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.


Nigels everywhere!!!

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

12 thoughts on “NAMALT

  1. Well said. Not all men need to perpetrate male violence against women and girls because men’s Male Supremacist System functions very well by condoning/justifying/excusing pandemic male violence against women and girls in all its forms.

    Just as not all white men owned slaves in order to maintain slavery so it is with mens’ Male Supremacist System.

    Issue isn’t about the mythical male unicorns who claim they ‘don’t oppress women and girls’ – issue is about mens’ myriad ways of maintaining their male pseudo sex right to continue oppressing women and girls.

    But we real Feminists mustn’t say this because it supposedly upsets mens’ fragile feelings and ‘upsetting the male dominators’ is very dangerous for women because men will retaliate with real male violence being perpetrated against women and girls.

    Until such time as men en mass rise up and hold other males accountable for their perpetuation of their Male Supremacist System, we will not see any real change in males and their behaviour. Reason is because males accord themselves real socio-economic power over all women and males never willingly discard this power they accord themselves and their brothers!

    Liked by 1 person

  2. I think the underlying point within NAMALT, even though it is buried within the body of the post, is that the bar is set so very low for any male to be regarded as A Nice Guy.

    Another point that I forgot to put in the post, but one that illustrates how ‘unsisterly’ (if not outright unfeminist) NAMALT is, is that for example, if a girlfriend just poured her heart out to you about how some jerk had treated her badly, or was violent to her, or raped her – would these same women NAMALT at her? My guess is in the majority of times, no. Which would show a significant degree of anti-feminism behind it, whether they realise it or not.

    I could not contain my anger there towards the end. NAMALTing happens so frequently. And I am sick of going over the same points, so I made this post, just to linkdump the post at them.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Here is an analogy (from a dude unfortunately), via Sam Berg, that illustrates why the radfem view is a sane response to the situation:

    I think the thing people don’t realize with that bullshit “well not all guys are dangerous, you should give them a chance” or what the fuck ever is like

    if i had a plate of cookies and i was like yeah, a few of them have laxatives in them and one’s got cyanide in there, BUT THEY’RE NOT ALL LIKE THAT

    you’re probably not gonna take a fucking cookie

    Liked by 2 people

  4. If I had a nickel for every time I’ve heard NAMALT, I’d be a very wealthy woman. The logic seems to be something like this: If only one dude, living in an igloo in Antarctica, isn’t “like that”, then one cannot say “all men are scum” because dude in igloo in Antarctica!!111!!!! These idiots don’t seem to understand the concept of majority/minority opinion. They try to gaslight us, when it is blatantly obvious to anyone with half a fucking brain, that 99% of men hate women and perceive us as inferiors, who are not entitled to the same human rights as they are.

    I shouldn’t have to preface every fucking male-critical statement I make with NAMALT. On the other side of the fence, men constantly make hateful blanket statements about women (eg. “All women are whores” by Dick Masterson), without receiving much, if any, criticism. Which brings me to the point where I ask…. where are all of those “men who aren’t like that” in the comment sections of various blogs and mainstream news sites? Are they even bigger cowards than the keyboard warriors that get off on spewing misogyny on the internet, or do they just not fucking exist? Perhaps they feel a twinge of guilt, but are just too goddamn selfish, and enjoying that male privilege just a little too much to give a fuck? Yeah, that sounds about right.

    FunFems get really mad when you bust up their Unicorn Theory™.

    Liked by 2 people

  5. “Feminism is the only political movement that priorities women’s rights and needs above the mainstream (ie male domination). If you cannot do that, then don’t call yourself a feminist.” So quotable and significant. We deserve to have the standards of our movement respected as much as any other group but feminism, because women have always been expected to be anything and everything men want of them and never allowed to be authentic and individual. It is typical patriarchal bullshit that men and male identified women should push their male ideologies and call it feminism. I copy and post this quote everywhere I see false feminism, it ruffles quite a few feathers and to be honest I am glad of it.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. Pingback: No need to panic; it’s just Schrödinger’s Family Annihilator | Radfem Groundhog Day

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s