this post was submitted on 23 Jul 2025
1604 points (94.6% liked)
Microblog Memes
8695 readers
2730 users here now
A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
Rules:
- Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
- Be nice.
- No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
- Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.
Related communities:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It's by definition sexist.
And around someone is mansplaining is always sexist though I do legit wonder when your not racist hard R's come into play.
Is it prejudicial or discriminatory based on sex? Then it's sexist, you may think it's moral and that's an argument I guess you could make but there is no question it's a sexist term in the same way femsplaining would be and btw they both sound extremely dumb.
We can dress it up however you like. Your claim is now: Any woman who believes a man is being misogynistic towards her is actually herself being prejudiced or discriminatory towards him.
Still a pretty whacky opinion, but if you like that better, who am I to stop you.
No. You're adding random shit that I never said and still avoiding two simple questions.
Wrong. I haven't added anything, just followed your reasoning.
Let's walk through it:
Scenario: A woman believes a man is being misogynistic towards her.
Your assessment: She can't actually know that he's intending to be misogynistic. Therefore she is making an assumption that it's based on sex/gender. By doing that, she is being bigoted/sexist/misandrous.
Based on your words:
I've asked you to explain how this somehow doesn't follow, but all you can do is accuse me of being obtuse, or adding in random shit.
So again, the sound conclusion of your logic is: Any woman who believes a man is being misogynistic towards her is actually herself being prejudiced or discriminatory towards him.
As for this:
I literally quoted them and responded directly to them in my previous response. What an absolutely pathetic attempt at gaslighting.
Correct.
They can't know intent they can assume, their assumption is sexist, the term used to describe it intentionally so. That's sexism.
Not any woman, if you know a dude and they're taking down to you and that's a pattern they're probably a misogynist. That said saying they're mansplaining is explicitly sexist, it's intended to be.
You did not.
Can I drop hard r's based on race and perception alone, my answer is sure but you're a racist.
Can you use a sexist term as an insult and not be a sexist? No, the same way I can't drop hard r's and that's ignoring the assumption of gender at all, what if they don't identify as a man or don't see you as a woman?
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?
That particular statement, I didn't think I'd need to explain direct responses.
Not at all, they can be misogynistic and you can misandrist, they aren't mutually exclusive.
When it's a sexist term you're going to be assigned to be sexist just like I'm not stopping to ask the person dropping hard r's if they think they're racist. I don't need to their actions say that much.
You didn't. You tried to explain how it isn't sexist when it is.
Correct, and then it also wouldn't be a sexist slur. So femsplaining = not sexist? Uh huh, can't wait to hear you explain that one away.
The mras response to clearly sexist slurs which is go figure, a clearly sexist slur. Who would have guessed?
By your definition, misogyny is a sexist term. Maybe that's what you're missing in all of this.
It is, it's just not a derogatory term. It can be used with the right context to be an insult but "mansplaining" or "femsplaining" are always derogatory just as they were intended to be.
Just so we're clear, you believe that using the term "misogyny" is discriminatory or abusive behavior towards members of the opposite sex?
It's by definition discriminatory because it's a statement of discrimination no one said anything about it being abusive. It's not just not necessarily derogatory whereas mansplaining always is.
What even is your argument at this point because at the moment you're hedging more and more every statement.