this post was submitted on 23 Jul 2025
1582 points (94.6% liked)

Microblog Memes

9751 readers
1433 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Madison420@lemmy.world -5 points 4 months ago (344 children)

That's exactly what I was doing hence the twice repeated question, you can claim a lot of things but that isn't one that has legs.

Correct, both are based on assumptions that are as offensive as the assumption that they're mansplaining or a dei hire or whatever.

My point is that you can't use either without yourself being bigoted enough to come to a conclusion based on bigoted assumptions so how are they substantially different?

[–] null@lemmy.nullspace.lol 5 points 4 months ago (343 children)

Them:

Definition of "Mansplaining"

You:

Isn’t that misandry to assume the man is a sexist

That explanation requires prior knowledge or post hoc knowledge

They didn't make any assumptions, nor did they explain anything that "requires prior knowledge" -- because they gave a definition of a term, not a scenario. Your questioning only makes sense if they were talking about a scenario. It makes no sense as a follow up to a definition.

Anyways, that's just meta noise.

Correct, both are based on assumptions that are as offensive as the assumption that they’re mansplaining or a dei hire or whatever.

My point is that you can’t use either without yourself being bigoted enough to come to a conclusion based on bigoted assumptions so how are they substantially different?

You're free to call women bigoted for how they feel about their lived experience regarding condescension from men. Just as I'm free to judge that as incel behaviour.

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world -4 points 4 months ago (342 children)

Yes the way they defined is use requires someone to know the intent of the speaker which means they know them or they're simply assuming and my assertion is that isn't substantially different then assuming someone doesn't know something because of their sex.

And you can call someone bigoted for saying something in a way that makes you feel uncomfortable solely based on their sex. I don't see the difference.

[–] null@lemmy.nullspace.lol 4 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (145 children)

But you can't callout a man for being misogynistically condescending to a woman. Got it.

load more comments (145 replies)
load more comments (341 replies)
load more comments (341 replies)
load more comments (341 replies)