Why is it OK to generalize men?
Why Is It OK to Generalize Men but Not Women?
Talking to feminists often feels like a complete headache. I’ve yet to have a logical argument with one that stays rational and reaches a clear conclusion. At some point, the discussion usually devolves into hateful comments or illogical reasoning.
Take the term mansplaining as an example. Feminists seem extremely defensive of it, even though it strikes me as a sexist term. It generalizes the actions of some men to the entire male population. Whenever I bring this up, it sparks anger, and the justifications I hear boil down to something like:
“It’s valid to generalize the behavior of men because men do it all the time, and it’s harmful.”
Get Aaron Solis’s stories in your inbox
Join Medium for free to get updates from this writer.
This logic feels like third-grade reasoning. I’m still waiting for someone to justify the term mansplaining without relying on a personal anecdote or a circular argument. Just because one woman’s friend was “mansplained to” doesn’t mean it happens universally or frequently.
The same logic applies to terms like manspreading and toxic masculinity. These terms create negative stereotypes about men, yet feminists often defend them as valid because “men need to tough it out.” But what percentage of men actually engage in these behaviors? How would anyone even measure something like mansplaining?
The problem is that mansplaining is ultimately subjective. If a man explains something to two different women, one might feel talked down to, while the other might find his explanation helpful. To strip away gender, imagine Person A explaining something to Person B. How do we define when Person B should feel overexplained to or condescended to?
We could try to list toxic words or derogatory sentence structures, but what about sarcasm or tone? We could make rules, but it wouldn’t be easy, and I’ve seen no objective data from feminists proving that men frequently overexplain in a condescending way. All I hear are subjective experiences.
And that’s the point: terms like mansplaining and toxic masculinity rely on feelings and personal anecdotes. They’re built on subjective generalizations, and feminists seem to think it’s okay to generalize men based on these experiences. This is troubling because feminism is so popular right now that these generalizations are becoming widely accepted — almost in a dystopian, 1984-type way. It feels like you either agree with feminism, or you’re automatically wrong.
In the end, what this shows is a clear double standard. Society — and feminists in particular — have decided it’s perfectly acceptable to generalize men, but not women. If the roles were reversed, and men created equally negative, subjective terms to generalize women, the backlash would be overwhelming. But when men are the target, it’s considered acceptable, justified, and even necessary. This hypocrisy highlights the growing problem of one-sided discourse, where one group gets to generalize freely while others are vilified for even questioning it.
