> > Is this one way of framing "mansplaining" or is it actually *men* being > arrogant and actually elaborating things which their (captive) audience > implicitely understands as a way of asserting dominance? >
No, I think it (the version we would still have to contend with even if we could contain the assholes) is the heart and soul of puritanism. If the main criterion for human existence is that humans go on existing, you can cut out a lot, and put more energy into the things you haven’t cut out. I’m not sure how those cause/effect relations get converted into “values”, but I think it is something like speaking from those, once they are. .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-.. FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom https://bit.ly/virtualfriam to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ archives: 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
