Because of the current cultural context, yes. Even when you add “overall.” But I’d be completely open to you elucidating that you are referring to some non-racist point.
If there’s been a history of people stating this about a group meaning every single member, then you need to assume that’s what they mean. I don’t think that’s the case with men.
Not saying one meaning must be assumed over the other, you’ll have to depend on cultural context to understand the deeper meaning.
Compare for example “men can’t give birth” vs. “men love sports”. The former clearly intends to say “all men”, the latter intends “the group overall”.
SmoothOperator@lemmy.world 16 hours ago
As I’m clearly in the wrong according to downvotes, could you elaborate on what I’m missing?
quips@slrpnk.net 6 hours ago
I think at the core its like we are all here to be kind to one another. You can point to statistics, historical context, etc… but when it comes down to it, is calling people trash leading with kindness? Is that the kind of speech that seeds good into the world? Is that speech that betters you, men, and women? I don’t think so. I think there are far more kind and constructive ways to have dialogue.
SmoothOperator@lemmy.world 1 hour ago
It’s not kind for sure, completely agree. My point was more that even if it’s unkind, it’s not necessarily racism or bioessentialism.
I think we must be kind to individuals, but still acknowledge problems with groups. That does require a shift in mindset to not feel personally impacted by statements about a group you belong to, which is easier said than done.