I hate how the term “mansplaining” has mutated from “When a man condescendingly explains a subject to a woman who is an expert in that subject, because he assumes being a woman makes her ignorant”, which is certainly a valid thing to be upset about, into “Whenever a man explains anything to any woman” , which is sexist and divisive.
The term is still pretty sexist as originally used though. It inherently implies that it’s a characteristic masculine behavior. If you disagree, allow me to demonstrate:
I just came up with this term, “womancomplaining”, it’s when a woman exaggerates a minor inconvenience into a targeted victimization.
How does that term make you feel? Does it seem to imply that I’m talking about a specific, isolated behavior? Or does it seem more like I’m implying this is a characteristic feminine behavior? Would it feel less sexist if I insisted I wasn’t talking about all women, but if you take offense then maybe you feel defensive about being a womancomplainer? What if I told you to calm down, because if you aren’t guilty of it then I’m not talking about you?
It still seems pretty sexist, doesn’t it.
I think the insulting part of mansplaining is the assumptive nature of it.
This can all be avoided by a soft check before explaining something, rather than assuming a boy/girl/chimp wouldn’t know the first thing about welding/cooking/crochet/throwing feces.
Whenever I have the urge to info dump about a topic I’ll probe with a, ‘You may very well know more about this than I, please let me know before it becomes tiresome.’ 10 out of 10 it works, and usually both of us learn something.
That often doesn’t really work though.
Take for example the classic tech support situation.
- Person with problem: “The remote connection to the device doesn’t work!”
- Tech support: “Are you sure the device is turned on?”
- Person with problem (getting angry): “Of course it’s on. Do you think I’m stupid?”
- Tech support: “Is it the device I see on the background of the video call?”
- Person with problem: “Yes”
- Tech support: “The lights are not on. Please double check if it’s turned on.”
- Person with problem: “Oh, I forgot to plug it in.”
A soft check would have lead the tech support to accept that the device is on, instead of digging further, and it would have lead to potentially hours of wasted time.
The same thing often happens in such situations. The person infodumping does so to clear up potential underlying misunderstandings that a soft check cannot catch. That’s not evil or mean or condescending. It’s done with the clear understanding that the person you are talking to likely knows 95% of the things you are saying, but that the remaining 5% might be an issue and a soft-check fails every single time for that kind of issue.
But it’s also a reverse issue. Many women reflexively assume that any time someone infodumps that person is only doing that to them, because they are women and because that man thinks that women are dumb. Even if that man does the same with other men.
The amount of times i had to explain to phone company customers that their phone line malfunction, which they were reporting from said phone line, was monetary in nature…
I just asume whatever I say is dumb and wrong, so I don’t explain things anymore, I let people find out the hard way, and then act like I didn’t see it coming.
Misogynists and misandrists are both awful. It’s kinda funny cuz they’re essentially the same type of person but on opposite sides
I don’t really see people use the term mansplain to mean anything other than men being condescending. While I do see it used “incorrectly” sometimes, I have no reason to believe the person using it doesn’t believe the man is being rude/condescending. Just because I personally believe something isn’t condescending doesn’t mean the person doesn’t view it like that (and whether the person is actually being condescending is a totally different topic). I see people call people assholes when they’re not being assholes. I see people call people jerks when they’re not being jerks. It’s not really a new thing.
In short, I don’t believe anyone is using the term differently, it could be that you don’t think the man doing the explaining is being condescending but they do, or it could be that the term really is used differently and I just haven’t personally seen it (always a possibility).
I have no reason to believe the person using it doesn’t believe the man is being rude/condescending. Just because I personally believe something isn’t condescending doesn’t mean the person doesn’t view it like that (and whether the person is actually being condescending is a totally different topic).
There are a lot of insecure people in the world, to whom any explanation feels condescending. Are we really suggesting that the perception of the recipient is more valid than the intent of the subject? That’s kinda the whole problem.
Is it mansplaining for a man who’s been a physical trainer for years to explain to a woman that she’s about to seriously hurt herself with improper form? He knows what he’s talking about, she’s definitely going to hurt herself, his tone is polite but urgent, and the intent is sincerely to help her avoid that. Is her feeling that he’s being condescending by criticizing her form enough to make him a mansplainer?
it could be that the term really is used differently and I just haven’t personally seen it (always a possibility).
I have personally seen it. I’ve personally been accused of mansplaining when correcting someone on something I know a great deal about, and immediately after watching them do it very wrong. Honestly I’ve probably seen it used defensively to delegitimize the man in question much more often than I’ve seen actual mansplaining.
I’m not saying it’s not a real phenomenon, but it seems more often to be a term used to shut down legitimate communication.
Your observation is valid, but it would be fair to admit that as you’re not on the receiving end, you might not notice all the occasions women get real condescending mansplaining because it doesn’t touch you personally as much.
I have personally seen it. I’ve personally been accused of mansplaining when correcting someone on something I know a great deal about, and immediately after watching them do it very wrong. Honestly I’ve probably seen it used defensively to delegitimize the man in question much more often than I’ve seen actual mansplaining.
I’m not saying it’s not a real phenomenon, but it seems more often to be a term used to shut down legitimate communication.
I’ve seen this one, too. There are women out there who are using this concept (and the concept of “old white men”) to shield themselves from every form of critique, even if they were totally wrong. There are men out there who are behaving idiotic, but there are also women out there who are behaving idiotic. And I feel that the concept of mansplaining is getting abused by idiotic women and is therefore used against “innocent” men who really want to help. Esp. in the internet the concept is often used as “you are not allowed to say anything because you are a man” and that totally is not helping anyone. Women are getting frustrated because of course the other side will react negatively when you are communicating like that and men totally will think that those feminists are really big idiots.
Are we really suggesting that the perception of the recipient is more valid than the intent of the subject? That’s kinda the whole problem.
When the topic is “do people use the term mansplaining to describe men explaining something without being condescending”, yes.
Is it mansplaining for a man who’s been a physical trainer for years to explain to a woman that she’s about to seriously hurt herself with improper form?
This is why I said
and whether the person is actually being condescending is a totally different topic
For the topic we’re talking about (do people use the term to describe men explaining things while not being condescending), if the woman in that example thought the man was being condescending and thought she knew better, she’d be using the term properly as you describe it should be used. That’s the point I’m trying to illustrate. In her mind she views the man as being condescending. In her mind she believes she knows better. So she’s using the term correctly.
Now to be clear, I’m not saying it is mansplaining. Nor am I saying the man shouldn’t be doing it in that scenario.
In her mind she views the man as being condescending. In her mind she believes she knows better. So she’s using the term correctly.
Now to be clear, I’m not saying it is mansplaining. Nor am I saying the man shouldn’t be doing it in that scenario.
That’s my point. It’s being used far too liberally. I’m not saying they don’t feel justified in using it, I’m saying that the standard being applied is far too low, and it shuts down legitimate communication. It has the built in defense of delegitimizing any attempts at clarification, because obviously the mansplainer is just mansplaining how he isn’t mansplaining.
To go back to my analogy:
Would you likewise agree that a man would be justified in accusing a woman, with an accurate and valid complaint, of womancomplaining simply because he felt she was exaggerating? And couldn’t he then go on to deflect any clarification she offers as further womancomplaining?
I’m not saying these people don’t feel like they’re using their terms correctly, I’m saying that it shuts down communication and accelerates the weaponization of accusation. It contributes to the gender divide, and has certainly helped to nudge men towards man-o-sphere radicalization.
I don’t mean to address any of your points with this reply, I just want to point out that men regularly accuse women of “womancomplaining” or “being too emotional” or “being hysterical.” A lot of women were lobotomised because of this kind of thing.
Yes, and it’s a bad thing. That’s my point.
You say that’s your point but,
Would you likewise agree that a man would be justified in accusing a woman, with an accurate and valid complaint, of womancomplaining simply because he felt she was exaggerating?
I’ve made it extremely clear, multiple times that I am not commenting on whether I believe anything to actually be mansplaining. By your definition of how people should use your hypothetical example term, the person in your example would be using it correctly.
I haven’t been discussing whether I think it’s a good term or bad term, that’s a different and unrelated topic, I am only talking about whether people “use it differently” now than they used to.
We agree that “mansplaining” means “When a man condescendingly explains a subject to a woman who is an expert in that subject, because he assumes being a woman makes her ignorant”.
I’m saying “condescendingly” is defined by intent, even subconscious.
You’re saying “condescendingly” is defined by perception, even inaccurate.
When I say it is being used differently, I’m talking about the shift from my definition of “condescendingly” to yours.
Although, there’s also the “who is an expert in that subject” modifier on “woman” that has definitely been dropped in contemporary usage as well.
No, I’m not saying that. I’m saying there is not some objective way for someone to know someone else’s intentions. Say you believe something is a fire hazard. You say “that’s a fire hazard.” Turns out it’s not a fire hazard. Have you used the term fire hazard differently than everyone else? No, of course not! You still used it to describe something you believed was a fire hazard, you were just mistaken about whether it was a fire hazard.
I’m saying people who use the term mansplain aren’t using it differently, they actually do believe the person talking to them is condescending.
You’re trying to make this about whether someone is correct in their assessment of whether someone is being condescending. I’ve said it multiple times that I’m talking about how people use it and not whether people agree that they’re correct.
If a woman says a man mansplained something and she believes the man is being condescending, then she’s using the same definition you just said we agree on. Full stop. I don’t believe women use the term differently. It does not matter what the intentions were. I am also not saying she would be right or wrong. Because all I have been talking about is how the term is used.
If you hear a woman say something was mansplaining but you don’t agree that the man was being condescending, that’s okay, there’s nothing inherently wrong with that. But it doesn’t mean she was using the term to describe something that wasn’t condescending. It just means you disagree that the man was being condescending.
Since the gendered nature of the term has been brought up, your comment makes me think of the word “bitch” compared to asshole or jerk. All three terms get used entirely subjectively, but I think most reasonable people agree that “bitch” is at least a bit more crass and tasteless due to its more gendered nature. I know we’ll never get rid of ugly words when using words to hurt and offend, but I think it does show that it matters if a term is gendered. So maybe when people are offended by a term being gendered, we should listen no matter their gender. And I think people who like using those terms, especially when told they’re hurtful, should have a long think about what feelings they get from using them.
It just made me think so I wanted to write that out.
I always like to think of notions like “mansplaining” as social weapons. They can be used against injustice, and they can be used to create it; the outcome varies on the morality or cognitive ability of the person using it.
The judges are out on how it is being used; however, one can be delightfully certain that the Dunning-Kruger effect is in play somewhere whenever the term is used. Which party - who can say?
The post says “basic things”
Tricky - basic is very contextual. Basic to an electrician isn’t basic to a plumber!
Right, so a man talking to a woman in the same field shouldn’t explain what is basic in their field. That is mansplaining. Mansplaining is contextual.
It is used much more freely than that. I agree that it’s a problem when it actually happens, but I’d argue the accurate use of the term is not the typical one.
I agree that it’s not always used accurately. I read your other responses and I honestly used to have the same beliefs as you, but I really tried to observe and listen openly the past few years and it shifted my perspective.
Mansplaining is a real problem. If you try to observe social interactions in detail, you’ll notice it more and more often, you’ll even catch yourself doing it. A lot of men really talk very differently to women than other men.
When so many women come out and talk about this issue, they’re not all wrong. I find it kind of ironic that a lot of times, they’re dismissed because men feel the urge to explain and tell them they’re over-reacting.
Sidenote as a response to one of your other replies: I believe that the way the message is perceived is more important than the intent of the message. My intent with this reply is to help you try to think and observe this issue more openly. If it is perceived as attacking your beliefs and putting you on the defensive, then it obviously wasn’t the right message to get through to you. I don’t mean to be condescending, but I’m sure these same words may be condescending to some people. I’m just not the right person to get through to those people on this issue.
Mansplaining is a real problem.
I get that, I do not disagree. My main complaints are:
1 With the term itself, because a la my “womancomplaining” analogy, it shifts the focus from “this man was being a sexist, condescending asshole” to “being a sexist condescending asshole is just a thing men do”
2 With the overuse which is used to broadly dismiss legitimate attempts at communication. It’s definitely a problem when random guys try to explain a woman’s specialty to her, not so much when an man with expertise tries to correct a woman who’s definitely wrong. The problem isn’t that this behavior is being called out when it happens, I’m totally fine with that (though the term itself is still sexist). The problem is that it’s being used to defect legitimate communication.
I believe that the way the message is perceived is more important than the intent of the message. My intent with this reply is to help you try to think and observe this issue more openly.
I appreciate that, but I’ve done that. I understand that it’s important to be empathetic, I try to myself whenever possible. But communication breaks down when you pander to everyone for the sake of the most sensitive perceiver. No one can control how someone else feels, and you can’t know who is going to feel what way. If everyone treated each other in the gentlest way possible no one could effectively communicate.
Conflict is necessary for improvement. You cannot progress without some disagreement with the current state. If someone is wrong, and no one wants to hurt their feelings by correcting them, they will continue being wrong. In another message, I used the example of a person about to lift weights with a terrible form that was sure to cause them avoidable injury. An expert onlooker holding their tongue for fear of seeming condescending spares the lifter the feeling of being talked down to, but replaces that with serious self-injury.
I don’t mean to be condescending, but I’m sure these same words may be condescending to some people.
This is a perfect illustration. You’ve been nothing but patient and gentle, you haven’t said anything condescending, but you’re still worried that I might think it is, even after I’ve shown clear objection to that kind of hypersensitivity. It’s infantilizing in its own way to treat everyone as if they can’t handle the slightest disagreement without being offended. The whole premise of moderating your communication to avoid offending the most sensitive perceiver grinds effective communication among equals to a halt.
I can understand your first point, but being sexist condescending assholes seems to be more of a thing men do, and obviously this was experienced by enough women for someone to coin the term and have it become an immediately relatable experience. You could definitely rephrase it to be something less sexist like “condes-plaining” (work in progress), but it loses the inherent nature of pointing out that it is something women are experiencing from men. I also agree with you that overuse of the term would be bad. I think I disagree that the term is being overused. Every term is used incorrectly in places. I know this is anecdotal, but I haven’t seen or experienced the term being used inaccurately all that often.
For the second half of our discussion, I think I should clarify that I was talking from a one-on-one conversational perspective, not a lecture hall, group discussion, or a friend group. I think those environments are very different and while perception also matters there, it would be a different kind of discussion. A one-one conversation like a gym trainer calling out someone with bad form could go like: “You know, that’s terrible form, here’s how you do it the right way” versus “Hey, excuse me, I noticed your form isn’t safe and could lead to injury. Would you like some help?” I think both ways get the point across, one of them is a lot nicer than the other.
I believe your communication should pander to the person you’re addressing, if you are trying to have a constructive conversation. You can disagree with someone and present it in about a million different ways - some of them might be offensive to that person, others might be well-received. The reason I mentioned that my words may be condescending to some people was not out of worry or fear of offending you, but as a point that different people expect communication in different ways.
I think you’re doing the same thing subconsciously, you’re saying things in a concise and respectful way such that you believe will be perceived well by me. You could say the same thing in ways I’d find incredibly rude, and we would not be having a constructive discussion. Now if someone finds what you’re saying offensive when you’re not trying to be offensive, then you can either rephrase yourself or accept that you won’t be able to effectively communicate with that person one-on-one.
Basic to who, the man or the woman? How does one know what another deems basic? What appears basic to you is not likely to be so for me, and the converse of this is also likely true.
Better said that mansplaining is a post-hoc label applied to an event with a presumption of intent on the speaking party made. One can liken it to “are you looking at me pal?”, but more socially acceptable.
I think every field has things that are pretty universally understood to be basic. If you and I are in computer science and I’m explaining how a keyboard works to you unsolicited, that’s pretty basic stuff and I would be mansplaining.
I’ve had arguments with colleagues over things I assumed were basic and blindingly obvious.
Never assume someone knows something.
In addition to “basic” being relative, I was also speaking more generally about the concept, not purely about the exact post.
To be fair. The only place i see mansplaining ( first kind. The second one is just to try finding a stick to kick a dog. ) is online. I see and talk to man … also i see womancoplaining online all the time.
Actually, no. I love explaining things, it’s part of my personality. But soo many women told me that I should stop mansplaining, that nowadays I just don’t talk to women anymore because of the fear that they see me as a mansplainer. My girlfriend has to live with that, but otherwise, I hate talking to women because of the stupid mansplaining thing. It’s sexist as fuck and I hate the term.
So there are woman irl that really stop a dude talking with the id he is msng
Luckily I never do mansplaining because I don’t understand how anything works.
Women often complain that when they go to home depot the workers always ask what project they are doing and walk them through how to do it instead of just pointing them to the product they are looking for.
Honestly I’d love nothing more than for a Home Depot worker to ask me about my project and walk me through how to do it. It would save me the inevitable return trip(s) to pick up that one part or tool I didn’t think about.
But I understand that it could be seen as condescending if you do know what you’re doing and just need help finding the thing you already know you need.
So many likes under this toxic shit post, though comments section is full of people with valid conclusions
It’s super easy not to mansplain. When you bring up a subject, just ask if they know about it, then segue into a conversation where you can both participate.
So I’ve noticed this post isn’t going over very well. I’d like to add a female perspective.
“Mansplain” isn’t meant to say you info dump or over explain a thing. It means that you assume you know more simply based on sex. It’s a type of misogyny that’s more typically overt in boomer culture, but it’s got a following in the whole Tate movement. I have rarely noticed it outside of that generation in the wild.
Now…Guys do infodump, which leads to this confusion, because a lot of people dislike that behavior too. Statistically women do speak less in mixed groups. Put it all together and it’s easy for people to over generalize a very specific behavior. It does happen, but compared to previous generations it’s not as common. It definitely occurs to women who work in non-traditional fields and take on non-traditional roles and I suspect that the same is true for men.
Imagine going to school for years and years. You have your doctorate. You’re in the field for 10 years. You work in field that is 93% male. You find a new job, good pay and reputable. The boss on the daily explains things to you. Some things that are just basic science and not even directly applicable to your work. No other new hires get these interesting and informative chats but what a coincidence, all the other new hires are men. I never called it “mansplaining,” it’s just sexism. One cute word doesn’t capture the malice that is often behind it and makes men who view themselves as harmless defensive. Of course there is pointing out systemic sexism that is ingrained in natural behavior but its important to note the difference in a simple conversation and singling out a woman to explain something while assuming she doesn’t have anything in that pretty little head of hers. Personally hence, I’ve noticed it used most often when the woman you’re targeting is smarter than you and this is a subtle power play to remind her of her place.
Mansplainer perspective here. No, it doesn’t come (for me) from a belief that a woman can’t do anything, it rather comes from an instruction from a childhood that boys should always help and defend girls. If I were in place of that boss, my unconscious intent would be to lower the woman’s burden.
I catch myself doing it and stop it but it’s the hardest pattern I have ever corrected insofar.
I really appreciate this perspective and it really does shine light on how one is raised based on their gender. I can think of a multitude of examples from your perspective and also from who you are responding to.
I’m absolutely positive that, regardless of how hard I tried not to, I did raise my son and daughter differently. All I hope is that I did a little better than my parents did for me and my brothers and, should they have kids themselves, my children do a little better than I did, and so on and so forth.
Today is not that day but maybe when I’m dust, society will slowly limp along and evolve. Conversations like this may seem divisive now but I think they’re needed in the grand scheme of things.
Some humans in the future might wake up in a better world because of people like you. Keep it up!
Bruh, I had a colleague who transitioned FTM and he would talk about this all the time. Constantly being told the most basic shit over and over really fucked with the guy before he transitioned, he said not having to deal with it felt like a breath of fresh air.
deleted by creator
No! We must hate men!
Info dump goes both ways, men usually info dump about things, women info dump about people. Its echoed in men vs women photography of trips also. Men typically photograph things (here’s a car/bike/castle I saw), and typically women photograph people.( here’s me and my sister, here’s a court yard with people dancing)
I noticed this with my parents.
All my dad ever sent me pictures of is architecture. Or a tank, he also likes a good tank.
I have no end of pictures on my phone of funny looking houses in Austria or somewhere.
Female. Why i take pics the way i do. I am there and the pic is proof. A pic without my partner, family,friend i can find online or on a postcard to. An animal is also fine.
As a male, my EXIF data proves I was there ;)
Infodumping male here, I generally do it because in my mind context is important to make sense, and of course I do it regardless of gender. It honestly feels like a detriment, as I feel myself taking too long, but don’t really know how to shorten it. I do it when explaining issues at work or when talking about stuff I like etc, but have audio has times where I tried to be brief then got the wrong info across or forgot to mention something important or just right make sense. It’s like I can’t find the right balance between explaining and dumping.
I didn’t find this post as an insult or anything though.
Tbh, that’s the main reason I stopped talking about things that matter to me with women unless they are asking me for it and keep asking during the conversation.
If I infodump on a guy, that guy thinks it’s because I’m maybe overly excited about my thing.
If I infodump exactly the same way on a woman, it’s because I’m mansplaining.
The only way I know around that is to not infodump on women. I pretty much trained myself to become an introvert around women.
Yup, i do the same, avoids bullshit.
I kinda overdo it though. Woman’s about to cross a road with her headphones on, running the pedestrian red light with intense traffic, not bothering to look either way? I’m not gonna mansplain, that’s offensive, she knows what she’s doing.
I have the same problem. I work in IT and when I was on the help desk I was one of the “go to” people if someone needed help with a call. There were a couple times I heard new hires complain that I was “mansplaining” to them because I never knew where someone was coming from in terms of technical ability so when I answered their question I began at the beginning to make sure they understood. I did the same thing regardless of gender but I can see how someone felt like I was being condescending if they weren’t familiar with me. It did always seem like it was people who didn’t want to be there that would complain about it too. On the other hand several people that went on to get promoted off the help desk sent me thank you notes for teaching them so much so it kind of balanced out.
I had an experience with a male coworker. I am a man too.
He asked me because he had a USB and he wanted to put the windows iso onto it but it didn’t work. Eventually he used the media creator (or whatever it is called) but he asked if I knew what the issue was. After a lot of questions, I had figured it out.
He wanted to create a bootable USB by drag and drop the iso onto the usb and the usb was formated in fat32, so the iso was too big for the filesystem.
In that conversation, he said multiple times that he knows about this or that and that he knows computers, e.g. when I asked about the size of the usb (maybe it was a very old USB with like 4gb storage). And I could tell how he was slightly offended by some questions.
Also please note, he was “following” the Microsoft tutorial
Edit: typos fixed
Yea, tons of stuff like that is why I did things the way I did. If I start at the beginning instead of trying to jump around and figure out where you messed up it’s usually much more efficient. There were people who I was confident in their ability enough to skip around but if they were new to me we were going to cover the entire process to be sure.
It means that you assume you know more simply based on sex.
Isn’t that misandry to assume the man is a sexist because he’s shitty at explaining things or communicating generally you know like a stereotypical man. We can’t be both incredibly myopic and excessively insightful of nuance.
Let me be more clear:
An operational definition of “mansplaining”: If a man assumes he knows more about than a woman explicitly because he is a man and she is a woman. He explains to her x,y,z from this perspective.
Example: A man always talks over female peers, and explains answers during open ended discussions, because he believes he is better and more rational at open-ended discussions than his female counterparts regardless of any evidence of this, or even in spite of it.
Non-Example: A man informs a woman or others about a topic he is more interested or informed in, at a (possibly annoying) length.
It isn’t misandry to call out this bad behavior. Yes it cuts both ways, but we are talking about this term specifically.
That explanation requires prior knowledge or post hoc knowledge otherwise you’re simply saying it’s based on sex or race.
How is this substantially different then screeching “dei” at every minority that mildly inconveniences you?
It wasn’t an explanation about how to assess whether someone is mansplaining or not – it was a definition of what mansplaining is.
I just gave you a behavioral definition with examples and non-examples. I’m sorry, I don’t know how else to simplify it. I can only assume you’re willfully not understanding. Have a good day.
I’m sorry, I don’t know how else to simplify it.
Maybe if you were a man, you could explain it better.
/s
That’s a neat dodge. How is it different then assuming someone is a dei hire instead of simply an incompetent employee?
I had a woman at a car service counter take in my car once. She was dressed nicely and clean so of course I assumed she only did paperwork.
I treated her like a human. Explained my car symptoms and where I think the problem is. (Car electric went nuts and lost power steering when i hit a puddle.)
Holy crap she knew her stuff. I mentioned it felt like the alternator wasnt performing right and undervolting, but since it’s only when driving threw a puddle it had to be a component siezing and pulling on the accessory belt. She agreed that’s a good place to start and ran through all the bits in that system as well as thier diagnostic steps planned.
I figured she knew about cars but it felt like she was a full on mechanic and was the manager dressed up.
Treating people with basic humanity should be the bare minimum, but sadly it’s a foregone conclusion.
Wouldn’t foregone conclusion mean that people do that?
Why are people so surprised when everyone starts to favor talking to AI’s…
I’m really nerding out on synthesisers right now, and 99 percent sure she doesn’t know what after-touch means, or why I’m excited that I picked up a late 90s synth with a good keybed and full midi.
My lady friend doesn’t own anything that looks like a keyboard, so I’ll apologize for the over explanation, then proceed to explain why I’m so stoked.
Essentially, I got, ‘I’m glad that makes you happy!’ Which I know means shit up and move on.
If she wants to know more about modular synthesis or rompers, I’m sure she would ask. I wouldn’t force an explanation on anybody.
Hahaha, my wife puts up with that same shit. I’m building drones on Veroboard. She’ll ask how the electric octopus is coming along and then instant glazed eyes when I tell her how I accidentally let the smoke out of a TL072 but at least I used sockets for all my ICs. She did buy me a JP-8000 a couple of years ago though. She’s a good one.
I love to hear people nerd out on their passions. Personally I view it like a gift.
IDK, I often find myself mansplain and not infodump. I am not from the boomers, I’m not sexist in any rational way, I’m pretty left leaning, I am though a piece of shit sometimes.
I think that’s how most people are. They don’t identify as sexist, but they do sexist things because of conditioning. No one ever thinks they’re a bad person, best we can do is try to be aware of our bullshit and keep learning.
No one ever thinks they’re a bad person
Well, there are people who do identify as sexists. Hell, the latest Jubilee episode shows that there are people identifying as fascists. All I wanted to say is that I do not believe that men and women have fundamentally different capabilities.
Nevertheless, I do sexist things and it’s disgusting and I have little to no control over it. Hopefully I will grow to control it
Without getting into philosophy, people who call themselves fascists and sexists don’t necessarily feel they’re “bad” because of it.
Yes, I made a generalization, but this isn’t a term paper and I don’t have references.
this post seems to be going over well, given the number of upvotes.
It’s being upvoted, but the vast majority of comments are not in agreement with the person in the screenshot.
There also seems to be a consensus that the term is misused a lot.
We probably shouldn’t use “agreement” as the guage of success?
Discussion is way more valuable
I had read a lot of the comments and wondered if it might be misconstrued
Okay but what if I’m excited to talk about dinosaurs? Is it mansplaining because I didn’t know the lady im talking to is a paleontologist ?
And people wonder why many men are afraid to talk to women.
Women: “Don’t be condescending”
Lemmites: “What the fuck”
As a man with adhd, I do this all the time to men and to women, and I’ve been accused of mansplaining. I’m working on it, but I promise it has nothing to do with sexism. I just think everybody needs to know all the details so rhey can reach the same conclusions as me.
And for what it’s worth, I really appreciate when someone does the same for me on a topic I don’t know about. But I understand how frustrating it is when someone does it on a subject I do know about, so I always try to gauge knowledge before info dumping. What catches me off guard is when someone isn’t interested in learning. They don’t know everything, and they are just OK with walking through life, knowing they don’t know something.
Point is, I really do appreciate the grace presented in the post. I don’t mind if you’re being condescending if you forgive me for oversharing.
Neurodivergents be like: “Wait people don’t want to know this? That’s absurd. So anyway, what I was saying was…”
How many “Men” are just ND?
My wife has accused me of mansplaining when I really was just sharing the information I had in my head about “the thing” because I was proud of myself about that.
There’s also the “You may already know all this, but it’s worth saying out loud anyway.”
I’m not saying mansplaining isn’t a thing - it certainly is - but there are other innocent “info dump” kinds of things that can look like mansplaining but weren’t intended to be. I try to be very clear about why I am info dumping when I do, but I’m not always able to catch myself in time.
#TouchOfTheTism
Exactly, when I tell my therapist about the funny things I learned about psychology, it’s just me saying stuff that I know now, how I think it’s cool, and asking for further information. I’m well aware that he already knows far more on the topic. If you’re explaining it with a tone of “you fucking idiot woman, I’m educating you”, then that’s mansplaining. Another important possibility, is just phrasing a question as a statement for clarification. Think of how a waiter will repeat your order back to you at a restaraunt. I do the same thing when I learn about a new concept. I repeat back what I think I understood about something to make sure I got it right. Tone is very important. If I don’t sound like I’m trying to be a dick to you, then I’m probably not.
Yeah the intention is far easier to sus out when it’s in person, especially with a known person. I’m a woman and I have ADHD and I do this to my husband all the time.
My partner has taught/trained me to ask “would you like to hear more?” before I info-dump on him.
Example: Me: “at work today I’ve been playing around with configuration settings for Primo VE, specifically the search scopes… Um… would you like to hear more?”
Response: “I’m glad you have an interesting problem at work and no, no thank you.”
You are a starship troopers propaganda video. Would you like to know more?
Yep! I even use that tone of voice with him.
Then she spent two hours talking about every single thing she experienced at work and her remarks on them…
There was no “she” in my story.
Edit: and we just had a test of the system. I got home bubbling about updating Anubis and the new config options, then asked “would you like to hear more?” and he was like “sounds like you had a good day, no thank you” then flopped face-first onto the couch.
I was just alegorizing an unbalanced relationship, not trying to describe yours.
Fair enough. I’m a tad prickly about it because folks assume sometimes and it gets tiring.
The problem with this, and it’s a serious one, is that gives them the opportunity to say no.
As a fellow autist, but also a cis woman person, I think there’s a genuine and clear difference between the two, but… I viscerally understand infodumps when the other person already knows…
You gas yourself up so much to share the thing and they are like… mmhmm. Deflation city. And it’s hard to stop yourself from sharing your own personal understanding of things with people, even if they can correct you, which you hope they will do if you are wrong, omg that would be amazing!
That contrasts so hard with the condescending “I know more than you” attitude. Because the things those dipshits pick to harp on are usually the more superficial aspects of the thing.
Like that’s nice, I’m glad you know the specific term for the thing, genuinely, now let’s proceed from our mutual understanding and iron out the details together!
But that’s really different from someone who talks over you, is wrong, won’t be proven wrong, don’t care or know all that much (like dunning kruger sort of thing)
I am very guilty of asking people if they know about something then telling them anyway.
Too many cases of people confidently telling me they know about computers, point to the monitor and tell me it’s a CPU, then proudly call the computer under their desk the hard drive. The only reason their “CPU” won’t turn on being they need to press the power button on the monitor.
I’ve had this experience before. I was excited to talk about what I learnt whilst volunteering for a war museum, and wanted to share my excitement with people. Got accused of Mansplaining. It really was upsetting, since I was just talking about a lovely experience and didn’t want to upset nor offend anyone…
They already knew everything you had to say?! War experts out there I guess
1 “fun” fact if you got it, maybe one of the less bloody/violent ones 😇
I knew about this before a bit, however in the museum they have a few bits dedicated to what information we have of Sophie Scholl and the White Rose resistance attempt.
As the Nazis tried vehemently to erase evidence of dissent, amongst other things of course, the story of Scholl’s attempt at gathering resistance has survived - despite her expected demise.I have not read up on my History in many years, however it’s often a short yet symbolic read to the persistence some humans have shown in the face of terror. I do recommend it.
Incredible
Sophie Scholl and the rest, heroes and martyrs
Distributed anti-nazi pamphlets and tried to take all the blame to save their friends. Defiant to the end, supporting their country but not its evil divergence.
RIP:
Sophie Scholl, Hans Scholl, Christoph Probst, Willi Graf, Alexander Schmorell, and Kurt Huber
My brother in law is a guy who knows pretty much everything about everything. Pretty much any interesting topic you bring up, he’ll have a deeper, more interesting conversation ready about that topic. This might sound annoying, but he’s got a way of making it seem like you’re discussing something you both already understand. Like, he isn’t explaining things unless you ask, he’ll say things like, “I’m sure you’ve already seen/heard of this”, “Maybe you were the one who told me this, but…”, (even when I’m pretty sure he knows I wasn’t) etc. By giving you the credit for the information, it removes the feeling of him trying to be superior or condescending. This might still be mansplaining, I don’t know. I’m a man, so maybe I have more of an ignorance for being mansplained to since I don’t have to constantly put up with it, but this feels a lot more like a man explaining rather than mansplaining
That’s a great observation Nougat! Great job!
Thank you! That’s exactly what I wanted to hear!
So, what’s the latest topic you want to info-dump about? I’m curious and invite an info-dump.
I just fixed one of my motorcycles, and I’m currently doing a deep dive on the pros and cons of phenolic caliper pistons. I could go on about motorcycling and vehicle mechanics all day every day.
It’s exposition for the voices in my head.
I explain basic things to anyone if they sound or act like they don’t know.
What was the deal with the Punic Wars again?
I don’t know.
So like Hannibal stole all the multivitamin punica and that made Scipio like hecka mad so he put salt in it
“Mansplaining” is sexist. It’s the equivalent of saying women are airheads, or gossips, or talk too much.
Is each man expected to just… Assume that everyone else shares their exact knowledge? Would such an assumption not therefore eliminate most communication entirely?
Or what if we decided to divide up groups by something other than gender. Would it be okay to say “asiansplaining” or “jewsplaining” or “gaysplaoning”?
Can a trans-man mansplaining? Can a trans-woman mansplain? Is there a separate category of “transplaining”?
You’re right. The behavior really should be called “non-consensual info-dumping”. Furthermore, people should ask first and only proceed to 'splain away if emphatic consent is given.
That’s the key. I LOVE explaining things I’m passionate about but it’s rude to just go wild on people, so I’ve developed a process to gauge familiarity and interest.
Here’s an example of “mansplaining”: I’ve been beekeeping for close to ten years. A gentleman joined our group recently who has had maybe a few months’ experience. Wearing a brand new bee suit and gloves, he proceeded to tell me how to carry out a basic hive inspection. He was not assuming I shared his exact knowledge, he was assuming I knew even less than him.
The term mansplaining came about because it encapsulates a very common scenario. I know a few chaps who constantly explain stuff to me that I know a lot more about than they do, and in a very condescending way. One old codger even patted me on the head and said, “A young thing like you wouldn’t know about MS-DOS.” I bought my first computer in 1984.
I haven’t found mansplaining as prevalent among young men, I must say. They seem more open and egalitarian in their approach, more respectful. Though a friend told me, “It’s because you remind them of their granny.”
Dude ngl so I was accused of mansplaining by an ex while explaining some technical shit I was talking about and I knew she didn’t know, claiming she did in fact know…
Assume that
everyone elseshe shares their exact knowledge?And that’s exactly what I did, upon her request. I stopped explaining technical terms when talking about something assuming she’ll just know what a buffer tube and an H3 weight are. Turns out that made her “feel stupid” which of course wasn’t my intention, I intended to both A) comply with her literal request as per respecting boundaries, and B) hope she’d see just how ineffective of a system that is for communication. Turns out I was the asshole for doing as she asked, who knew. She threatened to shoot me (she wasn’t gonna do shit but still threatening to isn’t exactly “chill”) when we broke up for the crime of checks notes spending my own money legally, so I’m sure I was the problem lol.
There’s not much of a point to that story really other than I enjoy telling it but I rarely get to since it’s rarely relevant, and to say don’t bother assuming everyone knows things, they might just hate that too lol. Danged if ya do danged if ya don’t, I’m royally danged.
“Mansplaining” is describing something sexist. It describes a real phenomenon that is necessarily gendered.
It’s not sexist for the same reason terms like “anti-semitism” or “gay bashing” aren’t prejudiced. They’re descriptive of a real thing that happens.
Terminology like this can help women navigate problems that men don’t have. If you don’t see the value in it, maybe that’s because you’ve never experienced that problem.
Bit of a difference between “mansplaining” and the other terms in that the other terms mention the target of the action, leaving the actor ambiguous. Anyone could be anti-semitic or bash gay people. Mansplaining is a term specifically coined to say that only men can perform condescending infodumps. What’s worse, nowadays it’s often used just for men explaining things they’re not sure if the other person knows. Some of us are also neurodivergent and have trouble picking up even fairly obvious social cues. I know it’s a problem for me with ADHD and I know there’s also “tism infodumps”. Both disorders affect women too (and ADHD in women is underdiagnosed), but I’ve never heard “womansplaining” used as a term, nor do I think it would be appropriate. It’d be a hella sexist term.
I’m sure there’s quite a few men out there who legitimately are so condescending, they feel they have to explain basic things to “dumb women”. But I’m willing to bet most cases of “mansplaining” are some guy being an idiot and missing hints from the other party in the conversation, as well as just misjudging what is common knowledge and what isn’t.
It doesn’t help that women are just more polite and more likely to let you finish talking even when they know everything lol
It doesn’t help that women are just more polite and more likely to let you finish talking even when they know everything lol
I was agreeing with you sooo heavily until this last paragraph. This is a biased generalization of women, and arguably an implied contrast to men.
Maybe it’s just the people I know? Could even just be the upbringing in a formerly soviet nation, it used to be pretty socially conservative in many ways here. Younger people are starting to break out of that pattern luckily. All I know is, in my generation and older ones, on average, guys tend to be more loud and in your face, more likely to interrupt you while talking.
But I’m willing to bet most cases of “mansplaining” are some guy being an idiot and missing hints from the other party in the conversation, as well as just misjudging what is common knowledge and what isn’t.
If you’re a man, who are you to invalidate the experiences of women like that?
If someone overuses the term and accuses someone of mansplaining when that’s not what they’re doing, by all means call it out. I’ve been unfairly accused of mansplaining before. But that had nothing to do with the word itself and everything to do with the person who said it. Not having access to that word wouldn’t have made them more reasonable.
Meanwhile the word describes an experience that you have never had, and you’re sitting here saying that most of the people who have had it actually haven’t. That’s kind of fucked up, dude. Take a step back.
The term literally is sexist because it implies it’s only bad when men do it. These days it’s used to describe any time a man explains anything. It’s lost any meaning it may have had originally.
White knightism is sexism in its own right too, because it brings to the table the assumption that women are weaker and need protection, thus not equal to men,
Because you seem to have missed it:
It’s describing something that is really happening.
There is a systemic bias that exists where men treat women this way. It’s a problem that these women have to deal with. Trust in the experience of people who are actually in this situation instead of trying to invalidate them to feed your need to win arguments on the internet.
Just because something happens doesn’t make it okay to generalize that behavior across an entire identity.
“Mansplaining” is a pretty mild example but we can look at other more extreme ones. One of the most classic is racists who love to say “Do you know 50% of crime is committed by 13% of the population?”, and use that as justification to the idea that black people are inherently more likely to be criminals. And they may occasionally walk it back and try to say shit like “not you, you’re one of the good ones”.
Or it’s like someone who feels as though they got taken advantage of in a business deal saying they got “jew’d”. And then trying to say “well no I’m not antisemitic, but I’ve personally seen and heard of Jews conducting business unfairly. And it’s common enough that the term has arisen, so it’s gotta be somewhat true. And if you are a Jew who conducts business fairly then I’m not talking about you”. If you encountered someone trying to say that, you would be quite correct to respond by saying “wow that’s actually really fucking antisemitic”. And this is the exact same thing you are trying to argue with the word “mansplaining”.
I never said it doesn’t happen. I said it’s overblown.
Online, literally anything a man has ever said seems to be described as mansplaining now. Offline, I’ve barely heard anyone complain about it - only talking about car mechanics I believe. And I’ve got some people in my circles who are pretty vocal about gender dynamics issues.
👍
I don’t know…my wife wifesplains things to me…assuming I’m a toddler and I’m not loading the dishwasher optimally; despite me knowing how to run computational fluid dynamics software and being aware of water flow optimiztion. 😀
That must be really frustrating.
So when my ex-husband first went to vet tech school they, at some point, learned about menstruation. He proceeded to explain to me, a middle aged woman, how periods work, lol.
So your ex-husband was an asshole. Cool story, but the world is full of condescending assholes of all kinds and polite people of all kinds.
Right, just an example of the behavior of note in action. Correct, he was also a condescending asshole. I think those are prerequisites.
That’s great input! Good job pete!
If you don’t do it, then don’t worry. The term doesn’t apply to you.
The problem is when people assume you’re mansplaining just because you’re a man explaining something.
No, it applies to “men”, and I identify as one.
That’s like whenever racists say shit like “hey did you know 50% of crimes are committed by 13% of the population?”, a black person calling out the racism, and then being dismissed by saying “well if you don’t commit crimes they aren’t talking about you”.
Look, you’re not wrong. It’s just really hard for me to take it seriously.
Does it truly hurt your feelings that men are stereotyped as overbearing and condescending? Are you truly injured by this stereotype? Are you personally treated differently because of it?
Maybe it’s just the people that hang out with, but I don’t find that any of them have had this phrase used against them. It seems more like we’re trying very hard to be offended because we have so little else to be offended by. In the name of fairness.
But that’s just me and my friends. Maybe you get teased with this incessantly and it really causes you emotional trauma. In that case, I apologize, and please tell me your story.
I’ve never had this phrase used against me personally, but that’s probably because I don’t really talk much with bigots.
If we want to build a world that is equal and just for everyone, we cannot afford to keep perpetuating these hateful divisions. I understand that historically, the vast majority of oppressors have been cis (allegedly) straight men, and in the US and Europe they have been white as well. So for some it feels cathartic to lash out against groups that resemble their oppressors. Hurt people want to hurt others. As long as we perpetuate the cycle the same mistakes will keep repeating. But it’s also important to remember that anyone can be an oppressor. Peter Thiel is gay and leading the world into technofascism. Look up a list of the world’s richest person and yes, there’s a lot of white dude at the very top but if you scroll down a little bit you’ll find find Jensen Huang, Carlos Slim, and tons more non-white people. The women of the Walton and Koch families.
Progressives keep asking why they are losing elections, why so many young men are falling into incel or alpha male culture. There’s a lot of complicated reasons for that, but shit like this certainly isn’t helping.
It’s especially disheartening to look through the profiles of some people here who are arguing in favor of this sexism. Because most of the people here I agree with 99% of what they post and comment.
Imagine this was a microagression about any other identity group. Imagine some asshole joking about how Asians are bad drivers to a Chinese person. Imagine that Chinese person gets offended, and you tell them “it’s really hard for me to take you seriously”.
I don’t have any emotional trauma about this. I was raised exposed to a certain amount of toxic masculinity, and as I grew older and strive to become a better person I had to un-learn some bad habits. I didn’t just memorize what words were offensive or not, but gave a lot of thought and educated myself into WHY they were offensive. The word “mansplaining” alone is mild, but what it’s doing is singling put a specific identity group, then generally associating a negative connotation to the whole group. It’s offensive, it’s bad, and it should not be perpetuated.
I think the real point here is that this is the thing you have chosen tofocusing on. You have had so little unfairness in your life that you feel the need to fixate on men being minorly teased.
If you really want fairness, maybe you should focus on the things that are massively unfair first.
Or do you only want fairness for white men?
Lol you have no idea what I focus on. You’re just reaching for a personal attack. Also it’s weird that you specify “white” men when I purposefully have not, because as far as I can tell there’s no racial component to the word “mansplaining”. Are you assuming that I’m white for some reason? I’m not sure if I’m white or not - kinda depends on who you ask.
Bigoted thinking is bigoted thinking, and I call it out when I see it. It’s fundamentally flawed. It’s bad science and bad statistics and leads to incorrect conclusions. It’s the same kind of thinking that eventually leads to bigger things. You cannot in good faith argue for fairness while allowing unfairness based on some arbitrary scale. You seem awfully comfortable turning a blind eye to prejudice when it doesn’t impact you.
You’re engaging in stereotypes, and stereotypes are harmful. Even positive ones, like the idea that Asians are good at math or women are nurturing.
The inequality people have suffered from bigotry throughout human history is horrible, but that does not justify bigotry against people who resemble old bigots.
You can say “minority teased”, but the modern word is “micro aggression”.
It’s pretty damning that most of the arguments you’re using here to justify the word are the same ones racist use to justify using the ‘N’ word, or any other bugot uses to justify their bigoted language.
So what do you focus on then?
I mean, in addition to microaggressions against the least impact among us.
deleted by creator
I’ve already heard the term “gaysplaining” unironically more than once in the bisexual sphere to call out gay people that try to gaslight bi people into thinking that they’re not really bi.
Sounds like a conversation that devolved into generalization and prejudice, treating each other as symbols of their identifies rather than individuals.
I’m sure it happens. Tons of bigoted shit happens. That doesn’t make it okay.
As we all know, a bi person dating a different gender than themselves is just confused and straight, while a bi person dating their own gender is pretending to be gay to fit into LGBTQ spaces. /s
And yes, women can mansplain
Not gonna lie, I had no idea until this post that “mansplaining” was strictly considered male behavior. I’ve had women do the same thing when I’m in spaces or situations that are traditionally female dominated, and figured that “mansplaining” was the appropriate descriptor for that. TIL.
Nope
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.
“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)
pontificate, harangue, bloviate, bluster, rant
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.
garage
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!
Unfortunately I am autistic and explaining something I think is cool. Only it gets interpreted as condescension :(
Its not always but its often enough
Bingo, every fucking time. I’m literally just sharing whats in my head. You know, trying to communicate like a fucking person? Sorry you took that as me thinking you were stupid. Because now i definitely think you’re stupid.
Same :c
As someone with friends and family on the spectrum, my best tip:
Take a moment to breathe when you’ve completed a thought related to what you’re explaining, and look at the other person to see if they have information to share, questions, or just to express what they know.
This helped a few folks pace themselves, and the break for others they believe helped in not appearing condescending.
Hope this helps!
This is accurate! With my wife, I go on rapid fire about topics and shes so used to it, she interrupts me to tell me to read the room.
It took me a long time to get better at actively scan the other person to gauge their interest, as well as knowing how to ask questions that open up the conversation. I even used to carry a stop watch to time how long I spoke, because I would go on and on.
Noone ever really grows up, some people are just better at hiding it.
I definitely get the same sorta thing, you just gotta practice managing it. Usually I’ll say something like “I have many thoughts and don’t wanna mansplain but I don’t know your familiarity…” and then ramble. Context is important, and a lot of people also don’t know where we’re at or where we’re coming from so if we just bust down the door and start telling them how something is then that’s kinda on us to manage.
And if they don’t take the clear opportunities I give them to slow me down and then say I should have somehow known better I ask them how on earth I was supposed to know what they never shared. People will often chill out after that.
I mean they aren’t wrong, she’s patronizing them with condescension they can’t perceive because of their clear deficits.
Is she explaining a basic thing herself?
