Ok, but the point is that you're ignoring the fact that women are being targeted here in favor of a middling "baseline" that refuses to actually address the issue at hand. Clearly they respect men, they think that women are clay to be molded in their personal image. Why should I tell them to respect men when they're already way past that point? It's like me telling Usain Bolt, "Hey man, don't run slow".
They do not respect their own intelligence if they subscribe to that sort of thinking.
I have never told you that you should tell them to respect men, and I don't really even know how you've come up with that based on what I've written. I suppose it is one of these preconceived American debates, that I often find myself subjected to here.
I've spoken of the practicality of remaining a neutral observer, and an objective judge of other people's character, at a time when people struggle to uphold standards without submitting to hypocrisy. With neither respect nor disrespect granted to people, until warranted.
That is not to say that standards should not exist, but the problem with upholding the standards as of now, is that upholding such standards would likely come off as even more offensive and inconvenient to women than the men. I do not think that women are particularly interested in a general debate about "respect for men", any more so (or even less so) than men are in a debate about respect for women.
Until both genders show a willingness to uphold a standard of conduct, neutrality appears the best alternative. If it were only men who did so in disproportion, we would only serve to enable these sorts of "MGTOW" movements, as a result of the created double standards.
This is the problem that I think a lot of people are afraid to address. If you acknowledge that this subset of people exist, and that it's an attractive doctrine to downtrodden dudes, then you might have to reconsider your stances entirely when you realize that these people exist and they might be your friends and neighbors. It's easy to say "Well, respect all people" when you're not the one in the crosshairs, and honestly I fail to see how ignoring the concerns of someone on grounds that you just don't want to deal with it is showing them any respect. That seems like a pretty arbitrary standard if you really think about it.
From a practical point of view, what I can say is that I have certainly had far greater results in changing the mind of a "misogynist" by appealing to their rationality rather than idealism or sentimentality. They find themselves, ultimately, more offended by their own hypocrisy and weakness of thought, than their deemed disrespect of others or even lack of results. Which is quite common to men, really. They often prefer boiling in their own grease, rather than submitting to another's will in order to find salvation.
Appealing to their "better sense", their lost chivalry, or even lost opportunities, will usually be received with sneers and contempt. But when made to appear intellectually fragile, these men show a much greater desire to re-evaluate their ideas.
