Sometimes I feel like there should be a bingo game for the tactics people use to avoid labeling themselves as something unpleasant.
There’s the one where they say that they have a friend of said sexuality/race/gender, and they don’t mind being insulted, so it’s fine. Also, those who start all of their careful sentences with, “I’m not (insert prejudice here), but…” And then there’s the all-too-common opt-out of, “But not all of us are like that.” As it’s been said commonly: not all guys.
Where does one begin with the growing phenomenon that is “not all men”? Fundamentally — as much as I hate to say this — it’s not quite wrong. Generalizing any group, no matter what that group happens to be based around, is wrong. I will fully admit this. But using this idea as a means to gag and lash out at someone is just as bad, if not worse, in my eyes.
Look at it like this: If you were punched in the nose and a parent told you that you shouldn’t be mad because not all people want to hit you, wouldn’t that throw you for a loop? Wouldn’t you want to say, “Wait a minute. I’m upset and hurt, but I shouldn’t be upset? Why, because this isn’t an issue of majority?” Such is the appealing trend of “Not All Guys.”
The fact of the matter is, when you dismiss someone to make yourself feel better, no matter the issue, there’s a problem with how you are acting, not with how they are generalizing. And yes, generalizing is essentially wrong.
Words like “always,” “every” and “never” are laced with poisonous pitfalls, and I feel that everyone should understand this. There is not going to be a full, complete, unanimous understanding of anything that contains multiple beings.
This does not — does not — give you the right to disregard someone else.