Saimatsu_Fan said:mansplaining isn't a thing in the same way terms like man spreading and man interrupting are garbage, they're used to just shut down arguments Feminists don't like, heck not even Feminists use them anymore
the term is espacially garbage because it implies that only men can be assholes and condescending, which is obviously dumb
that's like me saying : " woman gaslighting " is when a woman gaslights a man into thinking she did nothing wrong Because she's a woman and only men are bad, it's obviously stupid and sexist term lol
While you are correct being condescending is not restricted to any one gender, the idea of a man assuming a woman knows less because of her sex is not entirely meritless considering that women were either considered less intelligent or more irrational through a large part of human civilization. I think part of the reason is partially many industries were or still are dominated by men for various reasons.
This includes working with cars as mechanics and variouus engineering, engineering adjacent, and science fields, many of which still has a notable number of its professors alive since MLKJ was assassinated. It is to be expected that they are a tiny bit bigoted. Because of the stereotypes associated with what makes an engineer includes their race and sex, people have unconsciously developed a bias assessing more capable people of that profession being of a certain race or sex and less capable people of that profession being of another race or sex.
Forming biases is pretty natural, and everyone has biases. This does not make you a bad person, we just do not think about them until someone tells us to. Biases also exist against men, deeming them more aggressive than women, or that blacks are more likely to be criminals.
Back to mansplaining, it is not really uncommon for men in certain professions to assume women know less and by extension, men know more about their given profession, especially as more women attempt to head into these previously male dominated fields. You are acting as if we solved sexism and we have a perfect 50/50 ratio. For many fields, gains being made signify that women are not necessarily less interested in being engineers because sex and biology, but are overcoming barriers and being encouraged to be engineers. Many colleges today have 50% of their classes being women.
Is it not silly to suggest that women are somehow less interested in being the sciences, yet dismiss the legacy of sexism that has been present for numerous centuries beforehand, and to suggest we solved sexism in 50 years?