• samus12345@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    8 days ago

    Anyone can “mansplain,” so better to say “womansplain,” “non-binarysplain,” etc. as applicable.

    • paultimate14@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      8 days ago

      English already haz gender-neutral words for this. For an adjective, we have “condescending”. For a verb, we have pontificate, garage, bloviate, bluster, rant, etc.

      Language changes and evolves over time, so we could also make a new word for this phenomenon. “Mansplaining” is unnecessary gendered slur.

      • samus12345@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        8 days ago

        pontificate, harangue, bloviate, bluster, rant

        None of those words impart the same meaning as “mansplain.” A new word would be preferable.

        • aesthelete@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          8 days ago

          Bloviate pretty much covers what I do on work phone calls. In my defense (mildly), I welcome whenever someone interrupts me.

      • Soggy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        8 days ago

        “Language changes and evolves over time, so we could also make a new word for this phenomenon.”

        We did, you just don’t like it.

        • paultimate14@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 days ago

          Yes.

          There’s a lot of words people have created that have been deemed hateful, bigoted, and harmful. We call these “slurs”.

          • Soggy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            8 days ago

            And English is a very contextual language so something can be a slur in one use and not in another.

            • paultimate14@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              7 days ago

              Is that actually true? I’m struggling to think of any examples.

              There are occasions where a technical term is used as a slur in casual conversations while still being perfectly acceptable in the original context. “Retarded” for example. That certainly does not apply here.

              There’s some words that are more or less offensive in different English-speaking countries. “Cunt” and “Bloody” come to mind there. There’s also been some attempt at reclaiming “cunty” for women which… Eh, I’m just gonna stay away from that one.

              “Mansplaining” is offensive from it’s very etymology. It’s baked into the word without cultural context. The word itself is formed from unnecessary and bigoted generation.

              • Soggy@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                7 days ago

                The word is formed from an experience common enough that the word caught on overnight. We don’t need to get #notallmen about this.

                (Also, “I’m struggling to think of examples”: thinks of several examples)

                • paultimate14@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  7 days ago

                  So when someone says “hey did you know 50% of the crime is committed by 13% of the population”… Sounds like they are describing a common experience. So by that logic does that mean it’s not racist to say black people are criminals? If a black person got offended by that would you tell them “we don’t need to get #notallblackpeople” about this.

                  For large swaths of western history Jewish people had a disproportionate control of banks and the money supply. Does this mean that the conspiracy theories about Jewish cabals controlling the world aren’t anti-Semitic?

                  How common does an experience have to be by your logic in order to suddenly make generalization and prejudice acceptable? If one trans person gets caught sexually assaulting a woman in a public restroom does that mean JK Rowling was suddenly right all along?

                  And you clearly did not understand what I wrote. I came up with the closest examples I could think of and then explained how they were not applicable to the situation.

                  It seems like you really just want to be able to have a little bit of bigotry, a little bit of hatred. As a treat.

                  • Soggy@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    7 days ago

                    Alright well the key difference is that males are not a historically disadvantaged class and that makes a big difference.

                    Do you rail against “Karen” as an insult? What about philistine, Luddite, or barbarian? Do you fight this hard against “eat the rich” or ACAB?