I write the title to this entry with tongue in cheek, but let it be said from the beginning, I do not “mansplain” anything. This term is patently offensive and does not belong in meaningful discussion. It is meant to take an entire group of people and dismiss them as meaningless – to say to a man in an argument, “you don’t matter because you’re a man.” It’s an attempt at shutting down an argument by moving away from the key points and attacking the individual. It’s no better than the popular “snowflake” term that is so commonly used to shut people down. It’s a logical fallacy, an ad hominem attack which avoids answering a discussion point by attacking the arguer’s gender rather than their statement, and has no place in a real debate.
It is an ugly phrase, which implies that men as a whole are bumbling, clueless idiots. I will grant that some of us are, in fact, bumbling clueless idiots, and I have been “mansplained” to on several occasions, by both men and women. I have a well-meaning friend, a liberal white man who loves to explain to people – including poor, black people – what it means to be black and poor, and I suppose his discussion points fit the definition. The phrase is meant to indicate when an individual explains something to another person in a condescending manner, often when the explainer is not well-versed in the subject. A “mansplainer” is a know-it-all, and it’s not gender-specific. My second wife was a “mansplainer.” There needs to be a different term to describe individuals who do this. I prefer “know-it-all.”
The phrase is meant to indicate when an individual explains something to another person in a condescending manner, often when the explainer is not well-versed in the subject. A “mansplainer” is a know-it-all, and it’s not gender-specific.
|
Despite the fact that the term is obviously offensive, it is still used by people who ought to know better, by people who are capable of making sound arguments, by liberals and academics, and even, on occasion, by people in conversation threads on this publication, under the mistaken belief that it is acceptable to use flawed logic and ad hominems in an argument if your counterpart enjoys privilege. I’m not arguing the point of privilege, but it’s not relevant to the issue. A poor argument is still a poor argument.
Is it offensive? Absolutely. Let’s take the term and use variations of it. “Womansplain?” We wouldn’t dare. Should we for example, coin the term “blondesplain” to cater to a stereotype of how certain women may make an argument? How about if we coin the term “blacksplain?” “Jewsplain?” In fact, know-it-alls are available in every gender, race, and ethnic group. Of course, these usages would be immediately seen as offensive, and rightly so. None of those variations should ever be used in any circumstance. Why do we accept “mansplain?” Its usage is simply lazy debate. Call me a know-it-all if you must. Just don’t accuse me of “mansplaining.”
__
◊♦◊
◊♦◊
__
Photo credit: Getty Images
I’m just gonna leave this here https://www.bitchmedia.org/post/seven-studies-proving-mansplaining-exists
Well – thanks, but it appears your “truths” are fabricated for a very specific end purpose. Looking at the first example: 2.6 versus 2.8? Are you serious?
Interruption quotient as a measure of what exactly?
It’s a wonder why social sciences has fallen into such disrepute
How exactly does that 7th one work?
How exactly does men getting more retweets than women prove that mansplaining exists?
Am I to understand that you are unfamiliar with the deep, rich and varied reservoir of mean, unfair stereotypes, phrases and jokes that have been lobbed at people for being dumb blondes, bitchy women, black Americans, , etc? Because OF COURSE we can imagine phrases like “blondsplaining” or accusations that women talk too much or that black people have a way of talking that’s problematic or that Jews are whatever. All of those things (which you speak of as unthinkable) literally exist and you’re melting down over a word meant to capture the common male habit of talking authoritatively in… Read more »
Thanks for your thoughtful comment. The point is though, it’s not exclusively a common male habit as you suggest. The term genderizes a practice that is not gender-specific. Yes, lots of men do that — but plenty of women do, too.
All of those things (which you speak of as unthinkable) literally exist and you’re melting down over a word meant to capture the common male habit of talking authoritatively in a way that lacks self awareness. I don’t know what you think its meant to capture but mansplain has grown from an explanation for a real phenomenon to a defense of against criticism to the point that its now basically trying to gender a gender neutral behavior. No matter how badly you want it to be labeled inherently male (I notice that there is a real push to gender everything… Read more »
Good people contribute to male supremacy every day – and if you can’t face the ways male supremacy influences your life, you’ll never be able to change it. But maybe you don’t really want to change it. You’ve got to stop focusing on your good nature and intentions, which has you prioritizing your feelings over women and people of color’s pain. You’d have a much more positive impact if instead, you focused on addressing our very real, very valid concerns about how you’re contributing to our oppression. So rather than mansplaining or whitesplaining the ‘why’ of insensitive actions, try stepping… Read more »
“Good people contribute to male supremacy… You’ve got to stop focusing on your good nature and intentions, which has you prioritizing your feelings over women and people of color’s pain. You’d have a much more positive impact if instead, you focused on addressing our very real, very valid concerns about how you’re contributing to our oppression.” Giving (appropriate, mindful and meaningful) priority & expression to one’s own feeling is not tantamount to oppressing others, and I think it is a dangerous and dubiously false equivalency to suggest uniformly that it is. You would proceed from the notion that all is… Read more »
“Do you think it is appropriate or equitable to simply apply gender as a lens -universally and unconditionally…..”
Why yes Mostly – that is the key underpinning of gender dogma and ideology.
Have you not been paying attention? -:)
pssst – there is no magic sauce that comes forth from the lips of a woman or person of color. You must not be aware of the Evergreen college fiasco. How on earth did those kids and demented staff manage to upend such hegemony!
Your branding of low expectations, for yourself and others, is the truly perplexing component of all this nonsense.
Mansplaining just like creep shaming is blaming men for the inability to read women’s minds and know what they know. I’ve had people explain to me things which I thought were obvious and it was irritating. On the other hand, I’ve assumed people knew things that I thought were obvious and they didn’t. If you’ve spent 30 years in information technology you’ll learn that things that are “common knowledge” and “common sense” are not as common as you think and things that are obvious aren’t always obvious to everyone. Mansplaining in a sense is even misogynistic. It’s a behavior engaged… Read more »
The term “mansplain” hs nothing to do with men not being able to read women’s mins to ascertain what they already know (and therefore shouldn’t have explained to them), and evening to do with a man assuming that a woman is ignorant until proven smart, even when she is degreed in the field in which he’s explaining to her, and even if he knows that. It isn’t the drive to explain helpfully, it’s the assumption that women know nothing and therefore Need to have Everything explained to them. Mansplaining is the guy who corrected an astrophysicist on Twitter about thermodynamics… Read more »
“It’s the man who busts into a conversation about the marginalization of women to explain to the women talking about it that there is no such thing.” You’ve got a potpourri of entries that illustrates the issue at hand. I’ve picked the one above as an example: this is called a difference of opinion. That you call it mansplaining is on you. There is no right to expect that others share and agree with your politics. The other example of the dreaded astrophysicist mansplain: again, the comment was from a person who does not agree with global warming, and that… Read more »
That happens to everyone. I have an advanced degree in a certain specialist subject and I still get people with little to no knowledge of it tell me I’m wrong because of what they saw on a documentary a few weeks ago. It’s women as often as men and therefore nothing to do with gender.
“That happens to everyone.” That may be verifiably and indisputably true, but some people simply will not be amenable to that basic message, when it is put that way. I think in some cases they would be apt to shoot the messenger, to spite the message. This is not so much a comment here as it is a speculation, if you will indulge me as I walk myself through it: Someone who is of a more humanist or a universalist perspective would not take exception to that message, because it reaffirms their individual and collective sense of identity & community:… Read more »
Agreed. My area of expertise is one where people might object to my opinion or professional findings on grounds of their religious belief. Do we then call such a disagreement on the grounds of religion as “a faithsplaining microaggression” when a person of faith disagrees with my professional opinion on a subject? Or do we just call them an ignorant and boorish know it all without bringing their personal identity into it? This is why I disagree with the fundamental concept of “mansplaining”. In most cases, it is not real – just the posturing of somebody with an inferiority complex,… Read more »
Another example of this is a doctor friend of mine who regularly gets “…splained” by patients how “But there was an article in the newspaper last week…”
I asked him earlier today and he said it’s no more or less common in men than women. However, women seem particularly upset when challenging or questioning their parenting decisions.
Can we call this “womansplaining” or “mothersplaining”? Or perhaps gender doesn’t count when it’s a woman doing it? I would genuinely like to hear from people who think that mansplaining is both real and prevalent.
Thanks for this, but I am surprised this article was ever permitted publication at GMP considering the often uncritical nature it has towards women’s actions and behaviours. Of course mansplaining is a thing, but it’s not nearly as prevalent. It ignores the subtle nuances you discussed above and it’s also used as a silencing tactic to shame men into deferring to women every time. Feminists who use this accusation betray their own philosophies and its similarity to the chauvinism that women need protecting from everything and everyone. Let’s also call out womansplaining. There are plenty of examples of it. —… Read more »
The issue with the term is that while it has valid applications the desire to use it as a weapon against men has led to its definition being made so broad the term nearly useless. There is no question that there are men out there that will condescend to a woman and explain things to her that she already knows. However mansplain has been expanded to not only include that but it also now used as a: 1. Defense against criticism – Don’t like that a guy was critical of something? Accuse him of mansplaining. 2. A reason to dismiss… Read more »
“There is no question that there are men out there that will condescend to a woman and explain things to her that she already knows. ” I had a person complain to me that she kept clicking and all it did was ask what’s this? I told her to click the left mouse button. I had another person complain that they couldn’t get a zip disk out of the drive and when I got there found it lying on their desk (it wasn’t in the drive). I heard of a case where a person called tech support because their computer… Read more »
Pretty much.
I’ve been in forums where women accused me of mansplaining when I was factually correcting they said. And I could tell that it was a defense against criticism because even as they acknowledged that I was right they still tried to turn into a gender issue as if my being male and her being female was the core reason I spoke up as if I would never dare do that to a man.
Just wanted to say that I thought your comment summed it up perfectly – Kudos, Danny.
An interesting read, thank-you: I’m highly inclined to agree. The very dubious appeal of the term is rooted precisely in the fact that is does allow anyone who would deploy it to summarily dismiss the arguer -as part of an errant collective, and not as an individual- without having to address the relative flaws, merits or relevance of their argument itself. As a means of bypass or obfuscation such a term becomes a very handy (albeit dubious and intellectually disingenuous) rhetorical device. Moreover, the heady power of collective denigration can be highly gratifying to deploy against someone else if they… Read more »