The Sexist Mrs May

[altus]

Well done... you've found one, I would assume relatively fit, male to prove that men and women sit exactly the same and have the same physiology. My thighs are obviously too fat to allow me to sit like George in that photo. And I haven't given up anything - you were the one who mentioned men crossing their legs. With your comment about cycling - my girlfriend and I must be the exception to the rule, then, as we're often sore in different places after a spin session. We're obviously freaks...

 

When you put

Well, if you look at how a man crosses his legs and how a woman crosses her legs, there is a difference. This would say to me that the wedding tackle is slightly influential to how a man sits.

I read that as you were generalising about the population as a whole. If you were only talking about one man and one woman it does rather undermine your claim that men sit cross legged one way and women another.

 

What are you not a big fan of that is less than worse than others? I'm obviously not on your intellectual level as it doesn't really make any sense to me.

I wonder how much of it might be learned behaviour - e.g. little boys copying their dad, uncles, etc. None of the explanations I've seen mention that. Of course that leaves the question of who started doing it. Despite that, I'm happy to let the body language version stand until someone comes up with a better explanation. If you're not happy with the body language version I suggest you find a better explanation.

 

Regardless of our differing definitions of manspreading, I think we can both agree that this is an example of it.

 

So to explain 'mansplaining' you've used a version of Wikipedia that cites Anita Sarkeesian... forgive me if I treat that with the contempt it deserves.

It appears the name Anita Sarkeesian seems to have triggered you into failing to read the article. It doesn't cite Sarkeesian, it cites people commenting on her proposal for her series on women in video games. It also contains criticisms of the term.

 

A man may attempt to speak on behalf of a woman, and from a position of ignorance. If that happens, most people, men and women, will see him for what he is. However, you have a 'definition' of mansplaining, but many feminists use the term much more loosely to shut down debate, regardless of if the man is explaining from a position of education and has studied the subject first.

I didn't say "this is the only definition". I said "you've missed this definition off your list.

 

You'll be pleased to know someone has suggested the term should be replaced with "powersplaining" since it's really about someone asserting their (possibly unwarranted) superiority in a condescending manner over someone else - regardless of the gender of those involved. Mind you, the idea came from a feminist blogger so that will probably trigger you as well.

[Halibut]

A man may attempt to speak on behalf of a woman, and from a position of ignorance. If that happens, most people, men and women, will see him for what he is. However, you have a 'definition' of mansplaining, but many feminists use the term much more loosely to shut down debate, regardless of if the man is explaining from a position of education and has studied the subject first.

 

On what evidence do you base this assertion?

[Ontarian1981]

On what evidence do you base this assertion?

 

No evidence, he was just trying to get you involved.

[Litotes]

BTW. Your description of mansplaining missed the original and most important definition: Men explaining things (they often know little about) in a condescending manner usually to women (but not exclusively) without first finding out how much the person they are talking to knows about a subject.

 

Your spin is incredible.

 

The "(they often know little about)" bit doesn't appear in any dictionary definition I can find - perhaps it is your own sexist bias coming through?

 

Secondly, the male genitalia is external to the body - this is an undeniable fact. Therefore in some cases, it can feel more cramped than the womans', therefore to sit with legs apart may - and I say may - be a matter of comfort - not an attempt to dominate the environment.

 

I can't help feeling - yes, my opinion hence the use of the word 'I' - that you are trying to justify Mrs May's obvious (unwarranted and unchallenged) sexism.

 

---------- Post added 09-03-2018 at 19:33 ----------

 

An interesting (female) take on this...

 

"It reeks of gender essentialism – the idea that specific physical, social and cultural traits are native to a particular gender. It may be satisfying, refreshing, even empowering, to give men a hard time, but I can’t help imagine how I would feel if faced with similar accusations – “womanterrupting” or “womansplaining” for example. It would be degrading."

 

https://www.theguardian.com/media/mind-your-language/2015/feb/12/allow-me-to-explain-why-we-dont-need-words-like-mansplain

[Ontarian1981]

May and Trudeau should get together and start a gender fluid dictionary.Both of them actually think they have a sense of humour, but the laugh is on them not with them.

[altus]

Your spin is incredible.

 

The "(they often know little about)" bit doesn't appear in any dictionary definition I can find - perhaps it is your own sexist bias coming through?

I didn't have a problem finding it defined in a dictionary.

 

If you read about the origin of the term you'll find the explainer being wrong is often a feature of it. Try the Wikipedia article as a jumping off point.

 

Secondly, the male genitalia is external to the body - this is an undeniable fact. Therefore in some cases, it can feel more cramped than the womans', therefore to sit with legs apart may - and I say may - be a matter of comfort - not an attempt to dominate the environment.

I know what male genitalia are - I have a set myself. I dealt with the 'big balls' issue in replies above but a further point:- I'm generalising here, but I doubt real discomfort is an issue. Some men may be habituated to sitting in a certain way and find sitting in a different way feels awkward because they are not used to it but that is something that would go away as they got more used to it. It's not that there's something inherently uncomfortable in sitting that way. You could compare it to people being used to lying on their back when falling to sleep and finding it more difficult to get to sleep if they lie on their side - even though they can quite happily switch between both positions during sleep.

 

I can't help feeling - yes, my opinion hence the use of the word 'I' - that you are trying to justify Mrs May's obvious (unwarranted and unchallenged) sexism.

You obviously haven't seen my posts on political topics over the years or you'd never suspect me of that.

[Litotes]

I didn't have a problem finding it defined in a dictionary.

 

If you read about the origin of the term you'll find the explainer being wrong is often a feature of it. Try the Wikipedia article as a jumping off point.

 

You have quite eloquently pointed out that your addition to the dictionary definition is just that - your addition.

 

I found the definition - just not with your spin.

[mickey finn]

I saw the title and read it as "The Sexiest Mrs May", she might be sexy but she is not a patch on the great sexy lady herself Mrs Thatcher xx

[leviathan13]

Whilst having a shower, where i seem to do all my best thinking, the following came to my mind:

 

Is it still 'manspreading' or 'mansplaining' if the 'man' identifies as female?

 

What if the 'man' identifies as female, but has views which go against the feminist narritive?

[Ontarian1981]

Whilst having a shower, where i seem to do all my best thinking, the following came to my mind:

 

Is it still 'manspreading' or 'mansplaining' if the 'man' identifies as female?

 

What if the 'man' identifies as female, but has views which go against the feminist narritive?

 

Then you go the Canadian way and say 'personsplaining' or 'peoplespreading' Oh well, I need a shower anyway lol