805
2hot2handle
(mander.xyz)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 28 Aug 2025
805 points (100.0% liked)
Science Memes
16461 readers
2494 users here now
Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!
A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.
Rules
- Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
- Keep it rooted (on topic).
- No spam.
- Infographics welcome, get schooled.
This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.
Research Committee
Other Mander Communities
Science and Research
Biology and Life Sciences
- !abiogenesis@mander.xyz
- !animal-behavior@mander.xyz
- !anthropology@mander.xyz
- !arachnology@mander.xyz
- !balconygardening@slrpnk.net
- !biodiversity@mander.xyz
- !biology@mander.xyz
- !biophysics@mander.xyz
- !botany@mander.xyz
- !ecology@mander.xyz
- !entomology@mander.xyz
- !fermentation@mander.xyz
- !herpetology@mander.xyz
- !houseplants@mander.xyz
- !medicine@mander.xyz
- !microscopy@mander.xyz
- !mycology@mander.xyz
- !nudibranchs@mander.xyz
- !nutrition@mander.xyz
- !palaeoecology@mander.xyz
- !palaeontology@mander.xyz
- !photosynthesis@mander.xyz
- !plantid@mander.xyz
- !plants@mander.xyz
- !reptiles and amphibians@mander.xyz
Physical Sciences
- !astronomy@mander.xyz
- !chemistry@mander.xyz
- !earthscience@mander.xyz
- !geography@mander.xyz
- !geospatial@mander.xyz
- !nuclear@mander.xyz
- !physics@mander.xyz
- !quantum-computing@mander.xyz
- !spectroscopy@mander.xyz
Humanities and Social Sciences
Practical and Applied Sciences
- !exercise-and sports-science@mander.xyz
- !gardening@mander.xyz
- !self sufficiency@mander.xyz
- !soilscience@slrpnk.net
- !terrariums@mander.xyz
- !timelapse@mander.xyz
Memes
Miscellaneous
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Sure, but being an arrogant prick that thinks they're smarter than anyone else, regardless of gender, is already a thing that should be derided. Having only a single or few instances of this behavior being aimed at women as an example of his arrogance may mistakenly lead one to attribute that to misogyny instead of a general prickishness behavior, sure. But that's a perfectly understandable assumption to make in that situation and the mistake of calling them the wrong kind of asshole, I feel, is less of a concern than him, indeed, being an asshole.
You can do that without calling someone sexist.
Sometimes people are being sexist. Mansplaining is a real thing that happens. You may not see the need for the word because you personally don't need it, but maybe you can understand that there a lot of people who do need it?
I mean sure, but you can't deny it's misused sometimes. I never said it didn't happen at all. Stop reading what I didn't write.
Yes, it's misused sometimes. And it sounds like you agree that sometimes it's the right word for the situation.
If a man inaccurately and smugly trying to correct a female astronaut, punctuating it with "Simple thermo", isn't the right time to use "mansplaining", then when would be?
Sure. But it gives the appearance of sexism. Who gives a fuck if he is being an asshole if you mislabeled the kind of asshole he is. I don't.
You kinda should. The entire value of shaming people is to show a person that somebody else or a group of somebody elses do not approve of their behaviour. If you dont care about being accurate in calling out antisocial behaviour, how do you think the person expressing said antisocial behaviour will understand that interaction? Do you think they'll be able to understand what they did wrong? Obviously thats not always relevant, some people just want to mudwrestle and they'll never hear you no matter what you say. It's worth it to be accurate in case they are the type of person who might remotely consider your words though
If they were being sexist and you don't point that out, wouldn't that be inaccurate?
it would be incomplete, not inaccurate.
it is much better to be incomplete than inaccurate.
Yes, it would. It's also not related to the comment I replied to, in which you stated that you dont care about being accurate when calling somebody out. My point is that you should care about accuracy when youre calling out bad behaviour, I'm not trying to defend Mr "actually it would be spontaneous" from the image
Sure, my point was that a single instance outside of other context means that you cannot necessarily discern a pattern of behavior upon which to base your conclusion into which kind of asshole he is being. You could be innacurate in assuming he is sexist as well as assuming he isn't. If complete accuracy is required, then you would need to not make a conclusion at all and let the comment slide without feedback until you have more data. I'm saying that it is more important to call them out than to worry about the exact accuracy, to not let the comment slide, to make sure they know that, in some way, it was inappropriate.
One's experience may lead one to make some assumptions that are incorrect in this context, but I don't feel like that is the important part that you should critique. Either she says nothing, calls him a sexist, or calls him out but doesnt point out the sexism even if there is unconfirmed sexism involved. I'm saying either of the latter is reasonable under the circumstances.
It's not about making a value judgement on a person, its about calling out a specific behaviour. As a thought experiment, would you have engaged with me if I came at you like "you're an idiot" (making a value judgement on you as a person) rather than specifically addressing the behaviour you exhibited that I disagree with?
To be clear, I have no negative opinions of you and I absolutely do not think you're an idiot. That was posed purely as a hypothetical to illustrate the difference in communication effectiveness between making a value judgement about a person and addressing a specific behaviour.
Mansplaining is a behavior. It is a man arrogantly talking down to a woman assuming she knows less than him by virtue of being a woman or despite evidence to the contrary. If their defense to that was, "I just thought I was smarter than you and needed to demonstrate that, but it had nothing to do with your gender. How dare you judge me for being sexist." Then... well, I feel like they still need to examine that behavior.
Indeed, the behaviour does need to be examined. You are actively confusing that examination if you are inaccurate when calling out the behaviour (again, with no intention of defending the situation in the OP, purely disagreeing with your "I dont care about being accurate when calling people out" statements)