if you know a dude and they’re taking down to you and that’s a pattern they’re probably a misogynist.
Okay, so if the man is “probably” being misogynistic, that’s enough that a woman can believe they are being misogynistic without herself being a bigot/sexist/misandrist?
You did not.
And yet, miraculously, I can produce this screenshot!
Correct. That’s a pattern of behavior, it’s the same shit we use to define harassment. That is wholesale different that my question which is based solely on sex and perspective which in my experience is when people are said to be mansplaining. Let’s face it unless you’re fixing with your buddy the only way to use it is as an insult and gendered insults are without question sexist in the same way needlessly gendered toys are.
Link doesn’t work for me, you know you can just link comments correct?
Perfect! So we agree that a woman can, without herself being a bigot/sexist/etc, believe a man is being misogynistic towards her. You also confirmed this is true for condescension.
And as we’ve established, mansplaining is misogynistic condescension. Therefore, if it is possible for a woman to believe a man is being misogynistically condescending without herself being a bigot/sexist/etc, by definition it is possible for her to believe he is mansplaining without herself being a bigot/sexist/etc.
You finally got there!
Link doesn’t work for me, you know you can just link comments correct?
No. Saying they’re mansplaining is sexist. It’s a sexist term that’s my point, why are you ok being a sexist. The etymology goes back to an article where the writers intent is to fight fire with fire. To me that’s insane and just makes more sexists or racists or whatever.
Don’t you femsplain to me! That’s appearantly not a sexist thing to say according to you n
I could, and you could have linked the comment. What’s your point? You still dodged the question, why do you think a specifically sexist term from it’s very inception isn’t sexist. Then we move forward to why you’re on with fighting fire with fire but we haven’t gotten there because you simply refuse to accept the obvious.
Correct though misogynistic isn’t explicitly derogatory while mansplaining always is.
I’ve explained it in multiple and just above as well.
And my point is you didn’t answer the question in your linked comment either.
Yes you did.
So saying someone is mansplaining is sexist in the same way femsplaining is, they’re sex specific derogatory terms for things that need not be gendered.
Okay, so if the man is “probably” being misogynistic, that’s enough that a woman can believe they are being misogynistic without herself being a bigot/sexist/misandrist?
And yet, miraculously, I can produce this screenshot!
Correct. That’s a pattern of behavior, it’s the same shit we use to define harassment. That is wholesale different that my question which is based solely on sex and perspective which in my experience is when people are said to be mansplaining. Let’s face it unless you’re fixing with your buddy the only way to use it is as an insult and gendered insults are without question sexist in the same way needlessly gendered toys are.
Link doesn’t work for me, you know you can just link comments correct?
Perfect! So we agree that a woman can, without herself being a bigot/sexist/etc, believe a man is being misogynistic towards her. You also confirmed this is true for condescension.
And as we’ve established, mansplaining is misogynistic condescension. Therefore, if it is possible for a woman to believe a man is being misogynistically condescending without herself being a bigot/sexist/etc, by definition it is possible for her to believe he is mansplaining without herself being a bigot/sexist/etc.
You finally got there!
You know you can just scroll up a few comments correct? But let me hold your hand some more: https://lemmy.nullspace.lol/comment/4452
Yeah no one ever denied that.
No. Saying they’re mansplaining is sexist. It’s a sexist term that’s my point, why are you ok being a sexist. The etymology goes back to an article where the writers intent is to fight fire with fire. To me that’s insane and just makes more sexists or racists or whatever.
Don’t you femsplain to me! That’s appearantly not a sexist thing to say according to you n
I could, and you could have linked the comment. What’s your point? You still dodged the question, why do you think a specifically sexist term from it’s very inception isn’t sexist. Then we move forward to why you’re on with fighting fire with fire but we haven’t gotten there because you simply refuse to accept the obvious.
Then so is saying they’re being misogynistic. Simple as.
I’ve asked you repeatedly to square up the difference, but you just keep dodging.
My point was obviously that you shouldn’t have needed a link or screenshot in the first place.
No I didn’t.
I don’t think that.
Correct though misogynistic isn’t explicitly derogatory while mansplaining always is.
I’ve explained it in multiple and just above as well.
And my point is you didn’t answer the question in your linked comment either.
Yes you did.
So saying someone is mansplaining is sexist in the same way femsplaining is, they’re sex specific derogatory terms for things that need not be gendered.
Correct about what, exactly? This?
Because if so, then you’ve contradicted yourself.
So what? Plenty of derogatory words exist, that doesn’t mean using them inherently makes you a bigot/sexist/misandrist.
Yes I did. I even screenshotted it, and linked you to it, but for some reason you’re incapable of taking it in. Very odd indeed.
If it wasn’t gendered, then it wouldn’t be misogynistic and therefore wouldn’t be mansplaining. It’s a specific form of misogyny, which is gendered.
Also, what’s femsplaining?