'Mansplaining'

[zoogs]

Being a little dramatic don't you think?

Not really. I'm summarizing the false equivalence arguments as they're presented.

It's a pretty poor look, yes. The right response, IMO, from those who really believe in this sort of thing? Stop subscribing to the BS instead of blaming the people who point it out to them. For (almost) all of us who have at one point in our lives or another regurgitated these arguments (me included, obviously), I don't believe this is a core value to us. When it comes down to it, I don't believe it's who we are and something we'll choose to double down on. Hopefully when we recognize what those arguments are doing -- and the aims of the people who will make it their hill to die on -- we dissociate.

 

[RedDenver]

So under what circumstances is talking down to someone (with reason) okay?

Depends on your perspective. Some people might say it's never ok to talk down to someone. Others might say satire is a way of talking down to people that serves a bigger purpose that makes it ok. Still others are fine with sexism, so to them mansplaining is ok.

But regardless, I'm not taking sides of whether talking down to someone is good or bad, but rather pointing out that the term (the title of the thread) has a meaning and it's not generic like teach is making it out to be.

 

[Mierin]

Unless I'm misunderstanding the definition of "talking down to someone", I don't agree. I always thought "talking down" was done without just reason. So my understanding has always been that it's always "wrong" to do.

If I'm wrong on that, then I suppose I agree with you.

If someone's saying stupid and or harmful things, I think it's okay to treat them like they're stupid. (That doesn't necessarily mean I do it).

If someone's merely being a man, or a woman, I don't think it's okay to treat them like they're stupid.

 

[zoogs]

^ Exactly. This is not about the generic catch-all issue of one person speaking down to another. It's about the stark differences, one of many, in the way different kinds of people experience the world. 

It's nobody's fault in particular so much as how things are, born out of how things have always been. So it's important to acknowledge this for what it is, and deleterious to us all to insist on denying its existence.

 

[Landlord]

Well, the original charcter was white, so if people are allowed to be pissed when roles are reversed then I guess it's fair game.

Yeah but it's not quite the same as the history of whites being the only skin color represented in Hollywood, even for non-white roles, is it? 

 

[Mierin]

If some chick doesn't understand how something works and a guy takes the time to explain it to her

That isn't what this discussion is about, or what the term is referring to.

One of the requirements for something to be considered "mansplaining" is that the man assumes the woman is ignorant or stupid when it comes to the topic he's explaining to her, because she's a woman.

The situation you're talking about requires the man to be aware that the woman is ignorant about the topic because he took the time to find out whether she knows anything about it or not. In this case explaining is fine if he knows something about it.

 

[B.B. Hemingway]

Yeah but it's not quite the same as the history of whites being the only skin color represented in Hollywood, even for non-white roles, is it? 

No, it's not. And as I said, it doesn't bother me at all, I think Elba is fantastic. When Matt Damon was cast to play an Asian in that one movie (?) a couple years ago that was annoying (I get it though, Matt Damon sells in the box office)

 

[Landlord]

No, it's not. And as I said, it doesn't bother me at all, I think Elba is fantastic. When Matt Damon was cast to play an Asian in that one movie (?) a couple years ago that was annoying (I get it though, Matt Damon sells in the box office)

So do you take issue with the term whitewashing? 

 

[Ric Flair]

That isn't what this discussion is about, or what the term is referring to.

One of the requirements for something to be considered "mansplaining" is that the man assumes the woman is ignorant or stupid when it comes to the topic he's explaining to her, because she's a woman.

The situation you're talking about requires the man to be aware that the woman is ignorant about the topic because he took the time to find out whether she knows anything about it or not. In this case explaining is fine if he knows something about it.

So the assumption is that when a guy tries to be helpful and the gal takes offense, he's being an a$$ for assuming she doesn't understand? I've seen countless examples of women not getting something, but then taking offense when someone tries to educate them about it. There seems to be a correlation between being clueless and being clueless about the fact that one is clueless. Who knew?

The women freaking out about this need to relax. Between mansplaining, manspreading, and the whole host of things they have invented to take offense at, it's gotten pretty ridiculous.

 

[B.B. Hemingway]

So do you take issue with the term whitewashing? 

No, I don't. I've heard the term. Don't think it's really been that big of a deal in modern Cinema.

 

[ZRod]

No, I don't. I've heard the term. Don't think it's really been that big of a deal in modern Cinema.

Matt Damon in ancient China... Tom Cruise leading the Samuri last stand... 

This topic is genrally stupid. I read the first post and the last page. You should all apologize for wasting each other time, especially you teach, and move on with your lives.

Mansplaining and womansplaining are damn funny things when done tongue-in-cheek or good humor. But like anything else they are just stupid when they are meant to be demeaning or purposefully derogatory.

 

[teachercd]

I forgot about that Matt Damon movie...was it as terrible as the rumors claimed?

 

[B.B. Hemingway]

Matt Damon in ancient China... Tom Cruise leading the Samuri last stand... 

This topic is genrally stupid. I read the first post and the last page. You should all apologize for wasting each other time, especially you teach, and move on with your lives.

Mansplaining and womansplaining are damn funny things when done tongue-in-cheek or good humor. But like anything else they are just stupid when they are meant to be demeaning or purposefully derogatory.

Well, my best work was done between the 2nd, and 5th pages, so I'll just chalk this up as an uninformed opinion

 

[Mierin]

So the assumption is that when a guy tries to be helpful and the gal takes offense, he's being an a$$ for assuming she doesn't understand?

That still isn't what "mansplaining" is.

"Mansplaining" is not "when a guy tries to be helpful and the gal takes offense."

For one thing, it happens enough that I think most women just let it slide off of them. There isn't enough time to take offense every time.

For another, the purpose isn't that "a guy tries to be helpful." It's a guy lecturing a female on something he assumes she doesn't understand because she's female.

Lastly, the guy is acting like an a$$ if he assumes a woman doesn't understand something because she's a woman, but that doesn't mean he's an a$$ in general.

But your post and my response are a good example of why people shouldn't throw the word around. It can be used for what you're describing. It can also be used to try to shut a guy up or win an argument without arguing.

And before anyone chimes in, ya, I'm kinda lecturing above, but I'm not doing it because tfree32 is male. I'm doing it because of the words he typed that I'm responding to. In fact I don't know that he's male but it's probably a good assumption.

Well, my best work was done between the 2nd, and 5th pages, so I'll just chalk this up as an uninformed opinion

Mine too. I preferred that part. I'd prefer if this topic was split in 2.

 

[teachercd]

That still isn't what "mansplaining" is.

"Mansplaining" is not "when a guy tries to be helpful and the gal takes offense."

For one thing, it happens enough that I think most women just let it slide off of them. There isn't enough time to take offense every time.

For another, the purpose isn't that "a guy tries to be helpful." It's a guy lecturing a female on something he assumes she doesn't understand because she's female.

Lastly, the guy is acting like an a$$ if he assumes a woman doesn't understand something because she's a woman, but that doesn't mean he's an a$$ in general.

But your post and my response are a good example of why people shouldn't throw the word around. It can be used for what you're describing. It can also be used to try to shut a guy up or win an argument without arguing.

And before anyone chimes in, ya, I'm kinda lecturing above, but I'm not doing it because tfree32 is male. I'm doing it because of the words he typed that I'm responding to. In fact I don't know that he's male but it's probably a good assumption.

Mine too. I preferred that part. I'd prefer if this topic was split in 2.

I 100% love this!  When I talk down to anyone it is not because of anything other than the face they did something dumb.  Just like 99% of us.

Thank you for this.  #NotAboutGender

I love that this thread has gone so many different ways, has still for the most part been respectful and people have kept an open mind.