Sorry if off-topic, but regarding the original post this if refering to:
Does anyone else immediately lost interest in the article at the word "mansplaining"? Like, why do we need tp bring this in a discussion about logic and theoretical cs? Also if you post something in a public manner and people state their disagreement, that's not mansplaining...
Insecurity and narcissism. It's an attempt to shame dissenters into silence because the author imagines dissent and condescension as some personal injury to herself.
People who disagree with you arent personally insulting you. And even, people who are condescending online arent personally insulting you.
The self-esteem hack psychology of the 60s-80s has created a generation of people who haven't learnt how to tolerate insults and disagreement, ie., a sub-clinical narcissism.
The author of the original article does appear to be male, and I also found his use of "mansplaining" off-putting. I think he should have used a term like "nerdsplaining" which doesn't gratuitously bring gender into the discussion.
If someone wanders into a group of nerds to take an "I'm right" stance on a nerdy topic, what do you expect? No matter how delicately the responses are phrased, the underlying "well akshully" is going to show through.
Wow a downvote in less time than the linked video takes to watch... I am shocked by this. Just kidding I expected this. BTW if you don't like "mansplaining" you'll probably like the video.
Does anyone else immediately lost interest in the article at the word "mansplaining"? Like, why do we need tp bring this in a discussion about logic and theoretical cs? Also if you post something in a public manner and people state their disagreement, that's not mansplaining...