Comment on 2hot2handle
Gustephan@lemmy.world 21 hours agoYes, it would. It’s also not related to the comment I replied to, in which you stated that you dont care about being accurate when calling somebody out. My point is that you should care about accuracy when youre calling out bad behaviour, I’m not trying to defend Mr “actually it would be spontaneous” from the image
kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world 21 hours ago
Sure, my point was that a single sminstance outside of other context means that you cannot necessarily discern a pattern of behavior upon which to base your conclusion into which kind of asshole he is being. You could be innacurate in assuming he is sexist as well as assuming he isn’t. If complete accuracy is required, then you would need to not make a conclusion at all and let the comment slide without feedback until you have more data. I’m saying that it is more important to call them out than to worry about the exact accuracy, to not let the comment slide, to make sure they know that, in some way, it was inappropriate. One’s experience may lead one to make some assumptions that are incorrect in this context, but I don’t feel like that is the important part that you should critique. Either she says nothing, calls him a sexist, or calls him out but doesnt point out the sexism if there is sexism involved. I’m saying either of the latter is reasonable under the circumstances.
Gustephan@lemmy.world 20 hours ago
It’s not about making a value judgement on a person, its about calling out a specific behaviour. As a thought experiment, would you have engaged with me if I came at you like “you’re an idiot” (making a value judgement on you as a person) rather than specifically addressing the behaviour you exhibited that I disagree with?
To be clear, I have no negative opinions of you and I absolutely do not think you’re an idiot. That was posed purely as a hypothetical to illustrate the difference in communication effectiveness between making a value judgement about a person and addressing a specific behaviour.
kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world 20 hours ago
Mansplaining is a behavior. It is a man arrogantly talking down to a woman assuming she knows less than you by virtue of being a woman or despite evidence to the contrary. If their defense to that was, “I just thought I was smarter than you and needed to demonstrate that, but it had nothing to do with your gender.” Then… well, I feel like they still need to examine that behavior.
Gustephan@lemmy.world 19 hours ago
Indeed, the behaviour does need to be examined. You are actively confusing that examination if you are inaccurate when calling out the behaviour (again, with no intention of defending the situation in the OP, purely disagreeing with your “I dont care about being accurate when calling people out” statements)