Pretend for the moment we're in some crazy mirror world where women are frequently mistreated, in ways that many well-meaning men don't see. In this world, it makes sense for a woman to lecture those well-meaning men about empathy - to ask them not to tell women what to feel - because they're just missing some basic information.
Pretend for a moment we're in some crazy mirror world where whites are frequently mistreated, in ways that many well-meaning blacks don't see. In this world, it makes sense for a white to lecture those well-meaning blacks about empathy - to ask them not to tell whites how to feel - because they're just missing some basic information.
No, wait, that would be racist.
But your version magically is not sexist?
Edit: To the folks downvoting this without being able to offer a counterpoint: that strong negative emotion you're feeling? That's called cognitive dissonance.
There is no misunderstanding. The parent comment is trying to reinforce the practice of pitting the genders against each other and continues to argue that men need condescendingly "lectured" on the matter.
My change in wording is meant to show how ridiculous a notion that is. Sexist remarks in articles such as this are getting a free pass because at one time feminism served a purpose, and today's hypersensitive political-correctness puts it above reproach. But when you take those same statements and put them on an axis of racism, their nature is revealed.
The view of the piece's author is that there are things going on that women experience that some men are not aware of. She is trying to explain those things.
You feel this is being "condescendingly lectured", and I don't see a way around it. Being receptive to someone explaining something to you requires that you: 1. acknowledge you do not know or understand that thing; 2. acknowledge that the other person does; 3. are willing to receive that knowledge from the other person. If you are not willing to grant any one of those, you will feel the other person is being condescending.
I feel like you've ignored everything I've said up to this point. If the article had simply been an account of those four women's experiences, I would likely have no criticisms of it.
Instead, it's written as a hit piece and men are the target. I know exactly how hyperbolic that sounds, but it is the truth.
At every opportunity, men are painted as the problem: men aren't listening, men aren't doing this, men are saying that, men need to read this entire article of Do's and Don'ts to dictate their behavior towards women.
See my other comment in this thread[1] for just a few excerpts from the article I take issue with. I could provide more, as that's only going as far as the very first anecdotal account, but I would think they would be sufficiently convincing.
