Drew I did read your whole piece and I thought about a more detailed response to it but the irony was what elicited the strongest reaction for me. Mansplaining is one of those slippery words whose definition alone does not reflect the nuance in it’s meaning. It’s not always in the content of the argument sometimes it’s in the delivery. I don’t know you and you certainly gave no evidence or reason to justify the use of the term by the five women you site but I can make observations through the feelings I get from your piece and your response to my comment. The first observation I will make is that I believe you are sincere in your desire to have reasonable discourse and are genuinely frustrated by the intention of your words being misinterpreted. If I did not believe that I would not be wasting my words responding to your response. I also get the feeling that you are sensitive (not ment in a bad way). I am truly not trying to offend you but I think that may be an obstacle to you hearing the intention behind my words so I am telling you in advance that I am also being sincere. The word mansplaining came to be because of experiences women have had while communicating with men. It’s not a universal argument so it does not apply in all cases but to deny it’s validity and application through your experiences as a man is just not reasonable. Intention does not negate perception. It’s not possible to dictate another person’s feelings simply by rationalizing why they are wrong to feel that way. If you are really up for a little introspection you might look at your response to my comment. The first part of your response was to characterize my comment unworthy and the second part of your response was to dictate the terms if I wanted to participate in the argument. Full disclosure, mansplaining is not a word I use often (if ever), but if I were trying to capture it’s nuance I think I could find it in that response. Please don’t make me the sixth women lol