#manterruption

[drops-of-universe]

if "mansplaining" and "manterrupting" refer to a man interrupting a woman and trying to explain what she is already explaining, what is it called when a man does both "mansplaining" and "manterrupting" with another man, and they both do it with each other, calling it a conversation? a podcast

[moidloverxoxo]

Why is it, that you constantly use the terms 'male tears', 'male ego', 'male fragility', 'mansplain', 'manspread' 'manterruption', but when someone mentions 'male lonliness', you suddenly remember that we shouldn't assign gender to concepts?

[vanilla-voyeur]

Toxic masculinity is the same way where it will just be used as a motte and bailey to say that all (cishet) men are toxic. Tbh we should get rid of all the bs terms that form all sorts of annoying portmanteaus that start with man to villainize them: manspreading, manterruption, manolouges, manscuse, etc. Just call it obnoxious explaining. Y'all took the Dunning-Kruger Effect and made it pointlessly gendered.

i will never forgive the internet for what it did to the word “mansplain”

[noisycowboyglitter]

The Impact of "Excuse Me, I’m Speaking" on Gender Equality Discussions

The phrase "Excuse me, I'm speaking" gained prominence during the 2020 U.S. Vice Presidential debate when then-Senator Kamala Harris used it to assert her right to finish her point without interruption from Vice President Mike Pence. This moment resonated with many women who have experienced being talked over or interrupted in professional and personal settings.

Buy now:19.95$

The phrase quickly became a rallying cry for women's empowerment and a symbol of the ongoing struggle for equal respect and representation in various spheres of life, particularly in politics and the workplace. It encapsulates the frustration many women feel when their voices are disregarded or silenced in conversations and debates.

"Excuse me, I'm speaking" highlights the broader issue of "manterrupting," a term coined to describe the tendency of men to interrupt women in conversation more frequently than they do other men. This phenomenon has been documented in numerous studies and is often cited as one of the subtle ways gender bias manifests in daily interactions.

Buy now

The popularization of this phrase has sparked discussions about communication dynamics, gender equality, and the importance of giving space for all voices to be heard. It has encouraged women to be more assertive in claiming their right to speak and finish their thoughts without interruption.

The phrase has since appeared on merchandise such as t-shirts, mugs, and posters, serving as a reminder of the ongoing need for respect and equal treatment in communication. It has become a succinct way for women to reclaim their space in conversations and demand the attention and respect they deserve.

A funny Kamala Harris and Joe Biden gift typically plays on the duo's public personas, their relationship, or memorable moments from their campaign and administration. These gifts often blend humor with political commentary, appealing to supporters with a sense of humor.

Buy now

Popular items might include:

Novelty socks featuring caricatures of Harris and Biden

Coffee mugs with humorous quotes or memes

T-shirts with witty slogans or playful images of the pair

Bobblehead figures of Harris and Biden

Satirical coloring books featuring their adventures

Joke books filled with Biden-Harris themed puns

Parody action figures of the dynamic duo

Humorous fridge magnets with quips about their administration

Buy now

These gifts often aim to lighten the mood around politics while showing support for the administration. However, it's important to remember that political humor can be subjective and potentially divisive, so consider the recipient's preferences and sense of humor when selecting such a gift.

[sopalgbtqia]

Um grupo de pessoas dos mais atacados atualmente. Pelo simples e inofensivo fato de não se encaixarem em homem ou mulher.

Pessoa não binária pode fluir entre homem e mulher. Não ser nem lá e nem cá. Pode estar no meio. Sem gênero, com dois gêneros.

Quer apenas um tratamento pessoal de acordo. Tem quem não se importe se o pronome é masculino ou feminino. Tem quem use um pronome neutro. Tem quem goste de pronome de um gênero.

São diferentes entre si. Com singularidades. Únicas.

E nunca exigiram que cachorro fosse chamado de cachorre, nem que motorista virasse motoriste. Ou cadeira se tornasse cadeire. Mentiras baixas da reaçaria que tanta gente dita progressista engoliu.

Pessoas não binárias não querem destruir o binarismo alheio. São trans. E, assim, reconhecem que pessoas trans binárias existem e merecem ser tratadas com o respeito de suas identidades.

Tanto que 14/7 é dia do orgulho não binário. E ninguém pede pra chamar de “die de orgulhe”.

Não querem ser chamadas de pessoes. “Pessoa” é substantivo feminino. Sem problemas.

Pode-se neutralizar o tratamento construindo frases neutras ao se dirigir a uma pessoa não binária que tem pronomes específicos, se dói tanto em você usá-los.

“Ilze é minha amiga há 10 anos” pode virar “Tenho uma amizade de 10 anos com Ilze”.

Você consegue. Se consegue falar “lockdown” ao invés de “confinamento”, “home office” ao invés de “trabalho em casa”, “bowl” no lugar de “cumbuca”, “skincare” e não “cuidado com a pele”, “manterrupting” e não “interrupção de macho”, você consegue.

Você está longe de ter esse amor todo pela língua portuguesa. Pare com esse complexo fajuto de Luís de Camões, que nem o português que ele falava no século 16 se fala mais em canto nenhum.

#orgulholgbtqia #pridelgbtqia #gaypride #orgulhogay #orgulho #pride🌈 #lgbtpride #queerpride #queer #lgbtqia #naobinarismo #pessoanãobinária

[whitepinoy]

So in the span of one week, I’ve been working on a couple of comics to express my opinions on Feminist buzzwords. When I was making these comics I planned to only make like 2 or 3, but I found more buzzwords along the way of my research. This is the first time that I’ve ever drawn comics for discourse, but it’s a good exercise for me, because it’s been a while since I’ve drawn anything. 

In each panel I wanted to present the hypocrisy or irony of the definitions, and how these examples don’t really support the meaning of these buzzwords. If you see floating words that say “whitepinoy” on each panel, those are watermarks. 

This is my first new art blog. My main blog is @thecaucasianfilipino.

EDIT: Manslamming and Bropropriation panels were edited due to an incorrect order of layers, and added extra weight to the lines, respectively. 

I am also adding sources to my comics. Here is where I got my definitions. 

Source: http://archive.is/MAVkY

[jbk405]

I just started Moxie, and I cannot recall the last time I wanted to punch somebody in the face so fast after being introduced to them as when that football guy interrupted Lucy when she was talking in class.

The way he interrupted when she was answering the teacher’s question that was specifically addressed to her, not even tangentially a group discussion where somebody else could theoretically be expected to chime in, and then he does it three more times as she tries to keep going.  Including literally saying that she isn’t listening to him.

I don’t even remember his name and I hate him so much now.

[profeminist]

“BETC Sao Paulo has created an app that counts the number of times a woman is interrupted by a man (or anyone really). Woman Interrupted launched today in celebration of International Women’s Day and is available for download on Apple’s app store.

BETC made a video highlighting some of the app’s key features but also pointing out some of the most prominent instances of men interrupting women. Remember that time Kanye jumped onstage at the VMAs while Taylor Swift was accepting her award? 

The app is pretty easy to use. Users first record their own voices before the app can track conversations and interruptions. It uses your phone’s microphone to pick up and analyze conversations and tracks the number of interruptions by men.

Part of the purpose if the app is to help men realize when they’re jumping into conversations and cutting women off. It also shows women how pervasive the problem is in their own work or social lives.”

Read the full piece here

[coochiequeens]

Female economists probably didn’t need a quantitative study to know that they get asked more questions when presenting than their male counterparts. Indeed, many female academics are familiar with manterruptions, an offshoot of the mansplaining phenomenon. Female economists probably didn’t need a formal analysis of the kinds of questions they get asked to know that they face more patronizing or hostile queries than their male peers, either.

But numbers are a good thing -- especially to economists -- and now there exists such a study, courtesy of a group of prominent economists. These researchers plan to publish the new working paper with the National Bureau of Economic Research and otherwise use it to promote change in a field that has historically been unwelcoming to women.

........

In 2018, the AEA adopted a Code of Professional Conduct requiring “civil and respectful discourse” and a “professional environment with equal opportunity and fair treatment for all.” The researchers suggest that their data can be read as a progress report of sorts to see how far the discipline has come -- and how far it still needs to go. The field has indeed been called out for gender bias before, including in a 2017 study that found women economists receive less credit than their male co-authors when it comes to tenure and promotion, as economists list their author names alphabetically, not by levels of contribution. Another 2017 study found that women economists write more clearly than male economists but are subject to tougher editorial standards. And a 2020 paper documented how women face sexual harassment online.

The authors of the new study say that all of these factors contribute to the fact that women are less likely to be promoted than men in economics.

Men are so obnoxious that businesses have to create a Code of Professional Conduct.

[hysteric-machine]

Trigger Warnings list for E lucevan le Stelle

Chapter 1

Psychophobia

Torture

Racism

Suicide

Sexism in the form of Mansplainning

Freud mentionned only positively 😴

(Which makes sense in the setting of the game but still 🫣)

Chapter 3

Heavy bit of Racism (not only against arcanists)

Sexism in the form of Mansplainning/Manterrupting

Psychophobia

Chapter 4

Psychophobia

Heavy bigotry

Sexism

Chapter 5

Flashing lights

Chapter 6

Racism

Psychophobia

That's it for now, I will add the new chapters as I play them. It's not supposed to be perfectly exhaustive (since triggers are a personal thing anyway, everyone doesn't react the same), I just listed the most obvious ones I could see.

And I insist that chapter 3 is not safe for people having issues with flashing lights. The game in general has a lot of these (especially in combat sequences) but this story chapter is particularly clearly not safe for you guys.

Spoilers for the new Reverse 1999 chapters

TW Psychophobia, Torture, Intergenerational trauma?, Suicide Attempts...

Now started playing the new story chapters of Reverse 1999. And while I KNEW what I was going to go through, the instant I saw Isolde tied up on the electric chair... I reminded.

I reminded what it did to me as a mentally ill kid to play Alice Madness Returns. What it did to me when I watched Penny Dreadful as a young adult. So I paused. To talk about it.

I am one of the lucky ones. I never had go to a psychiatric ward (my parents tried to get me there after my first suicide attempt, but it was an adult only service, and as a 16 years old I wasn't old enough to enter, luckily my mom was there to attend to me all summer since she worked from home).

I did suffer the stigma, in many ways, but I did not suffer the medical abuse to a no return point extent. Of course the abuse in general is still terrible, but I got lucky. Some friends did not. Someone you know surely got through that. Everyone knows someone broken by psychiatric institutions. And a lot of these unlucky individuals did not recover, and sometimes died from this abuse.

We can argue that it's much better now, that there isn't torture anymore (that's a lie, getting tied down is torture, getting isolated is torture, and I won't start talking about how close to prisons psychiatric wards are, and yes I hate the reality of prisons too).

We can argue about all of this.

But we are still counting our dead. Mourning people that were not helped, not cured, but drowned even further into despair and left in shreds.

And my body knows, when I watch these pieces of fiction, when I read the history of how our condition were "studied", how the DSM got written. I feel an overwhelming and unspeakable fear. Because I know, it's me on the screen. It's my story. It could've been my exact story.

It has been the story of many unluckiest, unprivileged people (at this point I have to mention that of course, it is not just pure luck : if you aren't white, if you're lgbtq+, if a woman, you're particularly poor, if you're from a pious family, if you have commorbidities and many more can add to the list, it's going to be harder and you are the first ones on the list).

I can't ease this feeling. It's like a survival instinct. You know you don't want to ever have to go there. Even if "it can be fine sometimes", "there are some safe wards" or whatever. If you are mentally ill you just know.

So a kind reminder : always consider this when dealing with someone close to you that have mental health issues and seems to not be able to get the help they need, or sometimes are in emergency state. Please don't call the cops. Don't call the emergency services. Please don't get them to a psychiatric ward first without trying everything else, especially if they aren't ok with going there. It is, in and of itself a traumatic experience to live, and even the less abusive institution ARE abusive because psychiatry's history is what it is. It's not because some privileged people got out of there unharmed (and again I can't agree with that) that everyone would.

Anyway, it's all over the place, I can't find a good way to word this, because there is no good way to word that I'm terrified by all that shit, with reason.

Take care of yourself, of your loved ones. You can't change the world, and it is designed in a way that we still have very few alternatives to psychiatry nowadays, so you can't really avoid it all together. Just know that it's not only fiction and incredibly triggering for some of us.

Cheers. If you can relate and wish to read the new Reverse content maybe take your time to be ready, not alone, in a good mindset.

[gettothedancing]

add “man” in front of anything for insta-oppression

[edo-vivendum]

I have no chill, and I'm not sorry.

[jasmined]

But women justices should not be expected to fix the "manterruption" problem on their own. Chief Justice John Roberts, Jacobi and Schweers argue, could play a larger role as a referee. Or male justices could simply learn to let their female colleagues speak.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg: How She Cut Down on Being Interrupted | Fortune.com

[noisycowboyglitter]

Excuse Me, I'm Speaking: Kamala Harris Apparel for the Unapologetic Visionary

The phrase "Excuse Me, I'm Speaking" became inextricably linked with Kamala Harris during the 2020 U.S. Vice Presidential debate. This moment not only defined a key part of Harris's public persona but also resonated deeply with many viewers, particularly women and minorities who have faced similar experiences of being interrupted or talked over.

Buy now:19.95$

During the debate with then-Vice President Mike Pence, Harris firmly but politely asserted herself when interrupted, stating, "Mr. Vice President, I'm speaking." She repeated variations of this phrase several times throughout the debate, each time reclaiming her right to finish her thoughts without interruption. This moment quickly went viral, capturing the attention of millions of viewers and sparking widespread discussion on social media platforms.

The phrase struck a chord with many people who have experienced similar situations in professional, academic, or personal settings. It became a rallying cry for those advocating for equal respect and representation in conversations, particularly for women and minorities in male-dominated fields. Many saw Harris's calm yet assertive response as a masterclass in handling interruptions and maintaining composure under pressure.

Buy now

Harris's use of this phrase also highlighted the broader issue of "manterrupting," a term coined to describe the tendency of men to interrupt women in professional settings. This moment brought increased attention to gender dynamics in political debates, workplace meetings, and other professional contexts.

The impact of this phrase extended far beyond the debate. It quickly became a cultural touchstone, appearing on merchandise such as t-shirts, mugs, and face masks. Many people, especially women in professional fields, embraced these items as symbols of empowerment and solidarity.

Buy now

However, the popularization of this phrase also led to some criticism. Some viewed it as an oversimplification of complex gender dynamics or as the commodification of a serious issue. Others debated whether the focus on this moment detracted from substantive policy discussions.

For Kamala Harris, this phrase became a defining part of her public image during the campaign and beyond. It reinforced her reputation as a strong, assertive leader and resonated with her campaign's themes of breaking barriers and giving voice to the underrepresented.

Buy now

As the first woman, first Black person, and first person of South Asian descent to become U.S. Vice President, Harris's use of "Excuse me, I'm speaking" took on additional significance. It symbolized not just her individual assertion in that debate, but also the broader struggle for representation and respect faced by many in politics and beyond.

In essence, "Excuse Me, I'm Speaking" and Kamala Harris became intertwined in the public consciousness, representing a powerful moment of assertiveness, a call for respect, and a symbol of changing dynamics in American politics and society at large.

[puttingherinhistory]

“From corporate boardrooms to government chambers, research continues to show that women are interrupted more often than men. A pioneering 1975 study carried out by sociologists Don Zimmerman and Candace West examined overheard 31 conversations between various combinations of people and found that in the 11 conversations between men and women studied, men were behind all but one interruption recorded.

Similarly, a more recent study conducted in 2014 found that a woman was more likely to be interrupted (by both men and women) than a man was. In a separate but more informal study conducted that same year, Kieran Snyder observed 900 minutes of conversations between men and women working in the tech industry. The study found that men interrupted others twice as often as women did and were nearly three times as likely to interrupt a woman as they were a man.”

[femestella]

Read it here