Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Cheesecat wrote:
blues elements (music that is often associated with black culture)

Still very, very much a U.S. thing. I would rather have mentioned Jamaican music.

Mansplaining is when you try to use facts, reason and logic to prove your point and this is somehow seen as condescending because some people value their personal feelings above truth.

Many UK punk, post-punk and new wave bands have used Jamaican music as inspiration such as The Clash, Elvis Costello, The Specials, etc.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Mansplaining is when you try to use facts, reason and logic to prove your point and this is somehow seen as condescending because some people value their personal feelings above truth.

I love you.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Mansplaining is when you try to use facts, reason and logic to prove your point and this is somehow seen as condescending because some people value their personal feelings above truth.

What if the person doing "mansplaining" thinks he is super logical, reasonable and factual but it turns out his point(s) is/are full of faults, also just because feelings are involved doesn't mean that logic is completely absent.

 Cheesecat wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Mansplaining is when you try to use facts, reason and logic to prove your point and this is somehow seen as condescending because some people value their personal feelings above truth.

What if the person doing "mansplaining" thinks he is super logical, reasonable and factual but it turns out his point(s) is/are full of faults, also just because feelings are involved doesn't mean that logic is completely absent.

Then he's simply wrong.

No need to slap a made up derogatory gendered verb on it.

 Cheesecat wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Mansplaining is when you try to use facts, reason and logic to prove your point and this is somehow seen as condescending because some people value their personal feelings above truth.

What if the person doing "mansplaining" thinks he is super logical, reasonable and factual but it turns out his point(s) is/are full of faults, also just because feelings are involved doesn't mean that logic is completely absent.

The term didn't arise from men repeatedly being wrong, it arose from men repeatedly trying to make a reasoned argument to someone who has decided in advance not to listen.

 lord_blackfang wrote:

 Cheesecat wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Mansplaining is when you try to use facts, reason and logic to prove your point and this is somehow seen as condescending because some people value their personal feelings above truth.

What if the person doing "mansplaining" thinks he is super logical, reasonable and factual but it turns out his point(s) is/are full of faults, also just because feelings are involved doesn't mean that logic is completely absent.

The term didn't arise from men repeatedly being wrong, it arose from men repeatedly trying to make a reasoned argument to someone who has decided in advance not to listen.

Just saying, you're making a rather good illustration of the phenomenon discussed.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:

 Cheesecat wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Mansplaining is when you try to use facts, reason and logic to prove your point and this is somehow seen as condescending because some people value their personal feelings above truth.

What if the person doing "mansplaining" thinks he is super logical, reasonable and factual but it turns out his point(s) is/are full of faults, also just because feelings are involved doesn't mean that logic is completely absent.

The term didn't arise from men repeatedly being wrong, it arose from men repeatedly trying to make a reasoned argument to someone who has decided in advance not to listen.

Just saying, you're making a rather good illustration of the phenomenon discussed.

Meaning... Blackfang is trying to make a reasoned argument and you & Cheesecat have decided in advance not to listen?

If you think someone's arguments are full of faults, then you have to identify those faults and back up your argument and why you think his points are wrong. You don't just get to hand waive away and dismiss an opinion you don't like as "Mansplaining" without even bothering to supply a counter argument.

Simply labelling a faulty argument as "mansplaining" is lazy.

Anyway, is it still Mansplaining if its two guys talking?

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:


The term didn't arise from men repeatedly being wrong, it arose from men repeatedly trying to make a reasoned argument to someone who has decided in advance not to listen.

The universe must love me, because the Irony be a flowing today

Score one 'internets' for the Walrus.And you got your quoting mixed up there, Hatlord

But yes, anyhow, 'mansplaining' is just a term for a specific thing in specific situations that people have experienced. Or, in some cases, done. I can't really understand, myself, why someone would feel offended by the very existence of the term. Just think of it as a 'colloquial shorthand' for a condescending attitude in certain situations discussed in a certain way, with certain participants.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Mansplaining is when you try to use facts, reason and logic to prove your point and this is somehow seen as condescending because some people value their personal feelings above truth.

Awesome-sauce.

 Compel wrote:
Score one 'internets' for the Walrus.

But yes, anyhow, 'mansplaining' is just a term for a specific thing in specific situations that people have experienced. Or, in some cases, done. I can't really understand, myself, why someone would feel offended by the very existence of the term. Just think of it as a 'colloquial shorthand' for a condescending attitude in certain situations discussed in a certain way, with certain participants.

Fair point. Some men can be and are condescending towards women. And vice versa.

But if you think an argument is faulty, then point out those faults and justify/explain why you think its faulty by way of a counter argument.

Labeling an argument as "mansplaining", without bothering to explain why you think its wrong sounds like lazy Ad Hominem.

Don't attach non wargaming images to Dakka.
Reds8n

lol, did she change her twitter nick to LW3 now?

On the subject of "Cultural Appropriation", you have to remember that there's a fanatical sub-set of those - I'll call it Tumblr Cultural Appropriation - that say that using anything from another culture is a form of cultural appropriate and is always 100% without exceptions bad. And when I say "using", I mean:

Eating food from another culture (going out for Italian, ordering in Chinese food when you are neither Italian nor Chinese)
Speaking the language of another culture (learning Spanish, casually inserting German phrases into English despite not being Spanish/Latino or German/Swiss)
Using the dress of another culture (the aforementioned Katy Perry + Kimono nonsense... or it might've been Geisha, but whatever - that was bad simply because she did it, even if she did it with 100% respect for its origins and significance).

Like most of these "warrior" types, they're not worth worrying about because they are a pitiable bunch of attention craving professional offence takers all competing in the Oppression Olympics. Nevertheless, it's always good to be specific if you're talking about real cultural appropriation, or made up Tumblr-level appropriation.

The same applies to abelism.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
The term didn't arise from men repeatedly being wrong, it arose from men repeatedly trying to make a reasoned argument to someone who has decided in advance not to listen.

So the Dakka equivalent would be "Peregrinesplaining", yes?

 lord_blackfang wrote:

 Cheesecat wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Mansplaining is when you try to use facts, reason and logic to prove your point and this is somehow seen as condescending because some people value their personal feelings above truth.

What if the person doing "mansplaining" thinks he is super logical, reasonable and factual but it turns out his point(s) is/are full of faults, also just because feelings are involved doesn't mean that logic is completely absent.

The term didn't arise from men repeatedly being wrong, it arose from men repeatedly trying to make a reasoned argument to someone who has decided in advance not to listen.

Well, your definition of the term arose from a man (in this case you) being repeatedly wrong, but that's because you keep on saying the wrong definition. It arose, as has been said many times in this thread, from women (specifically Rebecca Solnit) being talked down to about things they know more about than the explainer. Not "making a reasoned argument to someone who has decided in advance not to listen" but attempting to explain the premise of a book to that book's author, for example.

I do, however, find it ironic that you've made a post about how people that use the term dislike facts, reason and logic, whilst also showing a disregard for facts, reason and logic. Well done on that.

It's Brianna Wu. She's a high-ranking Oppression Olympian, and experienced in long-distance offence taking. She also competes in the flying-off-the-handle-at-imagined-provocation section at the elite level.

True athlete that one.

She's also a game developer, although I really want to use " " on the developer part

Yeah, I was gonna say, game developer in the loosest possible terms.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:


The same applies to abelism.


So the Dakka equivalent would be "Peregrinesplaining", yes?

I have to say although it was mentioned previously abelism is a new one to me. I guess I need to social media more. Abelism : Where you act the victim so, much your brother decides to murder you - also known as the Caine effect.

Brianna Wu seems to think being talked down to = stating a general fact. I guess I need to social media more... who knew that this level of offence taking was around (not I said the Bullockist)

Yeah, abelism was a new one for me up until August. Basically it amounts to people taking the concept of "discrimination against those with disabilities" and - thick with irony - going full slow with the definition.

So, in the same way that Tumblr Cultural Appropriation centres around how doing anything related to a culture that is not yours is somehow bad (to the point where getting sushi when not Japanese is racist/evil), "abelism" is the policing of words that might (and I use "might" in the loosest possible sense) offend people with disabilities.

So this goes beyond the work Dakka censored above. This extends to things like "stupid" or "blind", or really any innocuous thing. So if someone misses something and you say "What are you, blind?", that's abelism. Now you're not actually discriminating against someone who is blind, and there might not even be a blind person for 1000 miles in every direction of you, but to the Tumblr crowd, simply using the word "blind" is a demonstration of just how evil you are, and how uncaring you are towards people with disabilities.

It goes even further though with the levels of mystifying stupidity, such as the conversation I saw the other day where someone used the phrase "hoisted by their own petard". Someone replied with, essentially, "I agree, but I find the suffix troubling." Naturally the first person asked "What suffix?", to which the other said "You said 'tard'". Yes, apparently real words that contain other "abelist" words are wrong now. It's a bit like people getting upset over the word "niggardly".

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

So, in the same way that Tumblr Cultural Appropriation centres around how doing anything related to a culture that is not yours is somehow bad (to the point where getting sushi when not Japanese is racist/evil), "abelism" is the policing of words that might (and I use "might" in the loosest possible sense) offend people with disabilities.

Is this cultural appropriation thing a slight (is that abelist?) bit racialist? I mean jusging whether someone can do something based solely on their culture they were born into/raised in? I don't get it but i can tell you one thing. No bastard is stopping me eating kim chi ,

This world is getting slowed.......

*stomps over to where frazzled is standing next to a grill holding a sign saying "Get off my lawn", takes a sign off the pile on the ground and holds it up. It reads "Men", stop saying good morning to my teenage daughter"*

I quite like Indian curries, doner kebabs and French oysters. Guess that makes me racist.

I'd agree but then again I'm casually racist so take that with a grain of salt.

If I can't eat other cultures food then I'm stuck with pies and fish and chips for the rest of my life, unless you count England as a seperate culture (which sjws wouldn't because they think all white people are the same) in which case I'm stuck eating... nothing.

 EmilCrane wrote:
If I can't eat other cultures food then I'm stuck with pies and fish and chips for the rest of my life, unless you count England as a seperate culture (which sjws wouldn't because they think all white people are the same) in which case I'm stuck eating... nothing.

I think anglophone nations are so irredeemably steeped in racism and privilege that we can all eat each others foods without making things worse.

DELETED

Mistook Emil for an Australian.

What about the new Zealand Maori culture? Doesn't t have some good traditional cuisine?

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
What, you Aussies don't bbq your kangeroos?

I think he's from that other, slightly smaller island. The ones with the hobbits.

- hah, can't take it back now, I was too quick!

 Bromsy wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
What, you Aussies don't bbq your kangeroos?

I think he's from that other, slightly smaller island. The ones with the hobbits.

- hah, can't take it back now, I was too quick!

God damnit

In my defence I'm using a kindle tablet. The flags are the size of a pin head on my screen.