Is heterosexual hook up culture fuelling rapes on campuses?

[Imperializt Russia]

Would you like to find me some instances of "womansplaining"?

Mainsplaining exists because (some) men feel, on some level, for whatever reason, women are just incapable of properly articulating themselves, or are slightly inaccurate (almost always while still being perfectly correct) and must be corrected. Yet leeway is often offered to men in the same position.

Some men do it, so let's demonize all men. Yeah, love that fucked up logic.

Complaining about mansplaining applies only to men who mansplain, calm yer tits.

Manspreading and mansplaining are indeed people being jerks, yes. Manspreading is just a thing men do, there's rarely any malice to it, but mansplaining is where a man actively belittles a woman who usually knows more than he does.

I don't manspread on public transport (I'm apparently part of that freak minority that can comfortably keep my legs shut or crossed), but I do take up multiple seats with luggage.

Wait, "manspreading" isn't something to do with propaganda, but with keeping my legs opened or closed? Feminism is being reduced to men opening and closing their legs? Thank you for reaffirming my position against 3rd wave feminism.

Doing it to the point of taking up literally multiple seats on public transport and giving those seated opposite an enormous view of their sac, rather.

You're right, sorry.
Hirota's examples, which I misattributed to you.

Anyone can make a condescending explanation. But there's a rationale behind a man giving a condescending explanation to a woman, especially if it's a qualified woman. Hence why mansplaining exists at all.

So anyone can engage in this behavior but when it's a man doing it to a woman there's a clear and obvious explanation. Like femembering when a woman loses her train of thought and has to take a second to collect herself because she was shocked by the realization she wasn't in the kitchen. Sure it's entire premise is based on an idiotic assumption and the fact I've conceded anyone can do it makes the name pointless but why would anyone say it if it wasn't true right?

Calm yerself, lad.

More than anything else, mansplaining is about tone. Mansplaining is arrogance, that you are right, and this woman must be wrong - even if that woman is more qualified than you are.

[Des-Bal]

Calm yerself, lad.

More than anything else, mansplaining is about tone. Mansplaining is arrogance, that you are right, and this woman must be wrong - even if that woman is more qualified than you are.

I am literally sitting in a robe sipping tea, if I was any calmer I would probably fall asleep.

You're describing a behavior that is exhibited by both men and women but presuming that when done by men the explanation for this behavior is sexism.

[Galloism]

And I have to admit I've exaggerated, I was a little angered yesterday, personal reasons, and that was combined with seeing male entitlement here...so it turned out in a form harsher than I wished to put it out.

Honestly, there's been more female entitlement from your posts than male entitlement from all the male posters in this thread put together.

[Imperializt Russia]

Calm yerself, lad.

I am literally sitting in a robe sipping tea, if I was any calmer I would probably fall asleep.

You're describing a behavior that is exhibited by both men and women but presuming that when done by men the explanation for this behavior is sexism.

"More than anything else, mansplaining is about tone".

Let's take the Trump PTSD example. A US Marine veteran, with PTSD, asks Trump what he would do about the 20 veterans a day who commit suicide in the US. Trump corrects her, "actually, it's 22." and then didn't even address it, beyond platitudes.
Trump was actually wrong. It was believed to be an average of 22 a day, but in July, the estimate was revised to 20. He was correcting her, when she was probably in a position to be more knowledgeable anyway, and we know of Trump's numerous women problems.

Let's say Trump was technically accurate at 22, and the estimate hadn't been revised to 20.
What if the woman had been rounding? "20 a day", is entirely acceptable when the actual figure is 22.
So what if she was inaccurate, believing the figure to actually be 20 when it was 22? Since it's acceptable rounding, it doesn't matter that she's out by two.

[Aelex]

"More than anything else, mansplaining is about tone".

Let's take the Trump PTSD example. A US Marine veteran, with PTSD, asks Trump what he would do about the 20 veterans a day who commit suicide in the US. Trump corrects her, "actually, it's 22." and then didn't even address it, beyond platitudes.
Trump was actually wrong. It was believed to be an average of 22 a day, but in July, the estimate was revised to 20. He was correcting her, when she was probably in a position to be more knowledgeable anyway, and we know of Trump's numerous women problems.

Let's say Trump was technically accurate at 22, and the estimate hadn't been revised to 20.
What if the woman had been rounding? "20 a day", is entirely acceptable when the actual figure is 22.
So what if she was inaccurate, believing the figure to actually be 20 when it was 22? Since it's acceptable rounding, it doesn't matter that she's out by two.

And the reason you consider said behavior to be "mansplaining" and not mere smart-assery is...?

[Balkenreich]

And I have to admit I've exaggerated, I was a little angered yesterday, personal reasons, and that was combined with seeing male entitlement here...so it turned out in a form harsher than I wished to put it out.

Honestly, there's been more female entitlement from your posts than male entitlement from all the male posters in this thread put together.

Careful Gallo, yer mansplaining.

[Sack Jackpot Winners]

Wait, "manspreading" isn't something to do with propaganda, but with keeping my legs opened or closed? Feminism is being reduced to men opening and closing their legs? Thank you for reaffirming my position against 3rd wave feminism.

Doing it to the point of taking up literally multiple seats on public transport and giving those seated opposite an enormous view of their sac, rather.

Rudeness isn't a gender-specific trait, nor is taking up too much space. Sort of a lame rallying cry for feminism.

And I have to admit I've exaggerated, I was a little angered yesterday, personal reasons, and that was combined with seeing male entitlement here...so it turned out in a form harsher than I wished to put it out.

Honestly, there's been more female entitlement from your posts than male entitlement from all the male posters in this thread put together.

Silly Galloism, don't you know calling her out on entitlement proves your entitlement *nods*

[Galloism]

Honestly, there's been more female entitlement from your posts than male entitlement from all the male posters in this thread put together.

Careful Gallo, yer mansplaining.

Doing it to the point of taking up literally multiple seats on public transport and giving those seated opposite an enormous view of their sac, rather.

Rudeness isn't a gender-specific trait, nor is taking up too much space. Sort of a lane rallying cry for feminism.

Honestly, there's been more female entitlement from your posts than male entitlement from all the male posters in this thread put together.

Silly Galloism, don't you know calling her out on entitlement proves your entitlement *nods*

Clearly, I'm a massive patriarch with a codpiece the size of New Zealand.

[Imperializt Russia]

"More than anything else, mansplaining is about tone".

Let's take the Trump PTSD example. A US Marine veteran, with PTSD, asks Trump what he would do about the 20 veterans a day who commit suicide in the US. Trump corrects her, "actually, it's 22." and then didn't even address it, beyond platitudes.
Trump was actually wrong. It was believed to be an average of 22 a day, but in July, the estimate was revised to 20. He was correcting her, when she was probably in a position to be more knowledgeable anyway, and we know of Trump's numerous women problems.

Let's say Trump was technically accurate at 22, and the estimate hadn't been revised to 20.
What if the woman had been rounding? "20 a day", is entirely acceptable when the actual figure is 22.
So what if she was inaccurate, believing the figure to actually be 20 when it was 22? Since it's acceptable rounding, it doesn't matter that she's out by two.

And the reason you consider said behavior to be "mansplaining" and not mere smart-assery is...?

People talk down to female scientists, to female sportspersons, to female servicepersons. They're not respected in these positions by some, because of their sex.

[Balkenreich]

Careful Gallo, yer mansplaining.

Rudeness isn't a gender-specific trait, nor is taking up too much space. Sort of a lane rallying cry for feminism.

Silly Galloism, don't you know calling her out on entitlement proves your entitlement *nods*

Clearly, I'm a massive patriarch with a codpiece the size of New Zealand.

If your the Patriarch of the Patriarchy, what does this make me?

A simple manape?

I HAVE PENIS, I DESERVE MORE GOD DAMN IT.

[Aelex]

Doing it to the point of taking up literally multiple seats on public transport and giving those seated opposite an enormous view of their sac, rather.

If there is no one sitting next to you and unless you're wearing a kilt like a true scot, I fail to see how much of a "problem" this is.

[Imperializt Russia]

Doing it to the point of taking up literally multiple seats on public transport and giving those seated opposite an enormous view of their sac, rather.

If there is no one sitting next to you and unless you're wearing a kilt like a true scot, I fail to see how much of a "problem" this is.

It's enormously inconsiderate. And hugely unsightly.

[Aelex]

People talk down to female scientists, to female sportspersons, to female servicepersons. They're not respected in these positions by some, because of their sex.

Do you actually have proof of this? Or is it mere allegations?
Because it honestly just sound like you're trying to make a capital offense of being a smart-ass to women when the whole issue isn't gendered in the first place.

[Aelex]

It's enormously inconsiderate. And hugely unsightly.

Given that we established that there is no one sitting next to the person "manspreading", toward who exactly is it "inconsiderate"?
And please, almost nobody spread their legs in a full 180° angle as 90° to 120° are sufficient enough. If you're still looking at people's crotch when they're opening them so little, I think you're the one who have a problem mate.

[Des-Bal]

"More than anything else, mansplaining is about tone".

Let's take the Trump PTSD example. A US Marine veteran, with PTSD, asks Trump what he would do about the 20 veterans a day who commit suicide in the US. Trump corrects her, "actually, it's 22." and then didn't even address it, beyond platitudes.
Trump was actually wrong. It was believed to be an average of 22 a day, but in July, the estimate was revised to 20. He was correcting her, when she was probably in a position to be more knowledgeable anyway, and we know of Trump's numerous women problems.

Let's say Trump was technically accurate at 22, and the estimate hadn't been revised to 20.
What if the woman had been rounding? "20 a day", is entirely acceptable when the actual figure is 22.
So what if she was inaccurate, believing the figure to actually be 20 when it was 22? Since it's acceptable rounding, it doesn't matter that she's out by two.

Let's pretend Hillary Clinton said that. Is there an explanation for her behavior and tone? Absolutely, I would probably guess that Clinton said "actually it's 22" as a way of showing she knew the issue. This would be important because if, for whatever, reason she didn't have a comprehensive and satisfactory answer in her pocket and instead had to rely on simple platitudes then she would want credibility. Using a specific number rather than one she felt had been rounded down she made it apparent that her lack of an adequate response was not because she's uninformed.

That's one explanation, it's also possible that it was a way of pausing without standing with her mouth open as she formed a response.

When someone's actions have multiple possible interpretations and you decide based on their gender that one explanation is the most obvious you're the one with the problem.

[Des-Bal]

It's enormously inconsiderate. And hugely unsightly.

It's an attempt to sit comfortably and keep my cock and balls from becoming trapped in an uncomfortable position.

[Galloism]

If there is no one sitting next to you and unless you're wearing a kilt like a true scot, I fail to see how much of a "problem" this is.

It's enormously inconsiderate. And hugely unsightly.

But what about my massive melon-like balls? Can't you be considerate of them?

[Balkenreich]

It's enormously inconsiderate. And hugely unsightly.

But what about my massive melon-like balls? Can't you be considerate of them?

i think you should see a doctor, my lord.

[Imperializt Russia]

People talk down to female scientists, to female sportspersons, to female servicepersons. They're not respected in these positions by some, because of their sex.

Do you actually have proof of this? Or is it mere allegations?
Because it honestly just sound like you're trying to make a capital offense of being a smart-ass to women when the whole issue isn't gendered in the first place.

I'd have typed an actual response, but it's not deserving of one.

[Imperializt Russia]

It's enormously inconsiderate. And hugely unsightly.

It's an attempt to sit comfortably and keep my cock and balls from becoming trapped in an uncomfortable position.

You can do that and not take up 2-3 whole seats. Or you can stand, that's fine too.

Or you can be completely honest about the matter and say "I don't want people to sit next to me". As shitty a reason it is, it's a much better reason than lettin' it all hang out.

[Imperializt Russia]

"More than anything else, mansplaining is about tone".

Let's take the Trump PTSD example. A US Marine veteran, with PTSD, asks Trump what he would do about the 20 veterans a day who commit suicide in the US. Trump corrects her, "actually, it's 22." and then didn't even address it, beyond platitudes.
Trump was actually wrong. It was believed to be an average of 22 a day, but in July, the estimate was revised to 20. He was correcting her, when she was probably in a position to be more knowledgeable anyway, and we know of Trump's numerous women problems.

Let's say Trump was technically accurate at 22, and the estimate hadn't been revised to 20.
What if the woman had been rounding? "20 a day", is entirely acceptable when the actual figure is 22.
So what if she was inaccurate, believing the figure to actually be 20 when it was 22? Since it's acceptable rounding, it doesn't matter that she's out by two.

Let's pretend Hillary Clinton said that. Is there an explanation for her behavior and tone? Absolutely, I would probably guess that Clinton said "actually it's 22" as a way of showing she knew the issue. This would be important because if, for whatever, reason she didn't have a comprehensive and satisfactory answer in her pocket and instead had to rely on simple platitudes then she would want credibility. Using a specific number rather than one she felt had been rounded down she made it apparent that her lack of an adequate response was not because she's uninformed.

That's one explanation, it's also possible that it was a way of pausing without standing with her mouth open as she formed a response.

When someone's actions have multiple possible interpretations and you decide based on their gender that one explanation is the most obvious you're the one with the problem.

The most reasonable response, if you believed it was 22, would be to engage the asker.

"I believed it was 22 per day"
"The estimate was revised in July"
"Oh my, how terrible. Good to see it's falling however slight. As for how to make it lower..." dot dot dot.

[Aelex]

I'd have typed an actual response, but it's not deserving of one.

"I, I totally had a perfect argument that would have made you admit I'm right, I swear! It's just that h-h-hu, you, h-h-hu, don't deserve it! Yeah that's it, you just don't deserve my argument that would have checkmated you! Ha! "

[Des-Bal]

You can do that and not take up 2-3 whole seats. Or you can stand, that's fine too.

Or you can be completely honest about the matter and say "I don't want people to sit next to me". As shitty a reason it is, it's a much better reason than lettin' it all hang out.

Or, I could be completely honest and say "I am sitting in a way I find comfortable, because of the positioning of my genitals and the length of my shins."

[Imperializt Russia]

I don't care how hyperbolic you're being, "you want to make being condescending to women a capital crime" is a fundamentally dumb statement not worth responding to.

But well, you've baited me into responding to it twice, so well done you I guess.

[Imperializt Russia]

You can do that and not take up 2-3 whole seats. Or you can stand, that's fine too.

Or you can be completely honest about the matter and say "I don't want people to sit next to me". As shitty a reason it is, it's a much better reason than lettin' it all hang out.

Or, I could be completely honest and say "I am sitting in a way I find comfortable, because of the positioning of my genitals and the length of my shins."

Maybe it's from being kicked in the nuts too many times at school, but I legitimately do not understand the supposed problem in keeping legs together. Or crossed, for that matter. Apparently I'm some weird hyper-flexible mutant, but only for that one specific act of contortion.