Mansplaining. Is it real?


Mansplaining. Is it real?

Author
Message
grazorblade
grazorblade
Legend
Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K, Visits: 0
quickflick wrote:

But don't you see that it's incumbent upon you, from the outset, to say you think the definitions (as per dictionary and how they're commonly construed) are wrong?

Yeah in hindsight my initial post should have explained the motivation for using this definition which is standard in advocacy groups as well as academia and is implicitly standard in out groups when interviewed and studied about their understanding of these issues. Hopefully my follow up posts clarified things

quickflick wrote:

Instead you've suggested that those who've used the definitions correctly (at least as things stand) don't understand the definitions and are confusing concepts. We're not doing that. We're simply using language in the way it is currently understood and used.

yeah here I disagree - understood and used by who. It'd be weird for people who have not had any experience with war not only defining war but having a different definition to those who had experienced it and insisting their definition is the "standard one".

quickflick wrote:

I agree that different people have different experiences of racism, sexism, etc. Maybe the English language needs separate terms to describe more flagrant instances of racism, sexism, etc.

The English language already does have different words for the system (racism/sexism) verse individual events (prejudice discrimination) when the language is being used by the out group, academics and advocacy groups. At the very least you should understand this if you are ever in a situation where someone says you are sexist or racist when you think you haven't said or done something with any prejudice in your heart. Their anger might be momentarily directed at you but if you ask enough questions and listen long enough you eventually realize that their complaint is actually with the system/culture and your words just happened to remind them or you were defending/promoting the system
quickflick wrote:

But that doesn't invalidate the argument that the more minor instances can still amount to sexism, racism, etc. For those concerned, it's still fairly shitty. And nobody wants to be the victim of prejudice, discrimination, or whatever on any scale.

I think this shows the importance of at least understanding these definitions even if you don't come to use them yourself.
Its not degree of prejudice (minor or major) but system verse intention. The former being the ism the latter being prejudice. This does not minimize prejudice or say its ok its just different. In fact all of the sources I cited in the previous page (there were a few posts with different sources) explicitly talk about the difference between racism/sexism and prejudice. At the very least if you understand the definition you understand what advocates are saying

Edited by grazorblade: 15/5/2016 08:14:55 PM
CG2430
CG2430
Hardcore Fan
Hardcore Fan (229 reputation)Hardcore Fan (229 reputation)Hardcore Fan (229 reputation)Hardcore Fan (229 reputation)Hardcore Fan (229 reputation)Hardcore Fan (229 reputation)Hardcore Fan (229 reputation)Hardcore Fan (229 reputation)Hardcore Fan (229 reputation)Hardcore Fan (229 reputation)Hardcore Fan (229 reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 221, Visits: 0
11.mvfc.11 wrote:
Obligatory.

[youtube]ZOXh5repOWI[/youtube]

Mansplaining as a word itself is sexist, considering it's pejorative definition and use of the male gender. Why can't people use the non gendered words we already have such as condescending, supercilious or patronising, rather than continually labeling and demonising sections of society?

I like the part where the took the defensive feminist position about a comment which had no indications to suggest it had anything to do with her gender.
Vanlassen
Vanlassen
Semi-Pro
Semi-Pro (1.4K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.4K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.4K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.4K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.4K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.4K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.4K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.4K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.4K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.4K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.4K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.3K, Visits: 0
Crusader wrote:
quickflick wrote:
grazorblade wrote:
quickflick wrote:
grazorblade wrote:
11.mvfc.11 wrote:
Obligatory.

[youtube]ZOXh5repOWI[/youtube]

Mansplaining as a word itself is sexist, considering it's pejorative definition and use of the male gender. Why can't people use the non gendered words we already have such as condescending, supercilious or patronising, rather than continually labeling and demonising sections of society?


sexism is a system of discrimination based on sex. You can't be sexist to a man - that's not to say you can't be predjudiced, hateful or crappy.


??

Please elaborate.

How can one not be sexist towards men? By the very definition and etymology of the word "sexism", it's perfectly possible to be sexist towards men.

Granted, women have been discriminated against on grounds of gender more than men have been throughout history, as a result of the patriarchal structures and values in most societies. But how does this preclude the possibility that men can be discriminated against on grounds of gender?

Are you saying men have never been discriminated against on grounds of gender? Are you saying that men aren't discriminated against on the grounds of gender?

If I can't get a job as a waiter because a restaurant prefers to hire women as waitresses is that not discrimination against men on grounds of gender?


predjudice is different from an "ism"

predjudice is about intention or an act. For example saying "all men/white people suck I won't hire them" is discriminatory and predjudice. Racism/sexism is when its harder to get as good a job in general because of society as a whole either through the culture or rules of institutions. Thats not to say predjudice isn't bad or in some cases worse. For example suppose a women kills a man because she is predjudiced, that is worse than the sexism that she might have experienced in her life.
racism or sexism is when there is a power dynamic and the group that has as a whole more social power has the ability to write the rules either culturally or within an institution. Not all forms of isms are bad - for example . Making the rules of athletics so that the fastest wins is sexist because its a system that advantages men but I don't know anyone who would complain about that. However sexism and racism tends to have a much more devastating effect than predjudice when you look at the average experience of a lot of people.

For sexism people will usually point to
1. Frequency of rape and alleged attitudes and myths that make rape more common and less likely to be prosecuted
2. Comparative frequency of domestic violence against women compared to men
3. Women allegedly earning less than men for similar work
4. Women being underrepresented at the top of most fields.

To contradict my original statement slightly sexism against men could occur in a subculture where the power dynamic goes the other way. But when academics and advocates talk about these isms they tend to mean a country as a whole


Have you got any links to peer-reviewed research to suggest that academics only regard prejudice (or discrimination) on an extremely widespread scale amounts to sexism, racism, etc?

I'm not an academic. And I'm not majoring in gender studies. I am, however, a university student who spends a good deal of time having discussions on similar things with academics. One of my majors is directly related to gender issues.

Edited by quickflick: 13/5/2016 07:35:31 PM


Enjoy being unemployed for the rest of your life.

:lol:
GO


Select a Forum....























Inside Sport


Search