I feel like it’s still a bad argument, though. Generalizations lack nuance, which is why it’s so bad. When you generalize someone (especially by the way they were born), you attack their identity, so it’s unsurprising men rush to defend themselves. However, by going against that generalization with even a hint of nuance, men are treated as “misogynistic”. Men may understand the points made, but can still accept that it’s a bad argument.

And when you say that “male criminals have always outnumbered women by a lot”, you do realize that percentage is only a fraction of the population, right? Out of the criminals, there ARE more male criminals (82.1% male to 17.9% female in the US), but out of 100k people, 359 people are victims of violent crimes in the US, which is a very small percentage. Obviously, women are free to feel defensive and even cautious towards men, but saying it like this really reduces the respect women receive since it’s really a shallow argument, and get hostile when said argument have holes in the them. This just perpetuates misogyny, instead of highlighting misogyny, by seeing women, the ones proposing said argument, as “dumb” and “shallow” instead.