Did you notice how the 'group of men' from which she drew her empathy observations, that she then generalized to the entire male population, were all admitted abusers? :floorlaugh:
When you hear someone -- nice helping lady that she is -- generalize like that, just remove the word "men" and substitute "Jews" or "Blacks" for the full effect.
That's the essence of bigotry: Unwarranted generalization from a sample that may or may not be representative to a group that the bigot identifies they belong to, with a heaping great dollop of confirmation bias and selection fallacy to weed out counterexamples.
For example, you can make a great case for black people being criminal, provided you 1. Notice the black criminals 2. Ignore the non-black criminals 3. Disregard more causal categories such as poverty and, well, let's face it, racism. 4. Ignore the black people who aren't criminals.
When you assume all abusers are male, and totally ignore non-male abusers, and discount other factors such as drug use and alcohol abuse that might be more causative than gender, and then define everything in such a way to preserve your biased (perhaps anti-male) world-view, such as by refusing to define any act that is objectively abusive as abusive, provided the person committing said acts has a vagina (and define anything the penile-enabled do as abusive) , you can justify anything to yourself.
Like throwing a dead guy under the bus to help out the nice girl psychopath.
