fredag 9 oktober 2015

On mansplaining

Dear man:
If you disagree with me, I would like to hear why. Not everything around the disagreement, which we agree on, but to the point about what you think I am wrong about and why. If I get the facts wrong you must correct me, I appreciate that. If you are truly an expert in a field, I really would like your opinion.
However; if we are having a discussion and you agree with me and you think I am right, I don’t want you to explain why you think I am right. I already know why I think I am right. I dont want you to describe the general situation for me. I don’t want you to help me making trivial predictions about the future. Unless I got them wrong or unless I asked you; I don’t want you to tell me the facts.
Because if we are in a discussion and you start giving me the basic description of how things (we basically agree on) really are two things happen:

I get bored really quickly

I get offended that you think I didn’t know this

So just don’t. I will be pissed off. I will most likely over-react and tell you to fuck-off, because I get this daily. Then you will have no idea about what is going on (because you tend to do this mansplaining unconsciously and automatically), you will feel hurt and you will utter phrases such as “But I thought we were discussing!”.

Discussing means that we present arguments to eachother. When you start to explain my arguments and their entire CV and future plans to me, we are no longer discussing. You are mansplaining.

3 kommentarer:

  1. I have come to realize there is another reason why I am so hostile towards mansplaining. Because as someone explains back your (common) opinion/idea/critique they also make it theirs. They take possession of it.

    This happened alot in my previous job where soon after I raised a point on something in a labmeeting or journalclub, the professor would say pretty much the same thing. The first year, I was pleased about this, I felt heard and appreciated. Then it slowly dawned on me that I was never credited for my input. As soon as the professor had reformulated it, it was as if I had never said it. I honestly dont think he was at all aware of what he did, and I never pointed it out. But it makes me quite suspicious of when I get things I just said explained back to me. I have seen this happen to other women too.

  2. Nä, du gillar bara inte att ha fel. Som t ex nu om de afghanska flyktingarna, som du babblade en massa nonsens om på Twitter, utan att ens besvära dig med att ta reda på fakta. Du pratar om den vetenskapliga metoden, men den lämnar du (om du ens behärskar den)så fort du får feeling. Du drar könskortet varje gång du har fel, om en man rättar dig. Du är bortskämd, lat och fantasilös.

  3. De var "trygga" i Iran? Really? Slavhandel, våld, fängelse, tvångsrekrytering till al-Assadas armé; i Afghanistan är den enda riktiga chansen till försörjning att joina talibanerna. Prata inte om saker du inte vet någonting om, Åsa.