Let me explain this to you slowly, to make sure you understand. Mansplaining is a made-up word, that combines the words man and explaining to describe when a person – usually a man – provides a condescending explanation of something to someone who already understands it.
Just because I am a woman doesn’t mean I can’t be guilty of something akin to it, but female recipients are more likely to respond negatively to male mansplainers doing it and to feel like their competence is being questioned, data suggests. They also speak up less frequently after it happens, which could have consequences for workplace contentment and productivity.
Although mansplaining has been the subject of various Twitterstorms in recent years, there has been relatively little research on why and how mansplaining occurs, or people’s reactions to it.
Men shrug and get on with it. Women complain about it. So, it’s the gendered reaction to it, not the thing itself, which is the problem.
That is, it’s all women’s fault.
When one considers the endless column kilometres? miles? light years? of Womansplaining things men are supposed to not understand…
‘while recordings of virtual meetings could also be monitored to learn how often people are being interrupted or ignored when speaking up’
So if you explain something you’re guilty. But if you don’t explain something you’re also guilty.
@Boganboy: how on earth will they square that with data protection laws, FFS!? In my office, no Teams calls can be recorded unless all consent.
If Teams or Webex meetings get recorded I tend to contribute a lot less. Not that I ever say anything particularly controversial, I just don’t like it.
“to feel like their competence is being questioned, data suggests.” My dear lady, let me explain. First, “data” is plural so you should have said “data suggest”. Secondly, unless you wish to speak subAmerican you should have written “feel as if their competence …”. You can feel “like a dimwit” or feel “as if you are a dimwit” but you really shouldn’t mix the two.
dearieme
Applause…
Yes dearieme
More applause!!
I mansplain. A lot. To both men and women. About subjects where I have 20+ years experience and my interlocutors are ignorant and retarded.
“female recipients are more likely to respond negatively to male mansplainers doing it and to feel like their competence is being questioned, data suggests. They also speak up less frequently after it happens, which could have consequences for workplace contentment and productivity.”
Who is going to explain to female employees that cutting down on the gossip and bitchiness will make for a more contented and productive workplace? I don’t mind who does that, but it sounds more like a man’s job…
As general Melchett so succinctly put it, “it’s like trying to teach a woman the value of a good forward defensive stroke”
Lord Flasheart had a few nuanced observations too.
I do sometimes wake up in a cold sweat form the nightmare of a “woke” remake of adder of colour.
Horses and courses? I accept the the OED might say otherwise, but “data suggests” has been generally accepted usage in the wider population for a long time.
My test is that if I was to use “data suggest” amongst normal educated business types/professionals (rather than amongst scientists or within academia), might it sound confected? Or conversely, would “data suggests” sound perfectly normal? In both cases the answer is yes (I accept MMV).
Male teachers double plus ungood.
‘Data suggests’ is no better than the interviewer/pundit’s favourite ‘some say’. Who says, and what did they actually say, and what do the rest say? What data, and how many suggestions does other data suggest?
data doesn’t suggest or write essays or hit a six over the bowler’s head: it is inanimate. Some people infer from data, others choose to ignore it.
” . . . female recipients are more likely . . . to feel like their competence is being questioned . . .”
Well, yeah. Not going to explain something that I think you already know.
@phillip not a problem as there are so few male teachers left
I was accused of mansplaining recently because I answered a question on a professional level. Presumably the woman concerned didn’t know the answer, or she wouldn’t have asked. I gave the standard industry response. That was mansplaining. A woman also gave the same standard response, but wasn’t accused of womansplaining. Go figure.
Dearie, Dearie, Dearie, “data” is a mass noun. You don’t say “rice are”, “meat are”, “milk are”, “sand are”, similarly you don’t say “data are”.
The sand is interesting
The milk is interesting
The rice is interesting
The data ****IS***** interesting.
@jgh… Shouldn’t the last one be “the datum is interesting”..?