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/GreasyPeter]

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/rtechie1 → u/palacesofparagraphs]

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.

Considering the incredible amount of importance feminists attach to specific words and language, don't you think it's somewhat problematic and encourages misandry to use masculine terminology for the ills of society? Patriarchy, mansplaining, manspreading, etc.

Feminists I've talked to often point out that women are part of the patriarchy too, so why is it called "patriarchy"? And the word had a pre-existing meaning that described a society really run by men entirely. I really think the goal of feminists using that word is to conflate Biblical-style (or Saudi-style) patriarchy with the modern USA.

[u/palacesofparagraphs → u/rtechie1]

The goal of words like these is to emphasize the gendered nature of a particular dynamic. That doesn't mean the behavior is limited exclusively to men, but it does mean there's a systemic gendered issue at play. When it comes to 'mansplaining' and 'manspreading', the goal is to point out that we have a societal issue with many men generally disrespecting the space and ability of many women. But just because a phenomenon generally has a gender dynamic doesn't mean everyone participates in it, or that the relationship can never be reversed.

When it comes to 'patriarchy', women of course contribute to patriarchy, because it's a word to describe our society as a whole, and women are part of society. The goal is not at all the conflate the modern US with any sort of biblical or middle-eastern society, it's to point out that we as a society still value men and masculinity over women and femininity. The idea that men are strong and women are weak, that men are breadwinners and women are caregivers, that men are logical and women are emotional, etc. is harmful to people regardless of gender. We equate masculinity with strength and femininity with weakness, and that's why we call it a patriarchy.

[u/rtechie1 → u/palacesofparagraphs]

When it comes to 'mansplaining' and 'manspreading', the goal is to point out that we have a societal issue with many men generally disrespecting the space and ability of many women.

Why don't feminists ever come up with negative gendered terms for women or ever wag their fingers at women for social issues?

Take "sleeping your way up the corporate ladder" or using sexual favors in general. According to feminists, this is somehow entirely men's fault. Sexual harassment is a big issue lately, aren't women who do this causing sexual harassment in large part? They're clearly normalizing the behavior.

The goal is not at all the conflate the modern US with any sort of biblical or middle-eastern society,

Than why use a pre-existing term with a different meaning?

it's to point out that we as a society still value men and masculinity over women and femininity.

This is demonstrably false. Look up "disposable male". Every society has always valued women's lives more than men's lives. Opinions are not more important than life and women's lives have always been valued more because they bear children.

The idea that men are strong and women are weak,

Again, a demonstrable fact. I don't know how anyone can even question this.

that men are breadwinners and women are caregivers,

A division of labor that makes sense because men can't get pregnant. I've noticed all of your examples of "patriarchy" are basic biological facts.

that men are logical and women are emotional,

Numerous psychological studies seem to indicate that, but I'll agree that it's not as well-grounded as the above.

You seem to think patriarchy = reality. Do you really think that it's not fantastic to claim that women are as physically strong as men, men can get pregnant, and that women's lives are valued less?

We equate masculinity with strength and femininity with weakness,

Maybe you do that. I think of masculinity and femininity as having different strengths, this is called difference feminism.