Here is a thought: if you accuse someone of being slightly patronizing and condescending, it is best if you do not take that tone yourself. It makes you look like a hypocrite and a jackass.
For someone unknown, Australian Senator Katy Gallagher decided to illustrate this point during a Senate committee hearing:
An ordinary parliamentary committee meeting has turned heated after Labor Senator Katy Gallagher accused Liberal Mitch Fifield of ‘mansplaining’, prompting an angry response about reverse sexism.
Communications Minister Fifield was answering a question from Ms Gallagher about welfare bills when the Labor senator interjected.
“I love the mansplaining. I’m enjoying it,” Ms Gallagher said, referring to the 2014 Macquarie Dictionary word of the year.
“You’re loving what? … What’s mansplaining, senator?” Mr Field asked.
Hilarity ensues from there:
Fifield’s response is perfect. If the roles were reversed and he used a term like “womansplaining” Gallagher and the like would stamp their feet in outrage. Yet when she uses a clearly sexist term designed to silence men, it is apparently acceptable. Note the way smug assurance crawls across her face as she thinks she scored a point. She thinks she has an advantage, a way to automatically shut down anything Fifield says. It backfires because he either does not know the word or decided to feign ignorance and throw her word back in her face.
What follows is one of the most brilliant examples of what is wrong with the progressive left: she explains the definition of “mansplain” to Fifield as being “the slightly patronising and condescending way that you’re responding to my questions” while being patronizing and condescending. Indeed, when she first uses the word she does so in a purely patronizing and condescending way. This is why Fifield’s response is so perfect:
“I would suggest, Senator, if you’re putting the word ‘man’ in front of some description of what I’m doing, you’re doing that — which I’m sure you’re very much against — is making a sexist implication about how I’m conducing my role as a man. Is that what you’re saying, Senator?”
Because that is precisely what she is doing. She is making a sexist implication. She is saying that if men do something she does not like it is perfectly acceptable to diminish and attack their sex as the reason. However, the best moment from the exchange is how Gallagher justifies the use of the word:
“Well, it is a term that’s used,” Senator Gallagher replied.
“I’m sorry you’re so offended by the use of the word, it is a word that’s used, I’m surprised that you are so shocked.”
It is that so?
Well, there is a tern that is used to describe when women behave in a patronizing and condescending way. It is called bitching.
That is what Gallagher is doing. She is bitching, and she is being rather cunty about it, too. With the level of bossiness she engages in pitching her hissy fit over someone daring to speak when she did not give him permission, it is a shock she does not fall into to pure dasmeling and start a Patreon account.
I am sorry, of course, if Gallagher and any other female Labour members would be offended by the use of those words, but they are words that are used, so I would be surprised if they were shocked.
If ever one wanted a perfect example of why people do not like feminists and why they find progressives so grating, I give you Senator Gallagher. All she does is bitch, bitch, bitch, bitch, bitch, bitch, bitch.
And before anyone complains about sexism, remember, Gallagher called it. Bitching is a word that is used. It is in the dictionary, so it is perfectly fine and inoffensive. Like every word in the dictionary.