Most examples of “mansplaining” are not really what purports to be mansplaining, even the supposedly egregious examples cited in the OP’s article.
Many are things that expert opinion does not have a consensus, in which case being the only expert in a particular conversation is not a valid trump card.
In some cases many women perceive things differently.
And some things are matters of opinion and/or semantics (e.g. eye color, or what constitutes a “refugee”).
FWIW, there was a striking example from this MB of what would otherwise be “mansplaining”, were it not for the fact that the target was a man and some of the mansplainers were women. Discussion was how to interpret some regulation in the context of Title IX, a long time poster notes that he is a Title IX lawyer and such-and-such interpretation (which many posters disliked for political reasons) is the correct one and that it’s a straightforward issue. Other posters - who were not lawyers, let alone Title IX lawyers - were unimpressed and continued arguing at length that the guy was wrong (and that even suggesting such a thing was borderline trolling).
(Of possible note, that lawyer does not appear to have posted to this MB since then.)