# data[].attributes.body
Althouse, Michaela. “How to Shut down Mansplaining at Work, According to 5 Philly CEOS.” Philadelphia Magazine, Philadelphia Magazine, 22 Apr. 2019, www.phillymag.com/business/2019/04/22/mansplaining-at-work/.

Bravata, Dena M, et al. “Prevalence, Predictors, and Treatment of Impostor Syndrome: A Systematic Review.” Journal of General Internal Medicine, U.S. National Library of Medicine, Apr. 2020, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7174434/.

Cogan, Marin. “The Mittsplainer: An Alternate Theory of Mitt Romney’s Gaffes.” GQ, GQ, 1 Aug. 2012, www.gq.com/story/the-mittsplainer-an-alternate-theory-of-mitt-romneys-gaffes.

“Donald Trump Guilty of Mansplaining during Campaign, Says Prof | CBC News.” CBCnews, CBC/Radio Canada, 24 Jan. 2017, www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatoon/university-saskatchewan-mansplaining-1.3949849.

Goodwin, Kim. "Mansplaining, Explained in One Chart." BBC Worklife, 27 July 2018, https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20180727-mansplaining-explained-in-one-chart.

“How to Overcome Impostor Phenomenon.” Monitor on Psychology, American Psychological Association, www.apa.org/monitor/2021/06/cover-impostor-phenomenon.

“Mansplaining.” Know Your Meme, Know Your Meme, 16 Oct. 2012, knowyourmeme.com/memes/mansplaining.

Mansplaining | English Meaning - Cambridge Dictionary, dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/mansplaining. Accessed 3 Apr. 2024.

Mei, Gina. "7 Absolutely Infuriating Examples of Mansplaining." Cosmopolitan, https://www.cosmopolitan.com/lifestyle/a9171951/mansplaining-tweets/.

Sifton, Sam, and Grant Barrett. “The Words of the Year.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 18 Dec. 2010, www.nytimes.com/2010/12/19/weekinreview/19sifton.html.

Tramontana, Mary Katharine. “Why Are Men Still Explaining Things to Women?” The New York Times, The New York Times, 9 Sept. 2020, www.nytimes.com/2020/09/09/us/why-are-men-still-explaining-things-to-women-mansplaining-authority-gender.html.

# data[].attributes.body
Mansplaining a combination of the words man and explaining. It is defined by Cambridge Dictionary as “the act of explaining something to someone in a way that suggests that they are stupid; used especially when a man explains something to a woman that she already understands”.

# data[].attributes.body
Mansplaining is a new term and is inspired by the essay, "Men Explain Things to Me: Facts Didn't Get in Their Way", written by author Rebecca Solnit in April of 2008. The article is centered around an anecdote about a man at a party who had heard she had written a couple books. When Solnit began to talk about her most recent book, one about Eadweard Muybridge, the man promptly cut her off and asked if she had "heard about the very important Muybridge book that came out this year". As the man summarized the book that he had merely read about in the New York Times Book Review, he had to be told 3-4 times that the book’s author was in fact standing in front of him before he processed it.

# data[].attributes.body
Sohit doesn’t use the word in her essay but instead “mansplaining” is first used in the comment section of a LiveJournal article around a month later. Sohit describes the feeling in her essay,

Every woman knows what I'm talking about. It's the presumption that makes it hard, at times, for any woman in any field; that keeps women from speaking up and from being heard when they dare; that crushes young women into silence by indicating, the way harassment on the street does, that this is not their world. It trains us in self-doubt and self-limitation just as it exercises men's unsupported overconfidence.

# data[].attributes.body
The term mansplaining is now mainstream. In 2010, it was named one of the words of the year by the New York Times. It has also broken out of English and has translations in German, Spanish, French and dozens of other languages. In politics it has been used to describe conservatives like Donald Trump, and Mitt Romney.

The continuous use of the term mansplaining across the world indicates an underlying truth about the presence of gender inequality in our society. These are the issues Sohit describes in her 2008 essay - issues we have faced for a long time and issues we continue to face today.

# data[].attributes.body
In this scene, Elena Alvarez expresses her frustration with a male classmate to her mother, bringing up the discussion about sexism in the form of mansplaining and microaggressions towards women.

While explaining the term ‘mansplaining’ to her grandmother, Schneider, jumps into their conversation and mansplains the term “mansplaining”— a term used to describe when men explain something to women in a condescending or patronizing manner, assuming she is less knowledgeable. However, he ends up doing exactly what he is describing, talking down to her and asking "Does that make sense?". When in reality, Elena is a social activist, fluent in the topic.

This moment is a humorous reversal in the media, highlighting how even well-intentioned men can sometimes inadvertently engage in the behaviour they are trying to critique.

# data[].attributes.body
In 'Mansplaining, explained in one simple chart' by Kim Goodwin, the concept of Mansplaining is simplified through the straightforward chart above. Mansplaining typically occurs when explanations are unsolicited and made without the recipient asking for one. This chart highlights the importance of only giving explanations when asked and understanding the impact of assuming one's competence.

After understanding Goodwin’s theoretical framework, you can see how ignoring these factors leads to mansplaining. In Gina Mei’s article, '7 Absolutely Infuriating Examples of Mansplaining,' we are provided with firsthand accounts of women experiencing the effects of mansplaining.

Prompted with the question: “[W]omen, what’s the most infuriating thing you’ve had mansplained to you?”

These were the results:

“I once had a friend mansplain to my roommate how to ~correctly~ pronounce her own name bc he thought she was doing it wrong” (qtd in Goodwin)

“[A]t the racetrack—where I've worked for 14 years—men regularly try to explain to me how gambling works as I take their bets.” (qtd in Goodwin)

“[M]en regularly try to explain that there weren’t women writing in the Middle Ages (I have a PhD in medieval women’s writing)” (qtd in Goodwin)

“[H]ow to ride a bike. While I’m on my bike. By a guy sitting in the SUV driving next to me.” (qtd in Goodwin)

“[H]ad a journalism student take over my lecture to explain to the class why the math I was doing was wrong. He was wrong.” (qtd in Goodwin)

These anecdotes provide tangible examples of mansplaining–highlighting how this phenomenon makes way into our daily interactions.

# data[].attributes.body
Highlighting the issue of mansplaining is crucial as it touches upon the broader implications of gender inequality and communication barriers in society. This condescending behaviour is not just about etiquette as it also reinforces a cultural pattern where women's knowledge and contributions are undervalued. Therefore, addressing mansplaining is essential because it "establishes its relationship to several known outcomes of mistreatment," impacting an individual's workplace experience and overall well-being​ (Cambridge University Press & Assessment). By bringing attention to mansplaining, we also shine a light on the subtleties of gender dynamics that, if left unchecked, perpetuate a cycle of inequality.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
'Well, actually': investigating mansplaining in the modern workplace

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Entering the zeitgeist as a social media phenomenon and hashtag, the term 'mansplaining' is commonly used to capture instances of a man providing an unrequested explanation to a woman in a condescending tone, with the assumption that it is not something with which she is already familiar (Bridges, Reference Bridges2017). Lutzky and Lawson ( Reference Lutzky and Lawson2019) revealed the pervasive use of the term mansplaining, highlighting that the neologism was mentioned at least 10,000 unique times on the social media platform Twitter during just a 6-month period spanning 2016 and 2017. This ongoing social conversation begs the question of whether this form of inappropriate behavior or rudeness is similarly prevalent in modern workplaces, and if so, what effect it is having.

Organizational research documents that more covert forms of workplace mistreatment have increased in prevalence (Pearson & Porath, Reference Pearson and Porath2005), which some authors attribute to the condemnation of overt discrimination in the modern Western context (e.g., Cortina, Reference Cortina2008; Kabat-Farr, Settles, & Cortina, Reference Kabat-Farr, Settles and Cortina2020). Indeed, the majority of incidents of mistreatment in a modern workplace are more likely to be behaviors that lack civility or are considered to violate social norms (Andersson & Pearson, Reference Andersson and Pearson1999; Cortina, Kabat-Farr, Magley, & Nelson, Reference Cortina, Kabat-Farr, Magley and Nelson2017), as compared to ones that are overtly discriminatory, hostile, or violent. Acts that include disrespect, condescension, and degradation are particularly effective in harming their target due to the inherent ambiguity surrounding perpetrator intent (Cortina et al., Reference Cortina, Kabat-Farr, Magley and Nelson2017; Cortina, Magley, Williams, & Langhout, Reference Cortina, Magley, Williams and Langhout2001).

Rudeness in the workplace is both prevalent and problematic (Cortina et al., Reference Cortina, Kabat-Farr, Magley and Nelson2017), yet whether mansplaining is just as pervasive and insidious as other forms of mistreatment remains to be seen. Moreover, we question whether mansplaining is just workplace incivility by another name, or whether it is a distinct concept altogether (see Hershcovis, Reference Hershcovis2011). Advancing research on both mansplaining and incivility requires responses to these questions.

As such, our research endeavors to make four contributions. First, we propose a more comprehensive definition of mansplaining that is grounded in the popular use of the term. We employ this definition to propose a scale for measurement. Second, we establish the extent to which mansplaining is ubiquitous in modern workplaces. Furthermore, we investigate whether men are indeed the typical perpetrators and women the usual targets. Third, we highlight that mansplaining may have deleterious effects by establishing its relationship to several known outcomes of mistreatment (e.g., turnover intentions, emotional exhaustion). Fourth, we explore whether mansplaining is a distinct form of workplace incivility. The results of this research further both our understanding of mansplaining and highlight the importance of including these behaviors in the study and management of workplace mistreatment.

Our research encompasses two studies. First, we qualitatively explore the characteristics and themes of mansplaining through its uses and mentions on Twitter, one of the original venues of the term (Bridges, Reference Bridges2017). We then apply the results of our first study to quantitatively investigate the nature and prevalence of mansplaining in the workplace, including the proposal of a short mansplaining scale, and the possible connection between mansplaining and negative outcomes, as well as its association with incivility. In the following sections, we first provide a brief overview of the concept of mansplaining. We then describe the process and results of our qualitative exploration of mansplaining in Study 1. For Study 2, we first review the literature on mistreatment and incivility, and outline our hypotheses related to mansplaining at work, which are followed by a description of our quantitative methods for investigating the prevalence and correlates of mansplaining, as well as its potential distinctiveness from incivility. Finally, our quantitative results and overall discussion are provided, with implications for researchers and practitioners alike.

Mansplaining

Mansplaining is a portmanteau that combines the words 'man' and 'explain' (Bridges, Reference Bridges2017). Mansplaining is conventionally understood as an exchange where a man clarifies something to a woman in a condescending tone and with the assumption that the woman does not already know what he is telling her (Bridges, Reference Bridges2017). First popularized in her essay entitled 'Men Explain Things to Me,' Solnit (2008/ Reference Solnit2014) recounted an instance when a man explained the premise and importance of a book to her. The book in question was in fact Solnit's own - and after her friend's repeated attempts to clarify this to the man by interjecting, 'That's her book,' several times, the man eventually appeared to be embarrassed. The mansplaining phenomenon has been characterized by the confidence with which the perpetrator delivers the unrequested message, a tone of condescension, and often involves an interjection, interruption, and a belief that the target has no prior knowledge of the subject (Bridges, Reference Bridges2017).

Women experience mansplaining in a wide variety of fields (Bates, Reference Bates2016). Interestingly, Twitter, the social media platform, has provided extensive evidence of this notion, and is argued to be a key driver of the increased societal discussion of mansplaining (Lutzky & Lawson, Reference Lutzky and Lawson2019). Famously, NASA astronaut Dr. Jessica Meir tweeted about a space-equivalent zone in which water boils instantly, only to have a male Twitter user (with no relevant credentials) attempt to correct her (Bates, Reference Bates2016). Similarly, astrophysicist Dr. Katie Mack's climate change commentary was admonished by a man tweeting a response that she should 'learn actual science' (Bates, Reference Bates2016). After Dr. Mack responded that acquiring more than her current credentials - a doctorate in astrophysics - might be 'overkill,' the perpetrator asserted that she did not get her money's worth for her degree (Bates, Reference Bates2016).

These accounts are certainly spectacular and raise cause for concern. However, just because there is prominent conversation of a phenomenon does not necessarily entail that it is pervasive. Moreover, even if it is pervasive, it does not necessarily follow that it is harmful. Finally, given that mansplaining is a neologism, it remains to be seen whether our working definitions actually capture how it is being used in the popular lexicon. It is this final unknown that our first study seeks to address.

Study 1: what is mansplaining?

Study 2: mansplaining prevalence, correlates, and association with incivility

Our qualitative findings replicate past research that suggests all employees are potential targets of disrespect, yet women - and especially women of color - are systemically more likely to experience gender-based mistreatment at work (McCord, Joseph, Dhanani, & Beus, Reference McCord, Joseph, Dhanani and Beus2018). Individuals from hegemonically powerful groups are believed to be the most common perpetrators (McDonald & Charlesworth, Reference McDonald and Charlesworth2016; Rospenda, Richman, & Nawyn, Reference Rospenda, Richman and Nawyn1998), implicitly or explicitly exerting their social power (and perhaps even acting upon their prejudices; Cortina, Reference Cortina2008) to police gender role stereotypes through gender-based mistreatment toward their colleagues (Berdahl, Reference Berdahl2007a, Reference Berdahl2007b; Kabat-Farr & Cortina, Reference Kabat-Farr and Cortina2014; Leskinen, Rabelo, & Cortina, Reference Leskinen, Rabelo and Cortina2015). Disrespectful gender-based conduct - or in this case, mansplaining - may therefore be perpetrated by any individual toward any other (as the tweets suggest; see also Fitzgerald & Cortina, Reference Fitzgerald, Cortina, Travis, White, Rutherford, Williams, Cook and Wyche2018), but empirical evidence and theory support that those with lower social and organizational power will be the most common targets and those with higher social and organizational power will be the most common perpetrators. Thus, as an initial investigation of the prevalence of mansplaining at work, we propose the following hypotheses:

Methods

Results

Overall, more than 95% of our respondents reported having experienced at least some form of mansplaining as exemplified by our six themes. Pairwise tests of proportions indicated no significant differences between men vs. women and gender minorities with respect to having experienced any form of mansplaining. However, looking at the six forms of mansplaining individually, men were significantly less likely to report having experienced five of the six forms, as compared to women and gender minorities (see Table 1). There were no significant differences in the sixth form of mansplaining that involved an explanation that is incorrect/inaccurate. Similarly, for those that had experienced each form of mansplaining, men reported significantly lower frequency in the same five of the six forms of mansplaining. As such, hypothesis 1a was partially supported: equal proportions of men and women and gender minorities have experienced mansplaining, but women and gender minorities experience mansplaining at significantly higher frequencies. It should be noted that only eight respondents identified themselves as a gender minority, rendering statistical tests of differences for this as a separate category impractical.

Hypothesis 1b was not supported. There were no significant differences between visible minorities and nonvisible minorities in either experience or frequency of mansplaining across any of the six items.

Men, women, and gender minorities were all reported to be perpetrators of mansplaining (see Table 1). However, binomial tests of proportions for each of the six forms of mansplaining indicated that men were significantly more likely to be reported as the perpetrators. As such, both hypotheses 2a and 2b were supported.

The means, standard deviations, and inter-correlations of our study variables are presented in Table 2. To explore the outcomes associated with mansplaining, we tested the correlations (pairwise Pearson) between each of the six mansplaining items and the five attitudinal and well-being outcomes (see Table 3). Hypothesis 3 was supported. Each of the six mansplaining items was significantly correlated with emotional exhaustion (H3a), psychological distress (H3b), turnover intentions (H3c), organizational commitment (H3d), and job satisfaction (H3e).

To test whether mansplaining represents a second factor of incivility (hypothesis 4), we performed confirmatory factor analysis (Child, Reference Child1990) using structural equation modeling, programmed in IBM SPSS AMOS (version 27), with incivility and mansplaining representing two correlated factors (items in the incivility scale are included in Appendix A). All of the six mansplaining items and the 12 incivility items loaded well onto their respective factors (>.6), but the model exhibited poor fit (χ ² = 538.1, df = 134, CFI = .878, RMSEA = .106, SRMR = .079). Based on modification indices, we covaried the errors on two similar incivility items (items 7 and 11; Hermida, Reference Hermida2015) and removed three other items from the incivility scale that did not load uniquely onto either factor (items 1, 2, and 5 in Appendix A). The resulting model exhibited excellent fit (χ ² = 180.2, df = 88, CFI = .978, RMSEA = .046, SRMR = .037) (Hu & Bentler, Reference Hu and Bentler1999). The standardized parameter estimates for the resulting two factors are included in Appendix A. We compared our hypothesized two-factor model to an alternative one-factor model as well as a two-factor model (incivility and mansplaining) with uncorrelated factors (see Table 4). Our hypothesized two-factor, correlated model provided the best fit (Δχ ² = 411.1, p < .01 and Δχ ² = 260.2, p < .01, respectively) with the factors highly correlated at r = .72.

The confirmatory factor analysis of the hypothesized two-factor, correlated model also showed good reliability for both factors, good to borderline convergent validity, but inadequate discriminant validity (Hair, Black, Babin, & Anderson, Reference Hair, Black, Babin and Anderson2010). The incivility factor had good reliability ( CR = .97) and convergent validity ( AVE = .57). The mansplaining factor had good reliability ( CR = .86) and borderline convergent validity ( AVE = .50). The discriminant validity for the model was not adequate ( MSV = .51, which is less than AVE = .5), suggesting that there is a non-negligible amount of shared variance between the two factors (Farrell, Reference Farrell2010; Hair et al., Reference Hair, Black, Babin and Anderson2010).

For the remaining analyses, we aggregated the six mansplaining items into a single mansplaining variable and employed the nine-item incivility scale. We performed linear regressions controlling for age, education, tenure, and visible minority status (step one). We added incivility at the second step, before adding mansplaining to the model during the third step (see Table 5). In each case, incivility was a significant predictor of the attitudinal and well-being outcomes. In turn, even with incivility in the model, mansplaining was a significant predictor of both job satisfaction ( B = −.263, SE = .104) and turnover intentions ( B = .153, SE = .076). Thus, mansplaining accounted for a small but statistically significant proportion of the variance in the outcomes beyond that of incivility in the case of both job satisfaction (Δ R ² = .012, Δ F(1,486) = 6.41, p = .012) and turnover intentions (Δ R ² = .007, Δ F(1,486) = 4.10, p = .043). Hypothesis 5 was therefore partially supported.

Discussion

Based on our qualitative findings, we propose an expansion of Bridges' ( Reference Bridges2017) definition of mansplaining: someone (usually a man) providing an unsolicited or unwelcome, condescending or persistent, explanation to someone (usually not a man), either questioning their knowledge or assuming they did not know, regardless of the veracity of the explanation.

Our results also indicate that mansplaining is much more than a social media phenomenon, and in fact permeates beyond the virtual realm to affect employees in their day-to-day work lives. Nearly every individual within our sample, regardless of gender, reported experiencing mansplaining at work at least once during the previous calendar year. Indeed, we found that women, gender minorities, and men alike all experienced mansplaining, and that individuals of all genders perpetrated mansplaining (albeit at different rates). Concurrently, as predicted and as the term itself suggests, men were indeed the most common perpetrators of mansplaining (almost twice as likely), and women and gender minority individuals were the most common targets. More than merely being an interaction whereby a man provides an unwelcome explanation to a woman, however, our qualitative study indicates that mansplaining is more multifaceted. More specifically, we identified six characteristics of mansplaining (unsolicited and unwelcome advice; explaining a topic the target knows well; condescending and patronizing tones; questioning a target's knowledge; speaking with arrogance, overconfidence, or persistence; explaining something incorrectly) that might arise individually or in concert within any given interaction identified as mansplaining. Together, these results suggest that mansplaining is both greater in scope than its name suggests and that it is seemingly ubiquitous in modern workplaces.

Beyond merely occurring in modern workplaces, however, our quantitative analyses suggest that mansplaining affects those who are targeted. That is, each of the types of mansplaining were significantly negatively associated with organizational commitment, job satisfaction, and significantly positively associated with turnover intentions, emotional exhaustion, and psychological distress.

Our analyses further suggest that mansplaining may be a form of incivility. Although mansplaining did not account for significant variance in all of the aforementioned outcomes when controlling for incivility experience, it did explain variance in job satisfaction and turnover intentions beyond that of traditional incivility. It could be that mansplaining is on the less severe side of incivility, leading to dissatisfaction rather than more serious psychological outcomes such as burnout and distress.

Given the gendered origins of the term mansplaining as well as the associated gender differences identified in this study, we checked for similar differences in incivility (ANOVA) but found no significant gender differences. This suggests that mansplaining may represent a type of gendered incivility - a form of rudeness most often experienced by women and gender minorities and most likely to be perpetrated by men.

Conclusion

More than just a social media phenomenon, our study reveals that mansplaining not only occurs in modern workplaces, but that it is pervasive. Through our qualitative evidence, we provide a multi-dimensional view of the construct. In turn, our quantitative evidence suggests that women are not the only targets of mansplaining nor are men the only perpetrators, and more broadly highlights the detrimental effects mansplaining can have. Our research suggests that mansplaining is distinct from incivility, and may be a gendered form of selective incivility. This requires further research and theorizing. Nevertheless, our research indicates that mansplaining should not be considered a petty grievance, nor merely a passing fad, but rather should be understood as an issue related to selective incivility, whereby individuals are targeted based on their identity and made to feel like they do not belong.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
'Well, actually': investigating mansplaining in the modern workplace | Journal of Management & Organization | Cambridge Core

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
'Well, actually': investigating mansplaining in the modern workplace

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
Tools to Develop Diverse & Inclusive Workplace Cultures

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What is Mansplaining and Are You Unintentionally Doing It | Next Pivot Point

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
What does mansplaining mean, what are examples of mansplaining, and how do you address mansplaining?

# data[].attributes.body
The importance of discussing mansplaining extends to its impact in professional settings. It is not just an interpersonal mishap but a widespread workplace phenomenon that can lead to "lower performance, and often, negative turnover"​ (InclusiHub)​. When we consider the importance of every team member feeling heard and valued, it becomes clear why tackling mansplaining is a pivotal step towards fostering a more inclusive and effective workplace culture. Acknowledging and addressing this issue is fundamental in promoting a sense of belonging and maximizing the diverse talents and opinions within any organization. When all employees feel valued and empowered, regardless of their gender, they can be their best selves and bring their best foot forward.

# data[].attributes.body
1) Do not make assumptions. Ask the other party about their level of expertise with a topic before explaining it.

This action comes with several benefits. It goes without saying that mansplaining cannot occur if you determine the other party's level of experience. Based on the chart by Kim Goodwin shown to the left, one can effectively determine whether it is appropriate to continue or avoid the act of explaining. The other key benefit is that the conversation becomes more meaningful and productive for everyone. It is nothing but a waste of time to explain to someone a topic they are already an expert at.

2) Wording is key. Acknowledge the other party's possibly experiences with the topic while explaining.

This action helps one set the right atmosphere for the conversation. It expresses that you understand that the other party has their own unique set of experiences and feelings surrounding the topic at hand. Examples include:

"I'm interested in hearing about what you thought, but in my opinion, ..."

"You might know as well, but to my knowledge, ...."

3) Continuously seek input from the other party.

It is optimal to keep the interaction as more of a conversation than an explanation akin to a lecture. If the latter is done, the other party may begin to feel as if they are being "preached" to or even may think that their intellect is not being acknowledged.

# data[].attributes.body
Know the Facts

Around 82% of people face the impact of imposter syndrome, the belief that one's success is undeserved (Bravata, D. M., et al). The individuals, in particular, are prone to backing down and being victims of mansplaining. Jessica Vanderlan, PhD, states that a key way to overcome this obstacle is to learn the facts (Abramson). If one has true mastery of their field, they will have greater confidence when put in possible mansplaining scenarios. Floss Barber, the CEO of Floss Barber Inc, an interior design studio expressed the following

One time, a project manager insisted that I was the cause of a problem with a carpet and the subsequent delay. In these situations, I stay calm and repeat the facts. When he persisted, I simply said he was inaccurate and that I did not appreciate his aggressive words. He stopped. (Althouse)

Support Others

If you see a situation that may possibly be mansplaining, find the right moment to interject. This can be done in a professional manner by simply asking the oppressed party for their thoughts. This utterance gives the party the opening they need to express and convey their own knowledge on the subject.

# data[].attributes.headline
How can one minimize mansplaining in today's society?

# data[].attributes.subject
How can one minimize mansplaining in today's society?

# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.question
Which of the following are examples of mansplaining?

# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.poll_choices[].choice_text
"If you're open to it, I'd like to share my thoughts on the matter, but please let me know if you're already familiar with this aspect."

# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.poll_choices[].choice_text
"Are you sure you understand? Let me break it down for you."

# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.poll_choices[].choice_text
"I noticed you mentioned X, and I wanted to offer some additional insights that might complement your perspective."

# data[].attributes.body
Over 95% of respondents from the Cambridge study said they had experienced some form of mansplaining. That's 19/20!