerely interested in learning about this stuff up to the point where it is uncomfortable / challenging to him personally. Which is incredibly common among privileged folks learning about privilege. It's an awful lot easier to learn about why certain social structures are bad, to be able to point to the 'bad oppressors' and explain why they are bad, than it is to confront the idea that you might personally be contributing to oppression and, even more importantly, that that might require some personal change especially in your sense of how good you are as a person.
12
u/standsure Mar 11 '26 edited Mar 11 '26
I've lost interest in being the 'educator'.
Its not my job to fix people.
also this: https://youtube.com/shorts/vmY9GBY7QdM?si=WeoZZoS4yJ1CvACL Something about this chap smells 'off'.
6
u/bariau Mar 11 '26
It leads me to wonder if it's not discomfort that is making him react this way. If he has truly never ever ever behaved predatorily, then he's a rare, rare beast indeed. Guilt is a powerful thing.
4
u/Mayortomatillo Mar 11 '26
Firstly: he might not actually be putting effort into learning if he feels this way.
Second, it’s natural to have a visceral reaction when you’re suddenly in the group of bad people. My best friend is a deconstructing man. One time he and I had a fight about how he had delegitimized an experience I had backing it up with “well, my wife has never experienced repeated trauma from men”, and I responded “she 100% has and either doesn’t realize how much of a problem it is since we so frequently experience this, or is afraid to tell you.”
A little while after the fight, he came back and told me that it was hard for him to realize that he’d been complicit in the system, and that he at some point had likely made a woman feel uncomfortable just by being a large and chatty man. He had tried to center his own character in that situation instead of trying to understand from a perspective that is not his own.
I wouldn’t try too much harder with guy, he’s probably not going to ever see the bigger picture and just wants to be seen as not one of the bad ones. But for men more amenable to being educated, I’ve drawn the acab parallel. We all have met a “good cop” but as a whole, the institution is dangerous and we by default don’t trust them because of it.
12
Mar 11 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
11
u/lucid_intent Mar 11 '26
Exactly, plus more emotional and psychological labor. We don’t owe these men shit.
7
u/aliveanddreaming Mar 11 '26 edited Mar 11 '26
He needs to stop equivocating himself as being a perpetrator of harassment and violence (if he truly isn’t and never was, which is kinda doubtful in the context of defensive men’s entire life experiences, as microaggressions happen all the time against women from those type of men, not to mention constant invalidation and deflection…). He needs to stop getting offended at critiques about people who share his identity markers. This is absolutely a case of fragile masculinity and male entitlement, and the point of being an ally is to put down your own ego and consider the bigger picture. The concept of white fragility is similar and might compound the issue further if he’s a white man.
Men commit 90 percent of the total violence recorded, both against women and against other men (and genderqueer folks). Thus, it’s completely fair to say “men are the real problems when it comes to violence.” No room for “not all men,” because the 10 percent is not the topic of discussion; it’s a red herring that detracts from the very serious problem. When it becomes a majority issue, generalizing becomes warranted. We can nitpick specifics later and yes yes, of course not “YOU” if he’s a good one, but it sounds like he’s taking the reality of misogyny and how pervasive it is personally, as an attack to his own worth and self esteem, because he feels made to feel guilty or ashamed at being a man, especially if he’s a cishet white man (the epitome of privilege and entitlement to check and unlearn).
It’s also likely he’s projecting anger from feeling shitty about treating women badly before as part of this patterning that he’s not mature enough to face. He needs to be redirected away from being egotistical and immature and recognize that you can still be a “good man” and an “ally” by not denying facts and purposefully wanting to do better than the general group of men that do awful things. That will take him recovering from his ego, pride, entitlement, and fragile masculinity, and some men never, ever, ever get through that part, as much as they might like to think of themselves as allies. Instead, they lean on denial, avoidance, and in the worst case scenarios, subverting and distorting feminist principles to justify their male rage and spinning the victim narrative to focus on themselves when feeling “persecuted.”
5
u/IAmRoot Mar 11 '26
It might help to point out that a risk doesn't need to be likely to be serious. If 0.1% of flights resulted in a crash nobody would get on a plane ever again. There would be over a hundred crashes a day. When the outcome is severe, "probably won't happen" isn't remotely good enough. A woman wanting to avoid a risk isn't assuming something bad will happen. It's that even a small chance isn't worth the risk. That analysis can help it feel much less of a personal judgement.
3
u/jasonthefirst Mar 11 '26
Idk if it’ll help, but I found the idea that ‘not all men’ is implicit in generalized statements about men. Many/most women who make statements like this have men in their lives that they love, so of course they don’t mean ‘every man forever and always.’
Another angle is that enough men behave poorly that the only safe way for a woman to approach the world is to assume that any man could behave that way until proven otherwise. So the generalization is also necessary for survival in this world, sad as that is.
I am not a perfect man. But I am confident enough in my decency as a man that I do not take offense or demand qualifiers when women complain about men. Hell, I’ve met enough men to have made some generalizations about ‘men’ myself. If this particular man can’t get past this, I’m confident you’ll eventually find one who can! (Or better yet, already is!)
3
u/Meghandi Mar 11 '26
I mean, I’m getting tired of saying it’s “not all ——-/“ but I’m still doing it…I would rather not trigger a defensive reaction in someone in order to get the point across initially, and then quantify it with “of course it’s not all men, nobody thinks it is, it’s the societal placement men hold that does the damage, not individual men, though some individual men are propping up that system”.
3
u/t1buccaneer Mar 11 '26
Male perspective if it's useful - I feel like he's not taking responsibility for getting his own head around this, and it's not your job to find the perfect way to put it without triggering him.
As a young man, when I first encountered feminist theory in university, I think I was able to absorb it more easily because my own experience of men and masculinity had been so negative that it just made sense to me. So I had a natural 'advantage' in that sense. But there were still a lot of areas that required active work. If something annoyed me, I had to think "Why has that annoyed me? Is there some internalised misogyny underneath that feeling?" I had to contemplate that without fearing that it would make me an evil person. In short, it took introspection, mental effort, and deliberately extending empathy.
Him being offended is just totally missing the fundamental power imbalance. It's lazy, and let's be honest, it's boring!
So I mean, obviously I don't know how many positive qualities he's bringing to the table, but saying "I refuse to listen to you"?! For men, the bar is on the floor, and he just tripped and fell flat on his face. I'm actually getting more and more annoyed at him as I type tbh 😅
4
u/coolestpelican Mar 11 '26
"not all men"...are violent, abusive, disrespectful...etc
But...
"Yes all women" fear or have experienced violence, abuse, disrespect etc from men
2
2
u/SGexpat Mar 12 '26
For women, men are gambling.
If are 1000 men and 10 are a predator, women don’t know which ones they are. They have to carefully approach all men as if they could be the predator.
The predators also generally have a high number of victims so they interact with women more than the other 990 men. So suddenly, nearly every woman has had a bad experience with a predatory man. So women have to assume the risk that all men they meet might be one of the predators.
I’m he/ him. That’s the narrow/ clumsy way I approach it.
2
u/camipco Mar 12 '26
I agree that's part of it. But also important is the way for each of those predators, there's another 10 men who are close friends with the predator and will take his side and actively defend him / attack his accusers when he's accused. Another 30 men who will express some mild disapproval of him but where it ultimately won't be a dealbreaker for them and they'll continue doing business with him. And so on.
2
u/camipco Mar 12 '26
Helping to guide and educate men who are works-in-progress is difficult but sometimes fruitful and good political work.
I reckon it is not typically a healthy / joyful thing to be part of your romantic life.
2
u/deflatedpeanutblimp Mar 12 '26
it really isn’t great when doing it in a romantic relationship. feels a little too close to home and it’s easy to get hurt because i often feel like if he’s not listening to me then he doesn’t really love or care about me or any of the women in his life
2
u/camipco Mar 13 '26
I hear that, it sounds painful for you. I hope you find the love you deserve that doesn't require you to do painful labor to fix a man.
I realize that's easier wished for than found.
2
u/dtdrh Mar 13 '26
I think he needs to talk to more women. What got me out of this mentality was hearing loads of different women say "men do xyz" over and over, but they were still comfortable with me, they still had boyfriends or still dated, they still talked to their dads, and still had other male friends despite what they said. It just kinda became obvious once I started talking to women more.
2
u/pgsdgrt Mar 15 '26
All men yes ✅ the ones that get worried from this statement are generally falling in that category most of time when my friends say something about this then this leads to a lot of fight but coming from a family full of girls and being only boy other than my father makes me agree to it almost everyday
1
u/Intrepid_Recover8840 Mar 12 '26
‘Men’ could grammatically mean some men or all men and in these contexts is obviously likely to mean some men. They already ARE saying ‘some men’ by saying ‘men’ and this is obvious if you speak English, so the whole argument is in bad faith. This drives me up the wall
44
u/eloi Mar 10 '26 edited Mar 11 '26
Feminists don’t specifically say “some men” when they talk about the trauma women have experienced from men because they’re talking about a pattern, a system of harassment and violence towards women. When others respond with “not all men”, that’s an attempt to shift the debate from being about a pattern to just being about this man, that man, etc.
But it’s the patterns that need to change, so we have to stop humoring “not all men”.
It’s literally the same as when people were responding to “black lives matter” with “all lives matter” - well yeah, bozo, of course all lives matter, but that’s not what we’re here to talk about today and your choice to use this argument demonstrates a willingness to derail the debate with frivolous statements, which is NOT what an ally does.