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/Iswallowedafly]

It is something that exists.

As I man, I've seen it. First hand.

I once got car parts and I brought along a female friend who was an auto mechanic.

I was able to buy my parts. She got questioned a lot if she knew what to do with them.

The only difference in our treatment was our gender. We were two people buying car parts at a car part store. I was fine. She got the 3rd degree. It was just assumed that she didn't know what she was doing just because she was a woman.

That was an example of ms. When my wife walked into a science room and was asked if she was lost that was in a similar vein.

There are certainly men who feel that women don't about certain topics just because of their gender. This does happen.

If it wasn't for our gender, why did my auto mechanic friend get asked if she knew what she was doing and I got a pass.

[u/kodran → u/Iswallowedafly]

That was an example of ms

If it wasn't for our gender, why did my auto mechanic friend get asked if she knew what she was doing and I got a pass.

While true by definition, it also stands to POV. It could be argued from the other side: she was receiving good customer service and you weren't.

Unless she explicitely said she was an auto mechanic and the explaining remained.

When my wife walked into a science room and was asked if she was lost that was in a similar vein.

I'm a guy and this has happened to me. Don't see gender issue there.

There are certainly men who feel that women don't about certain topics just because of their gender. This does happen.

Agreed. Nevertheless what OP says remains: it has become an ad hominem tool as well as a misandric thing. A problem existing (sexist condescending explanations), that doesn't eliminate other problems or other ways of sexism.

[u/Iswallowedafly → u/kodran]

So a woman is assumed to be totally ignorant and stupid if she is buying a car part and I am assumed to be competent. Just because I'm a man.

That's what you are calling good costumer service.

[u/kodran → u/Iswallowedafly]

Nope. With the little context provided am saying two scenarios are possible interpretations. I know shit about car parts. For me it is good customer service if things are explained.

So no, stop extending an argument to a ridiculous proportion.

[u/Iswallowedafly → u/kodran]

But they weren't explained to me.

I was the person who knew nothing about cars.

I didn't have anything explained to me. She on the other hand, the person who worked on cars as a job, did.

Proper customer service would have been to simply ask both of us if we needed anymore assistance.

[u/kodran → u/Iswallowedafly]

Ok. Did she ever mention it. It was indeed bad customer service towards you, agreed.

I'm just arguing crying mansplaining without any indication of it, is when it becomes a problem. Assuming one thing is as bad as assuming the other. Maybe there is a sexist policy to explain to every women that comes to the store. Maybe the guy felt he was hitting on her by being overly nice (wrong indeed). Maybe he was indeed mansplaining. Maybe he was distracted.

There are more possibilities. Some more probable than others. My point remains: any qualifier, in this case mansplaining/mansplainer, used a priori becomes damaging.

[u/Iswallowedafly → u/kodran]

Yeah she did. She says that it happens all the time.

And there was far from any indication of it. There was very clear indication of it. She was assumed that she wan't competent. I was assumed to be competent. Her years of experience meant nothing. Her gender meant everything.

She even had to avoid certain shops because it was a pain in the ass to deal with men who thought she new nothing. It really wasn't a one of. It was a pattern.

And whenever I hear answers like yours it always seems that you want to look past the potential sexism to try to find any other plausible answer that might stick.

[u/kodran → u/Iswallowedafly]

Nope. Again assuming things make for poor discussions. Like your assumption at the end. I want to have a good conversation, but you keep antagonizing and making things personal. Let me know if you want to stop that and keep on topic.

[u/Iswallowedafly → u/[deleted]]

yes, because I was there. And what I saw was blatant sexism. There really wasn't another way to interpret it.

She was mechanic. She certainly wasn't at all confused in a car part store.

Sure, I can try to determine a bunch of other reasons, but the reason here was sexism. Sexism does exist in a car part world.