It is not only your view, is “the” view, which generates a cyclical effect (as evidenced on most of — now — your words).
“Calling him a misogynist for what he said is just completely exaggerated.” — not only said. But I see in your words that you are OK with that. And that’s ok. For you, and probably for several other people, too. I respect that.
“What man has never talked dirty or sexual about a woman? Get real.” — with these words, and other words I read from you, you — or anyone else — don’t need to explicitly say that something justifies (or not) anything.
Considering your words, you are a person that considers “talk dirty,” regardless of gender, as a normal behaviour (again, “What man has never talked dirty or sexual about a woman? Get real.”).
Therefore, when you emphasize the fact that this type of behaviour is “normal,” (even implicitly) you immediately provide a justification for the happening of it, without the intention to break the cycle and, as I mentioned above, that’s ok, for you, for many others, and I respect that.
I just don’t agree. I don’t think is normal, and I do think people could behave better.
I hope you respect that too.
I truly believe that any person is allowed to prove themselves worthy of the floor they receive. I actually hope Trump will do a good job (probably others also), and I’ll praise him if that happens.
But that doesn’t mean he provides a role model concerning female (and a couple other *ales) interaction.
I believe you could (or not) agree with me that when a President acts in a way that is disrespectful against *ales, some people (not all, not much, I hope) might think it is OK for them to do the same.
And here is the issue with this type of (cyclical) behaviour.
It would be healthy if people could behave better. By keeping the cycle (saying it is normal, or simply ignoring it) there will probably be no improvement.