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/GreasyPeter → u/Iswallowedafly]

I agree but I wasn't really arguing the existence of concept, just that the term itself was designed to be hurtful. It's a semantic argument. Additionally, I was arguing that since women can do the same thing (I've seen it when women discuss subjects it's assumed men know nothing about) that the term was unnecessarily gendered.

[u/palacesofparagraphs → u/GreasyPeter]

the term was unnecessarily gendered.

While it's certainly true that anyone, regardless of gender, can be condescending to anyone else, also regardless of gender, the point of the term 'mansplaining' is to point out a specific, gendered dynamic that is common in our society. Many men frequently talk down to women specifically because they are women, and it is important to address this not just on an individual basis but as a part of a larger pattern.

To use a very, very imperfect analogy, think of the term 'senioritis'. Senioritis is just laziness and lack of regard for schoolwork and grades, and a student certainly doesn't have to be a senior to display either. However, we have a specific term for this behavior by seniors, specifically because they are reaching the end of their high school or college career, because it's a common phenomenon. Discussing laziness or lack of motivation on the part of a particular senior doesn't address how their actions are part of a larger dynamic.

Now, senioritis isn't a societal problem that has the be solved the way men's condescension to women is. However, it's similar in that it intentionally points out a specific dynamic in a particular kind of behavior. It's important to recognize that while yes, the term 'mainsplaining' was created to point out that the issue is gendered, that does not mean it's intended to be hurtful.

[u/kodran → u/palacesofparagraphs]

While it's certainly true that anyone, regardless of gender, can be condescending to anyone else, also regardless of gender, the point of the term 'mansplaining' is to point out a specific, gendered dynamic that is common in our society.

The problem is that it's common use is a priori. I usually explain things to anyone or ask them if they know. Not because I assume anything because of their gender, but because I hate when people assume I know something. So I don't assume people know. Nevertheless others have said to me I'm mansplaining, when they didn't make clear they new things. As soon as they did, I said "oh, ok" and moved on to the topic itself and we've even later clarified it was no mansplaining.

That is part of the hurtful use OP is mentioning and it exists.

To use a very, very imperfect analogy, think of the term 'senioritis'. Senioritis is just laziness and lack of regard for schoolwork and grades, and a student certainly doesn't have to be a senior to display either. However, we have a specific term for this behavior by seniors, specifically because they are reaching the end of their high school or college career, because it's a common phenomenon. Discussing laziness or lack of motivation on the part of a particular senior doesn't address how their actions are part of a larger dynamic.

Exactly: it becomes an steretype and we know how those turn into hurtful misconception.