Girls thread cont.

I don't wanna do this yoga thing. I'm trying to hide and pretend I'm not here.

Oh, it's not until 1.

Moving whatever discussion about the term "mansplain" to here:

I am 100% guilty of being an over-explainer for a bunch of reasons!!! Big sister, production manager, nuts & bolts, etc. I know I do this. But there's a already a gender imbalance present in all of our perceptions about who gets to "know" things and who is supposed to "learn" things from others, and I am positing that the imbalance makes it not the same when a woman overexplains (although equally annoying to the listener, I'm sure).

Hm maybe not "equally" but "also".

Sorry, I answered this on the wrong thread, Pyth.

The problem is, the "man" in "mansplain" doesn't ~have~ to refer to the male gender, but the inherent assumption of automatic greater knowledge due to unspoken privilege. If you can get all that in a snappy 2-syllable phrase, we're laughing.

^^ Yes. I wish there was something snappy to encompass that.

I meant my post here as a response to ENBB's saying that she's offended by the term, and I assume she doesn't mean because it's an ugly portmanteau, because "offended" is a strong, possibly inexact, word to use in that case.

There really needs to be a word that encapsulates the whole damn thing, because it's not as if there isn't White-splaining or Ameri-splaining or Hetero-splaining or any of those other things, we just don't have snappy words for them, really.

x-post - It just seems to me to imply that it's something that all and only men do which I don't think is actually the case. That's why I was saying that I'd prefer a term like FT was suggesting. One that encapsulates the phenomenon as FT stated above and doesn't seem so damning and exclusive.

the "man" in "mansplain" doesn't ~have~ to refer to the male gender, but the inherent assumption of automatic greater knowledge due to unspoken privilege.

Privilege that men have and women do not, in the hypothetical situation AND the specific conversation in which I used the term. To say that "men do it" does not imply that other kinds of people, in other situations, are not also benefiting from some other kind of privilege.

I don't like it because it's an ugly portmanteau but a word for the phenomena described aptly by FT needs to exist. I tend to use "mansplain" and then "mansplain" the shit out of why I'm using that word even though I hate it.

It's totally ugly and horrible like basic all media-created portmanteaus!! I first noticed it in what I think was the Tiger Beatdown essay about how fans of A Game of Thrones were so butthurt when the TBd writer critiqued the show from a feminist perspective, and how male fans kept trying to mansplain FEMINISM TO HER in the context of the awful, awful female characters in that entire show/series!!

I have to admit, that usage kind of validated it for me.

So, I'm the only one that seems to find it problematic because it makes it sound like something every man does? Really? I'm genuinely curious. I know a lot of guys that I've never heard/seen do this and think I'd pretty WTF at the existence of the word if I were one of them tbh. I know it doesn't actually mean that every single man ever does this but it just sort of makes it sound like it does in a way that I'm not comfortable with. Also, it's a horrible portmanteau, yes.

I don't think it's a media-based portmanteau? I think it came out of the blogosphere. Actually I would love to know who originated it because its slow seepage has been really illuminating - I can remember the reaction the first time I used it on ILX, and it's weird to me that it still gets that kind of reaction in places where people encounter it for the first time, like, a year or so later?

But no, you're not the only person who finds it problematic - but the problem is, there doesn't seem to be a word that has quite its power to accurating describe the phenomenon.

But also, this is like Feminism 101 - when you describe a problematic behaviour that men sometimes do (e.g. mansplaining) - you are NOT automatically associating it with EVERY MAN EVER. It's just saying that it's a thing that ~mostly men~ do, because: privilege. But it's so tiring to have to explain this, and not create a "do you not do this? then here are your feminist cookies, now try and convince other men to behave the same way rather than protesting your innocence, pls" badge afresh each time.

I know. I thought I said that I realized that? It just SOUNDS like it does in a way that makes me uncomfortable using it even though I know that.

Thank you, I couldn't quite find the calm place to think of that explanation from. Also, aren't blogs media? Maybe not in the big/commercial sense.

FT - I don't know if there's anything else I can say other than what I already have. I'm sorry that it's felt that way and will try to better clarify that I don't mean to delegitimize other people's experiences. In some ways though I've felt the similarly insofar as what I was saying earlier where is often seems like people have responded to things I've said in such a way as to suggest that I haven't experienced certain things/feelings because I just don't know or am not enlightened enough to realize certain things when I feel pretty firmly that, while surely true sometimes, is not always the case.

Also, I need to say this because I was really upset at the time but you were really horrible to me and all of the other women in this thread not that long ago. I know it was in reaction to the situation you’re describing above but I don’t really think that makes it OK. I was hurt and extremely upset when you completely dismissed my academic/work experience in a post that can only be described as a personal attack. I needed to mention this because it seems strange to me to be having these discussions without at least acknowledging that whole thing happened. I mean, you also took it outside ILX which just wasn’t on. I also realize that I responded in a pretty cruel and perhaps harsher way than was necessary but I was really upset (and understandably so imo) at the time.

WRT WS I understand that it makes some people uncomfortable and they don't want to participate and that's fine. Personally I'm OK with the judging part of it though, especially when it's positive. It's pretty undeniable that (while women certainly feel the brunt of this a lot more than men and also in completely different ways) we all make judgments about people's physical attractiveness all the time whether it's on a conscious level or not. Appearance is the first thing you notice about someone and a judgment is instantly formed somewhere. Denying that would seem a little strange to me. I don't really have a problem with someone saying "This is someone I find attractive." and find it pretty interesting a lot of the time.

When you say "prostrate cancer is a male disease" - are you saying that ~every~ man has prostrate cancer? Or just that it's a disease that mostly men get, because it's 99.9% (cis) men that get it?

That's kinda how I think about terms like "mansplaining" - while still recognising that the point you make is valid, oc. But I don't know how to get that across.

x-post because I need to read that properly and digest it.

xp I wd just like to say, though, that in certain ways that blow-up precipitated the revival of the Girls Only thread as a way more serious conversation about gender and less of a nail polish comparison manual (an awesome thing which has its OWN thread on normal ilx) and I think the GOT has become many times more active and supportive and brought something back to the conversation(s) on ilx that had kind of disappeared without anyone saying anything.

And I need that, because I can only fight the battles that I perceive to be present, and I need other people to provide meaty discussion topics that I'll never think of, and drop facts I don't know, and remind me to be kind and work for something better for everyone and not go down my personal rabbit-hole of anger.

Yeah, what FT said. There's also a parallel between that sort of objection to "mansplain" and the "Schrodinger's Rapist" phenomenon (it's too hard to post links on Zing, but search for sh@pley pr0se and schrodinger's rapist and you'll find the post.

While recognizing the many problems inherent to the term (including the one E articulates) I am unmoved by men's objections to the term because said objections change the conversation from "here is a thing that men often do to women that is a symptom of and also perpetuates sexism" to "your experiences are invalid because this word is imperfect and makes me feel bad."

I'd rather be able to have the discussion than spend that energy spraring men's feelings.

idk, i started out in the 'mansplaining is the correct term for this thing, it is an ugly but unavoidable term' camp but hmmm

i feel like "mansplaining" could be unfolded to "explaining, the way men do it" (which does not necessarily mean all men but certainly suggests a 'typical' man)
but you can't really say "getting prostate cancer, the way men do it" unless you are doing stand-up of some kind

(i have been thinking about the man-prefix quite a lot recently, after deciding to retire 'manwhore' from my vocabulary)

(because while it is a funny thing to say about dudes it implies a whole world of seriously unfunny things about women)

Sorry, I'm not ignoring what you're saying, E, I just need to think about it.

...

but seriously, on another topic, there comes a point where I just have to disengage when someone keeps repeating something ~as truth~ that has like 30 to 40 years of academic debunking of, and I just can't keep having that conversation without going crazy. I can't. I know this seems like I'm bowing out of the argument and letting them win, but it's like... there's 40 years of research on it. Go look it up! I know I brought up this subject, but, like - I have to remember. I am not ILX's personal Womens Studies Professor. If someone has a brain, go look it up. It becomes derailing for dummies - and I feel like, if I don't have the stamina to have these arguments I shouldn't bring it up, but really. I try but... I can't.

That's fine!

No, Foth, I think putting the info out there is all you can do. I ran into this blank wall w a male acquaintance the oth weekend and posted about it as well--people that should be allies still have some seriously fucked up and purposefully ignorant habits of thought and comment.

It is 6pm the day before I go on holiday and I am still staring at a report I haven't finished because I've been having these arguments, yet again, and I hate this feeling that yet again, I've got that "if you actually cared about this, you would explain 30 years of study to me instead of quoting authorities" which makes me feel like I've lost but really : I HAVE A LIFE I WOULD LIKE TO BE LIVING.

FT - get your stuff done and go home. Don't feel the need to respond to that post of mine now btw. I just wanted to put that out there but I understand needing to think about it. I thought it just deserved and needed to be mentioned and not in a malicious way either. I would have felt too fake not at least acknowledging it in some way.

seriously, do not let this get in the way of your awesome holiday! you having a gloriously beautiful break is way more important to the world than pandering to someone's argument-delaying tactic.

er xpost, i meant the explain 30 years of study stuff to me, we're all clear on that, right

This is so exhausting. Need to close the window before this happens:

http://www.gabbysplayhouse.com/?p=1444

Talk Show Host just came on Spodify so I'll be waiting with a gun and a pack of sandwiches, I'm READY.

(Yeah, I was talking about the "explain 30 years of feminist lingustics to me at 6pm on your last day" topic, not the unresolved stuff with E - just making that clear too!)

I prefer to use "condescension" as a catch-all for people explaining things to me that I already know, or acting like I'm stupid, or don't know what a churro is, or whatever. I am also the sort of person who will hold back like 498 of the 500 things I actually know because I like to have an arsenal of secret weapons at my disposal.

Anyway, my $0.02 is this: the ws thread has never really seemed as malevolent to my eyes as "women's magazines" in general -- ws says "this is attractive" whereas SELF/Cosmo suggests "this not-real picture of a humanoid is attractive and here are some lies to achieve that look, which btw you will never EVER achieve"

objectification vs focused self-esteem squashing, basically

LOLing a little at the idea of someone explaining a churro to you. Has that happened?

a mere two days ago!

There's a scene in Sheriff where the sheriff goes hunting with his daughter, and he sees some turkey shit in the path, and he says, "Jessica. You see that? That's turkey droppins. A turkey left that." The camera later pans to Jessica, and you know she is still pissed about the turkey droppins incident. She doesn't say a word, but you can tell. I love that part!

I mean lots of times I really don't know shit -- and at those times I like to have people explain things to me. But I know turkey droppins. Most of us do.

I sure as hell don't! Turkey droppings? Never seen 'em!

It looks like goose shit.

Oh I know what that looks like. DAMN YOU CANADIAN GEESE!

"A turkey left that" is what gets me.

Yeah. That's amazing.

"A turkey left that...for YOU."

when a male turkey loves a female turkey ...

A turkey left that precious gift...for you.

...(whispers) turkey droppins

but on the serious side -- i've spent a lot of my life being "one of the guys" -- and half the time I didn't really think about my gender at all. In moments of insecurity (that are too frequent tbh), I feel/felt that that status wasn't a privilege, but consolation for being fat and ugly.

When something is designed to exclude you, there's no end of ways it can make you feel bad abt yourself, sometimes with a lot of your own help.

AND BY "YOU" AND "YOUR", I MEAN "ME" AND "MY."