Yes, it is. Please set aside your need to be right and think about it:
Women talk for long streams. If men were to refer to it as "womensplaining," it would be condescending.
Men talk for long streams. When the small, vocal subset of women refer to it as "mansplaining," it is condescending.
The error in logic is to say that it's a gendered pattern of condescension. Because both genders do it, it only becomes gendered when you forget that women do it, too.
Who is the Zen master who makes the grass green? It is you. You make the grass green.
Mansplaining has nothing to do with "talk[ing] for long streams". It has to do with what is being said and why. Mansplaining is when there is an assumption of ignorance on the part of a woman that can only be rectified (and must be rectified) by a man educating her on a topic, where that assumption of ignorance stems from gendered biases. And it does happen. And the reverse does not happen in any serious proportion--in no small part because of the social conditioning where women would be considered pushy and bitchy for doing so, but where men are considered leaders and experts for it.
You've failed to even grasp the topic, and yet you would condescend towards dragonwriter (one of the wisest, most insightful posters around here on a wide variety of topics) about his "need to be right" while inventing an argument out of whole cloth. Tremendous.
> Mansplaining is when there is an assumption of ignorance on the part of a woman that can only be rectified (and must be rectified) by a man educating her on a topic, where that assumption of ignorance stems from gendered biases
So 'mansplaining' goes beyond simply noting a man's condescending behavior, but suggests that the only motivation is sexism. Is the evidence sufficient to prove the charge?
Maybe the man is simply rude towards everyone; maybe the woman is ignorant on the topic; maybe the guy was having a bad day.
The problem with the word is the logic that it implies. Soon we'll be finding that if a man is ever rude to a woman in public for any reason, he is automatically labeled a sexist. I'm not sure that's a very useful, or fair heuristic.
On topics that were traditionally feminine, like housework, childcare or cooking, women can be really condescending.
I still remember the tone used by the nurse when she "taught" to my brother how to change the diapers of his newborn. I've never seen someone that condescending.
It's unfortunate that you have such a strong desire to use clearly sexist language, to the extent that you'll write at such length defending it. This is your right, of course, but please keep it off HN, which is an inclusive site.
Speaking as a woman in tech, HN is PRETTY FUCKING FAR from an "inclusive site". It's repulsive, which is why i mostly stay the fuck away from it. 4chan is at least honest about being a cesspool.
