"The Conversation published an excellent research-based article by two professors at Queen Mary University of London, who documented why mansplaining is a genuine phenomenon and why Reeves was right to use the term. As Louise Ashley and Elena Doldor state: Men and women can be both perpetrators and targets of mansplaining. However, the term has particular force because it reflects deeper cultural patterns in which authority is still coded as male and, more specifically, white and middle or upper class."
"No one is arguing that there are not many men who do indeed know what they are talking about. That is not sufficient justification to attempt to essentially gaslight women generally into believing that the phenomenon does not exist. My own research shows that implicit bias in the way we judge other people's authority or expertise is so common that it can be demonstrated with even very small sample sizes."
The suggestion that mansplaining is no longer relevant is flawed because occasional unfair application to knowledgeable men does not erase the broader phenomenon. Many men do know their subject matter, but that fact does not invalidate patterns where women's authority is undermined. Research from Queen Mary University of London documents mansplaining as a genuine occurrence and explains why its use was appropriate in political contexts. Studies of implicit bias show that judgments of authority and expertise commonly favor men, observable even in small samples. Mansplaining remains a relevant term while cultural norms continue to code authority as male.
Read at www.theguardian.com
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]