NAMALT – internet (feminist) shorthand for ‘Not All Men Are Like That’. Yes, it got its own acronym because of its frequent use, particularly in feminist spaces, but also generally, as most reports of some male doing something really bad to females usually go to great pains to ‘other’ the offender from the rest of the herd (of males). Either that, or he is painted as some ‘poor innocent man wrongly accused’ (maybe it needs its own acronym, PIMWA?)

The use of NAMALT within general feminist spaces is beyond compulsion, it borders upon pathological need, more about in a second.

NAMALTs usually happen within the context of explaining how widespread a problem is with males; male supremacy; or male violence. If too many women are agreeing that this is indeed a widespread problem with males in general, then one or more NAMALTers rush in, and, well, just NAMALT.

Once the NAMALTing starts, it becomes a tsunami of NALMATing, NIGELs and UNICORNs.

NIGEL is feminist internet shorthand for NIcest Guy who Ever Lived. And Unicorns, apart from the pink sparky ponies shoved at girls, are apparently these very special pro-feminist men that are shoved at radfems, who are understandably sceptical that such pure creatures exist.

NAMALTing (and NIGELing and UNICORNing) are a pathological need for the NAMALTer to convince herself, more than the audience, that such a ‘majority’ exception exists. She is invested in the males in her life, be they husband or sons usually, and she must at all costs subconsciously separate those males that she knows as ‘different’ to ‘those nasty men who uphold patriarchy’.

Sad news bulletin – All males benefit from patriarchy. It is their birthright under patriarchy, that no matter what class or race they belong to, they will always be ‘one up’ on the females of that class or race. Sure, you can put untold effort into raising ‘feminist boys’, but your influence will pale into comparison once they are accepted into the brotherhood. Or start watching porn, the absent babysitter for turning males into misogynists. The odds are greatly stacked against you raising ‘feminist boys’.

The method by which NAMALTing or NIGELing get any ground, is that the bar is set very low indeed for ‘Good Men’. Basically, they just don’t have to rape or beat anyone to be considered ‘good’. The media does their job helping out with the delusion, distancing ‘evil men’ from the rest of the pack. Heaven forbid that women en masse wake up to the scam going on here, that ‘good men’ really are not doing anything at all for the plight of anyone but themselves, unless it affects them directly, don’t expect any action.

After all, even if we were to buy into the Equality scam (that feminism is supposed to be about), then where are these scores of Good Men protesting at the wage gap for females? I hear crickets, 40 years now and still only a percentage of the male wage. A small number might speak out about male violence, but only after it has affected themselves in some way, before that, crickets again. And where are the online Unicorns, each and every time a feminist gets attacked by male supremacists (or even trans activists) for speaking out? Again, the crickets are deafening.

Sure, the males in your life might not beat or rape you, but what else are they doing, of their own accord, within either social justice or particularly feminism? They do not deserve the mantle of Nice Guy unless they are doing this each and every day (as most of us feminists do), and without thanks (ie ‘cookies’ in feminist internet speak). Too many liberal feminists are willing to shower these dudes with cookies for doing so very little, apart from their own notoriety. See every liberal feminist that ever supported Hugo Schwyzer – creepy predator hiding in plain sight. Yeah, he even tried to murder a female friend of his once. Not a Nice Guy, but always held up as an example of Unicornism. pffft. Scratch the surface of most of these Unicorns, and not so glittery.

NAMALT is also reactionary – it is reactionary against Second Wave Feminism, where the Second Wave Feminists were routinely criticised as ‘hairy legged man haters’ in order to silence them and dismiss the ideas they had. The phenomenon of NAMALTing is also the phenomenon of stating NAFALT (Not All Feminists Are Like That), ie, not being one of those nasty manhater types of feminists. Yeah sure, we get it. Your ‘feminist’ politics are ‘man friendly’. They are also bullshit. Feminism is the only political movement that prioritises women’s rights and needs above the mainstream (ie male domination). If you cannot do that, then don’t call yourself a feminist.

NAMALT is also dangerous for females generally. NAMALT lulls females into a false sense of security, not all dudes are like that, this one seems fine, until they have found themselves in a bad situation. Because the onus is then on women and girls to ‘know’, from sight or even behaviour, which males are dangerous and which ones are not. It is a form of woman-blaming. Ted Bundy was notoriously charming towards his victims, and they mostly went with him willingly – he was after all, what seemed to be a Nice Guy, and because NAMALT, he seemed to be in the NAMALT category. There is absolutely no certain way to be able to tell a male predator from any other dude on the planet. None at all.

NAMALT is frequently said to women who have had really bad experiences with men (rape or domestic violence). NAMALT is a way to put them back into harm’s way again. After all, NAMALT. Worse for them if they happen to luck out with the next try, they get blamed for ‘choosing wrongly’, ie woman-blaming again – none of the blame ever goes to the big pool of dodgy males out there to choose from.

And finally, NAMALT is a way to distract from the scale of the problem. Apart from all the so-called Nice Guys doing jackshit to earn the title, the absolute volume of rapists and wifebeaters is not some small minority. The math of so many female victims does not add up with ‘just a few bad men’. There are a lot of them. Everywhere. In all walks of life. It is time to come to grips with the scale of the problem.

NAMALT is not the majority, it is at best, a minority. Hence the need for feminism to address male violence, male entitlement. Otherwise, if the Nice Guys were the majority, we would not have these rampant problems. And after 40 years, we would easily have equal pay, equal work opportunies. Rape conviction rates would not be in single digit percentages.

NAMALTing is at its core, anti-feminist and anti-woman. Think about that the next time you defend males particularly in a feminist space.

=========

ETA: Now, I don’t normally link to posts written by men, but under the circumstances of the NAMALTers, who really only listen to what men tell them—this post over at Meghan Murphy’s Feminist Current, is very good. Yes all men. All men benefit from patriarchy.

It is ‘all men’: Our culture of predatory misogyny