> For us this issue is settled and there is no reason to undo the progress which has been made.
This is just an "I've made up my mind and don't want to think about it" mentality.
Overall you're missing the point: You say "For us this issue is settled" and they say the same - it just settled differently. If you're not open to explore it, do you see that it is weird to expect them to be open to changing?
> This implies that you are assuming the perspective of a person which is in favor of a patriarchal society, let's take Afghanistan for example. The people you are referring to there do certainly not want to get convinced of the opposite of their beliefs, they would be giving up (unfair) privileges.
While this may be true of Afghanistan, it is not true of the people I am talking about. But how would you know that without engaging?
> There is no value for us assume their point of view, there's nothing to gain but an understanding of which methods could exist in order to try to educate these men to make them understand that those are no human rights.
Saying "there's nothing to gain" is simply saying "I know better" without knowing perhaps half of what there is to know. Of course you do! So do they!
> You simply can't put a person with me in a room which is pro-murder and have it debate with me that it is ok.
That much is clear from your comments. But if the pro-murder person is willing to listen to you, he is already ahead of you in understanding.
> There is nothing, absolutely nothing for me to gain from his point of view, with the exception of me maybe getting to understand how a murderer thinks which could be a benefit if I would be a detective, which I am not. There's also nothing for me to gain by having some Taliban with me in a room and he trying to make me understand that women have essentially no rights. There's zero reason for me to even listen to a single word which this person has to say to me in this regard.
Going back to my original comment, your mentality is the same as those who argue the opposite. And while opaque to you, it is crystal clear to people who have lived in both societies. They have the stances you find repugnant for precisely the same reasons you have your stances - you get validation from the society you live in and are unwilling to comprehend that there can be (reasonable) other points of view.
What I think is happening is that you simply don't want to explore these issues. As I said - that is totally fine. Life is limited and we can't explore everything. But instead of stating it as your preference, you are trying to make absolutist statements about it ("not worthy of debate" "other person is ... a stupid person", etc.)