Annoying modern trends...

[Angus Forbes]

And also by people who apply these terms to anyone they disagree with. For example, if someone tells you that Black people are highly overrepresented -- per capita -- in the commission of violent crime, is she a racist, or is she simply stating a fact? If someone tells you that the Bible condemns homosexuality, is she a homophobe, or is she simply stating a fact?

 

[LizzieMaine]

I will say, that while people often severely exaggerate the presence of "snowflakes", or whatever you'd like to call them, in modern society, that they do exist. Usually, however, they are few and far in between. I've only met 2 in my 4 years of college, and one of them doesn't even go to my school. My cousin being that latter person. She's not really into the kind of behavior, she doesn't need safe spaces, or whatever, but I do catch her using phrases like "mansplaining" every once in awhile. Her sister is much more moderate when it comes to this, and I think may be the centrist of the three siblings (the brother being a hardline conservative).

I think "mansplaining" is a very real thing. I experienced it just this past weekend. We hosted a foreign policy conference at work, connected to various tie points via Internet connection, and we were having issues with a low sound level being sent over the line. I asked that they boost it and received a "mansplaination" from their tech guy, a older gentleman who, shall we say, didn't think a wee slip of a girl could ever know much about working with audio. Now, I had my first job in a projection booth forty years ago this summer, and have dealt with audio in theatres and the broadcasting industry for a very long time, and I knew full well that this gentleman was blowing it out his nether portal. I ran some measurements to prove what I was saying was correct, told them their gain needed to be boosted about 20 dB, and received another "mansplaination" in return, followed by a call to my boss telling them that they wanted a man to take charge because I obviously didn't know what I was doing. My boss, a woman herself, pretty much hung up on him. The next day, I arrived prepared to hook their connection up to a pre-amp unit in order to get the correct level, only to find that somehow, mysteriously, it had been boosted 20 dB since we spoke.

"Mansplaining" is real, and it's not "snowflakes" who complain about it. It's hard-working, knowledgeable women who are sick of having to prove their credentials to OWM, despite a long record of getting the job done right. That particular fellow, too, can K. M. T.

 

[Angus Forbes]

Lizzie -- stuff happens all the time. Keep calm and carry on. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. Could it be that you have a hair trigger and a short fuse?

 

[LizzieMaine]

I'm glad you mansplained that for me.

 

[Angus Forbes]

See, this is what I am talking about. My response to you had nothing to do with your being female. The workplace is, and likely always has been, chock full of this stuff. Men get this treatment from other men all the time, women from other women, and so forth. Why is everything a gender issue? Perhaps it was this time, and perhaps not. Perhaps you were dealing with an equal-opportunity lout of some sort. Perhaps you came on a bit too strong, and ruffled his feathers. My opinion is that you're a genius, although perhaps not formally educated to the extent that your ability would easily support, and, quite frankly, rather rude. People are likely to respond in the same vein to you, in whatever way they can.

 

[LizzieMaine]

 

[Angus Forbes]

Hello?

 

[2jakes]

Hello?

Hello!
This is jake.
How's it going ?

 

[Angus Forbes]

Hey, Jake. Good to hear from you! All the best -- AF

 

[MisterCairo]

 

[LizzieMaine]

Just be sure not to spill any on the rug. We ain't here to clean up your messes.

 

[Bushman]

I think "mansplaining" is a very real thing. I experienced it just this past weekend. We hosted a foreign policy conference at work, connected to various tie points via Internet connection, and we were having issues with a low sound level being sent over the line. I asked that they boost it and received a "mansplaination" from their tech guy, a older gentleman who, shall we say, didn't think a wee slip of a girl could ever know much about working with audio. Now, I had my first job in a projection booth forty years ago this summer, and have dealt with audio in theatres and the broadcasting industry for a very long time, and I knew full well that this gentleman was blowing it out his nether portal. I ran some measurements to prove what I was saying was correct, told them their gain needed to be boosted about 20 dB, and received another "mansplaination" in return, followed by a call to my boss telling them that they wanted a man to take charge because I obviously didn't know what I was doing. My boss, a woman herself, pretty much hung up on him. The next day, I arrived prepared to hook their connection up to a pre-amp unit in order to get the correct level, only to find that somehow, mysteriously, it had been boosted 20 dB since we spoke.

"Mansplaining" is real, and it's not "snowflakes" who complain about it. It's hard-working, knowledgeable women who are sick of having to prove their credentials to OWM, despite a long record of getting the job done right. That particular fellow, too, can K. M. T.

Can it be real? Yes, is it as prevalent as it's made out to be? No. For the most part, I find that "mansplaining" is just an excuse to shut down a conversation when something contrary to the person's preconceived notions is challenged. I got struck with a mansplaining charge, and called a rapist after I tried explaining to a woman that teabagging in a video game is not the same as physical rape. To a person like that, the very conversation I'm having with you right now could be construed as "mansplaining" simply because I'm a man and you're a woman, and we're having a disagreement.

 

[MisterCairo]

Can it be real? Yes, is it as prevalent as it's made out to be? No. For the most part, I find that "mansplaining" is just an excuse to shut down a conversation when something contrary to the person's preconceived notions is challenged. I got struck with a mansplaining charge, and called a rapist after I tried explaining to a woman that teabagging in a video game is not the same as physical rape. To a person like that, the very conversation I'm having with you right now could be construed as "mansplaining" simply because I'm a man and you're a woman, and we're having a disagreement.

Um, what the hell kind of video games are you playing?!

I think I need to bleach my brain after reading that!!!

 

[LizzieMaine]

"Mansplaining" when used by a woman is, very specifically, a case where a man is *assuming that the woman in question* is unable to grasp the point under discussion, and presents his argument in a superior and condescending way. I don't consider your presentation of your views to be either "superior" or "condescending," so no, I wouldn't call it "mansplaining."

What I would call "mansplaining" is a man presuming to explain to me, for example, how to route sound in a projection booth despite my decades of experience in doing exactly that. Or, a man trying to explain to me the intricacies of how the broadcasting industry worked in the 1930s -- despite the fact at that at some point in the discussion he will likely quote from my own published writings on that topic without realizing that I am their author. (This has actually happened to me in another online venue. The word "mansplaining" did not exist at the time but a "mansplaination it indeed was.) And anyone who thinks that the dynamic that comes on to play when a man does this to another man is the same as a man doing this to a woman is, flat out, wrong.

Mansplaination is also any situation where a man is lecturing a woman on matters that he, as a man, can in no way comprehend. For example, it's a fact -- an unassailable truth -- that women experience the world from a different perspective than men. They are treated differently from the moment of their birth, by their parents, their families, and by society in general, and this leads to an utterly different experience of life that a man *cannot ever truly experience.* He can read about it, he can even empathize with it. But a man cannot know what it is to actually *live* that experience, and for a man to presume to do so and to attempt to lecture a woman on that subject -- such as, for example, a man presuming to explain "feminism" to a woman, or to deny that sexual discrimination continues to exist in the modern world -- is the worst and most pernicious form of "mansplaination." And it is, you can take my word for it, very, very common -- not just in the world at large, but right here on the Lounge.

 

[MisterCairo]

Just be sure not to spill any on the rug. We ain't here to clean up your messes.

I try not to spill and always take my empty bag to the garbage bin! My daughters do the same, perhaps not with the same degree of non-spillage, but they are learning!

 

[Bushman]

"Mansplaining" when used by a woman is, very specifically, a case where a man is *assuming that the woman in question* is unable to grasp the point under discussion, and presents his argument in a superior and condescending way. I don't consider your presentation of your views to be either "superior" or "condescending," so no, I wouldn't call it "mansplaining."

What I would call "mansplaining" is a man presuming to explain to me, for example, how to route sound in a projection booth despite my decades of experience in doing exactly that. Or, a man trying to explain to me the intricacies of how the broadcasting industry worked in the 1930s -- despite the fact at that at some point in the discussion he will likely quote from my own published writings on that topic without realizing that I am their author. (This has actually happened to me in another online venue. The word "mansplaining" did not exist at the time but a "mansplaination it indeed was.) And anyone who thinks that the dynamic that comes on to play when a man does this to another man is the same as a man doing this to a woman is, flat out, wrong.

Mansplaination is also any situation where a man is lecturing a woman on matters that he, as a man, can in no way comprehend. For example, it's a fact -- an unassailable truth -- that women experience the world from a different perspective than men. They are treated differently from the moment of their birth, by their parents, their families, and by society in general, and this leads to an utterly different experience of life that a man *cannot ever truly experience.* He can read about it, he can even empathize with it. But a man cannot know what it is to actually *live* that experience, and for a man to presume to do so and to attempt to lecture a woman on that subject -- such as, for example, a man presuming to explain "feminism" to a woman, or to deny that sexual discrimination continues to exist in the modern world -- is the worst and most pernicious form of "mansplaination." And it is, you can take my word for it, very, very common -- not just in the world at large, but right here on the Lounge.

I think therein lies the problem with it. Being condescending in the first place is rude. Being condescending because you're a woman is misogynistic, but the idea of when you're precisely being mansplained to seems to be typically left up to the person it's happening to, which is where it's fault lies. It becomes subjective, and hard to understand when the line that defines condescending explanation and misogynistic explanation is constantly being moved. To one person, simply disagreement can be considered mansplaining simply based on the sexes of the people involved. For example, I do not believe it either condescending nor misogynistic to explain to anybody of any sex that feminism is not about one sex being better than the other but rather the push for feminine equality in consideration to their male peers, but you wouldn't believe how many people would find that simple statement hateful and intolerant in and of itself simply because I am a man and I said.

 

[LizzieMaine]

I think therein lies the problem with it. Being condescending in the first place is rude. Being condescending because you're a woman is misogynistic, but the idea of when you're precisely being mansplained to seems to be typically left up to the person it's happening to, which is where it's fault lies. It becomes subjective, and hard to understand when the line that defines condescending explanation and misogynistic explanation is constantly being moved. To one person, simply disagreement can be considered mansplaining simply based on the sexes of the people involved. For example, I do not believe it either condescending nor misogynistic to explain to anybody of any sex that feminism is not about one sex being better than the other but rather the push for feminine equality in consideration to their male peers, but you wouldn't believe how many people would find that simple statement hateful and intolerant in and of itself simply because I am a man and I said.

I think a fundamental truth of any kind of oppressive behavior is that the one being oppressed is the one who gets to decide exactly when they're being oppressed. There were a great many white people in the South a hundred and sixty years ago who would never have though of themselves as oppressors, but those they were oppressing had a different idea. The dynamic tends to run the same way in any kind of use of social power by one class over another -- the one engaging in oppressive behavior never, ever believes that they are actually oppressing anyone. And that's what makes it so pernicious.

As for feminism, I think it'd be more accurate to refer to it as the inevitable result of an awareness of the historic use of class power as a means of social, political, and economic oppression of women. It's not about simple things like the right to vote or equal pay for equal work or saying "firefighter" instead of "fireman." It's about the entire class dynamic that has dominated human civilization since the rise of patriarchal culture six thousand-odd years ago, and the influence that dynamic continues to have right down to the present day.

 

[Bushman]

Can't argue with that. Just like the old belief that the villain always believes he's doing good.

 

[Fading Fast]

I think a fundamental truth of any kind of oppressive behavior is that the one being oppressed is the one who gets to decide exactly when they're being oppressed....

That's not objective justice that's just shifting the "I get to decide / I get to call the shots" from one side to the other.

What if the person who believes they are being oppressed is wrong and falsely accuses someone of being an oppressor? Who decides then? Does the accused have a right to defend themselves?

 

[LizzieMaine]

Depends on the act of oppression. If it's something that's codified under law, and there's evidence to prove the claim, well, see you in court. If it's simply something like a "mansplaination," well, Person A telling Person B she isn't being oppressed because Person A doesn't believe she's being oppressed in no way changes what person B is experiencing. And Person A, quite frankly, is being kind of a dink. Denial of oppression by an oppressor from a position of class power is in itself oppression. And dinkiness.