case: (Default)
Case ([personal profile] case) wrote in [community profile] fandomsecrets2016-05-28 03:27 pm

[ SECRET POST #3433 ]


⌈ Secret Post #3433 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.

__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.













Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 57 secrets from Secret Submission Post #491.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.
dethtoll: (Default)

Re: Man-splaining wank: The reboot.

[personal profile] dethtoll 2016-05-28 09:10 pm (UTC)(link)
You're overthinking this. "Mansplaining" isn't hurting anyone; those who are offended by it take issue with the notion behind it, that it's a habit among some men to explain something, usually in a condescending or patronizing way, usually to a woman, usually under the assumption that the listener is ignorant of basic concepts and facts and/or incapable of the speaker's "greater" understanding of an issue. The thing is, there is anecdotal evidence that this is, in fact, a verifiable phenomenon. Its roots go fairly deep.
Edited (quotation marks to signify the term itself, not the act) 2016-05-28 21:11 (UTC)
diet_poison: (Default)

Re: Man-splaining wank: The reboot.

[personal profile] diet_poison 2016-05-28 09:34 pm (UTC)(link)
+1

Re: Man-splaining wank: The reboot.

(Anonymous) 2016-05-28 10:34 pm (UTC)(link)
I dunno, when someone tells me the feel belittled by a term, am I really ok to say "No you're not stop being stupid"

Re: Man-splaining wank: The reboot.

(Anonymous) 2016-05-28 10:45 pm (UTC)(link)
If they're a man? Ofcourse.
dethtoll: (Default)

Re: Man-splaining wank: The reboot.

[personal profile] dethtoll 2016-05-28 11:06 pm (UTC)(link)
"Mansplaining" is supposed to be kind of belittling, I thought? It describes a widespread negative behavior that seems to be driven by gender inequality among other things. What would YOU call it?
greenvelvetcake: (Default)

Re: Man-splaining wank: The reboot.

[personal profile] greenvelvetcake 2016-05-29 01:48 am (UTC)(link)
The purpose of the word is to belittle people who do mansplain. It's like when guys complain about people using the word "creepy" as a descriptor, particularly about men coming into them. It's not supposed to make you feel good, it's supposed to negatively describe someone.
lb_lee: A happy little brain with a bandage on it, enclosed within a circle with the words LB Lee. (Default)

Re: Man-splaining wank: The reboot.

[personal profile] lb_lee 2016-05-29 06:54 pm (UTC)(link)
Sometimes? YES!

I mentioned last time I had to leave a feminist site because they were transphobic as fuck. They saw being called transphobic as being belittling to them, but IT DOESN'T CHANGE THE TRANSPHOBIA! Like, I'm not going to weasel words into some nice little box of, "well, you seem to have some problematic feelings regarding me and my fellow trans people," because it's not the word that pisses them off, it's the fact that they're being told their behavior is unacceptable.

Sometimes, you really do have to stay, "no, stop being stupid."

Re: Man-splaining wank: The reboot.

(Anonymous) 2016-05-28 11:59 pm (UTC)(link)
One of the finest examples of mansplaining I've seen. Congrats!
dethtoll: (Default)

(frozen comment) Re: Man-splaining wank: The reboot.

[personal profile] dethtoll 2016-05-29 12:02 am (UTC)(link)
0/10 I oughta throw you down a well, actually.
diet_poison: (Default)

Re: Man-splaining wank: The reboot.

[personal profile] diet_poison 2016-05-29 12:13 am (UTC)(link)
so do you know OP's gender?

Re: Man-splaining wank: The reboot.

(Anonymous) 2016-05-29 01:11 am (UTC)(link)
Neither does DT, but he feels comfortable being an authority on something he has no right to be an authority on. In this case he's taking the right side and saying something that's true, but that sense of entitlement to talk over someone on a topic he has no right to talk about, that is the problem and that is exactly why mansplaining needs to be recognised and called out. NAYRT, btw, but they're not wrong.
diet_poison: (Default)

Re: Man-splaining wank: The reboot.

[personal profile] diet_poison 2016-05-29 01:47 am (UTC)(link)
Except 1. the concept of mansplaining involves the person on the other end being female and the concept that's being explained to them being something they're supposed to know more about, whether it's the experience of being female or a field that they've studied, and 2. dethtoll is right, he's not pulling it out of his ass.

If men have "no right" to ever even talk about feminist issues we're never going to get anywhere, especially if you're trying to shut down the ones who are genuinely interested in helping. Good grief.

Re: Man-splaining wank: The reboot.

(Anonymous) 2016-05-29 03:10 am (UTC)(link)
Anon that DT wants to throw down a well here. I don't know the OP's gender, and I find it irrelevant.

I'm a woman. It's grating when women lecture me on feminist issues. But it's ten gazillion times worse when a man lectures me on feminist issues. It doesn't matter if DT is right; his attitude of condescension is exactly what people are referring to when they use a term like mansplaining.
diet_poison: (Default)

Re: Man-splaining wank: The reboot.

[personal profile] diet_poison 2016-05-30 01:10 am (UTC)(link)
It's not what I would qualify as mansplaining for reasons I already explained (did you read my comment? because you kinda just repeated what you already said with no change) so there's one data point against what you're saying (and yes, I am female). By definition gender is not irrelevant here. If you knew dethtoll were talking to a man, I guarantee you you would not be saying this. He was arguing about a concept without knowing the gender of the other person. I do not think it qualifies.

It's grating when women lecture me on feminist issues.

I'm really curious as to how you define "lecturing". because like sometimes people will disagree with you and are going to say so? you aren't the end authority on feminism, and it's a little telling that you don't think even women should be able to talk to you about it in a way you don't like.

Re: Man-splaining wank: The reboot.

(Anonymous) 2016-05-29 06:41 am (UTC)(link)
The thing is: it's not how it gets used anymore. Rather, it's used any time a guy tries to say something to shut him down, no matter if he actually displayed the behaviour the term was coined after or not. And just dismissing another person's argument outright based on their gender is kinda sexist.
diet_poison: (Default)

Re: Man-splaining wank: The reboot.

[personal profile] diet_poison 2016-05-30 01:11 am (UTC)(link)
so a. a term is being misused (shocking) and b. it's being misused in a way that's discriminatory. doesn't mean the original term is discriminatory.