Menspleying: Why men tell women how to live
Menspleying familiar to many - who did not find himself in a situation when a man indulgently explains something to a woman by “making a discount” on her sex. These may be explanations “especially for girls” - for example, about the device of programs or applications, because computers are not “female” matters, and uninvited comments, even if the woman herself is well versed in the question. Or coquetry, mixed with condescension: "You are a charming woman, but you do not understand what you are talking about." Or simply the exclusion of a woman from the general conversation, which seems interlocutors "not feminine." Women's forums, meanwhile, are rushing to help with tips - how to successfully play the naivete and not show that you understand the question, because it is pleasant to the self-esteem of the interlocutor. And even put his own thought into the mouth of a man - that’s what the wise partners are supposed to do.
How did menspleining appear?
The very phenomenon of splicing existed long before the word was found to describe it. Simone de Beauvoir, the author of the “Second Floor” work, which was symbolic for feminism, complained that she was annoyed when she received a reply in the discussion: “You think so because you are a woman,” she always wanted to answer: I think so because it's true. " Conventional ideas about the notorious "female logic", that women think differently (that is, worse), have always existed - this allowed men to treat women's words with insufficient attention and show indulgence towards their interlocutors.
The very notion of “menspleing” entered into feminist use after Rebecca Sunshit’s essay “Men Teach Me to Live,” in which she talked about how men love to teach women, regardless of how competent they are in the question. Solit recalls how at one party the landlord struck up an easy conversation with her, mentioned that he knew her as a writer, and inquired about her work. Solon began to talk to her companion about her latest work on photographer Edward Maybridge. The man almost immediately interrupted her and asked if she had heard about the brilliant new book about Maybridge. When a man launched into a story about the work, Solonit became clear that we were talking about her book - but her friend only with the third or fourth attempt was able to insert a word and explain that the book belongs to Rebecca. Moreover, during the conversation, Solonit managed to understand that the interlocutor did not even read the brilliant book, which he so confidently spoke about, not understanding what he was talking with its author.
Behind this seemingly random episode is actually a tradition of masculine behavior, which deprives a woman of her voice. But menspleiling is not only a condescending manner of explanation. This is the male habit of interrupting a woman, passing her words past the ears, devaluing women's statements, starting a conversation from the perspective of a person who is a priori right and has great knowledge. Of course, any person can be arrogant and disrespectful to the interlocutor, and not every explanation made by a man is an attempt to humiliate his interlocutor: it may just be a desire to share the really necessary information. But in most cases menspleiling reflects the established role asymmetry, which gives primacy and primacy to the man.
From school to office
If you believe the stereotypes, women say more than men. In fact, this is not the case. In an attempt to understand who speaks more — men or women — we often pay attention to the number of words spoken, and not to the situation in which they sounded. Research conducted by scientists at Brigham Young and Princeton University shows that during workers' meetings, women speak at least a quarter less than men - so women can be on the sidelines of the discussion when it comes to making important decisions. Moreover, men's voices dominate in the media space (although the media seems to be a relatively prosperous market in this sense): according to the OpEd Project, women own only 33% of the texts in new online media and 20% of texts in traditional media, for example The New York Times or The Wall Street Journal. But this gender imbalance does not arise in the political or media arena - it is still being formed at school.
Studies show that in school lessons and studies at the university, boys speak out more often, students are asked and encouraged to be active. Teachers more often count the boy's answer, if he shouted it without raising his hand - if the student does the same, she often gets a comment. The situation, as the researchers note, changes if the lesson is led by a teacher, not a male teacher: the presence of a female teacher in the class stimulates and inspires girls to be more active.
It's not about personal qualities.
What is the reason for this verbal imbalance? From early childhood, girls cultivate politeness and submissiveness, considering these qualities to be "feminine", while in boys society encourages activity and the ability to fight for their views, closing their eyes even in an aggressive manner of arguing. Thus, we are given to understand that quiet behavior is “feminine” behavior. The injustice of this approach is noted by Soraya Chemali, director of the WMC Speech Project and author of many texts on gender issues. In fifth grade, Soraya won the title of the most polite student in the class, while her brother enjoyed the fame of the main school clown. They performed typical gender roles of the “young lady” and “tomboy” only because the family is more strict with raising daughters in some aspects: the girls are taught to listen carefully, not to argue and not interrupt. As a result, growing up, girls understand that women are interrupted much more often than men. Of course, sometimes the interlocutor is interrupted to express his approval and agreement with his position - but, unfortunately, in most cases we are talking about trying to assign control over the conversation, and therefore over the situation as a whole.
Indicative is the story of scientist Ben Barres, who told about his experience in the scientific community before and after the transgender transition. Even before the coming out, when he was known as Barbara Barres, the scientist constantly faced discrimination, receiving from the professor instead of praise for solving a complex mathematical task a humiliating comment: "Surely for you, her boyfriend decided." The situation has changed dramatically after the transgender transition. Colleagues who did not know that Ben transgender man, by default, treated him with great respect, did not question his authority and listened attentively at meetings - he says he could “even finish a whole sentence without a man interrupting you” .
The story of Ben proves that inattention to the words of another person is not connected with social status, but with prescribed gender roles. Protection against menspeiling is not guaranteed to a woman not only by the status of a scientist or the head of a department, but, as the situation with Elizabeth Warren shows, even the position of a senator. After Warren was deprived of words at a meeting of the Senate, the phrase “She was warned. She was explained. But she continued” became a new symbol of the struggle for women's rights — not only Warren should continue.
For the time being, during important meetings, women are constantly being asked again: "Are you really sure about that?" - or, even worse, they don’t ask at all, menspleiling becomes a serious obstacle to career development. According to Ben Barres, the career development of a woman is hampered by the fact that she is excluded from public discussion and does not pay attention to her words, but not the innate abilities or difficulties of combining family and work, as is commonly believed. The Swedish union Union, for example, even launched a hotline to fight menspleiling, where women could get psychological support.
Underestimate mensplining is dangerous. Due to the fact that men dominate in the speech field, women's voices in politics, media and culture are not heard, important decisions are made without taking their opinions into account, and the situation from the TV series "Silicon Valley", where the hero menspleynit the concept of menspleinning, does not seem so far from reality. For the advantage of a male voice over a female one there are other serious problems: until the society takes the words of women seriously, unfortunately, it is not surprising that the stories of the victims of violence are not trusted.
Soraya Chemali believes that every girl should learn three basic phrases: "Do not interrupt me," "I just said that" and "No need for explanations." Non-addiction is not always a manifestation of a “difficult” character: it is this quality that is often necessary in business and other situations where you have to defend your opinion. Often, women's silence hides a lack of self-confidence, which is not customary to bring up in the “young ladies”. In boys, it is developed through debates and competitive games, and women, in turn, are taught to support male ego: openly listen to their chosen one and admire his erudition, carefully concealing that what he has told you is not new. As a result, a woman is forced to either remain silent and agree, or adopt the men's rules of the game in order to be heard. But there is a third option - to follow the example of Elizabeth Warren: "They interrupt us. We are explained. But we continue."
Images: hanna000000 - stock.adobe.com
