The MSNBC host, Stephanie Ruhle, seems to have no idea what "glass jaw" means. She asks, "What does that mean?" and Phil takes on the burden of mansplaining:
"That means you go down -- it's a boxing phrase, a boxer with a glass jaw is one who can't take a punch, goes down with a left jab instead of a right cross," Donahue explained. "And I think the press has to be above that. All you can do is pray that the people you serve will understand this and appreciate the job that you've got."Speaking of mansplaining, do I need to 'splain my "Of all people"? Phil Donahue was the prototypical sensitive man.
पोस्ट्स
९५ टिप्पण्या:
How old can Ms. Ruhle be- 10?
Phil Donahue was the prototypical sensitive man
What sweet joy it was when the manly Oprah crushed him.
Speaking of glass jaws!
Donahue vs Friedman
"Of all people" might be a good tag!
@Saint Croix The Friedman response is an absolute classic. A intellectual conservative goes against highly respected liberal and .......... destroys him.
"Just keep working" is pretty good advice.
Why was that "mansplaining?"
"That means you go down -- it's a boxing phrase, a boxer with a glass jaw is one who can't take a punch, goes down with a left jab instead of a right cross," Donahue explained.
That actually seems over-explained to me . . . I know what a "glass jaw" is, speaking rhetorically, and I'd say it's "someone who gets knocked out by one hit to the jaw" or something like that. "Left jab?" "Right cross?" I don't know what those are (why is one a jab, and the other a cross?), nor do I much care to.
Advising "Don't be so Sensitive" to mainstream journalists (mostly leftists, posing as neutrals) is like advising Pajama Boys to not live in their parents' basements.
Both features are central to their existence.
You know you're a snowflake when Phil Donahue calls you a wuss.
I plan to start a school where diversity in all its forms, even non-mammalian, will dominate admissions and teaching. We'll call it the University of All People.
On the street, they'll call it U. of All People.
His TV career started off in Dayton, Ohio where I grew up. My one claim to fame was being on his show. He had my skating teacher as a guest, and they froze over the parking lot at the local television studio and she had some of her students giving demonstrations.
I remember we were getting ready to go on the air and one of the older girls fell trying an axel (the ice was really rough.) She fell on her ass and he laughed. I never forgot that.
Also he couldn't skate for shit.
Re: Roy Jacobsen:
Why was that "mansplaining?"
Because sports are a "man" thing so using sports metaphors is exclusionary towards women.
And effete nerds like me, I suppose, except that even I know what a "glass jaw" is even though I know nothing of boxing. It's just'a phrase, like "cargo cult," that compactly expresses a useful concept.
I thought I had a bead on what 'mansplaining' meant, but this has thrown me. I'll need to look it up.
"27 year old journalists who know nothing"
Good heavens that woman is a f#cking idiot. Glass jaw. Really?
Taking "a page out of the KGB playbook." Really?
"pray that the people you serve will understand this" Prayer answered: we understand exactly who they are and what they do.
But Donahue does not. The so-called "sensitivity" of the MSM is just another prog pose, a tool in the culture war. They'll keep it up as long as it serves their purpose--journalistic ethics or serving the public have nothing to do with it.
Yeah, I hate mansplaining. When a woman asks a question, like "What does that mean, 'bankruptcy-remote'?" I tell her, "Figure it out for yourself." At least that's what I do with the female associates. I don't want some Ann Althouse type accusing me of mansplaining. I'll bet she wishes had worked at my firm.
Annie C said...
"I remember we were getting ready to go on the air and one of the older girls fell trying an axel (the ice was really rough.) She fell on her ass and he laughed. I never forgot that."
Mr. Sensitivity.
I would describe Phil Donahue not so much as sensitive, but as "so open-minded that the wind blows through".
Can one mansplain mansplaining?
Or is that a job for a woman?
He's still alive?
I used to like his syndicated program. Despite his personal politics he was almost always fair minded to his guests in a way that is at present disturbingly absent.
That Freidman exchange would never happen today.
I'm pretty sure he didn't know when I heard Brian Lamb of CSPAN Booknotes ask an author what "buggery" was. And he'd been a naval officer.
Why should journalists feel attacked by Trump? What's he going to do--nibble their bums?
Wow, Trump has managed to stop our slide completely into oblivion.
"Why was that "mansplaining?""
Because it's long, patient, and detailed in a way that conveys what seems to be a belief that the woman is rather dense.
In this case, she did seem dumb not knowing the term, but he didn't have to rub it in so massagingly.
"I don't want some Ann Althouse type accusing me of mansplaining." Careful, buddy. Venturing close to broflake territory.
Donahue was a syrupy sweet push over type whose success was 100% a creation of the talented producer who did the booking of interesting guests every day to talk with him about topical issues. Donahue was an Ed Sullivan type announcer on that show, and it only succeeded because of the attractive talkers booked by Roger Ailes.
He dumbsplained it. Anybody gets knocked down by the jab takes up another sport.
They don't make it to boxer with a glass jaw level.
Related
VERITAS Day 2 - Van Jones admits Russia Collusion story "a big nothing burger"
Really tells you how useless the Democrat Media is when the important stories are a result of leaks, hacks and undercover stings.
I don't understand that. If I ask Althouse to explain Marbury v Madison to me, I WANT her teaching to be long patient and detajled, as if I was dense.
We are not mind readers. We don't know what you don't know.
I think some women are just insecure.
The author of the article made her look dumber than Phil did.
Never thought I'd agree with him on several things political.
I'm impressed with Donahue's extemporaneous explanation of a glass jaw: going down with a left jab instead of a right cross. This is not a Pajama Boy explanation.
Good on you, Phil.
He could have just said "Google it".
There was a great Twitter exchange about mansplaining, some of you may remember it better than me:
Scene: Baseball game
Woman: If those fans aren't racist, explain why they are holding up "KKK" signs?
Man: Well, you see, in baseball "K" denotes a strikeout and something blah blah something blah.
Woman: Thanks for the mansplain, asshole!
Man: Wha- you fucking asked me to explain it!
Is it "mansplaining" because there were no female boxers present to explain the concept?
Balfegor said...
"Left jab?" "Right cross?" I don't know what those are (why is one a jab, and the other a cross?)...
When fighting, you don't stand square face-to-face with your opponent, you stand with one side ( your weak side, for most people their left ) further forward. Punches with this lead hand are quicker ( because they are starting closer), and less powerful ( because they have don't have distance to build up speed ). They tend to do little damage, but are enough that your opponent needs to block them, he can't just let you keep jabbing him in the face.
The cross is your power punch. As you throw it from your back hand, you rotate your hips and torso. It takes longer to get there, but does more damage. But taking more time gives your opponent time to dodge/deflect it, and if it misses its mark, you waste a lot of energy, and leave your head exposed.
The common tactic is to jab to keep them busy, and maybe get their hands out of position blocking your jab, while you look for an opening to throw your cross.
..., nor do I much care to.
Too late.
Depends on whether the female boxer identifies as a female. And you still have to check her politics, since conservative women aren't granted female status.
It seems the "mansplaining" term is evolving to include any explanation coming out of a man's mouth.
But I think this instance would more likely "trigger" finger pointing at Toxic Masculinity. That Donahue invokes it shows how far the pendulum has swung.
Next up, Alan Alda tells the press to "Grow a pair".
And how much more hypocritical could the left be?
If a person identifies as female, the Left demands we accept that as fact.
But if a woman is conservative, the Left demands that *they* get to accept whether are is female.
I think it's a consequence of having situational ethics. No consistency.
Nothing about truth, honestly, intellectual curiosity?
Nope.
Shorter Phil: Hack press can still be lying frauds. Don't act like it bothers you when the deplorables get upset.
Is explaining something patiently offensive? Anyway, his explanation painted a vivid picture of what's mean't by "glass jaw", and wasn't very long; it was 33 words -- only one word longer than it took for Althouse to call it too long, too patient, too detailed, and too 'splainy.
Humperdink said...
The Friedman ... A[n] intellectual conservative
Friedman was a (no-open-borders-with-welfare) libertarian.
Humperdink said...
The Friedman ... A[n] intellectual conservative
Fernandinande responded: "Friedman was a (no-open-borders-with-welfare) libertarian."
You are correct, he labelled himself a libertarian. However, he was clearly an economic conservative.
One of my favorite Friedman anecdotes: "While traveling by car during one of his many overseas travels, Professor Milton Friedman spotted scores of road builders moving earth with shovels instead of modern machinery. When he asked why powerful equipment wasn’t used instead of so many laborers, his host told him it was to keep employment high in the construction industry. If they used tractors or modern road building equipment, fewer people would have jobs was his host’s logic.
“Then instead of shovels, why don’t you give them spoons and create even more jobs?” Friedman inquired.
Another: "In 1940, Friedman accepted a position at the University of Wisconsin–Madison, but left because of differences with faculty regarding United States involvement in World War II. Friedman believed the United States should enter the war." - Wiki (Some things never change.)
AA said, "...he didn't have to rub it in so massagingly."
Huh. Phil Donahue always talks massagingly.
And how instead should he have said it? She asked what it meant. Should he have shouted it? Punched her in the jaw and said "that"? Said, "Look it up"? Or "I'm not really sure; I read it somewhere"?
Your comment is prototypical femihypersensitivity.
The MSM are doing their job. They do make mistakes and correct it soon after. When all is said and done the MSM along with the Intelligence Community and Judiciary will be the heroes when Trump & Family & Associates go down.
Unknown said: "The MSM are doing their job. They do make mistakes and correct it soon after."
^^^^^^^^^^
Fake post.
Phil Donahue was the prototypical sensitive man
The original Alpha Beta male.
@BE: "Your comment is prototypical femihypersensitivity." Nah. Just trolling to smoke out the broflakes.
Ignorance is Bliss said...
[A whole bunch of words explaining boxing and boxing terminology...]
Thank you! That's going to help me a lot in a story I'm working on.
"When all is said and done -
Nothing will happen and you will scurry back under your rock until you get knew talking points
But it's kinda cute how Trump lives in your head and has reduced you to beclowning yourself for our amusement. After a certain point though, it just feels wrong, like watching a retarded person disgrace himself for laughs.
Have you considered seeing a psychiatrist?
Yeah, Sebastian, you're probably right.
fake post
He said the other day that he has zero interest in discussion and is only here to mock and insult. Not sure why you bother with him, but "keep hope alive" that one day you will get him to drop his shtick.
This story is really about how our culture has changed. There are so few things that everyone has in common now, or has knowledge of in common. Years ago, almost everyone knew who Muhammad Ali and Joe Frazier were, for instance, boxing fans and non-fans alike. Now, most people probably don't know who Anthony Joshua or Joseph Parker is, or anyone else who claims some boxing title.
Despite the expansion of MMA, jujitsu, etc., fewer and fewer people have ever experienced any kind of fisticuffs or other fighting. It's no surprise that Ruhle didn't understand "glass jaw".
Oprah ruined at least two generations of Americans. Culture-wise, it's not even close.
Someone with a time machine could change so much just by taking Oprah out. You probably wouldn't need to bother with Donahue or Jerry Springer.
Think about what a change it'd be if you dropped Oprah and Paris Hilton before they became influential!
Pretty sure even the most rabid Progressive Feminists don't call it "mansplaining" when a woman literally asks a man to explain something.
Ann Althouse said...In this case, she did seem dumb not knowing the term, but he didn't have to rub it in so massagingly.
If she didn't actually know the term how would that be mansplaining? That's just explaining albeit in a less-than-ideal way. Explaining in an arrogant or condescending manner isn't the same thing as mansplaining, is it? Unwarranted condescension is a necessary but not a sufficient element of mansplaining, right?
(NB I'm ASKING here, not presuming to tell a woman something she likely already knows. We all know what that'd be!)
"Because it's long, patient, and detailed in a way that conveys what seems to be a belief that the woman is rather dense."
Stephanie Ruhle from MSNBC is dense. What does gender have to do with it? Most people in deplorable flyover country know what "glass jaw" means. You'd think and MSNBC anchor might know as well. Even if you never head the term, in the context of their conversation it wouldn't take much deductive reasoning to figure in out.
Wolf Blitzer is an idot. Ever watched his celebrity jeopardy fail on youtube? These people are a lot more like the William Hurt character in "Broadcast News" than they'd like to admit.
That girl....not the sharpest tool in the box.
Why hasn't anyone brought up Orwell, dead or dying metaphors, and "Politics and the English Language" yet? Yesterday there was a post about a 1984 play.
Dangerous territory for me, of course, since I know the Professor and others are familiar with those topics...if I try to make a statement or point I might accidentally mansplain something.
Political correctness doesn't stifle free, open discussion. No sir. Ma'am! I meant no ma'am.
I think it is funny he cut off his original explanation about going down to re-phrase.
"I don't know what those are (why is one a jab, and the other a cross?), nor do I much care to."
-- Jabs are, generally, straight on punches, compared to a cross that puts more of the body behind it (so like an uppercut.)
OT, but I want to get this out. Here's another one for Inga to think about. Comey's second in command (Acting Director Andrew McCabe) is now under investigation for violating the Hatch Act during his wife's run for VA senate last year. Link.
Clearly the upper reaches of the FBI suffer from gross negligence, hubris or stupidity. Good thing both these guys are on their way out. To make this relevant to the post: do you think we will see this in the MSM?
Yeah, if I do have to explain something to a female associate, I never do long, patient and detailed. Here are two kinds of useless short explanations guaranteed to protect against accusations of "mansplaining." First is one that presumes a whole lot of background which the listener doesn't have. So I might say, "Because it's a certificated security, we perfect by control." Almost no recent law school graduate knows what that means. The other kind is one that gives the answer, but with no theoretical understanding, which is fine for paralegals, but frustrates associates. So I might say, "On a mezz loan, we need the original certificate with a signed assignment and the name of the assignee blank." Now the associate can do this one transaction over and over, but she has no basis for figuring out how to do other transactions.
Long, patient and detailed? Not me. Maybe one of the other associates will help you out.
Re: Ignorance is Bliss:
"..., nor do I much care to."
Too late.
O, I will never be pure again.
Marlo Thomas, know as "Margie" when I knew her at SC in the 1950s (before her nose job), is still married to Donohue.
I give them both credit for that.
We, the consumers of this blog, need a new term "Annsplaining," to complain whenever we feel Ann's explications of law, feminism or any other arcana are needlessly rubbing our noses in our own ignorance. (I haven't won shorts one day this summer, thanks to Annsplaining how I am perceived.)
And I wore pants to the US Open on thursday when it was +90F. Other than the golfers, I was the only one out there.
"In this case, she did seem dumb not knowing the term, but he didn't have to rub it in so massagingly."
In other words, he talked to her like a man instead of a woman.
Being a women, he should have understood that she not only had to be given the information, but given it in the CORRECT manner, so that her fragile feelings wouldn't be hurt.
I can't think of a single time, anyone has "mansplained" something to me. Probably because I was primarily interested in getting the information, or I informed the person that I just needed the time of time and not information on how to build a watch.
But of course with women it'll all about style - 'cause feelz.
Phil Donahue should just go away. I can still remember when he invited female conservative guests on his rinky-dink cable TV show and then would brag about how he'd talked over them, interrupted, and generally prevented them from talking.
That was Mr. Feminism. Or perhaps Phil was "Mansplaining"
Marlo Thomas is a perfect example of Hollywood nepotism. I doubt she would ever have gotten a TV show is hadn't been Danny Thomas' daughter. I liked "That Girl" when I was 6, but I saw it a few years ago, and its awful. God, the crap we had on TV back then!
Phil Donahue was the prototypical sensitive man.
You misspelled "beta male".
" Jabs are, generally, straight on punches, compared to a cross that puts more of the body behind it..."
True, that's a better mansplanation than Phil Donahue gave. It's not the relative difference in distance covered that causes the lesser power of a jab compared with other types of punches, but the weight and force behind it. I have a feeling it's been a long time since Phil was last in a fight.
Still, Donahue's advice to journos was right.
Funny how women like Althouse perceive it as overdone "mansplaining" and men like the authenticity of it. Men love authentic details, Moby Dick was a so so story chock full of authentic details that made it a great read for us men. It's almost as if feminists, or female supremacists, as I like to call them, don't like the male way of processing information in this world and think it should stop.
Marlo Thomas is a perfect example of Hollywood nepotism. I doubt she would ever have gotten a TV show is hadn't been Danny Thomas' daughter.
Saw her on Broadway a couple years back. Still hot.
I still wear shorts, but I feel guilty... :^O
The problem with mansplaining is the implication that the woman lacks a fully functioning brain. Even if there's reason to think that in this case, you could rein it in out of tact.
Ann Althouse: "The problem with mansplaining is the implication that the woman lacks a fully functioning brain."
Let me take a moment to make clear to you why that is wrong.....
Why in the world would "glass jaw" need explaining of any sort? Is there some secret meaning of "glass" or "jaw" that everybody doesn't understand? Too many syllables when you put them together? I don't understand. Could somebody explain it to me?
Oh wait. It involves hitting you say? I thought it was about talking too slipperyish.
Hitting vs. talking is man vs. woman in a nutshell.
Do I need to explain nutshell?
you could rein it in out of tact
You mean like "Don't you worry your pretty little head about it honey."
"The problem with mansplaining is the implication that the woman lacks a fully functioning brain. "
You've missed the point that several commenters have made by now – men will give the exact same explanation to other men, because men tend to like detail. There's nothing "sexist" or patronizing about it.
Did Donahue assume she didn't have a functioning brain? She asked a question and he answered it.
Your explication of what makes mansplaining bad undercuts your assertion that Donahue was mansplaining. She didn't know something and asked for an explanation. He didn't assume she didn't know something that she did know.
I will ask it: is there or is there not a difference between mansplaining and regular explaining in a less-than-perfectly well mannered way?
Geez, are we in Humpty Dumpy territory with "mansplaining" now?
AA, if you try irony, no work with us men. We simple.
"could rein it in out of tact"
What is this 'tact' you speak of? :)
I think society has focused so much on "understanding" where women are coming from that we just assume we already understand men. Cue the Homer Simpson stereotypes.
It's the same with "maninterrupting". So incredibly sexist... until you notice that men always talk over other men too. It's rude and maybe Alpha games, but not sexist.
Mansplaining, maninterrupting, manspreading. All feminist bullshit terms that need to be retired.
"Kalie, give that to me again in Captain Dummy Talk" - Captain Reynolds, Firefly
Fen is my twin brother. He's missed his nightly dose of medication for several days now. I apologize for his behavior. We, his family, have tried to convince him to admit himself, as he is once again veering into hyper-mania. He has delusions of being smarter, faster and more powerful than mere normal people. He can't be held responsible, please excuse him.
So when a woman asks for something to be explained how are men to judge how much information to give.
I'll be honest, asking what is a "glass jaw" implies to me zero knowledge of boxing. If found the given explanation relatively clear and concise.
If he's answered "easily hurt" would she know what a glass jaw was?
Or should we always ask, "You want the long story or the short story". Or perhaps, "Figure it out yourself". Ever, "It's a man thing,you would not understand".
I find man splaining to be a parallel to why many men do not open doors for women today.
I still do, open doors for women and the elderly. And I continue to explain, as well as I can, when asked. But then I live in a better part of the world.... the south.
Ann.
"mansplaining" is the same as explaining to another man except you're spared "dumbass" and "asshole"
tactful indeed.
The problem with mansplaining is the implication that the woman lacks a fully functioning brain. Even if there's reason to think that in this case, you could rein it in out of tact.
You must never, ever, make a woman feel bad. This includes treating the ignorant like they are ignorant.
Point probably already made, but
She asks, "What does that mean?"!!!!!!!!!
Is Phil supposed to say "I don't know, you figure it out."
" I liked "That Girl" when I was 6, but I saw it a few years ago, and its awful. God, the crap we had on TV back then!"
I know, tell me about it. On Scooby-Doo, they kept running past the same things over and over and over.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा