6 ms·

This is classic tribalism -- like-minded people will congregate in safe spaces to share ideas and whatnot while denying entry to outsiders. Attributing it to so

by ihsw 10y ago

This is classic tribalism -- like-minded people will congregate in safe spaces to share ideas and whatnot while denying entry to outsiders. Attributing it to some kind of banal hostility towards all women is nonsense, it is simply indicative of hostility towards outsiders (and in a male-dominated environment, women are outsiders). Rigid power structures, nepotism, and the like are present everywhere but it wasn't until recently that women have been regarded as partners rather than servants. The trend will inevitably change but attacking "manliness" with silly terms like "mansplaining" and "manspreading" will only get you labelled a nitwit (and rightfully so). The goal should be to empower women, not degrade men.

eropple 10y ago
I am a man. "Mansplaining" isn't degrading. It's the recognition of a common facet in Western society where men assume that women aren't competent in mathematical and technical fields at first glance and presume without cause that they need it explained to them by those men. And that first glance is because they're women. It is not, unless you get shitty when called on it, some deep character flaw. Societal inculcation is a thing and it's hard to shake without being confronted with it. I've seen plenty of people apologize when called on it and avoid making that assumption a second time. Recognize it, do better, move on.
- ihsw 10y ago
  Just call it condescension, making it into a gendered term is bigotry. Tolerating the usage of that term is acknowledgement that bigotry towards men is acceptable. The fact that you are a man is irrelevant, I'm also a man and I find the acceptance of bigotry towards men to be abhorrent.
  - eropple 10y ago
    Please define "bigotry" and explain, in very if-A-then-B form, exactly how "mansplain" is either an example of bigotry or encourages such. If you believe that words mean things--which, even in today's climate, is a generally accepted position--this might be a difficult one for you.
    - jimmywanger 10y ago
      Mansplain means taking a neutral world, "explain", and associating it with both gender and a negative connotation. It also implies that only men can be condescending in this way, and that it's impossible for a woman to do the same. Would it be all right to say that somebody is "whitesplaining" or "gooksplaining" or "blacksplaining"?
  - dragonwriter 10y ago
    Recognizing and calling out a particular common gendered pattern of condescension isn't bigotry toward anyone.
    - chillingeffect 10y ago
      ...Implying women don't also talk for long streams wherein men are expected to listen to them. Any socially astute man knows that women benefit from being listened to in sustained streams-of-thought speech. It's commonly called "processing." And if you're not doing it currently, then all the women in your life, from your family to friends to lovers, will be happy when you start. It's a way of showing women respect and demonstrating that you're listening to them and take them seriously. So both men and women will talk for long paragraphs. It's only recently that a small, vocal subset of women decided to genderize it with the term "mansplaining" to mock and dismiss men. It was kind of funny when it was just a joke, but now that it's used to shout down men and these women are forgetting their own propensity for endured, one-sided conversation, it's not funny anymore. But secretly, I'm happy when I hear a woman use the phrase "mansplaining." It's a signal that helps me decisively eliminate her from my social life. Anyone using that term as anything more than a small side joke doesn't deserve my attention.
      - dragonwriter 10y ago
        No, not implying that at all; thats not even rationally connected to what you are responding to.
        chillingeffect 10y ago
        Yes, it is. Please set aside your need to be right and think about it: Women talk for long streams. If men were to refer to it as "womensplaining," it would be condescending. Men talk for long streams. When the small, vocal subset of women refer to it as "mansplaining," it is condescending. The error in logic is to say that it's a gendered pattern of condescension. Because both genders do it, it only becomes gendered when you forget that women do it, too. Who is the Zen master who makes the grass green? It is you. You make the grass green.
- dragonwriter 10y ago
  The usual use of "mansplaining" isn't limited to scientific and technical fields, in fact, I'd argue that is neither the original nor most common domain in which "mansplaining" was and is called out.
  - eropple 10y ago
    Oh, sure--they're just where people I know have most egregiously run into it.
- jimmywanger 10y ago
  > men assume that women aren't competent in mathematical and technical fields at first glance and presume without cause that they need it explained to them by those men. Wow, what a minefield. I don't expect anybody to be competent in mathematical or technical fields, so I generally start from the beginning until somebody says "Oh, I already worked with this particular tech stack this is the problem I can't figure out." Immediately attributing that to the fact that they're women and the main thing they need is explanation, by a man, that's a huge leap. Calling it Mansplaining is horrible. Like somebody else pointed out, condescending is the gender neutral way to say it, and calling it mansplaing indicates it's problem exclusive to men. Can Caitlyn Jenner mansplain? Can Oprah mansplain?
RangerScience 10y ago
Mansplaining = commisseration + condescension Ironically, I learned valuable psychological hacks from manspreading: When you feel down, spread yourself out and take up a bunch of space. It's really empowering! > The goal should be to empower women, not degrade men. Yes, but - Mansplaining is meant to point out situations when men are degrading women. So it's not about degrading men, it's about degrading assholes, although yeah, the term is inherently gender'd.
- ihsw 10y ago
  Then call it what it is -- condescension. Do we label Asians that cheat on tests in college as "chinks"? No! That's awful and bald-faced racism, we just call them cheaters with low moral standards.
tptacek 10y ago
This sounds like a tightly reasoned argument but is in fact just an exercise in the rhetoric of rationalist dismissal. You can see this by simply looking carefully at the words you've chosen. "Classic tribalism", you say. Apart from begging the question of what exactly is "classic" about it, there's the bigger problem of how hard it is to come up with any human conflict that can't be cast and dismissed a "tribal", from the proper border between Kaliningrad and Lithuania to whether and how cities should regulate Uber drivers. You know the complaint about "mansplaining" is utterly bogus because of the real problem with the term, which is that English already has a universally-accepted word that means literally --- exactly literally --- the same thing: "patronizing". What you object to isn't the term: you object to the people using it, and seek to dismiss and mock them.
- chillingeffect 10y ago
  My strawperson-per-minute meter just pegged. Don't you find it unreflexive and ironic to dismiss their writings as rationalistically dismissive then proceed to nitpick denotative meanings? And how on Earth do you get that deploying a bigoted version of an existing word means the person who doesn't like getting targeted with it has no right to complain about it? For example, how do you feel about people who call women "cunts"? By your logic, objecting to that practice would be utterly bogus (not just bogus, mind you, but utterly bogus...), because the jerks doing it have a right to do it. In your logic, the bigoted, offensive term "cunts" is fine. Anyone complaining about getting called a "cunt" doesn't dislike the term, they just want to dismiss and mock the jerks calling them that... That's ridiculous. People who call women "cunts" are trying to verbally intimidate them through gendered, offensive references. And the same is true with people who label others "mansplainers." They're just offensive namecallers, trying to use sexual imagery to shame someone into shutting up, to demonstrate that they will go further in a conflict, that they have less to lose, and dare them to push back. Look, I kind of understand where you're coming from, tptacek. I've read a lot of the same social theory as you in grad school. I've read a lot of your writings here and elsewhere. And I object to mainstream society in a big way, too. And I object to a lot of the tech scene as well, from the huge bets on stupid tech to the path of tech from research to military to police to consumer. But take this from someone who wants to see you succeed: You're flipping out and not being persuasive. You're relying too much on trying to overwhelm people with big words from the literature and failing to communicate. You're letting yourself get triggered and losing the ability to relate to those who disagree with you and see two or more simultaneous perspectives in your mind at once. You're moving into all black and white territory, but you know reality isn't like that.

by ihsw 10y ago

eropple 10y ago

I am a man. "Mansplaining" isn't degrading. It's the recognition of a common facet in Western society where men assume that women aren't competent in mathematical and technical fields at first glance and presume without cause that they need it explained to them by those men. And that first glance is because they're women. It is not, unless you get shitty when called on it, some deep character flaw. Societal inculcation is a thing and it's hard to shake without being confronted with it. I've seen plenty of people apologize when called on it and avoid making that assumption a second time. Recognize it, do better, move on.

ihsw 10y ago
Just call it condescension, making it into a gendered term is bigotry. Tolerating the usage of that term is acknowledgement that bigotry towards men is acceptable. The fact that you are a man is irrelevant, I'm also a man and I find the acceptance of bigotry towards men to be abhorrent.
- eropple 10y ago
  Please define "bigotry" and explain, in very if-A-then-B form, exactly how "mansplain" is either an example of bigotry or encourages such. If you believe that words mean things--which, even in today's climate, is a generally accepted position--this might be a difficult one for you.
  - jimmywanger 10y ago
    Mansplain means taking a neutral world, "explain", and associating it with both gender and a negative connotation. It also implies that only men can be condescending in this way, and that it's impossible for a woman to do the same. Would it be all right to say that somebody is "whitesplaining" or "gooksplaining" or "blacksplaining"?
- dragonwriter 10y ago
  Recognizing and calling out a particular common gendered pattern of condescension isn't bigotry toward anyone.
  - chillingeffect 10y ago
    ...Implying women don't also talk for long streams wherein men are expected to listen to them. Any socially astute man knows that women benefit from being listened to in sustained streams-of-thought speech. It's commonly called "processing." And if you're not doing it currently, then all the women in your life, from your family to friends to lovers, will be happy when you start. It's a way of showing women respect and demonstrating that you're listening to them and take them seriously. So both men and women will talk for long paragraphs. It's only recently that a small, vocal subset of women decided to genderize it with the term "mansplaining" to mock and dismiss men. It was kind of funny when it was just a joke, but now that it's used to shout down men and these women are forgetting their own propensity for endured, one-sided conversation, it's not funny anymore. But secretly, I'm happy when I hear a woman use the phrase "mansplaining." It's a signal that helps me decisively eliminate her from my social life. Anyone using that term as anything more than a small side joke doesn't deserve my attention.
    - dragonwriter 10y ago
      No, not implying that at all; thats not even rationally connected to what you are responding to.
      - chillingeffect 10y ago
        Yes, it is. Please set aside your need to be right and think about it: Women talk for long streams. If men were to refer to it as "womensplaining," it would be condescending. Men talk for long streams. When the small, vocal subset of women refer to it as "mansplaining," it is condescending. The error in logic is to say that it's a gendered pattern of condescension. Because both genders do it, it only becomes gendered when you forget that women do it, too. Who is the Zen master who makes the grass green? It is you. You make the grass green.
dragonwriter 10y ago
The usual use of "mansplaining" isn't limited to scientific and technical fields, in fact, I'd argue that is neither the original nor most common domain in which "mansplaining" was and is called out.
- eropple 10y ago
  Oh, sure--they're just where people I know have most egregiously run into it.
jimmywanger 10y ago
> men assume that women aren't competent in mathematical and technical fields at first glance and presume without cause that they need it explained to them by those men. Wow, what a minefield. I don't expect anybody to be competent in mathematical or technical fields, so I generally start from the beginning until somebody says "Oh, I already worked with this particular tech stack this is the problem I can't figure out." Immediately attributing that to the fact that they're women and the main thing they need is explanation, by a man, that's a huge leap. Calling it Mansplaining is horrible. Like somebody else pointed out, condescending is the gender neutral way to say it, and calling it mansplaing indicates it's problem exclusive to men. Can Caitlyn Jenner mansplain? Can Oprah mansplain?

RangerScience 10y ago

Mansplaining = commisseration + condescension Ironically, I learned valuable psychological hacks from manspreading: When you feel down, spread yourself out and take up a bunch of space. It's really empowering! > The goal should be to empower women, not degrade men. Yes, but - Mansplaining is meant to point out situations when men are degrading women. So it's not about degrading men, it's about degrading assholes, although yeah, the term is inherently gender'd.

ihsw 10y ago
Then call it what it is -- condescension. Do we label Asians that cheat on tests in college as "chinks"? No! That's awful and bald-faced racism, we just call them cheaters with low moral standards.

tptacek 10y ago

This sounds like a tightly reasoned argument but is in fact just an exercise in the rhetoric of rationalist dismissal. You can see this by simply looking carefully at the words you've chosen. "Classic tribalism", you say. Apart from begging the question of what exactly is "classic" about it, there's the bigger problem of how hard it is to come up with any human conflict that can't be cast and dismissed a "tribal", from the proper border between Kaliningrad and Lithuania to whether and how cities should regulate Uber drivers. You know the complaint about "mansplaining" is utterly bogus because of the real problem with the term, which is that English already has a universally-accepted word that means literally --- exactly literally --- the same thing: "patronizing". What you object to isn't the term: you object to the people using it, and seek to dismiss and mock them.

chillingeffect 10y ago
My strawperson-per-minute meter just pegged. Don't you find it unreflexive and ironic to dismiss their writings as rationalistically dismissive then proceed to nitpick denotative meanings? And how on Earth do you get that deploying a bigoted version of an existing word means the person who doesn't like getting targeted with it has no right to complain about it? For example, how do you feel about people who call women "cunts"? By your logic, objecting to that practice would be utterly bogus (not just bogus, mind you, but utterly bogus...), because the jerks doing it have a right to do it. In your logic, the bigoted, offensive term "cunts" is fine. Anyone complaining about getting called a "cunt" doesn't dislike the term, they just want to dismiss and mock the jerks calling them that... That's ridiculous. People who call women "cunts" are trying to verbally intimidate them through gendered, offensive references. And the same is true with people who label others "mansplainers." They're just offensive namecallers, trying to use sexual imagery to shame someone into shutting up, to demonstrate that they will go further in a conflict, that they have less to lose, and dare them to push back. Look, I kind of understand where you're coming from, tptacek. I've read a lot of the same social theory as you in grad school. I've read a lot of your writings here and elsewhere. And I object to mainstream society in a big way, too. And I object to a lot of the tech scene as well, from the huge bets on stupid tech to the path of tech from research to military to police to consumer. But take this from someone who wants to see you succeed: You're flipping out and not being persuasive. You're relying too much on trying to overwhelm people with big words from the literature and failing to communicate. You're letting yourself get triggered and losing the ability to relate to those who disagree with you and see two or more simultaneous perspectives in your mind at once. You're moving into all black and white territory, but you know reality isn't like that.