# Paint A Vulva Picture: or Mansplaining Fail. **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [March 8, 2019, 8:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/paint-a-vulva-picture-or-mansplaining-fail/830749 "2019-03-08T08:50:17Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 11
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2019, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/paint-a-vulva-picture-or-mansplaining-fail/830749/201 "2019-03-10T18:01:51Z")
> [@Novelty\_Bobble](#): > > Well…clearly no. Not functionally the same thing at all Is “functionally” yet another word you’re going to need explained? They sure do rack up… > [@](#): > > I also said “nagging” was another term that I don’t like. The issue isn’t with whether you \*like \*something or not. It’s whether you think it’s an actual distinct phenomenon being described, which by your own words you clearly don’t. > [@](#): > > I think “mixologist” is a bullshit and unnecessary term but I don’t deny the fact that some people create cocktails. But you \*do \*deny the fact that there’s a mode of condescending explanation uniquely performed by males. So your analogy fails. > [@](#): > > You made a clear accusation that I personally had made “stupid sexist arguments”. Your words. Yep. I’ve even repeated the two dumbest examples. > [@](#): > > Now when challenged I note that you are unable to produce any evidence for that _Au contraire, mon cher imbécile_ - anyone can read what you’ve written here. > [@](#): > > That’s a direct accusation that I’ve put forward sexist arguments. Yes. In this thread. > [@](#): > > Wow, So you cannot find any real quotes of mine that are a problem. I’ve quoted you. I’m not going to keep doing it when the thread is here, and my précis are accurate. > [@](#): > > Yet you have no problem directly making up quotes and constructing your post to attribute them to me. This may be the pit but surely you aren’t allowed to do that? Passive-aggressive much? If you think I broke a rule, fucking report me. > [@](#): > > I never, ever said either of those things. Not in so many words, which is why they’re not in quote boxes, genius. You’re about as good at rhetoric as you are at literacy, you know. > [@](#): > > It is barrel-scraping desperation of the lowest kind for you to make them up. Don’t like your ideas put out in the sunlight? Look very different outside the cave, don’t they, troglodyte? > [@](#): > > You’ve now moved into outright fabrication, somehow forgetting that the whole of this thread stands as a record of what was actually said. Boy, does it ever… ---
**Author:** ![raventhief](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/raventhief/32/4_2.png) [@raventhief](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/raventhief)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2019, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/paint-a-vulva-picture-or-mansplaining-fail/830749/202 "2019-03-10T18:02:03Z")
> [@Novelty\_Bobble](#): > > Tell you what, If want to know whether I’m referencing a tweet why don’t you look for the part of my post where I mention the tweet. To what were you referring to, if not the bike who tweeted that argument? That’s what everyone else was talking about (well, that and the vagina/vulva dialogues) - so what were you referencing if NOT the tweet and it’s faulty calculations? If I go into a conversation about wether and dreary taking about rain, it doesn’t matter if I never explicitly say the way “weather.” I can’t later say I wasn’t actually talking about weather because I didn’t say “weather.” ---
**Author:** ![raventhief](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/raventhief/32/4_2.png) [@raventhief](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/raventhief)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2019, 6:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/paint-a-vulva-picture-or-mansplaining-fail/830749/203 "2019-03-10T18:08:39Z")
> [@Novelty\_Bobble](#): > > How dare you, there are plenty of women out there who do have exactly that experience. Are you suggesting they are abnormal in some way? > > I am kidding of course but the core point stands. If someone’s experience of menstruation was with a woman who did have such a cycle then it is hardly surprising that their calculations might reasonably start from that assumption. > That’s not a bad thing, doing the calculation is not a bad thing, being informed of the facts and revising calculations is not a bad thing. > Sticking to erroneous assumptions and refusing to listen \*is \*a bad thing. Who are you talking about when you say someone? We were talking about the guy who made the tweet but apparently you aren’t. So who did the calculation? Who may have had experience with a woman who only had nine periods a year? WHO are you talking about? What on Earth promoted your statements about calculations and Google search and nine periods of year? It wasn’t the tweeting guy, and it wasn’t anyone in the thread, because that’s who we were talking about. Who is the someone your were thinking of? ---
**Author:** ![Kobal2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kobal2/32/20_2.png) [@Kobal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kobal2)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2019, 6:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/paint-a-vulva-picture-or-mansplaining-fail/830749/204 "2019-03-10T18:10:27Z")
_scans thread_ _scans thread AGAIN_ No but, seriously… who gives a fuck ? Like, for real ? ---
**Author:** ![raventhief](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/raventhief/32/4_2.png) [@raventhief](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/raventhief)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2019, 6:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/paint-a-vulva-picture-or-mansplaining-fail/830749/205 "2019-03-10T18:10:32Z")
> [@raventhief](#): > > To what were you referring to, if not the bloke who tweeted that argument? That’s what everyone else was talking about (well, that and the vagina/vulva dialogues) - so what were you referencing if NOT the tweeter and his faulty calculations? > > If I go into a conversation about weather and start talking about rain, it doesn’t matter if I never explicitly say the word “weather.” I can’t later say I wasn’t actually talking about weather because I didn’t say the word “weather.” So many typos. Corrected above. ---
**Author:** ![raventhief](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/raventhief/32/4_2.png) [@raventhief](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/raventhief)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2019, 6:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/paint-a-vulva-picture-or-mansplaining-fail/830749/206 "2019-03-10T18:13:57Z")
> [@Kobal2](#): > > _scans thread_ > _scans thread AGAIN_ > No but, seriously… who gives a fuck ? Like, for real ? You know what? Valid point. ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2019, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/paint-a-vulva-picture-or-mansplaining-fail/830749/207 "2019-03-10T18:38:56Z")
> [@MandaJo](#): > > And as a woman, I find it especially irritating to be called a liar about my own experience from a position of extreme ignorance because I can’t begin to get away with that. In professional settings, I have to preface new ideas with 'This might be a bad idea" or “Probably yall already thought about this . . .” and if I want to disagree with someone I have to be a fucking lawyer, laying out a non-confrontational line of questioning that takes twenty minutes because if I don’t, I’ll be perceived as a fucking harping bitch–when my male co-workers can be blowhards and make fools of themselves and they are excused as being, at worst, a little awkward–and at best as “leaders”. Qft. Women are socialized to qualify their declarations. To hedge and use disclaimers. We are conditioned to preface everything with “I think” or “I believe”. We express disagreement through questions. “I think we’re supposed to head south. Are you sure we should be taking a left at the light?” Men seem less bound to these expectations. “We’re supposed to head south. Turning left at the light is wrong.” Mansplaining is when gender differences in communication interact with 1) belief in female inferiority and 2) desire to derive status by acting as an expert authority. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2019, 6:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/paint-a-vulva-picture-or-mansplaining-fail/830749/208 "2019-03-10T18:42:53Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > I \*like \*Bobsisting 🙂 210 posts of it gets a little old, I find. ---
**Author:** ![Novelty\_Bobble](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Novelty\_Bobble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Novelty_Bobble)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2019, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/paint-a-vulva-picture-or-mansplaining-fail/830749/209 "2019-03-10T18:50:16Z")
> [@Nawth\_Chucka](#): > > Sweetie Pie, There’s no need to patronise is there? How have I been uncivil to you? > [@](#): > > it’s not that we don’t understand what you’re saying, you don’t have to keep restating and repeating your blather - it’s just we don’t agree w/ you. Which is fine, not agreeing is a healthy thing. > [@](#): > > I’m sure you think our disagreement indicates our failure to understand your words and intent, but you are wrong. and yet no-one has yet been able to quote me directly and show me where I’m wrong. > [@](#): > > We don’t have to prove to you why you’re wrong, you’re not entitled to an explanation and only an ass would think they were. Good lord no. heaven forfend that you need to back up a position you hold. Why explain and discuss when “mansplain” or “sexist” will do. > [@](#): > > The same kind of ass that mansplains. There we are. Look, this is how it goes. I don’t like the term, I criticise the use of the term but condemn what it describes. That’s not enough apparently. Anything less than wholehearted agreement with the term, its usage or it ultimate merit is not acceptable. By even criticising it I must be a “mansplainer” and therefore people feel comfortable in reading anything else through that lens. Clearly what I write must be hiding a sexist agenda. yes? Even though my actual words are carefully chosen and clearly condemn the sexist behaviours of others that is ignored. The damage is done. What I have actually said is irrelevant and the focus shifts to what you _think_ I must mean. No attempt to clarify or remove ambiguity. Confirmation bias, you see what you want to see, you interpret the worst possibility because that confirms what you want to believe. Have I expressed sexist beliefs? then show it. Proof not innuendo or interpretation please. Have I excused the bad behaviours of those who did “mansplain” ? no, and only now are people actually starting to admit it? Have posters in this thread attributed quotes to me that I didn’t make? yes. Through clumsiness or malice I don’t know but certainly no apology has been forthcoming. Lots of people have ranged against me for a variety of reasons I’m sure. All of them have had ample opportunity to quote my supposed sexist positions, denial of “mansplaining”, or support of sexist behaviours. Not one…not one, single quote has been put forward to back it up. Not one. It is certainly a valid criticism to say that I’ve taken this on too long but part of the reason for that is my fascination with this mode of discussion. Trumpian in its post-factual nature. ---
**Author:** ![raventhief](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/raventhief/32/4_2.png) [@raventhief](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/raventhief)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2019, 7:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/paint-a-vulva-picture-or-mansplaining-fail/830749/210 "2019-03-10T19:08:43Z")
[Sea lions](http://wondermark.com/1k62/). Hate 'em. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2019, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/paint-a-vulva-picture-or-mansplaining-fail/830749/211 "2019-03-10T19:12:59Z")
> [@Novelty\_Bobble](#): > > Have I expressed sexist beliefs? then show it. Proof not innuendo or interpretation please. The final sentence really sums it up, dunnit? “Proof” without interpretation is an incoherent concept. You’re demanding something that’s literally impossible to provide, because you believe that’s gonna win the argument for you. Have a gold star and be done. ---
**Author:** ![Novelty\_Bobble](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Novelty\_Bobble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Novelty_Bobble)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2019, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/paint-a-vulva-picture-or-mansplaining-fail/830749/212 "2019-03-10T19:35:46Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > The final sentence really sums it up, dunnit? “Proof” without interpretation is an incoherent concept… Proof in the form of an actual quote of what I’m accused of saying. That’s all. Not an interpretation of what people think I mean or a complete fabrication like Dibble created. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2019, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/paint-a-vulva-picture-or-mansplaining-fail/830749/213 "2019-03-10T19:40:33Z")
So, reported me, yet? Put up or shut up, motherfucker! ---
**Author:** ![Ace309](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ace309/32/1050_2.png) [@Ace309](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ace309)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2019, 7:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/paint-a-vulva-picture-or-mansplaining-fail/830749/214 "2019-03-10T19:41:05Z")
> [@Novelty\_Bobble](#): > > If I am referencing the tweet I’ll be sure to reference the tweet. I didn’t and I wasn’t. > > So now we are clear on that, do you agree that my original, _general_, statement is accurate and uncontroversial i.e. that. We’re on page four and you’re still acting like this? You must be a fucking _riot_ at parties. ---
**Author:** ![Novelty\_Bobble](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Novelty\_Bobble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Novelty_Bobble)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2019, 8:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/paint-a-vulva-picture-or-mansplaining-fail/830749/215 "2019-03-10T20:09:01Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > Is “functionally” yet another word you’re going to need explained? They sure do rack up… Certainly you appear to be using it in a way completely unfamiliar to me. > [@](#): > > The issue isn’t with whether you \*like \*something or not. It’s whether you think it’s an actual distinct phenomenon being described, which by your own words you clearly don’t. by my words which you cannot quote > [@](#): > > But you \*do \*deny the fact that there’s a mode of condescending explanation uniquely performed by males. No, men definitely talk down to women and quite possibly to a greater extent than for other types of interaction. Is the condescending explanation of a man to a woman uniquely performed by a man to a woman? I feel confident in saying “yes” to that. > [@](#): > > Yep. I’ve even repeated the two dumbest examples. If by "repeated"you mean “made up” then yes, yes you certainly did. > [@](#): > > In this thread. I’ve quoted you. I’m not going to keep doing it when the thread is here, and my précis are accurate. So were they quotes or a precis? If the former that’s an outright lie, if the latter then they are inaccurate. > [@](#): > > Not in so many words, which is why they’re not in quote boxes, genius. I admire your attempt at plausible deniability. Not in so many words eh? is that your way of admitting that the they are “something I made up”? > [@](#): > > Don’t like your ideas put out in the sunlight? Look very different outside the cave, don’t they, troglodyte? Still zero evidence that you have the slightest ideas of what you my “ideas” actually are. Go on, stick your neck out and ask me direct question on what you think my ideas are. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2019, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/paint-a-vulva-picture-or-mansplaining-fail/830749/216 "2019-03-10T20:30:14Z")
> [@Novelty\_Bobble](#): > > Certainly you appear to be using it in a way completely unfamiliar to me. I imagine lots of words are like that to you… > [@](#): > > by my words which you cannot quote Already quoted them. > [@](#): > > No, men definitely talk down to women and quite possibly to a greater extent than for other types of interaction. …and there’s a name for that specific behaviour. > [@](#): > > So were they quotes or a precis? Yes. > [@](#): > > If the former that’s an outright lie, Are you claiming I’ve never directly quoted you in this thread? > [@](#): > > if the latter then they are inaccurate. Says you… > [@](#): > > I admire your attempt at plausible deniability. Whereas you pathetic attempts at sophistry bore me. > [@](#): > > Not in so many words eh? is that your way of admitting that the they are “something I made up”? Yawn! > [@](#): > > Still zero evidence that you have the slightest ideas of what you my “ideas” actually are. You are neither as big nor clever as you seem to think, mate. > [@](#): > > Go on, stick your neck out and ask me direct question on what you think my ideas are. Do you think mansplaining is a “stupid and unnecessary” term in the lexicon? Do you think a man, uninvited, doing a calculation of the economic costs of menstruation to women as an argument tactic is “not a bad thing”? ---
**Author:** ![Novelty\_Bobble](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Novelty\_Bobble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Novelty_Bobble)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2019, 8:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/paint-a-vulva-picture-or-mansplaining-fail/830749/217 "2019-03-10T20:39:17Z")
> [@raventhief](#): > > Who are you talking about when you say someone? It is a hypothetical “someone”. Just a pretty standard rhetorical device. Let me state it again. There was disbelief that anyone could be so stupid as to come up with the figure of “9” periods a year. I was not so amazed as I have known other men with some very weird ideas about what constitutes “normal” regarding menstruation. I gave a scenario where a hypothetical “someone” might have very limited exposure and an incurious nature and grab the first per annum figure that comes to hand. That "someone " is not referring to the person in the tweet. I have absolutely no idea where he came by that figure. I correctly said that that is not a bad thing in itself. We all get things wrong or act on bad information. Were that person to extrapolate from bad information, well, they’d be even wronger but if someone gave them better information and they modified their calculations accordingly that is not a bad thing, that’s a good thing, it is how things _should_ work. But again, let me stress. That was not a reference to how I think the person in the tweet behaved. Clearly they did not and I never claimed they did. The last part refers to behaviour that is problematic, refusing to listen and reluctance to be educated by people who know. That is the only part that is truly bad. It is not a direct reference to the man in the tweet but it is certainly the only behaviours that we know he displayed. The reason for taking it in to the realm of the hypothetical was to suggest a way that someone might come by that figure as a means to address the incredulity of some other posters. I wouldn’t want to do that whilst referring to this specific man would I? Seeing as I have no idea why he did what he did. Now, this has gone pretty far down the road now and you are probably absolutely convinced that I am some sort of sexist, mansplainer-supporting monster and are interpreting my words though that lens. I’m not. Never have been. If possible try to set your preconceptions aside and read what wrote neutrally. Everything I have said above is consistent with the all words I have written. No defence of this man, no excusing of his behaviour, In fact quite the opposite, no defence of people demeaning and being condescending to women, no denial that such behaviour exists. ---
**Author:** ![Novelty\_Bobble](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Novelty\_Bobble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Novelty_Bobble)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2019, 9:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/paint-a-vulva-picture-or-mansplaining-fail/830749/218 "2019-03-10T21:05:46Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > Are you claiming I’ve never directly quoted you in this thread? I’m claiming you have never quoted any sexist statements from me. > [@](#): > > Yawn! I expect no better from you. That was the point at which you could have defended your made up quotes or apologise. > [@](#): > > Do you think mansplaining is a “stupid and unnecessary” term in the lexicon? yes, Indeed I do. As I said in my very first post. Stupid, unnecessary and ultimately unhelpful. The behaviour that it _refers_ to however is very real and very problematic. > [@](#): > > Do you think a man, uninvited, doing a calculation of the economic costs of menstruation to women as an argument tactic is “not a bad thing”? What is his argument? how does he conduct himself? are his calculations just a starting point? how open is he to correction and education? That is precisely why I addressed my points to a hypothetical “someone” and general principles rather the specific case in the tweet. So give me full detail and I’ll give you a fuller answer. If you are talking about the case referred to in the tweet then having read my posts fully you’ll know that I condemn his behaviour and have done consistently. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2019, 9:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/paint-a-vulva-picture-or-mansplaining-fail/830749/219 "2019-03-10T21:26:22Z")
> [@Novelty\_Bobble](#): > > I’m claiming you have never quoted any sexist statements from me. Well, none that you’ll accept as such, anyway. > [@](#): > > your made up quotes Miraculously, I remain unmoderated. > [@](#): > > yes, Indeed I do. Enough said. > [@](#): > > What is his argument? Irrelevant > [@](#): > > how does he conduct himself? Irrelevant > [@](#): > > are his calculations just a starting point? Irrelevant > [@](#): > > how open is he to correction and education? Irrelevant > [@](#): > > That is precisely why I addressed my points to a hypothetical “someone” and general principles rather the specific case in the tweet. You mean “Argued with a strawman rather than the obviously indefensible real case.” > [@](#): > > So give me full detail and I’ll give you a fuller answer. The details are exactly as I’ve given them. No more information is needed: in an online discussion on the expenses attached to female sanitary products, a man, unasked, launches into a calculation of the cost of same, as a way to make an argument point. Is that “not a bad thing”? ---
**Author:** ![Novelty\_Bobble](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Novelty\_Bobble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Novelty_Bobble)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2019, 10:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/paint-a-vulva-picture-or-mansplaining-fail/830749/220 "2019-03-10T22:19:09Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > The details are exactly as I’ve given them. No more information is needed: in an online discussion on the expenses attached to female sanitary products, a man, unasked, launches into a calculation of the cost of same, as a way to make an argument point. Is that “not a bad thing”? Are you referring to the case in the tweet? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/paint-a-vulva-picture-or-mansplaining-fail/830749.md?page=10) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/paint-a-vulva-picture-or-mansplaining-fail/830749.md?page=12)