I've watched gender-based hatred tear a campus apart, and now, probably, down, all because a small, highly vocal group of
female leaders ran scared some very fine people out, simply because they were male, genteel, and less than raucous spineless over certain points the ruling triumfeminate considered supreme important.
And, maybe those people were wrong in the first place and lost the arguments on merit, but let's not entertain that possibility.
Hmmm . . . I've found--at least at my CC--that not all faculty/adminicritters are versed in discussing ideas in terms of privilege, patriarchy, 'splaining, etc.--especially those that come from the "real world" our junior high school gym coaches talked about. When confronted with such conversations/discussions/arguments some of them tend to perform badly because they don't quite know how to respond, even when they might be correct overall.
The world of academics is indeed not the "real world." That's ok, because that is true for a host of other proessions as well. But it's a good thing to have the self-awareness to know that the discussions on this thread could largely take place only in the academic world. Outside of it, most people - including most women in my experience - would not follow this thread well.
My own wife is certainly submissive to no one - and has shut down quite pointedly men with the tendancies described in this thread before. But she would likely just chalk it up to "That person is a blow-hard and an idiot," without spending too much time thinking about things such as gender dynamics. I suspect many are like her.
The fact that someone doesn't notice or acknowledge gender dynamics in a particular situation does not mean that they are not a factor. We all operate hugely in the realm of the "taken-for-granted" (what Bourdieu calls the "doxa"), and the point of being a scholar or researcher is, at least in part, to problematize the "taken-for-granted."
For a long time, for example, people who thought about it generally believed in geocentrism and took it for granted.
Any CC that is not aware of issues of privilege is not a very good CC.
Yes, I agree with you, but there does come a point where there is too much of a good thing. To listen to some people on this thread, a man can basically never explain to a woman that he believes she is wrong, lest he be guilty of "man-splaining."
In the realm of everyday life, I think that this much parsing, hand wringing, and frankly, bitter anger only leads to increased unhappiness and higher blood pressure. YMMV, but I'd rather just say of someone "f*ck him, what a stupid know-it-all blowhard," and dismiss him than spend hours getting angry and frustrated at tendencies that you are not going to change, no matter your response.
And, rest assured, the "man-splainer" isn't "winning" anything at all when you take my approach. Rest assured, in my experience, everyone already rolls their eyes at him and doesn't take him seriously, even if people placate him to his face.