Antisexism

I wonder if part of that comes from the top bar, it being 90% white when 10% red primes thinking about it as portion of the population whereas (at least how I believe you are describing it) the second graph is about depicting more of the spectrum of the different stances without regard to population size. I wonder if making the first bar 50-50 would help clarify that it's moreso showing the view of either your evil or you arnt.

Honestly, trans men aren't much better. I've talked to others about the rampant sexism in the gay community especially against trans masculine and nonbinary people. The response I got from trans men was defensiveness and my comments being deleted. A lot of men (not all) can't take criticism.

This is a post about violence towards women by men.

It's a post about men being predators. Women are not mentioned. You are the one showing your true colors by assuming women are the only people who can be preyed upon.

If you're going to be haughty and dismissive, you should at least make sure you are right first.

I’m exhausted at the “you’re all rapists and if you say otherwise you’re attacking us”

Fuck off with this divisive straw man shit.

The irony of this post is it goes “there’s no black and white”, then creates a new black and white with different goal posts.

You can’t accuse an entire sex (except generously 10%) of being evil then pretend that they shouldn’t be offended by it. Nobody is saying there aren’t bad men, but this is just complete unhealthy misandry.

Yes, there are problematic behaviours and it is absolutely not black and white, but seriously? Swap out the group to any other group and this is offensive and clearly wrong.

While it might be phrased unfortunately, I think "you're no angle either" is a natural way to respond to a verbal (image-based?) attack.

If you compare the colors top and bottom, the amount of 'good men' go from 90% down to 10%, with only 'heroic men' still getting the pure white color. Or in other words: "You are part predator, if you're not a hero".

But people - in general - like to hang with others that are similar to them. So, if you're e.g. a 'Well-meaning man', you will mostly enjoy the presence of 'well-meaning men', 'heroic men' and 'unfortunate fact men', with very very little amount of actual predators.

And since men usually don't start with "What's your stance on violence against women", to men, the top bar is their true experience: You're a good guy, until you're not.

And, the female impression is probably wrong, too. Since they're women, predators will actively seek them out.

So, the question then remains: What is the purpose of this post for men?
It makes sense in an all-women space. It validates the female viewpoint, and thus allows everyone to vent and grief their experience.

But men can only maybe define themselves as part predator and move on, because this post doesn't help transition our point of view towards the bottom one.

It just says: men are wrong, here is the truth, thus the reaction you got.

I think, in male or mixed spaces, a post would provoke less of this kind of reaction, if it would first validate men's viewpoint and then helps them - without invalidating their experience - explain the true population and women's experience.

Even better, if it removes men's worries about transitioning towards being a 'heroic men' and gives them a guide on how to recognize, stop and therapy predators.

After all, if only 10% of men you encounter are active predators, you will need some good training just to spot them when they're not 'on the hunt'.

This is a post about violence towards women.

Not true. The post is about male predators and victims. Doesn't mention the gender of the victims as it shouldn't, because it is irrelevant.

We’re all assholes sometimes, other times more heroic.

In the sense that a person has no single defined position on the chart? Yes

In the sense that two people cannot have different average positions? No