If you’ve spent five minutes on social media lately, you’ve probably seen it: a male coach jumps into a women’s health conversation and opens with something like:
“If I say this, you’ll just tell me I don’t have a uterus.”
“You’ll just call me misogynist.”
It’s meant to sound brave, like they’re willing to speak “truth” despite the backlash. But in reality? It’s a conversational pre-nup that lets them dismiss any disagreement before it even happens.
This isn’t about men never contributing to conversations on women’s health. It’s about why this specific tactic is so exhausting — and why it shuts down the very dialogue they claim to want.
What This Tactic Really Does
Frames women as irrational before they’ve said a word
By preloading the conversation with “you’ll just say X,” the speaker casts any future pushback as emotional, illogical, or personal rather than legitimate critique.
Shifts the focus away from the topic
Instead of discussing the actual science, training, or lived experience in question, the conversation becomes about their hypothetical victimhood.
Creates a shield against accountability
If they’re “just going to be called misogynist” no matter what, then why bother examining whether the comment itself might actually carry bias?
Why Women Push Back
Here’s the thing:
Most women do not care if a male coach lacks a uterus.
They care if that coach lacks curiosity, empathy, and context.
When male coaches jump in with rigid takes and zero willingness to learn from lived experience, it reads as paternalistic. Especially when:
-
The population in question has been historically underserved, under-researched, and dismissed in medical and sports science.
-
We’re talking about areas where data gaps mean lived experience often fills in what research can’t yet explain.
-
The coach’s “expertise” doesn’t account for how hormonal changes, surgical menopause, or health inequities shape performance, recovery, and training needs.
What Could Happen Instead
A male coach could approach the same conversation like this:
“That’s interesting — I’ve seen X in my work, but I’m curious about your experience. Can you tell me more?”
That doesn’t mean they agree. It means they value the dialogue enough to keep the door open. And that’s how you learn things you didn’t know you didn’t know.
The Double Standard in ‘Science First’ Coaching
It’s worth noting: many of the men who pull this tactic also claim to be “science-first” coaches. But if the evidence is mixed or incomplete, they still expect women to defer to their interpretation — not to their own bodies, experiences, or the data we do have on sex differences.
That’s not science. That’s authority dressed as expertise.
Women aren’t shutting down male voices because they’re male.
They’re shutting down male voices that refuse to engage in good faith.
If you really want to contribute to the conversation? Lose the “you’ll just call me misogynist” shield. Bring your research, your experience, and your humility — and be ready to hear something that challenges you.
That’s where respect is earned.