Were we not on Tom’s substack, I’d thank you for the mansplaining as I usually find the comments analytic. As it is I’ll assume you realize that ‘disappearing’ has been achieved by voters.
Were we not on Tom’s substack, I’d thank you for the mansplaining as I usually find the comments analytic. As it is I’ll assume you realize that ‘disappearing’ has been achieved by voters.
being very old and, happily, very unhip about what the young folks say, I am mystified by what the fuck "mansplaining" means. if it means (as I THINK it means) a man explaining something to a woman in a condescending or patronizing manner, the whole thing strikes me as very, very subjective. and IMHO, it is part of what I feel is a degradation of language we don't rally need. I know I can be an asshole about this, but I've been an English Major all my life and every day, I find more evidence that people just don't give a fuck about this. I could start with "fulsome" and the pronunciations of words like "electoral" and "formidable." and then it gets work. my friend Ruth will have no truck with "my bad" (which I use, but with obvious sarcasm) and "so fun" (which just sounds dumb).
it just occurred to me that this could be construed, probably correctly, as a mini-tantrum.
I apologize for the tantrum, but not for the shit I'm angry about.
I've had any number of people disagree with me about different things. But mansplaining? Never been accused of that one before, Gail. So, thanks. Glad to finally check that one off my list. Would say I'm sorry to disappoint you on the analytical front, but I write what I mean in my comments here and elsewhere. So, while you seem to be offended by what I wrote to the point of needing to resort to this type of reply, I want to assure you that no offense has been taken on my part from it. And since you've given me no reason here to change my mind, I'll just end this (and any further comment) by saying that I stand by what I wrote.
Were we not on Tom’s substack, I’d thank you for the mansplaining as I usually find the comments analytic. As it is I’ll assume you realize that ‘disappearing’ has been achieved by voters.
being very old and, happily, very unhip about what the young folks say, I am mystified by what the fuck "mansplaining" means. if it means (as I THINK it means) a man explaining something to a woman in a condescending or patronizing manner, the whole thing strikes me as very, very subjective. and IMHO, it is part of what I feel is a degradation of language we don't rally need. I know I can be an asshole about this, but I've been an English Major all my life and every day, I find more evidence that people just don't give a fuck about this. I could start with "fulsome" and the pronunciations of words like "electoral" and "formidable." and then it gets work. my friend Ruth will have no truck with "my bad" (which I use, but with obvious sarcasm) and "so fun" (which just sounds dumb).
it just occurred to me that this could be construed, probably correctly, as a mini-tantrum.
I apologize for the tantrum, but not for the shit I'm angry about.
Apology accepted.
I've had any number of people disagree with me about different things. But mansplaining? Never been accused of that one before, Gail. So, thanks. Glad to finally check that one off my list. Would say I'm sorry to disappoint you on the analytical front, but I write what I mean in my comments here and elsewhere. So, while you seem to be offended by what I wrote to the point of needing to resort to this type of reply, I want to assure you that no offense has been taken on my part from it. And since you've given me no reason here to change my mind, I'll just end this (and any further comment) by saying that I stand by what I wrote.
How erudite! Odd you ignore the premise