7d ago

So proud!

You're viewing part of a thread.

Show Context

509 comments

I mean, even if you think you know them, that's still an assumption.
But let's grant you that, because congratulations, you've answered your own question! That's exactly how you can use the term "mansplaining" without being a bigot. By knowing that that's what they are doing.
- You're catching on, so again how is this substantially different then screeching dei when inconvenienced by a minority? It's not is it? It's just bigotry.
  
  Just to be sure I understand your question, you're asking how a woman knowing they're being mansplained to is different than someone screeching dei when inconvenienced by a minority?
  That's your real question?
  
  How do they "know" anymore then the man "knows" you aren't aware of whatever it is they're explaining?
  They don't, they assume, it's just a bigoted assumption.
  
  You tell me! You were the one who asserted that the only way a woman can believe a man is being misogynistically condescending and not herself be a bigot is for her to "know" that he is.
  I granted you that, but sure, if you want to dissect your own claims, let's do it.
  Tell me, how can a women know that a man is being misogynistically condescending to her?
  
  You're being obtuse. I can't tell you how someone can know something that's impossible to know, what I can say is it makes them a bigot to simply assume shit based on sex.
  What claim? Unless you're saying it's not bigoted to make assumptions based solely on perception and sex then I think we actually agree you just haven't made the jump to say mansplaining is specifically and exclusively a sexist preconception.
  They can't, they can say a person is condescending to them, to assume it's based on either parties sex is sexist. You've met a condescending asshole and decided it's because of their sex, that's sexist.
  
  What you're reading as obtuse is me taking what you're saying at face-value.
  I can’t tell you how someone can know something that’s impossible to know
  So then why did you need to lead us around this loop? We already established your view: Any woman who believes that a man is being misogynistically condescending to her is a bigot herself. Wild opinion to hold publicly, but you do you.
  What claim?
  Me:
  And how can you know that intent without being a mindreader?
  You:
  To know them.
  That claim.
  they can say a person is condescending to them
  How? Mind-reading?
  How can they know the person is being condescending, but not be able to use the same faculties to know they are being misogynistic?
  Make it make sense. Or deflect by calling me obtuse. Up to you.
  
  Not at all.
  Simple and applies to most bigoted statements.
  If all you have to go on is ____ and your perception and you make a conclusion based on that then you're in fact a bigot.
  A woman can mansplain correct? If so using a term specifically sexed and derogatorily used and created you're in fact a bigot. I'm not even sure what your argument is here at this point because you never actually answer the direct questions I ask.
  
  If all you have to go on is ____ and your perception and you make a conclusion based on that then you’re in fact a bigot.
  This applies to literally every social interaction, including deciding that someone is being condescending.
  So I repeat:
  How can they know the person is being condescending, but not be able to use the same faculties to know they are being misogynistic?
  Make it make sense.
  A woman can mansplain correct?
  I'd probably say no, but I could see a semantic argument for it.
  If so using a term specifically sexed and derogatorily used and created you’re in fact a bigot.
  This is grammatically incoherent and I genuinely have no idea what it's supposed to mean.
  I’m not even sure what your argument is here at this point because you never actually answer the direct questions I ask.
  What questions have I not answered?
  
  Correct but assuming someone is a condescending ass is wholesale different then assuming they're x because you are y.
  If I assume you're rude because you're black is it ok to drop the hard r or is that bigoted? It's solely based on my perception of both your attitude and your race, is that ok or is that bigoted.
  How can they know the person is being condescending, but not be able to use the same faculties to know they are being misogynistic?
  I'll say this again my point is they can't, they're simply being a bigot it's like the main argument here and your confusion on that is quite honestly perplexing.
  Probably not, but I could see a semantic argument for it.
  Ok so either a woman can never talk down to a woman because she's a woman or the term is exclusively sexist. Remind me again, is sexism a form of bigotry?
  This is grammatically incoherent and I genuinely have no idea what it's supposed to mean.
  We have a word for taking down to people it's condescending, you choose instead to use a word that explicitly refers to men and is intended to be derogatory, that's objectively bigoted. I wouldn't say you're acting hysterically because you're a woman that's emotionally unstable at the moment because that's sexist.
  How is using a sexist term you've just admitted you think only applies to men not in fact sexist.
  
  Ah okay, so you wanted to clarify that the condescension part is irrelevant.
  Your actual stance is: Any women who believes a man is being misogynistic towards them is actually being misandrous herself.
  Still a wild stance to hold publicly, but thanks for clarifying.
  
  It is not that it is happening, it is how it is being conducted. The body language, tone, specific wording, etc. You can generally tell when someone is talking down to you by these contextual behaviors. Have you never had someone speak to you, and you can tell from the way they are behaving, that they are being condescending to you? That person doesn't have to know anything about you to behave as though they feel superior to you. While this can be done to anybody, by anybody, men are more likely to behave in this manner to women, than other men, and women are less likely to do this to men. This is where mansplaining comes from, as the propensity for men to talk down to women more often than other men, and more than women do, thus the factor here is the person being spoken down to's gender.
  This disparity of frequency is what defines a lot of how bigotry is executed. Both white men, and women, are targets of illegitimate arrest, investigation, violence, and other civil rights abuse from authority. However, non-white, and also non-female, demographics show a disparity, against their favor, in frequency of this mistreatment, even when all other factors are similar.
  If you search academic study on mansplaining you will get a wealth of actual academic work, rather than an internet argument. I suggest doing that.

509 comments