Home
Community
Blacklist
Discuss
Login
Don't have an account? Register Here.
Do you think the term "Mansplaining" is sexist
Current Events
Page
of 2
Current Events
» Do you think the term "Mansplaining" is sexist
Losing an argument? Ends it with but...but...Hillary and her emails!
It's a stupid term that should be eradicated from our vocabulary.
S / K / Y / N / E
Twitch/YouTube/GT: Adzeta
Twitch/YouTube/GT: Adzeta
It just makes me cringe because it sounds like manscaping.
For all your gaming pleasures:
http://www.youtube.com/user/thismikeplaysgames
Currently Playing: Majora's Mask, Final Fantasy XIII, Shadow of Mordor
Currently Playing: Majora's Mask, Final Fantasy XIII, Shadow of Mordor
Obviously it is
I have trouble concentrating because I have 80HD.
Probably but I can't fathom what it is aside from a stupid term from and for stupid people.
For problems with the site, start here:
http://www.gamefaqs.com/feedback/index.php?type=37
It's not, but it can be easily abused to be. It's not difficult to twist it, especially in radfem spaces, so that any man with an opinion on a topic can be dismissed as mansplaining and silenced.
Ironic, really.
Ironic, really.
~Drewnami: The Drew abides.~
Gonads are useful for their purpose, but they are no substitute for brains. -Paul Harvey
Gonads are useful for their purpose, but they are no substitute for brains. -Paul Harvey
If they made a gender neutral term for "people who use their genders to defend and argument" it would not be sexist -_- Now it targets only men :0 so it's sexist T_T
I am mature enough to not follow the
noob shaming
flavor of the century
swag
fashion T_T and will fight for us >:)
I think it's a joke word that people with low intelligence use in an attempt to debate with their intellectual superior.
{}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{}
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>
The only people use their gender to look superior in an argument are feminists...
Shenmue II = best game of all time
Shenmue = 2nd best game of all time
Shenmue = 2nd best game of all time
Nope. Great way to decide who is an idiot though
Well, technically...yeah it is sexist.
I suppose the real questions are:
-does what the term implies happen enough to warrant excusable usage?
-if you believe no, does that change depending on what part of the world you're referring to? Not everywhere is like the US or Europe...
I suppose the real questions are:
-does what the term implies happen enough to warrant excusable usage?
-if you believe no, does that change depending on what part of the world you're referring to? Not everywhere is like the US or Europe...
Bite me like one of your French rolls.
http://ultraimg.com/images/2016/11/11/xWp0.gif http://ultraimg.com/images/2016/11/11/xWpz.gif
http://ultraimg.com/images/2016/11/11/xWp0.gif http://ultraimg.com/images/2016/11/11/xWpz.gif
That word is just so dumb and unnecessary. It's unbelievably sexist. Why was it even created? It just means "A man talking condescendingly". Why did that need to have "man" attached to it? Why is cuckoldry infecting our dictionary now?
God I wish an asteroid would come and hit this fucking rock that we live on. We went horribly wrong.
God I wish an asteroid would come and hit this fucking rock that we live on. We went horribly wrong.
Ugly people hate me.
I guess this was made because of my topic or something.
ClockworkHare posted...
I mean, yeah there are men out there who explain things in a condescending manner to women because they think they are intellectually inferior or something. But those types of people tend to be irritating to be around regardless of sex.
It's kinda ironic since I've never seen the term not used in a condescending manner so it's like... an endless recursion of condescension.
ClockworkHare posted...
Well, technically...yeah it is sexist.
I suppose the real question is: does what it implies happen enough to warrant the term excusably existing?
I mean, yeah there are men out there who explain things in a condescending manner to women because they think they are intellectually inferior or something. But those types of people tend to be irritating to be around regardless of sex.
It's kinda ironic since I've never seen the term not used in a condescending manner so it's like... an endless recursion of condescension.
spritual powah will never die
Don't be shy to drop a PM to me, I'm always open for conversation.
Don't be shy to drop a PM to me, I'm always open for conversation.
It's a sexist-driven term because there is already a word for explaining the phenomena without attaching needless and unfounded gender implications to it i.e. condescending. You can even say "condescending and sexist" if sexism is overtly present. By coining a separate phrase all you are doing is institutionalizing a victim complex based on presumptuous and denigrative generalizations about male behavior.
It's like calling it "black chatting" when a black person talks in a theater. If that sounds wildly accusative and offensive, it's probably because it is.
It's like calling it "black chatting" when a black person talks in a theater. If that sounds wildly accusative and offensive, it's probably because it is.
// BEAUTY IS NOT LOVE - LOVE IS NOT MUSIC - MUSIC IS THE BEST - WISDOM IS THE DOMAIN OF THE WIZ--WHICH IS EXTINCT //
http://www.last.fm/user/Pogo92
http://www.last.fm/user/Pogo92
People try their best to not get the point when it comes to the term 'mansplaining'. Which I think kind of demonstrates why it could be useful in the first place.
=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]
Dismissing anyone's statement because of their gender shows that person's own fault in acceptance. It's why words like these are invented. If you can't debate or have a conversation with what a person is saying and not who they are, making up words to validate that just shows the kind of person you are.
I think I need a drink. Almost everybody does only they don't know it. -- Charles Bukowski
Geno4LoveGeno4L posted...
um, "explaining"?
If they made a gender neutral term for "people who use their genders to defend and argument " it would not be sexist -_- Now it targets only men :0 so it's sexist T_T
um, "explaining"?
You have the right to remain silent, anything you post will be misquoted, then used against you.
I mean realistically if you have to invent a new word to insult men then yes, you are a fucking idiot.
So to the radfems that use it, they're empowering themselves.
to the realistic people they're idiots.
So to the radfems that use it, they're empowering themselves.
to the realistic people they're idiots.
What a stupid ass fucking word. If I ever heard somebody say that shit I'd smack em in the face.
"i was a mistake" - ahmedzub
COVxy posted...
So what is the point then? IME, it just seems like nothing more than a way to personally attack someone because of their sex. What does mansplaining have over condescending and sexist like another poster said? Well, it is shorter to write out, I guess.
People try their best to not get the point when it comes to the term 'mansplaining'. Which I think kind of demonstrates why it could be useful in the first place.
So what is the point then? IME, it just seems like nothing more than a way to personally attack someone because of their sex. What does mansplaining have over condescending and sexist like another poster said? Well, it is shorter to write out, I guess.
spritual powah will never die
Don't be shy to drop a PM to me, I'm always open for conversation.
Don't be shy to drop a PM to me, I'm always open for conversation.
COVxy posted...
If the only way you can make a point is by creating accusative and simplified terms, you're probably not making a good point. Are some men condescending to women? Yeah, no shit Sherlock. Are some Jewish people greedy, manipulative bastards? Yeah, by law of averages obviously, but if you run around yelling about "JewGreed" to fight them people are still going to call you an anti-semite piece of crap (Rightfully, too).
Stop using divisive language if you want equality. Stop demonizing the opposition. It's about educating others, not indignant self-righteousness and groupthink.
People try their best to not get the point when it comes to the term 'mansplaining'. Which I think kind of demonstrates why it could be useful in the first place.
If the only way you can make a point is by creating accusative and simplified terms, you're probably not making a good point. Are some men condescending to women? Yeah, no shit Sherlock. Are some Jewish people greedy, manipulative bastards? Yeah, by law of averages obviously, but if you run around yelling about "JewGreed" to fight them people are still going to call you an anti-semite piece of crap (Rightfully, too).
Stop using divisive language if you want equality. Stop demonizing the opposition. It's about educating others, not indignant self-righteousness and groupthink.
// BEAUTY IS NOT LOVE - LOVE IS NOT MUSIC - MUSIC IS THE BEST - WISDOM IS THE DOMAIN OF THE WIZ--WHICH IS EXTINCT //
http://www.last.fm/user/Pogo92
http://www.last.fm/user/Pogo92
it used to actually mean something real years ago. but now it's been used too often that it only makes the user of the word seem a new wave feminist that you shouldn't take seriously. if i'm giving basic directions using neutral vocabulary that is not "mansplaining". just because i know something you don't and am male does not make everything i talk about "mansplaining"
It's a term that actually does mean something but it's almost always used wrong
You're only as sick as your secrets, but the truth shall set you free.
The truth is the truth, so all you can do is live with it.
The truth is the truth, so all you can do is live with it.
Marklar posted...
If I don't give everyone a chance, I can hardly pretend to preach what I teach, now can I?
Plus, the sentiment is useful regardless of the user's intent. He is not the only one reading, and my goal is not to win an argument here.
You're responding to a troll
If I don't give everyone a chance, I can hardly pretend to preach what I teach, now can I?
Plus, the sentiment is useful regardless of the user's intent. He is not the only one reading, and my goal is not to win an argument here.
// BEAUTY IS NOT LOVE - LOVE IS NOT MUSIC - MUSIC IS THE BEST - WISDOM IS THE DOMAIN OF THE WIZ--WHICH IS EXTINCT //
http://www.last.fm/user/Pogo92
http://www.last.fm/user/Pogo92
PostCrisisJ2 posted...
Pogo_Marimo posted...
The original point of the term was not to counter any arguments. The original point was to point out a situation that seemed to be pervasive within certain circles, primarily within academic circles. Which is when a man would approach a woman and make a point that both often had codified language and was clearly a point that any reasonable person should assume is within the speaker's knowledge. As a toy example, the idea is female grad student presenting a poster at a cellular biology conference about some newly discovered form of water transport in mammalian cells.
"Okay, but Hun, the cell membrane is composed of a phosopholipid bilayer, which makes it hydrophobic , meaning that it repels water."
The occurrence of these types of events were common enough that the community derived a term to describe them. That's all. This isn't some sort of nefarious term that was created to undermine men's opinions, though it has been appropriated by certain groups who have used it as such.
Marklar posted...
Are you calling me a troll? Wish I knew where you got that idea.
COVxy posted...
People try their best to not get the point when it comes to the term 'mansplaining'. Which I think kind of demonstrates why it could be useful in the first place.
So what is the point then? IME, it just seems like nothing more than a way to personally attack someone because of their sex. What does mansplaining have over condescending and sexist like another poster said? Well, it is shorter to write out, I guess.
Pogo_Marimo posted...
COVxy posted...
People try their best to not get the point when it comes to the term 'mansplaining'. Which I think kind of demonstrates why it could be useful in the first place.
If the only way you can make a point is by creating accusative and simplified terms, you're probably not making a good point. Are some men condescending to women? Yeah, no shit Sherlock. Are some Jewish people greedy, manipulative bastards? Yeah, by law of averages obviously, but if you run around yelling about "JewGreed" to fight them people are still going to call you an anti-semite piece of crap (Rightfully, too).
Stop using divisive language if you want equality. Stop demonizing the opposition. It's about educating others, not indignant self-righteousness and groupthink.
The original point of the term was not to counter any arguments. The original point was to point out a situation that seemed to be pervasive within certain circles, primarily within academic circles. Which is when a man would approach a woman and make a point that both often had codified language and was clearly a point that any reasonable person should assume is within the speaker's knowledge. As a toy example, the idea is female grad student presenting a poster at a cellular biology conference about some newly discovered form of water transport in mammalian cells.
"Okay, but Hun, the cell membrane is composed of a phosopholipid bilayer, which makes it hydrophobic , meaning that it repels water."
The occurrence of these types of events were common enough that the community derived a term to describe them. That's all. This isn't some sort of nefarious term that was created to undermine men's opinions, though it has been appropriated by certain groups who have used it as such.
Marklar posted...
You're responding to a troll
Are you calling me a troll? Wish I knew where you got that idea.
=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]
So it basically means correcting a woman? Also that seems more of a friendly correction. Maybe I should be harder on women so I'm less sexist. "No bitch lol, you're wrong, it repels water"
Ugly people hate me.
_ShinnoK_ posted...
There's gotta be some sort of irony in here that you are interpreting the woman as incorrect in an example which was designed for her not to be wrong.
So it basically means correcting a woman? Also that seems more of a friendly correction. Maybe I should be harder on women so I'm less sexist. "No bitch lol, you're wrong, it repels water"
There's gotta be some sort of irony in here that you are interpreting the woman as incorrect in an example which was designed for her not to be wrong.
=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]
COVxy posted...
I know why the term came to be. I have made that abundantly clear. Women face a very real issue in many professional environments wherein men innately view them as intellectually inferior to some capacity and explain existing knowledge in a condescending manner. This discussion is not about that. This discussion is about the nature of language and words, and the power they hold.
"Mansplaining" is a derogative term. There is no point sugar-coating that. It can be used with widely varying degrees of spite, but it describes a common negative experience women share. The issue is when the demarcation line is drawn along an axis of innate trait, like gender, because words take on the characteristics of associated words. When you association male with condescending explanations instrinscally, the association becomes codified and catagorized. It's why "ghetto" is associated with "blacks", for instance, which only serves to institutionalize bigoted generalizations, in this case in Feminism. "Mainsplain'" didn't become adopted by spiteful/radical feminism by accident, it happened because it expresses succintly a bigoted notion in two syllables, and was adopted thusly. It's an accusative term regardless of its more pacified origins and we need to talk about these issues from a perspective of sharing understanding.
<The original point of the term was not to counter any arguments. The original point was to point out a situation that seemed to be pervasive within certain circles, primarily within academic circles. Which is when a man would often approach a woman and make a point that both often had codified language and was clearly a point that any reasonable person should assume is within the speaker's knowledge. As a toy example, the idea is female grad student presenting a poster at a cellular biology conference about some newly discovered form of water transport in mammalian cells.
"Okay, but Hun, the cell membrane is composed of a phosopholipid bilayer, which makes it hydrophobic , meaning that it repels water."
The occurrence of these types of events were common enough that the community derived a term to describe them. That's all. This isn't some sort of nefarious term that was created to undermine men's opinions, though it has been appropriated by certain groups who have used it as such.
Marklar posted...
You're responding to a troll
Are you calling me a troll? Wish I knew where you got that idea.
I know why the term came to be. I have made that abundantly clear. Women face a very real issue in many professional environments wherein men innately view them as intellectually inferior to some capacity and explain existing knowledge in a condescending manner. This discussion is not about that. This discussion is about the nature of language and words, and the power they hold.
"Mansplaining" is a derogative term. There is no point sugar-coating that. It can be used with widely varying degrees of spite, but it describes a common negative experience women share. The issue is when the demarcation line is drawn along an axis of innate trait, like gender, because words take on the characteristics of associated words. When you association male with condescending explanations instrinscally, the association becomes codified and catagorized. It's why "ghetto" is associated with "blacks", for instance, which only serves to institutionalize bigoted generalizations, in this case in Feminism. "Mainsplain'" didn't become adopted by spiteful/radical feminism by accident, it happened because it expresses succintly a bigoted notion in two syllables, and was adopted thusly. It's an accusative term regardless of its more pacified origins and we need to talk about these issues from a perspective of sharing understanding.
// BEAUTY IS NOT LOVE - LOVE IS NOT MUSIC - MUSIC IS THE BEST - WISDOM IS THE DOMAIN OF THE WIZ--WHICH IS EXTINCT //
http://www.last.fm/user/Pogo92
http://www.last.fm/user/Pogo92
Pogo_Marimo posted...
And yet you are clearly not demonstrating an understanding of it. It has nothing to do with
And the fact that you continue to talk about it in reference to a dialog, continues to mean that you aren't really appreciating how the term is useful. Because it's not just someone being treated with condescension, because that happens to everyone. It's not labeling another person in an active conversation to shut them up. It's simply labeling a phenomenon that needs to be discussed.
We can call it 'condescension', but that doesn't cover it. We can call it 'sexist condescension' but it still doesn't quite cover it, as it is primarily a woman's issue.
Your dislike of the term comes primarily from people who misuse it.
I know why the term came to be. I have made that abundantly clear.
And yet you are clearly not demonstrating an understanding of it. It has nothing to do with
making a good point
And the fact that you continue to talk about it in reference to a dialog, continues to mean that you aren't really appreciating how the term is useful. Because it's not just someone being treated with condescension, because that happens to everyone. It's not labeling another person in an active conversation to shut them up. It's simply labeling a phenomenon that needs to be discussed.
We can call it 'condescension', but that doesn't cover it. We can call it 'sexist condescension' but it still doesn't quite cover it, as it is primarily a woman's issue.
Your dislike of the term comes primarily from people who misuse it.
=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]
COVxy posted...
No, your acceptance of the term comes from a No True Scotsman fallacy. You view any use of the term as derogatory as a misuse, even though it is the most common use of the word (By anecdotal evidence, but I'm sure we could search #mansplainin' to prove this if you must insist). This may be a convenient tool for you to handwave any reality you don't like or would rather not confront, but if you are rational you should be capable of stepping back and viewing the social stratification a term like this causes. In fact, this topic is wonderful proof that this term literally causes more harm than good . So how is it useful for "labeling" the issue? There are plenty of great ways to label an issue without leaving the backdoor open for exploitation by hatemongerers.
We can talk about social issues without using easily exploitable terms to discuss them--Our capacity for language is impressive. Why should I be satisfied, then, with a word or phrase that is mostly used for hate, just because it comes from benign origins? There is a vast array of extremely offensive words that stem benign origins. If it is no longer used benignly, though, then it is no longer worth accepting. Use something better. Use something less exploitable. Take some damn responsibility for careless communication.
Pogo_Marimo posted...
I know why the term came to be. I have made that abundantly clear.
And yet you are clearly not demonstrating an understanding of it. It has nothing to do with
making a good point
And the fact that you continue to talk about it in reference to a dialog, continues to mean that you aren't really appreciating how the term is useful. Because it's not just someone being treated with condescension, because that happens to everyone. It's not labeling another person in an active conversation to shut them up. It's simply labeling a phenomenon that needs to be discussed.
We can call it 'condescension', but that doesn't cover it. We can call it 'sexist condescension' but it still doesn't quite cover it, as it is primarily a woman's issue.
Your dislike of the term comes primarily from people who misuse it.
No, your acceptance of the term comes from a No True Scotsman fallacy. You view any use of the term as derogatory as a misuse, even though it is the most common use of the word (By anecdotal evidence, but I'm sure we could search #mansplainin' to prove this if you must insist). This may be a convenient tool for you to handwave any reality you don't like or would rather not confront, but if you are rational you should be capable of stepping back and viewing the social stratification a term like this causes. In fact, this topic is wonderful proof that this term literally causes more harm than good . So how is it useful for "labeling" the issue? There are plenty of great ways to label an issue without leaving the backdoor open for exploitation by hatemongerers.
We can talk about social issues without using easily exploitable terms to discuss them--Our capacity for language is impressive. Why should I be satisfied, then, with a word or phrase that is mostly used for hate, just because it comes from benign origins? There is a vast array of extremely offensive words that stem benign origins. If it is no longer used benignly, though, then it is no longer worth accepting. Use something better. Use something less exploitable. Take some damn responsibility for careless communication.
// BEAUTY IS NOT LOVE - LOVE IS NOT MUSIC - MUSIC IS THE BEST - WISDOM IS THE DOMAIN OF THE WIZ--WHICH IS EXTINCT //
http://www.last.fm/user/Pogo92
http://www.last.fm/user/Pogo92
Pogo_Marimo posted...
No, I view any use that is literally not appropriately applying it as misuse. Like, it was literally created for a very specific purpose.
Pogo_Marimo posted...
This would happen regardless of the labeling. Think hard about topics about sexism on this board. Have any of them not been marred with "but women can be sexist too!".
Like, yes, of course they can, but that's not the fucking point. We're discussing a very particular instance of sexism, one that particularly happens in areas of high education in technology or the sciences.
Further, if we're going to throw out any term that has been appropriated widely as an insult, we have to throw out pretty much every label in existence. SJW, alt-right, democrat, republican. etc...
No, your acceptance of the term comes from a No True Scotsman fallacy. You view any use of the term as derogatory as a misuse, even though it is the most common use of the word
No, I view any use that is literally not appropriately applying it as misuse. Like, it was literally created for a very specific purpose.
Pogo_Marimo posted...
In fact, this topic is wonderful proof that this term literally causes more harm than good. So how is it useful for "labeling" the issue?
This would happen regardless of the labeling. Think hard about topics about sexism on this board. Have any of them not been marred with "but women can be sexist too!".
Like, yes, of course they can, but that's not the fucking point. We're discussing a very particular instance of sexism, one that particularly happens in areas of high education in technology or the sciences.
Further, if we're going to throw out any term that has been appropriated widely as an insult, we have to throw out pretty much every label in existence. SJW, alt-right, democrat, republican. etc...
=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]
Or, if you're really so deadset on maintaining the terminology, might I recommend another battle you can fight too? The term "negro" has been hijacked by racists to denigrate black people when, in reality, it's a very useful anthropological term (And root for other scientific teeminology--Like the taxon ethnic group "negroid"!) used by scientists for decades before its misuse became widespread.
Or maybe, sometimes, possibly, words can be offensive regardless of their original intent, but that doesn't prevent us from communicating the same concept in different words that aren't offensive.
Or maybe, sometimes, possibly, words can be offensive regardless of their original intent, but that doesn't prevent us from communicating the same concept in different words that aren't offensive.
// BEAUTY IS NOT LOVE - LOVE IS NOT MUSIC - MUSIC IS THE BEST - WISDOM IS THE DOMAIN OF THE WIZ--WHICH IS EXTINCT //
http://www.last.fm/user/Pogo92
http://www.last.fm/user/Pogo92
COVxy posted...
I'm not much of a science guy, but it seems as if she made a minor mistake and he gave a friendly correction and the sexist part was "Hun". Big words are boring. Either way, even if he thought he was wrong, that just sounds like a dumb ass too over confident in his opinions.
_ShinnoK_ posted...
So it basically means correcting a woman? Also that seems more of a friendly correction. Maybe I should be harder on women so I'm less sexist. "No bitch lol, you're wrong, it repels water"
There's gotta be some sort of irony in here that you are interpreting the woman as incorrect in an example which was designed for her not to be wrong.
I'm not much of a science guy, but it seems as if she made a minor mistake and he gave a friendly correction and the sexist part was "Hun". Big words are boring. Either way, even if he thought he was wrong, that just sounds like a dumb ass too over confident in his opinions.
Ugly people hate me.
Also you said "sexist condescension"
If that's one of your defenses, that's even worse. It's fucking saying "sexist = men"
If that's one of your defenses, that's even worse. It's fucking saying "sexist = men"
Ugly people hate me.
Obviously and anyone who uses the word in a serious conversation is a moron.
Further, if we're going to throw out any term that has been appropriated widely as an insult, we have to throw out pretty much every label in existence.
SJW,
alt-right, democrat, republican. etc...
Actually I can pretty much agree that this particular term has outlived its purpose, and this is coming from someone who used to use the term. Not as a way to attack other people, but a particular mindset that was making discussion of social justice topics, which is already huge minefield of emotions, even more toxic. Certain types of individuals caught wind of it and eventually became "trendy" by those who weren't as informative about the terms' origins (or some who were aware but were more interested in getting clicks) and now even mentioning the term shuts down any attempt at a conversation being had.
Despite the fact this sort of mentality is still an issue that still needs to be discussed more than ever considering how volatile politics have become, mentioning the term SJW is going to get people riled up, even if you meant it in a non-insulting way. I'd be more than willing to use another term that clarifies the problem if it helps bring this sort of discussion into the light. Like emotional radicalization, which is probably not even a real term.
I would go a step further and agree that mansplaining is a legit term--the problem is that it's something that only works in certain spaces. Similar to the concept of privilege. It's something that I think intelligent enough can agree with exists, but it's something that can only really discuss well if you're able to emotionally distance yourself from it, which I don't think the majority of people aren't able to do without having the proper training to do so. And people on both sides of that debate are guilty of that.
Language is always changing in some shape or form. Terms that were once considered benign now aren't so much, and sometimes in order to get our message across we have to change the wording too. Sure any word is capable of becoming abused like that, but some are more susceptible to it than others due to a myriad of factors that are out of our control.
Actually I can pretty much agree that this particular term has outlived its purpose, and this is coming from someone who used to use the term. Not as a way to attack other people, but a particular mindset that was making discussion of social justice topics, which is already huge minefield of emotions, even more toxic. Certain types of individuals caught wind of it and eventually became "trendy" by those who weren't as informative about the terms' origins (or some who were aware but were more interested in getting clicks) and now even mentioning the term shuts down any attempt at a conversation being had.
Despite the fact this sort of mentality is still an issue that still needs to be discussed more than ever considering how volatile politics have become, mentioning the term SJW is going to get people riled up, even if you meant it in a non-insulting way. I'd be more than willing to use another term that clarifies the problem if it helps bring this sort of discussion into the light. Like emotional radicalization, which is probably not even a real term.
I would go a step further and agree that mansplaining is a legit term--the problem is that it's something that only works in certain spaces. Similar to the concept of privilege. It's something that I think intelligent enough can agree with exists, but it's something that can only really discuss well if you're able to emotionally distance yourself from it, which I don't think the majority of people aren't able to do without having the proper training to do so. And people on both sides of that debate are guilty of that.
Language is always changing in some shape or form. Terms that were once considered benign now aren't so much, and sometimes in order to get our message across we have to change the wording too. Sure any word is capable of becoming abused like that, but some are more susceptible to it than others due to a myriad of factors that are out of our control.
spritual powah will never die
Don't be shy to drop a PM to me, I'm always open for conversation.
Don't be shy to drop a PM to me, I'm always open for conversation.
The23rdMagus posted...
Why are men in female spaces? That's totally the guys fault for not staying in his lane.
It's not, but it can be easily abused to be. It's not difficult to twist it, especially in radfem spaces, so that any man with an opinion on a topic can be dismissed as mansplaining and silenced.
Ironic, really.
Why are men in female spaces? That's totally the guys fault for not staying in his lane.
Pokemon Moon FC: 1994-2190-5020
IGN: Vanessa
IGN: Vanessa
nothing to get offended at once you're a secure male. women have a gripe with a certain type of male, and I'm not included in that.
What do you stand for? What do you stand against? Where do you draw the line? Figure it out!
Whats the female version, femsplaining?
MAKE AMERICA SMART AGAIN
http://i.giftrunk.com/rv4b2c.gif
http://i.giftrunk.com/rv4b2c.gif
I dont know even know what that means.
gunplagirl posted...
"Feminism is for men too! Feminism doesn't care about only women!"
I hate you to your core.
The23rdMagus posted...
It's not, but it can be easily abused to be. It's not difficult to twist it, especially in radfem spaces, so that any man with an opinion on a topic can be dismissed as mansplaining and silenced.
Ironic, really.
Why are men in female spaces? That's totally the guys fault for not staying in his lane.
"Feminism is for men too! Feminism doesn't care about only women!"
I hate you to your core.
Ugly people hate me.
_ShinnoK_ posted...
Magus specified female spaces. Men don't belong in women's spaces. Yes, men can be feminists. But they should never be the ones who act as leaders in any capacity. They will never experience misogyny but will benefit from it, and therefore are not supposed to speak on certain experiences because there's zero way they can have an actual understanding of what's going on from the perspective of having endured such things.
gunplagirl posted...
The23rdMagus posted...
It's not, but it can be easily abused to be. It's not difficult to twist it, especially in radfem spaces, so that any man with an opinion on a topic can be dismissed as mansplaining and silenced.
Ironic, really.
Why are men in female spaces? That's totally the guys fault for not staying in his lane.
"Feminism is for men too! Feminism doesn't care about only women!"
I hate you to your core.
Magus specified female spaces. Men don't belong in women's spaces. Yes, men can be feminists. But they should never be the ones who act as leaders in any capacity. They will never experience misogyny but will benefit from it, and therefore are not supposed to speak on certain experiences because there's zero way they can have an actual understanding of what's going on from the perspective of having endured such things.
Pokemon Moon FC: 1994-2190-5020
IGN: Vanessa
IGN: Vanessa
gunplagirl posted...
_ShinnoK_ posted...
gunplagirl posted...
The23rdMagus posted...
It's not, but it can be easily abused to be. It's not difficult to twist it, especially in radfem spaces, so that any man with an opinion on a topic can be dismissed as mansplaining and silenced.
Ironic, really.
Why are men in female spaces? That's totally the guys fault for not staying in his lane.
"Feminism is for men too! Feminism doesn't care about only women!"
I hate you to your core.
Magus specified female spaces. Men don't belong in women's spaces. Yes, men can be feminists. But they should never be the ones who act as leaders in any capacity. They will never experience misogyny but will benefit from it, and therefore are not supposed to speak on certain experiences because there's zero way they can have an actual understanding of what's going on from the perspective of having endured such things.
Ugly people hate me.
ITT: Sexist woman being a feminazi and swearing she isn't sexist
Ugly people hate me.
we had a good run
spritual powah will never die
Don't be shy to drop a PM to me, I'm always open for conversation.
Don't be shy to drop a PM to me, I'm always open for conversation.
"I don't get it! why aren't there more women on CE?"
Never let those intent on misunderstanding you be the narrator to your story!
BAWSE!
BAWSE!
I don't believe it's inherently sexist, no. I do, however, believe that sexists use it to justify their prejudices. I also believe that some people use it as a means to outright dismiss claims regardless of any sexist leanings.
PSN: kazukifafner
I do, however, believe that sexists use it to justify their prejudices
There's the rub. Far too many people use such terminology not to open their minds, but to excuse their unwillingness to examine their own biases. It feels cold saying this, but a man who feels contempt for women is no worse or better than a woman who feels contempt for men. The circumstances that lead up to them believing this maybe different, but the results are the same.
...That's what it is, isn't it? What I really wanted was to challenge others and be challenged. And I've certainly challenged myself, but it didn't really feel like I was challenging others. It wasn't like everyone was using dirty tricks, but more like everybody was more interested in being in their own world where it was perfectly fine to be hateful towards one group of people. No wonder why I felt like I was hitting a brick wall in these discussions--they might as well be brick walls.
Sorry about this, I'm just kinda having a moment. If there is one thing I've learned from all of this, is that I'm a bit more confident in my social skills, even if I prefer to spend time alone.
There's the rub. Far too many people use such terminology not to open their minds, but to excuse their unwillingness to examine their own biases. It feels cold saying this, but a man who feels contempt for women is no worse or better than a woman who feels contempt for men. The circumstances that lead up to them believing this maybe different, but the results are the same.
...That's what it is, isn't it? What I really wanted was to challenge others and be challenged. And I've certainly challenged myself, but it didn't really feel like I was challenging others. It wasn't like everyone was using dirty tricks, but more like everybody was more interested in being in their own world where it was perfectly fine to be hateful towards one group of people. No wonder why I felt like I was hitting a brick wall in these discussions--they might as well be brick walls.
Sorry about this, I'm just kinda having a moment. If there is one thing I've learned from all of this, is that I'm a bit more confident in my social skills, even if I prefer to spend time alone.
spritual powah will never die
Don't be shy to drop a PM to me, I'm always open for conversation.
Don't be shy to drop a PM to me, I'm always open for conversation.
No, just stupid
Who fears to walk upon the grass? But it is the grass that hides the viper from his enemies and shelters him until he strikes.
Current Events
» Do you think the term "Mansplaining" is sexist
Page
of 2