@Tinkeringbell Oh, nothing, just made a remark on that "surprise-seeking wife" question. One answer said "I agree with Masked Man", another called out a specific phrase from my comment. Later my comment got deleted, which makes both those answers look... strange.
I'm a guy. I don't like it when people inappropriately touch certain parts of my body, specifically the sides of my abdomen. In fact, I hate it. So much even I can't believe it!
Now some of my colleagues are really close friends of mine. They occasionally deliberately poke the said area. It has ...
@Tinkeringbell You will get better at it if you stick around for a bit. Picking bikeshed questions that are a tad bit "controversial" is almost guaranteed to work.
You have an XY Problem here. The most common cause of this symptom is the HNQ cancer, which has spread across StackExchange but it affects "subjective" sites like Workplace more severely. The problem results from a number of positive feedback loops, as explained below:
HNQ → more views → m...
If the OP were asking specifically about a workplace incident, your answer is insufficient, I think, given that perception by managers and colleagues around the office matter a great deal and your advice to the OP - to walk away and to stop trying to debate or reason with their colleague - could portray them as incompetent. (But, as the question stands, it's too broad.) — D.Hutchinson19 hours ago
@ryanyuyu My comment appeared needlessly brusque and curt, because I hit enter before I could elaborate. The thing is, while those are indeed good qualities to have, everyone else will claim the same.
@ryanyuyu the work experience section is better now as well - you've got the info in there about the tech stacks you were using which is a big improvement
@ryanyuyu there is simply no way to convey that you are personable on paper. However, going in, greeting people with a firm handshake, a warm smile, and polite deference demonstrates it quite clearly.
@motosubatsu as @MaskedMan said, her advice is mediocre at best, with some of it being clearly sexist and filled with misandry. Her advice for people with disabilities will pretty much ensure that they never work
@motosubatsu I've seen it myself, including her claim that "mansplaining" isn't a sexist term, and more nonsense. She's usually more subtle about it, but she eggs on the sexist comments. I got disgusted and haven't been there in months.
Probably don't have time to debate today, but put me solidly in the "just because you don't like the term mansplaining, that doesn't mean its sexist" column. The behavior it describes is absolutely more prevalent along gender lines, although clearly there are examples of 'splainers of all types.
@RichardU Yes, the term suggests it is more prevalent along gendered lines. I'd imagine you would disagree with that characterization, no matter what term was being used.
Clearly everyone has experience with know-it-all boors of all genders. But overwhelmingly, women very much relate to the phenomenon of men who talk down to them, who assume (without evidence) that they don't know what they're talking about, and who think their own thoughts-off-the-top-of-their-head have as much validity as a woman who is an expert in the field. Yes, the phenomenon is a specific manifestation of sexism. Using a term that accurately labels it as such is not improper.
@MaskedMan Not typically, no. That would just be "being a know-it-all asshole" or "assuming you know more than you do". The term "mansplaining" is useful because it describes the phenomenon in a certain relevant context
@BradC So, if it can only be used for certain gender-roles, it's at the least bordering on the google definition of sexist: relating to or characterized by prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination, typically against women, on the basis of sex.
Yeah, I was going to make an analogy to "prejudice" vs "racism as an expression of institutional power", but I don't suspect that will help at the moment
@Tinkeringbell it's along the same line. If you can paint any group with a broad brush and then claim it's not a slam against those as a whole, it requires a doublethink worthy of Orwell.
@Tinkeringbell It will. Is it ok if a white person abusing a black person is called "racism", but a black person abusing a white person is called "being an asshole"?
So, @RichardU. Do you believe that the behavior pattern observed by those who describe "mansplaining" is valid? Do you have a problem with what the term describes? Or only the term itself?
@Tinkeringbell Ok, so here's the deal. It is 'sexist' only when the "victim" is a woman and the perpetrator is a man, just like it is 'rape' only when a man forces sex on a woman, or 'mansplaining' is only when a man speaks patronizingly to a woman. It all makes sense.
Hey, didn't I tell you that you should add "#killallmen" to your "this is sarcasm" category? I think you need to go back and revisit that, since you keep bringing it up.
But if you're still not understanding the history and context of that sarcastic hashtag (along with #maletears), then again, we can't possibly have a productive conversation.
As I said before, #maletears and #killallmen are a sarcastic response to the worst their enemies accuse them of, not a sincere belief. Like atheist who joke about eating babies, not because atheists eat babies, but because its the most absurd accusation the other side throws at us.
I have seen more than a handful of instances where a genuinely good answer (not mine) was criticized only because some "Allison Green" said otherwise, with no other explanation.
@MaskedMan SPLORT! Good thing I swallowed my coffee BEFORE reading that!
@Tinkeringbell back to earlier. In my day, you didn't misbehave towards a woman, and if you did, there'd be at least five other men ready to show you the error of your ways. It's how we were raised. Now, we're in the position, where if we don't act, it's "Chivalry is dead", and if we do, it's "sexist"
@RichardU Look, I've not seen #maletears used in that context; and if it has been, I would object. I see #maletears primarily used in response to men complaining about very minor inconveniences they encounter in efforts to move to more equality. Like complaining about having to set aside an hour a year to attend sexual harassment training. Or complaining about adding a few more stalls to the women's restroom or something.
That's why its sarcastic: it's basically, "boo hoo, I really feel for your minor inconvenience (not)"
It doesn't even have to go that far. Thanks to some self-declared feminists, we now have the "Door Dilemma". Should you hold the door for a woman to pass through? If you do, you are "sexist" because obviously the woman doesn't need your help. If you don't, you clearly think the woman is "inferior" and doesn't deserve your help.
@Tinkeringbell I had to look that up, "#BalanceTonPorc" apparently means "Out your pig". Not sure if all the same connotations are there in French as in English, but doesn't sound like they're calling all men pigs; sounds like they're calling abusers/harassers pigs.
@BradC it's used in that context, and when the 93% of workplace fatalities being male, and the need for male shelters is brought up. So, I guess everything is equal in those regards, and wanting to do something means you object to equality
@Tinkeringbell I do agree with one of the comments though, it is Western-culture centric, which is entirely fair since the question is tagged germany. Here in India, asking anyone out politely wouldn't be such a huge deal (unless, of course, you do it in an a-holish way), at least not in the more "modern" urban areas.
@MaskedMan another huge cultural difference is asking about one's family. Do that in America, and it's considered rude unless you are close to that person.
@BradC I'm curious as to where you've ever seen those hashtags used in any context other than clear and blatant misandry. Please provide a specific example.
I work in the software industry in India. I will look for new jobs after April. The notice period at my current job is 2 months. However, from my experience, most employers wait for a maximum of one month, and sometimes just 1 or 2 weeks.
Most of the time, employer will hire new employees becau...
@BradC It can be interpreted both ways, as a call to out any man that once did something insensitive and just call them a pig before you even know what they did, or like you said
So, while talking about Rosalind Franklin, noting that two white men got the Nobel prize for HER discovery instead of her, is "unnecessary political commentary" and "out of place". Oh poor guys. #maletears #34c3 #sorrynotsorry
@enderland I was curious as to why this answer was deleted. It essentially asks the OP to back off from the fight and look for alternatives. While it is arguable if that is good advice, it does answer the question.
I don't feel strongly about it to open a meta post, and in any case, I am not questioning your decision, just asking for clarification.
@Tinkeringbell Not sure why the rejection needs to be rude. Someone asks someone out, if they don't like it, just say no. No need to make a song and dance about it.
@RichardU No, thank you :) I already have enough trouble with English
@MaskedMan Not really what I meant, but over here when working retail you should be polite at almost all times. If I would say 'you don't even know me' out loud and start laughing for example, that would not be rude per session, but it would be rude for retail...
The thing is, here in India (and also in many Eastern cultures), we don't really consider anyone a "stranger" per se, so it would be rather odd to say, "you don't even know me". Though of course, going to the cashier you have met for the first time and saying, "I want to go on a date with you" would fall into the a-holish territory.
@MaskedMan I'll tackle your question above regarding race: yes, it is worthwhile to distinguish between "prejudice because of skin color" in a general sense, and "prejudice because of skin color supported by 250 years of US history involving slavery, Jim Crow laws, and a (debatable) degree of ongoing institutional prejudice".
There are some who use "prejudice" in the first (general) context, and "racism" in the second context. Clearly not everyone understands the distinction, and it make some conversations difficult and confusing.
But yes, that's why (using these definitions) some people summarize it as "black people can't be racist" as a shortcut that actually means "clearly black people can be prejudiced, but when they do, that isn't supported by the ongoing institutional racism of our system, so its at least somewhat different"
On one level, this is about terms and making sure we understand each other, but on another level, its about a disagreement whether the "institutional" aspect of racism and sexism still exist (or ever did)
@MaskedMan Well, if the conversation is happening in the US or in relation to events in the US, then its a relevant distinction. And a common misunderstanding of terminology. So depends on the context.
Here, please explain to me why the above article uses the word racism, and what US history has to do with any of it.
@BradC And why is it assumed that the conversation is happening in the context of US? I don't seem to recall ever stating it when I asked the question. I point this out because you specifically said you were responding to my question.
An Australian cricket umpire accuses Asians of racism. Even though there is no such "250 years of history" of "institutional racism" between Asia and Australia, and in any case, it has nothing to do with US, which doesn't even play cricket (not at any serious level, anyway).
I'm certainly more familiar with the US, but my broader point is that discussion of prejudice/racism/sexism doesn't take place in a vacuum, they take place in a specific context of historical prejudice/racism/sexism. I'm clearly not qualified to examine that with regard to Australian/Pakistani history and I have no comment on that specific case.
And as I said before, some people do use "racism" to simply mean "prejudice" in a broad sense.
So here is the deal... If X doing bad things to Y is named Foo, then Y doing the same bad thing to X should also be called Foo. Doing it any other way, and justifying it for whatever reason is just wrong.
@BradC So just use the word "prejudice" in all cases, problem solved. Not sure exactly what is gained by inventing words for one case, not the other, other than stirring up old sh**.
@MaskedMan I agree that prejudice (in any direction) is wrong. I think we agree on that.
@MaskedMan One important consequence of the distinction I've outlined above between prejudice (generally) and racism (prejudice supported by our institutions) is that the proposed remedies are different. Prejudice is more of an individual question: "what can we do to improve people's heart?". Whereas examining the lingering institutional aspects of racism is an altogether different question, and has altogether different solutions.
Or going back to the original point that started this whole thing, if condescension is good enough to describe women speaking patronizingly to men, then it is good enough to describe men speaking patronizingly to women. There is no need to invent additional words, and defend them, just because someone has a blog to write.
@BradC So you mean white people's hearts cannot be "improved"?
@MaskedMan what? No, I simply meant that addressing individual prejudice is a fundamentally different problem than addressing institutional racism.
And distinguishing the one from the other helps us examine solutions for each differently.
Regarding our original topic, "mansplaining". The experience seem to resonate with many women; they tend to find it supported by their own life and experience, specifically as a gendered issue; above and beyond "everyday condescension". No, the term does not come from a male-centric viewpoint, but I'm not going to deny their experience nor their right to call it what they like.
Here's the best explanation/justification I've heard for the term "mansplainer" (its buried down in the comment section of a page, so linking is hard), by a commenter named "staranise":
> “Mansplaining” is that rare thing, a word that assumes a female POV. It was invented by women, talking among each other about their experiences with this phenomenon. So if you’re a man, doubtless it feels weird and disorienting to have a word where you always have to mentally say, “Oh, I am not the default gender in this worldview; I have to stop and picture things from the other gender’s point of view to make this word make sense.”
> Most women have had to do that mental displacement trick since we were small children trying to understand language the first time around when there are phrases like “farmer’s wife” but not “farmer’s husband”. Our attempts to change language to make it less essentially disorienting (eg. “policeman” to “police officer”) have been difficult and frustrating.
> So when a man says, “This term which makes perfect sense to you is disorienting to me because I am not the default gender of its point of view” we tend to know exactly where he is coming from… but to us, finding a gender-neutral “mansplaining” falls down on the priority list past finding a gender-neutral entire rest of the English language. We’ll get around to it! …Eventually.
> Is it the most noble and strictly egalitarian impulse in the world? No. We get criticized a lot for our “hypocrisy” in having such an explicitly female-POV word. But on the other hand, having the word in our lexicon is an excellent litmus test. If a male ally is not willing to bear with the potential discomfort hearing it or using it gives him, he is probably not ready to do the more advanced work of re-examining his own privilege either.
I'm sure you'll have objections to that as well, but I for one think it is a good way to look at it
@RichardU Yeah, I noticed. I still don't get where the lines are on SE though, and I've seen enough nasty comments today to the extent that even yours didn't make me smile :/
@Tinkeringbell while skating as close as possible to the edge of the "be nice" policy, I suspect that if the OP was fed Viagra, the only effect would be that he would grow taller.
I lost maybe 5 of my heaviest ever, but I'm a bit stuck... doctor says I have to quit birth control first, but I don't want to do that unless she agrees to a hysterectomy, so we're having an impasse...
@RichardU It's the same for my age, it isn't healthy... but yeah, I'm not going to stop enjoying life once in a while. I can lose weight, but it would require not eating anything nice.
@Tinkeringbell My approach has been to load up with healthy foods so that I feel "full", then eat any treats I like. I can still enjoy things, but I won't ever pig out on them.
I also made my food very colorful and flavorful. When I cook, each plate looks like a work of art.
@RichardU I don't pig out... but if I choose to eat a portion of crisps, I gain weight. The only thing that seems to working is salads and apple juice, because it gives me diarrhea
@RichardU I can make dinners that look very fancy. I take a pic, send it to mom and dad and mash everything together in a big bowl to eat it in front of the tv without messing
Several approaches:
Push back your appointments so that work doesn't conflict.
Tell your supervisor that you have a doctor's appointment
Show up late occasionally to your appointments.
Go to HR.
The first one is out of the question, and the fourth one is unwise as HR IS NOT YOUR FRIEND
If ...
@RichardU I walk 20 minutes to the train each day, 15 during lunch and 20 minutes home from the train. In the weekends, I go on hikes of about 10 - 12 km.
@RichardU I don't have any other symptoms. I'm just fat.. The doctor want's me to see a food advisor, but they also want to see what happens when I leave my meds...
@Tinkeringbell Good luck, and keep on your doctors. Something is going on. If you're moving that much, and not pigging out, there has to be a reason why you're not 60 kilos max
@RichardU Probs the meds preventing me from losing right now, and keeping me just stable. (I must admit I did gain the weight by doing all the wrong things)
You have an XY Problem here. The most common cause of this symptom is the HNQ cancer, which has spread across StackExchange but it affects "subjective" sites like Workplace more severely. The problem results from a number of positive feedback loops, as explained below:
HNQ → more views → m...
I work in the software industry in India. I will look for new jobs after April. The notice period at my current job is 2 months. However, from my experience, most employers wait for a maximum of one month, and sometimes just 1 or 2 weeks.
Most of the time, employer will hire new employees becau...
Several approaches:
Push back your appointments so that work doesn't conflict.
Tell your supervisor that you have a doctor's appointment
Show up late occasionally to your appointments.
Go to HR.
The first one is out of the question, and the fourth one is unwise as HR IS NOT YOUR FRIEND
If ...
