[pvaldes]

A part of the advantages of being human is that you can understand other humans. Having exactly the same pain receptors, eyes and body temperature... Yes, men can talk and understand about how women feel.

And "mansplaining" is a concept that was created to justify having smaller seats in a train basically. And to target and ashame people that cames in different sizes and shapes. The solution to mansplaining whatever it means is simple: bigger seats.

[amcoastal]

How did you type this entire comment and not realize that mansplaining and manspreading are two different things?

[pvaldes]

Maybe because I couldn't care less about those stupid new void concepts that are used basically as 'holier than thou' weapon against other people.

This terms are based in the --false-- claim that [all] men are dominant and [all] women are passive and unable to defend themselves from the big-bad-male. They aim for a society uniform when people will have much less margin to be an individual, and people with long legs or that weight different will be ashamed for that. Both terms, mansplaining and manspreading evoke a very dystopian feeling.

But if this is the kind of society that you wish for, feel free to spread the sticky mess

[posterboy]

Yes, "men can talk and understand about how women feel." But mansplaining is not that.

Epistemic implication is saying, for example, "she is home, because her car is in the drive way". The car is not the reason, and the first clause is not a statement of fact. It is not too odd that "must" can be found in this middle voice, "She must be (a slut/a victim) because ..."

Saving grace is that the comment did not explain anything, so it can be chalked off as self-ironic take.

[Chris2048]

You seem to be describing slut-shaming, not mansplaining.

Mansplaining is the phenomenon of which an arrogant male-persons arrogance can be attributed to their sex/gender (as appropriate), usually with some reference to "patriarchy" and the undeserved confidence of those higher up in the power hierarchy when belittling or underestimating those lower on that same scale.

In practice, it is a gender-specific, weaponised term used in any situation where a man is perceived to be arrogant towards a women i.e. it is commonly abused beyond any positive philosophical aims.

Maybe it has a similar reasoning i.e. men sexist-ly assume women know less than them - but the fact is that it is rarely clear b/c arrogant, narcissistic people of both genders exist without the need for such a basis.