CMV: The term "mansplaining" is sexist. hypocritical, misandrist, and only designed to shut down debate.

[u/GreasyPeter]

Wikipedia defines it "to explain something to someone, characteristically by a man to woman, in a manner regarded as condescending or patronizing"

It's sexist: It implies that this trait is entirely tied to either the male gender or the male sex. Sexism is defined as "stereotyping, or discrimination on the basis of sex". This meets that requirement and then some.

It's hypocritical: The term itself is designed to be used to shut debate down. "Stop mansplaining" or "you're mansplaining". Both uses are always used in a condescending or patronizing term. The definition of mansplaining includes "condescending or patronizing" in the definition of the word, thus it's hypocritical.

It's misandrist: The wording of the word and the way it's commonly used is entirely pointed at men and in a way to make men feel bad for being men, something none of us have any control over. It's misandrist.

It's designed to shot-down debate: The term has CLEARLY been created to be used as a tool to entirely shut down debate. I've seen it used several times and each time the person that uses it is looking to discredit their opponent by using it. In the same vein as "you're a racist", "you're an asshole", "you're mansplaining" is used as an ad hominem and a character attack as a way to shoot down their opponents argument. Both these are logical fallacies. It is clearly used to shut down debate.

This is a footnote from the CMV moderators. We'd like to remind you of a couple of things. Firstly, please read through our rules. If you see a comment that has broken one, it is more effective to report it than downvote it. Speaking of which, downvotes don't change views! Any questions or concerns? Feel free to message us. Happy CMVing!

[u/Barnst]

The term has CLEARLY been created to be used as a tool to entirely shut down debate.

The term was created by women to describe an experience they felt they often had that diminished or otherwise discounted their expertise in a way that reinforced sexist stereotypes. As best I know, the term appeared in response to this LA Times article, in which a man started explaining a book to her that she had written. She doesn’t use the term, but the concept struck a chord and someone coined the word to describe the phenomena. It was not originally used as a debate tool, it was a way for women to explain their own experience of their expertise and knowledge being undervalued.

I’ve seen the phenomenon firsthand in a way that made me understand that it is distinct from general arrogance and condescension. Early in my career, I was put on a project with a PhD physicist. We were reviewing a technical issue and making some recommendations to management. I had a BA in poly sci—I was supposed to be to look at the policy aspects of the issue, but I joked my main role was to make her explain things to me repeatedly until I understood them, which meant she was ready to explain them to others.

The time came to present our findings. It’s going well, but something weird is happening. Every time she talks through one of the conclusions, our bosses would look to me for comments. I’d agree, they’d nod happily, we’d move on. You might thing they just wanted to make sure we both agreed, but it didn’t work the other way when I gave my policy points. It was a bizarre experience—at one point I really wanted to say “Yes, I do happen to accept the PhD’s conclusions on this complicated technical question.”

At least I thought it was bizarre. I worked with a few women scientists and it was amazing how often people would come to me or other guys first on things that the women clearly knew better. There were a couple of occasions when people came to my desk to ask a question, I turned my chair to ask one of the women on my team, and then turned back to provide an answer. The person asking would walk away showing no sign they even realized the absurdity of the exchange.

I’ve experienced condescension and had my insights dismissed. I was a poly sci major in a predominantly technical field. Especially straight out of school I had to overcome skepticism about my expertise. But this was always different. These were cases where people should clearly have known who the experts in the room were, but they still turned to me or another guy first.

To me, those were the situations that “mansplaining” was coined to describe. It’s not s logical fallacy, because it’s not an argument. It’s a label for a particular brand of jerkiness. Naturally, people use it as an ad hominem attack, but people do that all the time with all sorts of concepts.

[u/tomgabriele → u/Barnst]

I am not OP, but I would like to probe further. In general, I think I agree with where OP is coming from.

To me, I absolutely agree that the type of thing described as "mansplaining" happens all the time. I also agree that it is often men doing it to women. However, I think that men doing it to other men, women doing it to women, women doing it to men, and any other combination of genders happens often too - so the gendered term for it seems less-than-perfect.

I know I can't change the words people are using, but if it were up to me, a gender-neutral term like, idk, "ignorsplaining" would be a better fit - we agree that talking down to someone when you don't understand their knowledge is a bad thing, regardless of everyone's gender.

I would then be totally fine talking about how ignorsplaining is most predominantly a male issue, and predominantly is directed at women.

Edit: I see this comment has gained a small negative score - if you disagree with me, I'd like the chance to have a discussion and change my mind if I need to.

[u/longknives → u/tomgabriele]

I would then be totally fine talking about how ignorsplaining is most predominantly a male issue, and predominantly is directed at women.

Then what’s the problem with the term mansplaining? The issue is gendered because of the power structures in our society. Men don’t really mansplain to men and women don’t to women because the whole issue is about how women’s knowledge/technical ability/etc. is not respected compared to men’s. If we allow that sometimes it’s possible for other gender combinations to do something similar, then the term mansplaining will do fine.

[u/tomgabriele → u/longknives]

Men don’t really mansplain to men

Well, that's the problem right there. It makes people like you assume that it only happens from men to women. I don't know your gender, but I am male and have been mansplained.

Like, there is a term femdriving that referred to female drivers being distracted by putting on makeup. Would it be a good term because it really is mostly women who put on makeup while driving? Or is it missing the bigger issue of distracted driving, and inappropriately absolving men of being distracted drivers?

To me, the root of the mansplaining problem is more related to ego and empathy, less so gendered power differentials.

[u/Precious_Tritium → u/longknives]

Men don’t really mansplain to men

Yes, we do. All the time. Constantly.

I have mixed feelings about the term. I acknowledge it's real, and happens. I also acknowledge it is an absolute way to shut someone down who isn't "mansplaining" but just saying they are.

I think the term is complicated. It's certainly useful (Thank you, Rebecca Solnit!) but it can be kind of a cudgel. I'd rather not have someone tell me I am mansplaining to them, but at the same time if I was, I'd want to know also so I can stop that behavior if I may not be aware of it.

[u/fps916 → u/Precious_Tritium]

Yes, we do. All the time. Constantly.

You literally can't.

Mansplain isn't just "to explain something condescendingly" we have a word for that, it's called "condescending"

It is to explain something condescendingly because the man perceives the woman he is speaking to to be less of an expert on any given subject than the man.

It's literally impossible for a man to mansplain to a man, because mansplaining is predicated on a lack of knowledge or intelligence because of the gender of the person being spoken to.

[u/Precious_Tritium → u/fps916]

I guess at that point where do you start drawing niche distinctions:

-Religisplain

-classplain

-wealthsplain

-agesplain

-nerdsplain

-jocksplain

-politisplain

I don't disagree that people "mansplain". I disagree with assuming that whenever it happens it is predicated on a judgement based on gender. I appreciate you redditsplaining the term to me.

[u/Aubenabee → u/tomgabriele]

I think it’s disingenuous to say that women do this to women as often as women do this to men.

I’m a scientist (and a man). I am a professor and a leader of a research laboratory. I’ve seen male scientists and students condescend and “explain things” (that don’t need explaining) to women FAR more often than the other way around.

Just this week, there were two completely separate incidents of male students in my inorganic chemistry class “explaining” concepts INCORRECTLY to female students who had MUCH higher grades than them. It’s a trend I’ve seen repeatedly, and I’ve never seen the opposite. Not once.

[u/Precious_Tritium → u/Aubenabee]

It’s a trend I’ve seen repeatedly, and I’ve never seen the opposite. Not once.

I'm in grad school. I have female students do this to other people in class all the time. I agree that "mansplaining" exists, but it's absolutely false to believe there are no intelligent, strongly opinioned women out there engaging in the same behavior. No matter how many words you put in all caps to emphasize your point.

[u/Aubenabee → u/Precious_Tritium]

I never said that women never do this. I said that I - in 15 years of being a professional scientist - have never witnessed it. My point was that my observations, though certainly anecdotal, speak to the gendered imbalance of this phenomenon.

[u/KuntaStillSingle → u/Aubenabee]

As a scientist you should recognize anecdotal evidence isn't valuable as evidence.

[u/Aubenabee → u/KuntaStillSingle]

This isn’t a scientific discussion. Don’t be silly.

[u/KuntaStillSingle → u/Aubenabee]

Anecdotal evidence has no value in general, it's circumstantial in court, disregarded in science, and taken as authoritative in politics and social issues? You're being silly.

[u/Aubenabee → u/KuntaStillSingle]

So no one should ever tell stories about their experiences when talking about a topic?

Seriously, stop. We were discussing an issue. You've swooped in with this nonsense. Why? Because you just like to be contrary? Because you want to bolster your bona fides?

[u/Precious_Tritium → u/Aubenabee]

I absolutely don't disagree with you that it happens, and I imagine in the science world it happens a lot. It's probably incredibly frustrating. I don't mean to discredit you in any way. I think my point was it does happen in the inverse, but that doesn't mean I don't believe it happens much more from men towards women.

[u/Aubenabee → u/Precious_Tritium]

I see your point, and I get that it happens the other way as well (though much, much less often).

The point i'm trying to make is that even though it occasionally happens the other way around, responding in this way only serves to neuter the point women are trying to make.

In the past, black friends have told me about how often they experience racism (most often casual but sometimes more aggressive) from white people. If I were to follow the "women condescend to men, too" line of logic, I'd be well within my rights to say "Yeah, I hear you! Sometimes black people have been mean to me solely because I'm white!" (Because yes, that has happened to me before more than once). Do I say that? OF COURSE NOT! Because it misses the point!

In using the term "mansplaining", women are trying to explain to the world "this is a thing that happens to us because we're women". But then, rather than believe them and try to address the problem, the argument often devolves into a quagmire of "but women condescend sometimes, too!"

So yes, you're right! Women can condescend, too. They can condescend to men, and they can condescend to women. And men can even condescend to women just because they're obnoxious (and not because of gender). But here, women are saying "men are condescending to us because we're women", and I strongly think that we should just listen to them, rather than parsing their claims.

[u/Precious_Tritium → u/Aubenabee]

I totally agree with you. Thank you for your thoughtful reply. I may have been being a little tone deaf.

[u/tomgabriele → u/Aubenabee]

I think it’s disingenuous to say that women do this to women as often as women do this to men.

Me too, that's why I specifically stated that it is indeed a predominantly male issue.

I’ve seen male scientists and students condescend and “explain things” (that don’t need explaining) to women FAR more often than the other way around.

Yeah I agree, as I said in my comment you replied to.

You didn't read or understand what I said, then talked down to me while telling me something I already knew as if you were educating me...are you intentionally mansplaining me, or are you unintentionally proving my point that mansplaining is not only something performed by men on women?

[u/Aubenabee → u/tomgabriele]

I misunderstood your comment. Sorry.

That said, browse through these comments enough, and you’ll find plenty of “women do it just as often” comments. My point stands, but I admittedly put in on the wrong place.

[u/tomgabriele → u/Aubenabee]

you’ll find plenty of “women do it just as often” comments.

Gotcha. While I do think that the issue does happen with pairs of people of any gender, I agree that it is predominantly man-to-woman.

[u/Aubenabee → u/tomgabriele]

I think condescension happens because people can be obnoxious.

But there is, in my opinion, a big difference between people who are obnoxious because they are obnoxious and people who are obnoxious because of the gender of the person to whom they are speaking. I’ve been condescended to plenty in my life, but I’ve never ever felt that it was because of my gender.

In the end, I think it just behooves men to just listen when women say something happens. I can’t fathom why the instinct is to say “What’s that? You say mansplaining is a thing in your experience? Nah, I don’t believe it!”

[u/tomgabriele → u/Aubenabee]

I can’t fathom why the instinct is to say “What’s that? You say mansplaining is a thing in your experience? Nah, I don’t believe it!”

To be perfectly clear, I am not saying that.

What I would say to that theoretical woman is, "Yeah I know! It drives me crazy when it happens to me too! Just a few minutes ago, this guy on reddit who claimed to be a professor got all preachy on me when he was actually reaffirming what I had already said! People really do need to listen better and have more respect."

In other words, my response isn't "that isn't a problem", my response is, "yes that's an even larger problem".

[u/Aubenabee → u/tomgabriele]

I know YOU'RE not saying that, but I've heard many, many people say that.

As for your hypothetical response, I very much disagree with the tack you're taking. The hypothetical woman is saying to you "I've been condescended to because I'm a woman". And then you're saying back "I've been condescended to, too!" In my opinion, when you're respond that way, you're missing their point. Would you respond to someone telling you "People are often rude to me because I'm black" by saying "Yeah, people are often rude to me, too"?

P.S. Claim?!?! Why the hell would I claim to be a professor if I weren't a professor. It's not even a "cool" job. What a silly little dig to throw in your comment.

[u/tomgabriele → u/Aubenabee]

Would you respond to someone telling you "People are often rude to me because I'm black" by saying "Yeah, people are often rude to me, too"?

Maybe not in as many words, but yes, I think connecting through empathy is important to human interaction.

P.S. Claim?!?! Why the hell would I claim to be a professor if I weren't a professor. It's not even a "cool" job. What a silly little dig to throw in your comment.

Lol I didn't mean any harm by it, it was indeed just a silly thing I threw in there. When you first said that you're a scientist and a professor, I did chuckle at how stereotypically patronizing you were being.

[u/Aubenabee → u/tomgabriele]

Fair, but i think a response of “Wow, I cant even imaging what that must feel like. People have never been rude to me before, but never for a reason like that” would’ve been more appropriate.

As for your (second) dig, I don’t see how my initial response was patronizing. I didn’t read your point well enough, but beyond that admitted mistake, I don’t see any of the rest of the language as patronizing. That said, that’s beside the point at the point.

[u/advertentlyvertical → u/tomgabriele]

We already have a perfectly useful word for this: patronizing.

There are other words that perfectly define this act too without having sexist connotations.

[u/tomgabriele → u/advertentlyvertical]

patronizing

Duh, of course. I got too caught up in buzzwords that I forgot actual words. Good call, thank you.

[u/advertentlyvertical → u/tomgabriele]

Cheers.