What is the problem with saying "not all men are like that" when talking about sexual harassment?

Answered in response to “What is the problem with saying "not all men are like that" when talking about sexual harassment?”

I am assuming this question is asked in light of 2014 #notallmen and #yesallwomen hashtag trends. First and utmost, it's important to note that #yesallwomen was a reaction not only to sexual harassment, but also to sexism in general and, primarily, to rape and sexual violence.

But on a more general note, to make sure we’re all on the same page: there’s a classic derailment that people with some form of privilege will often engage in when confronted with the reality of societal injustice: they will make some comment that paraphrases the sentiment “Not all [privileged group] do [injustice]! In the case of sexual violence, a man being told about sexual violence committed by a man against a woman might protest that “not all men” are sexually violent. However, this response is common in discussions about race, class, sexual orientation, etc., not just sexism.

There are a number of problems with the classic #notall response. Let's go through them:

1. Passing responsibility

Upon being told of a a horrendous, horrible problem with our society, or even just a story from an individual about a terrible thing that happened to them, instead of reacting by saying "That's awful!" or "What can I do to help?" or "Let's fix that together!" the #notall response is saying "Well, but I didn't do it, so that's not my problem."

Let's imagine a few scenarios like this:
Problem-solver: Wow, did you know that in 2011, 23% of all auto collisions involved cell phones? We should do something about that.
#notalldrivers: Not all people text and drive. I've never done that. You shouldn't be prejudiced against drivers just because some of them do crappy shit.

Problem Solver: I posted up a video to support anti-bullying efforts… I got really bullied by the football players at my school.
#notallfootballplayers: I used to play football, and I never bullied anyone. Don't judge all jocks by just your experience!

Problem Solver: The planet has been invaded by sentient space wombats who want to enslave the population! We have to organize a resistance movement!
#notallwombats: I was just sitting here eating grass! I didn't do anything!

By using #notall, the user disclaims all responsibility for what is, after all, a collective problem that needs to be addressed by the entire community in order to be solved. The fact that the user of the hashtag is not personally responsible for the problem is completely irrelevant—they still need to be part of the solution.

2. It's all about me

Not only is the #notall responder focusing on how the problem isn't their fault, they’re insisting that a conversation about the problem can't continue until everyone acknowledges that they, personally, are not to blame. In the case of sexual violence, #notallmen guy is making a conversation about horrific things that are done to women all about how he's not personally the man who hurt them.

This is basically attention-seeking behavior. This is often the same type of person who, whenever you're telling a story, can't let you get five sentences into it before talking about how a similar thing happened to them. This is annoying behavior at any time, but it's particularly grating when someone is doing it in the middle of what should be a serious, and is often a painful, conversation.

3. Derailment

Not only is #notall responder refusing to help with a general problem because it's not specifically their fault, not only are they doing it to get attention in a situation they feel isn't sufficiently focused on them—additionally, by doing this they’re actually making it harder to find a solution to the problem. Instead of working to fix the issue, or instead just standing aside and letting other people do so, they’re actively trying to delay or even halt progress by insisting that they and other people like them be absolved of blame before other people can get on with working toward equality.

4. Escalation

Frequently, the #notall response is used defensively, in anger and hostility. Now, it's not surprising that, in reaction to hearing that other people who belong to the same group you belong to have done horrific things, you might respond defensively. It's a pretty natural response—because you belong to the group, you see the group as an extension of yourself, and you respond to any criticism of any member of the group as an attack upon yourself.

But it's not. A woman saying "men have hurt women" is not saying that all men hurt women. She's not saying that you have hurt women. She's stating a painful fact because in order to solve a problem, you have to know what the problem is. Reacting defensively doesn't help the situation; rather, because you're angry and upset, the people around you are going to get angry and upset. This escalates the emotions of what was probably already a tense situation (cause, you know, talking about sexual violence and sexism is rarely a lighthearted, giddy type of conversation) and makes it much less likely that anything constructive will happen.

In conclusion
 #notallmen is a classic tactic used by men (Some men. Not all men!) to shut down productive conversations about sexism and/or transform them into nonconstructive arguments. More generally, the classic #notall response is used by privileged people to avoid joining the collective effort to make our society better, and instead focus on their own ego.

There isn’t a problem with it.
Some people just like to make factual comments out to be “evil” as part of their little white-knight crusades.

The statement by itself is factually helpful.
History has taught us to avoid generalizations that label an entire ethnicity, gender, or sexual orientation as “[X]”, where “X” is some action or observed trait.

Some people, in this case a subset of women, haven’t learned to keep this fact close at hand, and remain objective without labeling an entire gender.

Keep in mind that as I say this, I am well aware of many men and women I have met who create and hold these overarching, fallacious beliefs

There are two primary reasons an individual would say - “Not all men are like that.”

#1. The individual is worried, probably based off of a past experience, that some subset of women will judge the character of his entire gender based on the repugnant and heinous acts of a small subset of said gender.

or

#2. The individual simply wants to reinforce a maintenance towards objectivity, and away from misandry (in this case).

Despite the rhetoric and complaints about the phrase, these are wholly valid reasons to utter it.

Moving past this, is the line of frustration drawn (rightfully so) by women who merely want meaningful change and an actual addressing of the problems rather than a reinforced reminder meant to foster objectivity.

In other words, “Stop reminding us of what we already know, and start telling us what you are willing to do, or can recommend to help change it!”

Even considering the veracity of their position, attacking men who utter this phrase is completely unhelpful.

It’s divisive, rude, and to be wholly blunt, factually incorrect to come to some conclusion of where they stand or what they have to contribute based on their use of the phrase.

A man who states this, and then ambles off, or does a net of “zero” to actually effect or contribute to change is rightfully accused of “doing nothing to fix the situation”.

Whether or not he has stated “Not all men are like that.” has zero indication of whether or not they are an ally.

Period.
Close up shop.
Stop the parade.

This whole attack on the utterance of an actual fact is irrational, and makes you look like a fucking idiot.

I have seen people in this very thread try to break down the statement into what they maintain are the “reasons” or “impetus” behind the statement.

Below are some direct examples:

One poster says:
“It attempts to refocus responsibility.”

Well.
No shit.

None of us like to be associated by our group or subgroup by the heinous act of another person in said group or subgroup.
Therefore we just want to remind you that while a cultural problem absolutely exists, please do not cloud your objectivity by either emotively or contextually applying said thing to the entirety of the subgroup or group. Thanks.

They follow it up with:
“It’s an egocentric statement.”

Patently false.

Pleading with you to not apply a given trait or prejudice to a group is the exact opposite of egotism.

If the man said, “Well I don’t do that,.. so whatever.”, then yeah, he’s a dumbfuck.
That’s not what “Not all men (plural case, entire gender, pay attention) are like that.” infers, addresses, or states.

The entirety of responses here by a swath of confused people is tragically telling.

Just, please knock off this irrational crusade against an honest and factual statement.

Stop it.
Thanks.
_______________________________________________________________________________________

I am reminded of multiple circumstances where I have sat down with emotively driven people who tend to not apply a whole lot of rationality to their cognitive processes.

In the actual occurrences, both men and women were representative.

“Men just disgust me. I am so fucking sick of these assholes. All they ever want to do is get in my pants and then fucking leave!”

I felt this woman’s position.
She was looking for a meaningful relationship, and some men were exploiting her desire for intimate closeness as a way to use her body for pleasure.

I very likely did say something along the lines of, “Just please, do your best to remember that not all men are like that, ok?”
It was helpful.
It was informative, and helped keep her worldview straight by reinforcing her objectivity.

Certainly I expounded (when asked!) on things that people (not just men) commonly do that are “tells” or indicators of their actual intentions, and she was likewise grateful for that.

I have a male friend who was raped by one of his exes.
The downward spiral of his worldview, and the strong unilateral prejudices (and discomfort) formed from the sheer depravity and violation of the act are almost justifiable, and certainly understandable.

However, truth remains truth, and he did need to come back to the recognition that not every man is like that.

Regardless the screeching and screaming at men for using the term, you cannot infer, or nullify the truth that it contains.

If the man walks off after uttering it, or avoids a conversation on the matter, then and only then can you derive that they seem to be avoiding an actual conversation on the topic.

Welcome to real life, and please, for the love of humanity, stop going on these absurd SJW segues.

Many great answers here, here's another idea.

Imagine that a serial killer escapes from a prison not far from your house. And, (oops!) the police have lost all photos of this person, so no one knows what they look like. Literally anyone could be a serial killer. Obviously, most people are not, but you really don't know who is and who isn't. It's not like serial killers introduce themselves!

So you're walking down the street at night, and someone is walking a few metres behind you. There's a serial killer on the loose, and while there's a very good chance that the person behind you isn't a serial killer, you don't know for sure. Probably some pretty scary thoughts go through your mind.

Of course, most people are not serial killers. And most men are not rapists. But they are out there, we don't know what they look like, and they also don't introduce themselves. So I really don't know if you are a rapist or not, until you act in one way or the other. So aside from all the other good reasons listed in the other answers, "not all men" is also a red herring, that says "you should trust me, because I'm one of the good ones", but I still don't know that until you act like a baseline decent person and never rape me. Actions mean so much more than words, and "not all men" is trying to get away with being seen as trustworthy, without doing anything to deserve that trust.

As an aside, I think this comes mostly from men who find it difficult to imagine what the world might be like from a female perspective. Imagine living (like Louis CK suggested) in a world where you can only date lions or bears. Maybe the lion you go out with this week will turn out to be one of the good ones, but they still have the capacity to physically hurt or dominate you, and they know it. At some point most women decide to risk the possibility that this lion will hurt them, and give them a chance to prove otherwise. Like Margaret Atwood said: "Men are afraid that women will laugh at them. Women are afraid that men will kill them".

Edited to say: I wrote this before the Louis CK scandal, but I’ve left my paraphrasing of one of his jokes in here. I think his name in here gives a bit of extra weight to the argument: we really don’t know who the good guys are until they prove themselves otherwise.

See also:
Schroedinger's rapist
And:
For those who don't understand Schroedinger's rapist

(edited to tidy up the formatting of the links)

The main problem is that when someone makes a hurtful sweeping generalization about a gender, and you point out the fact that it is incorrect, well that person just gets annoyed at being proven wrong, and gets further entrenched in their position, finding ways to rationalize it.

Often it is easier to find someone to blame than to actually fix a problem. Most of our justice system is based on finding someone to blame and punishing them, instead of preventing the issues. So it is no wonder that people think like that.

With sexual harassment, or rape, it is much easier to just say “men are to blame” and consider the issue resolved, rather than admitting that any human is capable of that behavior, and finding ways to prevent it.

Blaming groups of people is easier than finding solutions. Those people may cry out in outrage at being blamed for the sins of others, but since they are considered the enemy, their voice doesnt count.

Usually, it is more efficient to simply agree. If someone says that women are right to be scared of men in the streets, it is better to agree with them. Go full speed in their direction. “Yes you are right, since all men are potential rapists, women should be scared in the streets, and since crimes happen more often at home by someone known, they should be even more scared there! What can we do, should we lock up all men preemptively? Should we throw young boys in cages and only let them out once they have somehow proven that they wont rape anyone in the future?“ At that point, they will usually reconsider, and agree themselves that perhaps that is going a little bit far, maybe not all men should be punished, maybe we can focus on the inappropriate behaviors, and how to stop them.