• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    14 days ago

    Correct.

    They can’t know intent they can assume, their assumption is sexist, the term used to describe it intentionally so. That’s sexism.

    Not any woman, if you know a dude and they’re taking down to you and that’s a pattern they’re probably a misogynist. That said saying they’re mansplaining is explicitly sexist, it’s intended to be.

    You did not.

    Can I drop hard r’s based on race and perception alone, my answer is sure but you’re a racist.

    Can you use a sexist term as an insult and not be a sexist? No, the same way I can’t drop hard r’s and that’s ignoring the assumption of gender at all, what if they don’t identify as a man or don’t see you as a woman?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      14 days ago

      if you know a dude and they’re taking down to you and that’s a pattern they’re probably a misogynist.

      Okay, so if the man is “probably” being misogynistic, that’s enough that a woman can believe they are being misogynistic without herself being a bigot/sexist/misandrist?

      You did not.

      And yet, miraculously, I can produce this screenshot!

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        13 days ago

        Correct. That’s a pattern of behavior, it’s the same shit we use to define harassment. That is wholesale different that my question which is based solely on sex and perspective which in my experience is when people are said to be mansplaining. Let’s face it unless you’re fixing with your buddy the only way to use it is as an insult and gendered insults are without question sexist in the same way needlessly gendered toys are.

        Link doesn’t work for me, you know you can just link comments correct?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1
          edit-2
          3 days ago

          Correct.

          Perfect! So we agree that a woman can, without herself being a bigot/sexist/etc, believe a man is being misogynistic towards her. You also confirmed this is true for condescension.

          And as we’ve established, mansplaining is misogynistic condescension. Therefore, if it is possible for a woman to believe a man is being misogynistically condescending without herself being a bigot/sexist/etc, by definition it is possible for her to believe he is mansplaining without herself being a bigot/sexist/etc.

          You finally got there!

          Link doesn’t work for me, you know you can just link comments correct?

          You know you can just scroll up a few comments correct? But let me hold your hand some more: https://lemmy.nullspace.lol/comment/4452

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            13 days ago

            Yeah no one ever denied that.

            No. Saying they’re mansplaining is sexist. It’s a sexist term that’s my point, why are you ok being a sexist. The etymology goes back to an article where the writers intent is to fight fire with fire. To me that’s insane and just makes more sexists or racists or whatever.

            Don’t you femsplain to me! That’s appearantly not a sexist thing to say according to you n

            I could, and you could have linked the comment. What’s your point? You still dodged the question, why do you think a specifically sexist term from it’s very inception isn’t sexist. Then we move forward to why you’re on with fighting fire with fire but we haven’t gotten there because you simply refuse to accept the obvious.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              1
              edit-2
              3 days ago

              Saying they’re mansplaining is sexist.

              Then so is saying they’re being misogynistic. Simple as.

              I’ve asked you repeatedly to square up the difference, but you just keep dodging.

              I could, and you could have linked the comment. What’s your point?

              My point was obviously that you shouldn’t have needed a link or screenshot in the first place.

              You still dodged the question

              No I didn’t.

              why do you think a specifically sexist term from it’s very inception isn’t sexist

              I don’t think that.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                13 days ago

                Correct though misogynistic isn’t explicitly derogatory while mansplaining always is.

                I’ve explained it in multiple and just above as well.

                And my point is you didn’t answer the question in your linked comment either.

                Yes you did.

                So saying someone is mansplaining is sexist in the same way femsplaining is, they’re sex specific derogatory terms for things that need not be gendered.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  1
                  edit-2
                  3 days ago

                  Correct

                  Correct about what, exactly? This?

                  Then so is saying they’re being misogynistic. Simple as.

                  Because if so, then you’ve contradicted yourself.

                  misogynistic isn’t explicitly derogatory while mansplaining always is

                  So what? Plenty of derogatory words exist, that doesn’t mean using them inherently makes you a bigot/sexist/misandrist.

                  And my point is you didn’t answer the question in your linked comment either.

                  Yes I did. I even screenshotted it, and linked you to it, but for some reason you’re incapable of taking it in. Very odd indeed.

                  sex specific derogatory terms for things that need not be gendered.

                  If it wasn’t gendered, then it wouldn’t be misogynistic and therefore wouldn’t be mansplaining. It’s a specific form of misogyny, which is gendered.

                  Also, what’s femsplaining?

                  • @[email protected]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    118 hours ago

                    That particular statement, I didn’t think I’d need to explain direct responses.

                    Not at all, they can be misogynistic and you can misandrist, they aren’t mutually exclusive.

                    When it’s a sexist term you’re going to be assigned to be sexist just like I’m not stopping to ask the person dropping hard r’s if they think they’re racist. I don’t need to their actions say that much.

                    You didn’t. You tried to explain how it isn’t sexist when it is.

                    Correct, and then it also wouldn’t be a sexist slur. So femsplaining = not sexist? Uh huh, can’t wait to hear you explain that one away.

                    https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=femsplaining

                    The mras response to clearly sexist slurs which is go figure, a clearly sexist slur. Who would have guessed?