This is generally what is meant by “manspreading.”
This guy probably had some excuse.
Gotcha thanks, yeah that’s pretty extreme.
My theory is that manspreading is a response to the decline in popularity of boomboxes.
It used to be that guys would define their territory on public transportation by playing loud music on a boombox. Now that boomboxes are passé and everyone’s listening to MP3s on their phones, men must resort to crude physical gestures to announce their spatial domination on a bus or train.
Well, if they’re such fragile flowers, they should invest in a car so they don’t have to be near any other humans when they commute. When they’re on public transportation, they don’t get to decide if someone sits next to them or not.
I’m thinking the opposite. Each time the subject of reclining airline seats comes up, the majority opinion is “I paid money so I can do whatever I want and if you don’t like it, go pay for first class”. Following that example, they paid for their ticket so they can ride however they want and if it bothers you, you should go buy a car or something where no jerks will take up space with their bodies or bags.
The SDMB taught me something! 
One easy way to stop this is let him overhear a conversation between you and another co-worker about how you noticed the outline of his junk when he turned around and it was the smallest penis outline you had ever seen. In a stage whispers speculate about whether or not he has a) suffered some terrible injury or b) may be a female to male transsexual.
Why are they illustrating a Boston article about manspreading with a picture of it on a New York subway car? If it’s such a ubiquitous Boston problem, couldn’t they get a good picture of it on a T car?
(That’s a New York Subway map behind the guy. Granted, the other two pix appear to be on Boston’s system (based on the patterns on the seats), but that opening shot was imported.)
If people don’t manspread, how am I supposed to stare at people’s junk?
Women don’t understand. Real Americans manspread.
But in the case of public transportation, their ticket entitles them to one seat, not two, so the comparison doesn’t really work. Since I also paid for a seat, I’m more entitled to it than their leg.
You know I always thought guys sat with their legs closed or crossed over the knee (in either configuration… figure 4 or in close draped over the other leg) but I think that might be just TV/Movie guys.
I put in “men sitting older photos” into google image search. While it brings up mostly older guys… it also brought up older photos of guys sitting. And, yeah, even back in black and white photos guys be spreading it wide. Click and scroll… might even see some boobies because safe search is off
LinusK is an MRA who blames women for all of his shortcomings. pay him no mind.
My understanding is that it’s first come, first served. There’s no assigned seating on commuter rail. You’re entitled to a ride to your destination, not to do so according to your desired level of comfort. And, in the obligatory photo people keep using, it’s a bench without separations so there is no “You’re taking two seats”.
I see what you did there.
What about us vertically superior who jam our knees into the seat in front. So I usually stand.
Do you also walk with your knees at a forty degree angle? I mean, the shit fits. So to speak.
Huh. I’d think that putting my handbag on a different seat would invite some young, fleet purse snatcher to take off with it. Mine stays under my arm or on my lap.
Men in other countries manage to use public transport without spreading wide to air the wedding tackle, so close your legs already.
Can we compromise? How about it I keep my legs closer and just swing my ballsack over onto the seat net to me?
I consider myself a feminist, but I have a problem with this concept. “Man spreading” seems to suggest that being inconsiderate of others’ space on public transport is a primarily male failing. Back in the day, I took public transport daily for 5 years into NYC. The distribution of inconsiderate assholes seemed pretty evenly spread amongst the genders.
Similar is the term “mansplaining,” which is supposedly how men talk down to women in a condescending fashion. The truth is though that being a condescending ass is another one of those gender nonspecific failings. Case in point, I’m a bit of a condescending asshole at times. It’s a flaw of mine. However, I talk down to both women and pretty much equally. It’s not your gender, it’s more like if I feel I can get away with acting smug and superior. (Btw, I’m not proud of this, and I try not to do this, and sometimes catch myself and stop and apologize, but not always, like I said, it’s a failing.)
Anyway, it’s bad enough that I’m occasionally a condescending asshole. If I happen to be a condescending asshole to a woman do I have to be sexist as well? Isn’t condescending asshole enough?
In that same vein, why is a women being a jerk a bitch? If she is being a jerk to a man, why is she a ball breaker?
It seems to me that we have enough legitimate gender and racial issues to work out as a society. What good does it due to give racially or sexually charged names to common human flaws based on who’s doing them and to whom?
Well, where I live, the subway (BART) has seats, and people do that shit all the time. Also, you’re absolutely right: you’re not entitled to ride at your desired level of comfort. So when you’re sitting there unnecessarily taking up room where I could be sitting, I’m not the dick for making you move your bitch-ass leg over, you’re the dick for stretching out like that in the first place during commuter hours.