You must log in or # to comment.
Great post, thanks for sharing!
Women: “Don’t be condescending”
Lemmites: “What the fuck”
It’s super easy not to mansplain. When you bring up a subject, just ask if they know about it, then segue into a conversation where you can both participate.
Is she explaining a basic thing herself?
Neurodivergents be like: “Wait people don’t want to know this? That’s absurd. So anyway, what I was saying was…”
How many “Men” are just ND?
Okay but what if I’m excited to talk about dinosaurs? Is it mansplaining because I didn’t know the lady im talking to is a paleontologist ?
And people wonder why many men are afraid to talk to women.
I mean they aren’t wrong, she’s patronizing them with condescension they can’t perceive because of their clear deficits.
As a man with adhd, I do this all the time to men and to women, and I’ve been accused of mansplaining. I’m working on it, but I promise it has nothing to do with sexism. I just think everybody needs to know all the details so rhey can reach the same conclusions as me.
And for what it’s worth, I really appreciate when someone does the same for me on a topic I don’t know about. But I understand how frustrating it is when someone does it on a subject I do know about, so I always try to gauge knowledge before info dumping. What catches me off guard is when someone isn’t interested in learning. They don’t know everything, and they are just OK with walking through life, knowing they don’t know something.
Point is, I really do appreciate the grace presented in the post. I don’t mind if you’re being condescending if you forgive me for oversharing.
She’s probably an idiot and had to be told in that way
I catch myself doing this all the damn time, and that’s precisely what it is for me.
I suspect that’s what it is for many of us. Most of us don’t intend condescension, but I expect that doesn’t make it any better ;)
It would be cool if we could keep sexism off lemmy. This isn’t reddit.
Yeah. Too bad all the incels came over.
Gender wars stuff is the worst. I would be in favour of it being banned.
Agreed. Gender in many societies has gotten too cooked at this point. IDK how this gender war shenanigans is ever going to end.
So I’ve noticed this post isn’t going over very well. I’d like to add a female perspective.
“Mansplain” isn’t meant to say you info dump or over explain a thing. It means that you assume you know more simply based on sex. It’s a type of misogyny that’s more typically overt in boomer culture, but it’s got a following in the whole Tate movement. I have rarely noticed it outside of that generation in the wild.
Now…Guys do infodump, which leads to this confusion, because a lot of people dislike that behavior too. Statistically women do speak less in mixed groups. Put it all together and it’s easy for people to over generalize a very specific behavior. It does happen, but compared to previous generations it’s not as common. It definitely occurs to women who work in non-traditional fields and take on non-traditional roles and I suspect that the same is true for men.
Imagine going to school for years and years. You have your doctorate. You’re in the field for 10 years. You work in field that is 93% male. You find a new job, good pay and reputable. The boss on the daily explains things to you. Some things that are just basic science and not even directly applicable to your work. No other new hires get these interesting and informative chats but what a coincidence, all the other new hires are men. I never called it “mansplaining,” it’s just sexism. One cute word doesn’t capture the malice that is often behind it and makes men who view themselves as harmless defensive. Of course there is pointing out systemic sexism that is ingrained in natural behavior but its important to note the difference in a simple conversation and singling out a woman to explain something while assuming she doesn’t have anything in that pretty little head of hers. Personally hence, I’ve noticed it used most often when the woman you’re targeting is smarter than you and this is a subtle power play to remind her of her place.
Bruh, I had a colleague who transitioned FTM and he would talk about this all the time. Constantly being told the most basic shit over and over really fucked with the guy before he transitioned, he said not having to deal with it felt like a breath of fresh air.
Mansplainer perspective here. No, it doesn’t come (for me) from a belief that a woman can’t do anything, it rather comes from an instruction from a childhood that boys should always help and defend girls. If I were in place of that boss, my unconscious intent would be to lower the woman’s burden.
I catch myself doing it and stop it but it’s the hardest pattern I have ever corrected insofar.
Also turn that around.
You are a man in a male-dominated field. You have minimal contact with women within that field. And the small number of women you meet in that field, you over fixiate on, because they are a rare unicorns.
Because of that over-fixiation, and the likely average performance of these women, you might find more flaws in their performance than to your male peers, which you only notice, when they are outperforming you. This creates a subconscious bias in your reasoning, that stays with you.
This is a perception/cognitive bias which causes preconceptions to shift into sexist direction.
No! We must hate men!
IDK, I often find myself mansplain and not infodump. I am not from the boomers, I’m not sexist in any rational way, I’m pretty left leaning, I am though a piece of shit sometimes.
I think that’s how most people are. They don’t identify as sexist, but they do sexist things because of conditioning. No one ever thinks they’re a bad person, best we can do is try to be aware of our bullshit and keep learning.
I’m really nerding out on synthesisers right now, and 99 percent sure she doesn’t know what after-touch means, or why I’m excited that I picked up a late 90s synth with a good keybed and full midi.
My lady friend doesn’t own anything that looks like a keyboard, so I’ll apologize for the over explanation, then proceed to explain why I’m so stoked.
Essentially, I got, ‘I’m glad that makes you happy!’ Which I know means shit up and move on.
If she wants to know more about modular synthesis or rompers, I’m sure she would ask. I wouldn’t force an explanation on anybody.
Hahaha, my wife puts up with that same shit. I’m building drones on Veroboard. She’ll ask how the electric octopus is coming along and then instant glazed eyes when I tell her how I accidentally let the smoke out of a TL072 but at least I used sockets for all my ICs. She did buy me a JP-8000 a couple of years ago though. She’s a good one.
I love to hear people nerd out on their passions. Personally I view it like a gift.
Info dump goes both ways, men usually info dump about things, women info dump about people. Its echoed in men vs women photography of trips also. Men typically photograph things (here’s a car/bike/castle I saw), and typically women photograph people.( here’s me and my sister, here’s a court yard with people dancing)
I noticed this with my parents.
All my dad ever sent me pictures of is architecture. Or a tank, he also likes a good tank.
I have no end of pictures on my phone of funny looking houses in Austria or somewhere.
Female. Why i take pics the way i do. I am there and the pic is proof. A pic without my partner, family,friend i can find online or on a postcard to. An animal is also fine.
Infodumping male here, I generally do it because in my mind context is important to make sense, and of course I do it regardless of gender. It honestly feels like a detriment, as I feel myself taking too long, but don’t really know how to shorten it. I do it when explaining issues at work or when talking about stuff I like etc, but have audio has times where I tried to be brief then got the wrong info across or forgot to mention something important or just right make sense. It’s like I can’t find the right balance between explaining and dumping.
I didn’t find this post as an insult or anything though.
I have the same problem. I work in IT and when I was on the help desk I was one of the “go to” people if someone needed help with a call. There were a couple times I heard new hires complain that I was “mansplaining” to them because I never knew where someone was coming from in terms of technical ability so when I answered their question I began at the beginning to make sure they understood. I did the same thing regardless of gender but I can see how someone felt like I was being condescending if they weren’t familiar with me. It did always seem like it was people who didn’t want to be there that would complain about it too. On the other hand several people that went on to get promoted off the help desk sent me thank you notes for teaching them so much so it kind of balanced out.
I had an experience with a male coworker. I am a man too.
He asked me because he had a USB and he wanted to put the windows iso onto it but it didn’t work. Eventually he used the media creator (or whatever it is called) but he asked if I knew what the issue was. After a lot of questions, I had figured it out.
He wanted to create a bootable USB by drag and drop the iso onto the usb and the usb was formated in fat32, so the iso was too big for the filesystem.
In that conversation, he said multiple times that he knows about this or that and that he knows computers, e.g. when I asked about the size of the usb (maybe it was a very old USB with like 4gb storage). And I could tell how he was slightly offended by some questions.
Also please note, he was “following” the Microsoft tutorial
Edit: typos fixed
Yea, tons of stuff like that is why I did things the way I did. If I start at the beginning instead of trying to jump around and figure out where you messed up it’s usually much more efficient. There were people who I was confident in their ability enough to skip around but if they were new to me we were going to cover the entire process to be sure.
Tbh, that’s the main reason I stopped talking about things that matter to me with women unless they are asking me for it and keep asking during the conversation.
If I infodump on a guy, that guy thinks it’s because I’m maybe overly excited about my thing.
If I infodump exactly the same way on a woman, it’s because I’m mansplaining.
The only way I know around that is to not infodump on women. I pretty much trained myself to become an introvert around women.
Yup, i do the same, avoids bullshit.
I kinda overdo it though. Woman’s about to cross a road with her headphones on, running the pedestrian red light with intense traffic, not bothering to look either way? I’m not gonna mansplain, that’s offensive, she knows what she’s doing.
I had a woman at a car service counter take in my car once. She was dressed nicely and clean so of course I assumed she only did paperwork.
I treated her like a human. Explained my car symptoms and where I think the problem is. (Car electric went nuts and lost power steering when i hit a puddle.)
Holy crap she knew her stuff. I mentioned it felt like the alternator wasnt performing right and undervolting, but since it’s only when driving threw a puddle it had to be a component siezing and pulling on the accessory belt. She agreed that’s a good place to start and ran through all the bits in that system as well as thier diagnostic steps planned.
I figured she knew about cars but it felt like she was a full on mechanic and was the manager dressed up.
Treating people with basic humanity should be the bare minimum, but sadly it’s a foregone conclusion.
Wouldn’t foregone conclusion mean that people do that?
Why are people so surprised when everyone starts to favor talking to AI’s…
It means that you assume you know more simply based on sex.
Isn’t that misandry to assume the man is a sexist because he’s shitty at explaining things or communicating generally you know like a stereotypical man. We can’t be both incredibly myopic and excessively insightful of nuance.
Let me be more clear:
An operational definition of “mansplaining”: If a man assumes he knows more about than a woman explicitly because he is a man and she is a woman. He explains to her x,y,z from this perspective.
Example: A man always talks over female peers, and explains answers during open ended discussions, because he believes he is better and more rational at open-ended discussions than his female counterparts regardless of any evidence of this, or even in spite of it.
Non-Example: A man informs a woman or others about a topic he is more interested or informed in, at a (possibly annoying) length.
It isn’t misandry to call out this bad behavior. Yes it cuts both ways, but we are talking about this term specifically.
That explanation requires prior knowledge or post hoc knowledge otherwise you’re simply saying it’s based on sex or race.
How is this substantially different then screeching “dei” at every minority that mildly inconveniences you?
It wasn’t an explanation about how to assess whether someone is mansplaining or not – it was a definition of what mansplaining is.
Yeah and I’m asking them to use their definition in comparison, how exactly is saying “he’s mansplaining” substantially different then “dei hire”.
Yeah and I’m asking them to use their definition in comparison
To be clear, no you weren’t. Hence the confusion.
But since you’ve clarified: obviously using any term to unfairly accuse someone of being or doing something is a bad thing. Is that a real question?
That’s exactly what I was doing hence the twice repeated question, you can claim a lot of things but that isn’t one that has legs.
Correct, both are based on assumptions that are as offensive as the assumption that they’re mansplaining or a dei hire or whatever.
My point is that you can’t use either without yourself being bigoted enough to come to a conclusion based on bigoted assumptions so how are they substantially different?
I just gave you a behavioral definition with examples and non-examples. I’m sorry, I don’t know how else to simplify it. I can only assume you’re willfully not understanding. Have a good day.
That’s a neat dodge. How is it different then assuming someone is a dei hire instead of simply an incompetent employee?
I’m sorry, I don’t know how else to simplify it.
Maybe if you were a man, you could explain it better.
/s
Yeah because clearly seeking understanding means I’m a bigot and yes I see your /s and I’ll say that doesn’t make it much less of a shitty thing to imply.
my /s was to show that this is the sad joke line someone would actually say like it was a truth. I’m on your side…
this post seems to be going over well, given the number of upvotes.
It’s being upvoted, but the vast majority of comments are not in agreement with the person in the screenshot.
There also seems to be a consensus that the term is misused a lot.
We probably shouldn’t use “agreement” as the guage of success?
Discussion is way more valuable
I had read a lot of the comments and wondered if it might be misconstrued
I hate how the term “mansplaining” has mutated from “When a man condescendingly explains a subject to a woman who is an expert in that subject, because he assumes being a woman makes her ignorant”, which is certainly a valid thing to be upset about, into “Whenever a man explains anything to any woman” , which is sexist and divisive.
The term is still pretty sexist as originally used though. It inherently implies that it’s a characteristic masculine behavior. If you disagree, allow me to demonstrate:
I just came up with this term, “womancomplaining”, it’s when a woman exaggerates a minor inconvenience into a targeted victimization.
How does that term make you feel? Does it seem to imply that I’m talking about a specific, isolated behavior? Or does it seem more like I’m implying this is a characteristic feminine behavior? Would it feel less sexist if I insisted I wasn’t talking about all women, but if you take offense then maybe you feel defensive about being a womancomplainer? What if I told you to calm down, because if you aren’t guilty of it then I’m not talking about you?
It still seems pretty sexist, doesn’t it.
Misogynists and misandrists are both awful. It’s kinda funny cuz they’re essentially the same type of person but on opposite sides
I think the insulting part of mansplaining is the assumptive nature of it.
This can all be avoided by a soft check before explaining something, rather than assuming a boy/girl/chimp wouldn’t know the first thing about welding/cooking/crochet/throwing feces.
Whenever I have the urge to info dump about a topic I’ll probe with a, ‘You may very well know more about this than I, please let me know before it becomes tiresome.’ 10 out of 10 it works, and usually both of us learn something.
That often doesn’t really work though.
Take for example the classic tech support situation.
- Person with problem: “The remote connection to the device doesn’t work!”
- Tech support: “Are you sure the device is turned on?”
- Person with problem (getting angry): “Of course it’s on. Do you think I’m stupid?”
- Tech support: “Is it the device I see on the background of the video call?”
- Person with problem: “Yes”
- Tech support: “The lights are not on. Please double check if it’s turned on.”
- Person with problem: “Oh, I forgot to plug it in.”
A soft check would have lead the tech support to accept that the device is on, instead of digging further, and it would have lead to potentially hours of wasted time.
The same thing often happens in such situations. The person infodumping does so to clear up potential underlying misunderstandings that a soft check cannot catch. That’s not evil or mean or condescending. It’s done with the clear understanding that the person you are talking to likely knows 95% of the things you are saying, but that the remaining 5% might be an issue and a soft-check fails every single time for that kind of issue.
But it’s also a reverse issue. Many women reflexively assume that any time someone infodumps that person is only doing that to them, because they are women and because that man thinks that women are dumb. Even if that man does the same with other men.
The amount of times i had to explain to phone company customers that their phone line malfunction, which they were reporting from said phone line, was monetary in nature…
I just asume whatever I say is dumb and wrong, so I don’t explain things anymore, I let people find out the hard way, and then act like I didn’t see it coming.
To be fair. The only place i see mansplaining ( first kind. The second one is just to try finding a stick to kick a dog. ) is online. I see and talk to man … also i see womancoplaining online all the time.
Actually, no. I love explaining things, it’s part of my personality. But soo many women told me that I should stop mansplaining, that nowadays I just don’t talk to women anymore because of the fear that they see me as a mansplainer. My girlfriend has to live with that, but otherwise, I hate talking to women because of the stupid mansplaining thing. It’s sexist as fuck and I hate the term.
So there are woman irl that really stop a dude talking with the id he is msng
I always like to think of notions like “mansplaining” as social weapons. They can be used against injustice, and they can be used to create it; the outcome varies on the morality or cognitive ability of the person using it.
The judges are out on how it is being used; however, one can be delightfully certain that the Dunning-Kruger effect is in play somewhere whenever the term is used. Which party - who can say?
I don’t really see people use the term mansplain to mean anything other than men being condescending. While I do see it used “incorrectly” sometimes, I have no reason to believe the person using it doesn’t believe the man is being rude/condescending. Just because I personally believe something isn’t condescending doesn’t mean the person doesn’t view it like that (and whether the person is actually being condescending is a totally different topic). I see people call people assholes when they’re not being assholes. I see people call people jerks when they’re not being jerks. It’s not really a new thing.
In short, I don’t believe anyone is using the term differently, it could be that you don’t think the man doing the explaining is being condescending but they do, or it could be that the term really is used differently and I just haven’t personally seen it (always a possibility).
I have no reason to believe the person using it doesn’t believe the man is being rude/condescending. Just because I personally believe something isn’t condescending doesn’t mean the person doesn’t view it like that (and whether the person is actually being condescending is a totally different topic).
There are a lot of insecure people in the world, to whom any explanation feels condescending. Are we really suggesting that the perception of the recipient is more valid than the intent of the subject? That’s kinda the whole problem.
Is it mansplaining for a man who’s been a physical trainer for years to explain to a woman that she’s about to seriously hurt herself with improper form? He knows what he’s talking about, she’s definitely going to hurt herself, his tone is polite but urgent, and the intent is sincerely to help her avoid that. Is her feeling that he’s being condescending by criticizing her form enough to make him a mansplainer?
it could be that the term really is used differently and I just haven’t personally seen it (always a possibility).
I have personally seen it. I’ve personally been accused of mansplaining when correcting someone on something I know a great deal about, and immediately after watching them do it very wrong. Honestly I’ve probably seen it used defensively to delegitimize the man in question much more often than I’ve seen actual mansplaining.
I’m not saying it’s not a real phenomenon, but it seems more often to be a term used to shut down legitimate communication.
I have personally seen it. I’ve personally been accused of mansplaining when correcting someone on something I know a great deal about, and immediately after watching them do it very wrong. Honestly I’ve probably seen it used defensively to delegitimize the man in question much more often than I’ve seen actual mansplaining.
I’m not saying it’s not a real phenomenon, but it seems more often to be a term used to shut down legitimate communication.
I’ve seen this one, too. There are women out there who are using this concept (and the concept of “old white men”) to shield themselves from every form of critique, even if they were totally wrong. There are men out there who are behaving idiotic, but there are also women out there who are behaving idiotic. And I feel that the concept of mansplaining is getting abused by idiotic women and is therefore used against “innocent” men who really want to help. Esp. in the internet the concept is often used as “you are not allowed to say anything because you are a man” and that totally is not helping anyone. Women are getting frustrated because of course the other side will react negatively when you are communicating like that and men totally will think that those feminists are really big idiots.
Your observation is valid, but it would be fair to admit that as you’re not on the receiving end, you might not notice all the occasions women get real condescending mansplaining because it doesn’t touch you personally as much.
Are we really suggesting that the perception of the recipient is more valid than the intent of the subject? That’s kinda the whole problem.
When the topic is “do people use the term mansplaining to describe men explaining something without being condescending”, yes.
Is it mansplaining for a man who’s been a physical trainer for years to explain to a woman that she’s about to seriously hurt herself with improper form?
This is why I said
and whether the person is actually being condescending is a totally different topic
For the topic we’re talking about (do people use the term to describe men explaining things while not being condescending), if the woman in that example thought the man was being condescending and thought she knew better, she’d be using the term properly as you describe it should be used. That’s the point I’m trying to illustrate. In her mind she views the man as being condescending. In her mind she believes she knows better. So she’s using the term correctly.
Now to be clear, I’m not saying it is mansplaining. Nor am I saying the man shouldn’t be doing it in that scenario.
In her mind she views the man as being condescending. In her mind she believes she knows better. So she’s using the term correctly.
Now to be clear, I’m not saying it is mansplaining. Nor am I saying the man shouldn’t be doing it in that scenario.
That’s my point. It’s being used far too liberally. I’m not saying they don’t feel justified in using it, I’m saying that the standard being applied is far too low, and it shuts down legitimate communication. It has the built in defense of delegitimizing any attempts at clarification, because obviously the mansplainer is just mansplaining how he isn’t mansplaining.
To go back to my analogy:
Would you likewise agree that a man would be justified in accusing a woman, with an accurate and valid complaint, of womancomplaining simply because he felt she was exaggerating? And couldn’t he then go on to deflect any clarification she offers as further womancomplaining?
I’m not saying these people don’t feel like they’re using their terms correctly, I’m saying that it shuts down communication and accelerates the weaponization of accusation. It contributes to the gender divide, and has certainly helped to nudge men towards man-o-sphere radicalization.
I don’t mean to address any of your points with this reply, I just want to point out that men regularly accuse women of “womancomplaining” or “being too emotional” or “being hysterical.” A lot of women were lobotomised because of this kind of thing.
Yes, and it’s a bad thing. That’s my point.
You say that’s your point but,
Would you likewise agree that a man would be justified in accusing a woman, with an accurate and valid complaint, of womancomplaining simply because he felt she was exaggerating?
I’ve made it extremely clear, multiple times that I am not commenting on whether I believe anything to actually be mansplaining. By your definition of how people should use your hypothetical example term, the person in your example would be using it correctly.
I haven’t been discussing whether I think it’s a good term or bad term, that’s a different and unrelated topic, I am only talking about whether people “use it differently” now than they used to.
We agree that “mansplaining” means “When a man condescendingly explains a subject to a woman who is an expert in that subject, because he assumes being a woman makes her ignorant”.
I’m saying “condescendingly” is defined by intent, even subconscious.
You’re saying “condescendingly” is defined by perception, even inaccurate.
When I say it is being used differently, I’m talking about the shift from my definition of “condescendingly” to yours.
Although, there’s also the “who is an expert in that subject” modifier on “woman” that has definitely been dropped in contemporary usage as well.
No, I’m not saying that. I’m saying there is not some objective way for someone to know someone else’s intentions. Say you believe something is a fire hazard. You say “that’s a fire hazard.” Turns out it’s not a fire hazard. Have you used the term fire hazard differently than everyone else? No, of course not! You still used it to describe something you believed was a fire hazard, you were just mistaken about whether it was a fire hazard.
I’m saying people who use the term mansplain aren’t using it differently, they actually do believe the person talking to them is condescending.
You’re trying to make this about whether someone is correct in their assessment of whether someone is being condescending. I’ve said it multiple times that I’m talking about how people use it and not whether people agree that they’re correct.
If a woman says a man mansplained something and she believes the man is being condescending, then she’s using the same definition you just said we agree on. Full stop. I don’t believe women use the term differently. It does not matter what the intentions were. I am also not saying she would be right or wrong. Because all I have been talking about is how the term is used.
If you hear a woman say something was mansplaining but you don’t agree that the man was being condescending, that’s okay, there’s nothing inherently wrong with that. But it doesn’t mean she was using the term to describe something that wasn’t condescending. It just means you disagree that the man was being condescending.
Since the gendered nature of the term has been brought up, your comment makes me think of the word “bitch” compared to asshole or jerk. All three terms get used entirely subjectively, but I think most reasonable people agree that “bitch” is at least a bit more crass and tasteless due to its more gendered nature. I know we’ll never get rid of ugly words when using words to hurt and offend, but I think it does show that it matters if a term is gendered. So maybe when people are offended by a term being gendered, we should listen no matter their gender. And I think people who like using those terms, especially when told they’re hurtful, should have a long think about what feelings they get from using them.
It just made me think so I wanted to write that out.
The post says “basic things”
Tricky - basic is very contextual. Basic to an electrician isn’t basic to a plumber!
Right, so a man talking to a woman in the same field shouldn’t explain what is basic in their field. That is mansplaining. Mansplaining is contextual.
It is used much more freely than that. I agree that it’s a problem when it actually happens, but I’d argue the accurate use of the term is not the typical one.
I agree that it’s not always used accurately. I read your other responses and I honestly used to have the same beliefs as you, but I really tried to observe and listen openly the past few years and it shifted my perspective.
Mansplaining is a real problem. If you try to observe social interactions in detail, you’ll notice it more and more often, you’ll even catch yourself doing it. A lot of men really talk very differently to women than other men.
When so many women come out and talk about this issue, they’re not all wrong. I find it kind of ironic that a lot of times, they’re dismissed because men feel the urge to explain and tell them they’re over-reacting.
Sidenote as a response to one of your other replies: I believe that the way the message is perceived is more important than the intent of the message. My intent with this reply is to help you try to think and observe this issue more openly. If it is perceived as attacking your beliefs and putting you on the defensive, then it obviously wasn’t the right message to get through to you. I don’t mean to be condescending, but I’m sure these same words may be condescending to some people. I’m just not the right person to get through to those people on this issue.
Mansplaining is a real problem.
I get that, I do not disagree. My main complaints are:
1 With the term itself, because a la my “womancomplaining” analogy, it shifts the focus from “this man was being a sexist, condescending asshole” to “being a sexist condescending asshole is just a thing men do”
2 With the overuse which is used to broadly dismiss legitimate attempts at communication. It’s definitely a problem when random guys try to explain a woman’s specialty to her, not so much when an man with expertise tries to correct a woman who’s definitely wrong. The problem isn’t that this behavior is being called out when it happens, I’m totally fine with that (though the term itself is still sexist). The problem is that it’s being used to defect legitimate communication.
I believe that the way the message is perceived is more important than the intent of the message. My intent with this reply is to help you try to think and observe this issue more openly.
I appreciate that, but I’ve done that. I understand that it’s important to be empathetic, I try to myself whenever possible. But communication breaks down when you pander to everyone for the sake of the most sensitive perceiver. No one can control how someone else feels, and you can’t know who is going to feel what way. If everyone treated each other in the gentlest way possible no one could effectively communicate.
Conflict is necessary for improvement. You cannot progress without some disagreement with the current state. If someone is wrong, and no one wants to hurt their feelings by correcting them, they will continue being wrong. In another message, I used the example of a person about to lift weights with a terrible form that was sure to cause them avoidable injury. An expert onlooker holding their tongue for fear of seeming condescending spares the lifter the feeling of being talked down to, but replaces that with serious self-injury.
I don’t mean to be condescending, but I’m sure these same words may be condescending to some people.
This is a perfect illustration. You’ve been nothing but patient and gentle, you haven’t said anything condescending, but you’re still worried that I might think it is, even after I’ve shown clear objection to that kind of hypersensitivity. It’s infantilizing in its own way to treat everyone as if they can’t handle the slightest disagreement without being offended. The whole premise of moderating your communication to avoid offending the most sensitive perceiver grinds effective communication among equals to a halt.
I can understand your first point, but being sexist condescending assholes seems to be more of a thing men do, and obviously this was experienced by enough women for someone to coin the term and have it become an immediately relatable experience. You could definitely rephrase it to be something less sexist like “condes-plaining” (work in progress), but it loses the inherent nature of pointing out that it is something women are experiencing from men. I also agree with you that overuse of the term would be bad. I think I disagree that the term is being overused. Every term is used incorrectly in places. I know this is anecdotal, but I haven’t seen or experienced the term being used inaccurately all that often.
For the second half of our discussion, I think I should clarify that I was talking from a one-on-one conversational perspective, not a lecture hall, group discussion, or a friend group. I think those environments are very different and while perception also matters there, it would be a different kind of discussion. A one-one conversation like a gym trainer calling out someone with bad form could go like: “You know, that’s terrible form, here’s how you do it the right way” versus “Hey, excuse me, I noticed your form isn’t safe and could lead to injury. Would you like some help?” I think both ways get the point across, one of them is a lot nicer than the other.
I believe your communication should pander to the person you’re addressing, if you are trying to have a constructive conversation. You can disagree with someone and present it in about a million different ways - some of them might be offensive to that person, others might be well-received. The reason I mentioned that my words may be condescending to some people was not out of worry or fear of offending you, but as a point that different people expect communication in different ways.
I think you’re doing the same thing subconsciously, you’re saying things in a concise and respectful way such that you believe will be perceived well by me. You could say the same thing in ways I’d find incredibly rude, and we would not be having a constructive discussion. Now if someone finds what you’re saying offensive when you’re not trying to be offensive, then you can either rephrase yourself or accept that you won’t be able to effectively communicate with that person one-on-one.
Basic to who, the man or the woman? How does one know what another deems basic? What appears basic to you is not likely to be so for me, and the converse of this is also likely true.
Better said that mansplaining is a post-hoc label applied to an event with a presumption of intent on the speaking party made. One can liken it to “are you looking at me pal?”, but more socially acceptable.
I think every field has things that are pretty universally understood to be basic. If you and I are in computer science and I’m explaining how a keyboard works to you unsolicited, that’s pretty basic stuff and I would be mansplaining.
I’ve had arguments with colleagues over things I assumed were basic and blindingly obvious.
Never assume someone knows something.
In addition to “basic” being relative, I was also speaking more generally about the concept, not purely about the exact post.
My wife has accused me of mansplaining when I really was just sharing the information I had in my head about “the thing” because I was proud of myself about that.
There’s also the “You may already know all this, but it’s worth saying out loud anyway.”
I’m not saying mansplaining isn’t a thing - it certainly is - but there are other innocent “info dump” kinds of things that can look like mansplaining but weren’t intended to be. I try to be very clear about why I am info dumping when I do, but I’m not always able to catch myself in time.
#TouchOfTheTism
My brother in law is a guy who knows pretty much everything about everything. Pretty much any interesting topic you bring up, he’ll have a deeper, more interesting conversation ready about that topic. This might sound annoying, but he’s got a way of making it seem like you’re discussing something you both already understand. Like, he isn’t explaining things unless you ask, he’ll say things like, “I’m sure you’ve already seen/heard of this”, “Maybe you were the one who told me this, but…”, (even when I’m pretty sure he knows I wasn’t) etc. By giving you the credit for the information, it removes the feeling of him trying to be superior or condescending. This might still be mansplaining, I don’t know. I’m a man, so maybe I have more of an ignorance for being mansplained to since I don’t have to constantly put up with it, but this feels a lot more like a man explaining rather than mansplaining
That’s a great observation Nougat! Great job!
Thank you! That’s exactly what I wanted to hear!
So, what’s the latest topic you want to info-dump about? I’m curious and invite an info-dump.
I just fixed one of my motorcycles, and I’m currently doing a deep dive on the pros and cons of phenolic caliper pistons. I could go on about motorcycling and vehicle mechanics all day every day.
Exactly, when I tell my therapist about the funny things I learned about psychology, it’s just me saying stuff that I know now, how I think it’s cool, and asking for further information. I’m well aware that he already knows far more on the topic. If you’re explaining it with a tone of “you fucking idiot woman, I’m educating you”, then that’s mansplaining. Another important possibility, is just phrasing a question as a statement for clarification. Think of how a waiter will repeat your order back to you at a restaraunt. I do the same thing when I learn about a new concept. I repeat back what I think I understood about something to make sure I got it right. Tone is very important. If I don’t sound like I’m trying to be a dick to you, then I’m probably not.
My partner has taught/trained me to ask “would you like to hear more?” before I info-dump on him.
Example: Me: “at work today I’ve been playing around with configuration settings for Primo VE, specifically the search scopes… Um… would you like to hear more?”
Response: “I’m glad you have an interesting problem at work and no, no thank you.”
The problem with this, and it’s a serious one, is that gives them the opportunity to say no.
You are a starship troopers propaganda video. Would you like to know more?
Yep! I even use that tone of voice with him.
Then she spent two hours talking about every single thing she experienced at work and her remarks on them…
There was no “she” in my story.
Edit: and we just had a test of the system. I got home bubbling about updating Anubis and the new config options, then asked “would you like to hear more?” and he was like “sounds like you had a good day, no thank you” then flopped face-first onto the couch.
I was just alegorizing an unbalanced relationship, not trying to describe yours.
Fair enough. I’m a tad prickly about it because folks assume sometimes and it gets tiring.
Yeah the intention is far easier to sus out when it’s in person, especially with a known person. I’m a woman and I have ADHD and I do this to my husband all the time.
As a fellow autist, but also a cis woman person, I think there’s a genuine and clear difference between the two, but… I viscerally understand infodumps when the other person already knows…
You gas yourself up so much to share the thing and they are like… mmhmm. Deflation city. And it’s hard to stop yourself from sharing your own personal understanding of things with people, even if they can correct you, which you hope they will do if you are wrong, omg that would be amazing!
That contrasts so hard with the condescending “I know more than you” attitude. Because the things those dipshits pick to harp on are usually the more superficial aspects of the thing.
Like that’s nice, I’m glad you know the specific term for the thing, genuinely, now let’s proceed from our mutual understanding and iron out the details together!
But that’s really different from someone who talks over you, is wrong, won’t be proven wrong, don’t care or know all that much (like dunning kruger sort of thing)
I’ve had this experience before. I was excited to talk about what I learnt whilst volunteering for a war museum, and wanted to share my excitement with people. Got accused of Mansplaining. It really was upsetting, since I was just talking about a lovely experience and didn’t want to upset nor offend anyone…
They already knew everything you had to say?! War experts out there I guess
1 “fun” fact if you got it, maybe one of the less bloody/violent ones 😇
I knew about this before a bit, however in the museum they have a few bits dedicated to what information we have of Sophie Scholl and the White Rose resistance attempt.
As the Nazis tried vehemently to erase evidence of dissent, amongst other things of course, the story of Scholl’s attempt at gathering resistance has survived - despite her expected demise.I have not read up on my History in many years, however it’s often a short yet symbolic read to the persistence some humans have shown in the face of terror. I do recommend it.
Incredible
Sophie Scholl and the rest, heroes and martyrs
Distributed anti-nazi pamphlets and tried to take all the blame to save their friends. Defiant to the end, supporting their country but not its evil divergence.
RIP:
Sophie Scholl, Hans Scholl, Christoph Probst, Willi Graf, Alexander Schmorell, and Kurt Huber
I am very guilty of asking people if they know about something then telling them anyway.
Too many cases of people confidently telling me they know about computers, point to the monitor and tell me it’s a CPU, then proudly call the computer under their desk the hard drive. The only reason their “CPU” won’t turn on being they need to press the power button on the monitor.
It’s exposition for the voices in my head.
Unfortunately I am autistic and explaining something I think is cool. Only it gets interpreted as condescension :(
Its not always but its often enough
Same :c
Bingo, every fucking time. I’m literally just sharing whats in my head. You know, trying to communicate like a fucking person? Sorry you took that as me thinking you were stupid. Because now i definitely think you’re stupid.
As someone with friends and family on the spectrum, my best tip:
Take a moment to breathe when you’ve completed a thought related to what you’re explaining, and look at the other person to see if they have information to share, questions, or just to express what they know.
This helped a few folks pace themselves, and the break for others they believe helped in not appearing condescending.
Hope this helps!
This is accurate! With my wife, I go on rapid fire about topics and shes so used to it, she interrupts me to tell me to read the room.
It took me a long time to get better at actively scan the other person to gauge their interest, as well as knowing how to ask questions that open up the conversation. I even used to carry a stop watch to time how long I spoke, because I would go on and on.
I definitely get the same sorta thing, you just gotta practice managing it. Usually I’ll say something like “I have many thoughts and don’t wanna mansplain but I don’t know your familiarity…” and then ramble. Context is important, and a lot of people also don’t know where we’re at or where we’re coming from so if we just bust down the door and start telling them how something is then that’s kinda on us to manage.
And if they don’t take the clear opportunities I give them to slow me down and then say I should have somehow known better I ask them how on earth I was supposed to know what they never shared. People will often chill out after that.
Noone ever really grows up, some people are just better at hiding it.
