English already haz gender-neutral words for this. For an adjective, we have “condescending”. For a verb, we have pontificate, garage, bloviate, bluster, rant, etc.
Language changes and evolves over time, so we could also make a new word for this phenomenon. “Mansplaining” is unnecessary gendered slur.
Is that actually true? I’m struggling to think of any examples.
There are occasions where a technical term is used as a slur in casual conversations while still being perfectly acceptable in the original context. “Retarded” for example. That certainly does not apply here.
There’s some words that are more or less offensive in different English-speaking countries. “Cunt” and “Bloody” come to mind there. There’s also been some attempt at reclaiming “cunty” for women which… Eh, I’m just gonna stay away from that one.
“Mansplaining” is offensive from it’s very etymology. It’s baked into the word without cultural context. The word itself is formed from unnecessary and bigoted generation.
So when someone says “hey did you know 50% of the crime is committed by 13% of the population”… Sounds like they are describing a common experience. So by that logic does that mean it’s not racist to say black people are criminals? If a black person got offended by that would you tell them “we don’t need to get #notallblackpeople” about this.
For large swaths of western history Jewish people had a disproportionate control of banks and the money supply. Does this mean that the conspiracy theories about Jewish cabals controlling the world aren’t anti-Semitic?
How common does an experience have to be by your logic in order to suddenly make generalization and prejudice acceptable? If one trans person gets caught sexually assaulting a woman in a public restroom does that mean JK Rowling was suddenly right all along?
And you clearly did not understand what I wrote. I came up with the closest examples I could think of and then explained how they were not applicable to the situation.
It seems like you really just want to be able to have a little bit of bigotry, a little bit of hatred. As a treat.
Anyone can “mansplain,” so better to say “womansplain,” “non-binarysplain,” etc. as applicable.
English already haz gender-neutral words for this. For an adjective, we have “condescending”. For a verb, we have pontificate, garage, bloviate, bluster, rant, etc.
Language changes and evolves over time, so we could also make a new word for this phenomenon. “Mansplaining” is unnecessary gendered slur.
None of those words impart the same meaning as “mansplain.” A new word would be preferable.
Bloviate pretty much covers what I do on work phone calls. In my defense (mildly), I welcome whenever someone interrupts me.
“Language changes and evolves over time, so we could also make a new word for this phenomenon.”
We did, you just don’t like it.
Yes.
There’s a lot of words people have created that have been deemed hateful, bigoted, and harmful. We call these “slurs”.
And English is a very contextual language so something can be a slur in one use and not in another.
Is that actually true? I’m struggling to think of any examples.
There are occasions where a technical term is used as a slur in casual conversations while still being perfectly acceptable in the original context. “Retarded” for example. That certainly does not apply here.
There’s some words that are more or less offensive in different English-speaking countries. “Cunt” and “Bloody” come to mind there. There’s also been some attempt at reclaiming “cunty” for women which… Eh, I’m just gonna stay away from that one.
“Mansplaining” is offensive from it’s very etymology. It’s baked into the word without cultural context. The word itself is formed from unnecessary and bigoted generation.
The word is formed from an experience common enough that the word caught on overnight. We don’t need to get #notallmen about this.
(Also, “I’m struggling to think of examples”: thinks of several examples)
So when someone says “hey did you know 50% of the crime is committed by 13% of the population”… Sounds like they are describing a common experience. So by that logic does that mean it’s not racist to say black people are criminals? If a black person got offended by that would you tell them “we don’t need to get #notallblackpeople” about this.
For large swaths of western history Jewish people had a disproportionate control of banks and the money supply. Does this mean that the conspiracy theories about Jewish cabals controlling the world aren’t anti-Semitic?
How common does an experience have to be by your logic in order to suddenly make generalization and prejudice acceptable? If one trans person gets caught sexually assaulting a woman in a public restroom does that mean JK Rowling was suddenly right all along?
And you clearly did not understand what I wrote. I came up with the closest examples I could think of and then explained how they were not applicable to the situation.
It seems like you really just want to be able to have a little bit of bigotry, a little bit of hatred. As a treat.
Alright well the key difference is that males are not a historically disadvantaged class and that makes a big difference.
Do you rail against “Karen” as an insult? What about philistine, Luddite, or barbarian? Do you fight this hard against “eat the rich” or ACAB?
Is that a typo or is there a definition of garage that is synonymous with bloviate that my dictionary doesn’t list?
Lol autocorrect REALLY doesn’t like the word “harangue”
Don’t you garage to me!