Jump to content
kali Wylder

about this boomer thing

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 90 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts

Just now, Tolya Ugajin said:

If a woman mansplains, is it transplaining, or womansplaing?  Or is it genderappropriationsplaining?  Before today I'd never heard of "gensplaining" so I want to make sure I understang this new lingo.

I vote for genderappropriationsplaining. I've been the victim, the victim I say, of it several times in the Forums. In fact, I've been mansplained by women far more than I have by men (assuming gender that is). I dunno. I'm old. I get confused. BUT I'M NOT AS OLD AS PEOPLE WANT ME TO BE, DAMNIT!  

  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I have no idea if I am a zoomer or a millennial(I am 1996-07-09 in YYYY/MM/DD format for reference).

This is a tricky thing. Under normal circumstances, I'd ignore it as if it were just another meme, but it often has hateful rhetoric behind it, as those who tend to use the "ok boomer" are also those who have a burning desire for all "boomers" to die(Source: Twitter).

My main problem with it is that people use it as a dismissive for any ideas that they don't like(EG: "Maybe you are asking for too much?") and refuse to listen, instead of explaining their side of the argument. I've been called boomer and by my age, I am quite clearly not. Not to say that "ok boomer" is the only dismissive thing these days. I've seen many people be dismissive because of age, gender, race, orientation, etc.

In this day and age, a majority of people seem to have gotten to the point of just outright dismissing people and refusing to find a common ground or compromise with situations. Don't get me wrong here when I say this as it can seem I am saying "oh the left doesn't like to listen", the right doesn't either, and this is a major problem. I partially blame Twitter for this as the people use it as a major communication platform, despite it originally having a 128 character limit, which is now 256 characters. This basically crippled any conversations and tells people to respond with emojis or be dismissive because it discourages long conversations and thoughts, as stuff longer than that has to either be written out in multiple tweets(which is a pain to do), or be put in a image(which less people will read and wont show up in search).

If we are to continue to strive as a species, we need to understand that "my way or no way" is not a option and we have to share this planet, else we have yet another genocide. (Not advocating it, just stating, this is where it typically leads when major politics turns to the "my way or no way" situation).

People forget that there are about 7.8 billion people we have to share this space rock with, and each one of them has their own view points. There is no cookie cutter for humans, you will never find someone with exactly the same view points, there will always be one thing that is disagreed upon. I personally think that is pretty awesome at how the brain can be so unique like that.

Another thing people forget, is it is ok to be friends with someone with different view points. You don't have to agree with everyone. I personally have more conservative leaning view points and I have quite a few liberal friends, and we get along just fine! The key is to understand that everyone has different view points and that is fine, but if you are truely their friend, don't force them to change. It is ok to explain your side if they are willing to listen, or have a constructive discussion on political view points, but don't make them change if they don't want to, and don't get mad if they don't agree.

Here is a quote from Ellen DeGeneres regarding this: (Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lSZtjol7mJA )

Quote

Here's the thing: I'm friends with George Bush. In fact, I'm friends with a lot of people who don't share the same beliefs that I have. We're all different, and I think that we've forgotten that that's OK that we're all different.
For instance, I wish people wouldn't wear fur. I don't like it, but I'm friends with people who wear fur. And I'm friends with people who are furry, as a matter of fact. I have friends who should tweeze more. But just because I don't agree with someone on everything doesn't mean that I'm not going to be friends with them.
When I say be kind to one another, I don't mean only the people that think the same way that you do. I mean be kind to everyone.

 

Edited by Chaser Zaks
Trimmed, cut, and shaved the massive amount of new lines at the end at the bottom
  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Seicher Rae said:

I vote for genderappropriationsplaining. I've been the victim, the victim I say, of it several times in the Forums. In fact, I've been mansplained by women far more than I have by men (assuming gender that is). I dunno. I'm old. I get confused. BUT I'M NOT AS OLD AS PEOPLE WANT ME TO BE, DAMNIT!  

Isn't "masplaining" limited to when men talk to women as if women could not POSSIBLY understand the "manly arts", such as fixing cars, sports, power tools, shooting guns, and surreptitiously scratching your gonads?

While we're on mansplaining, is womanspreading a thing now, too?  I mean, there is a very good anatomical reason men generally sit with their legs spread a bit, and while I can only assume (since I lack lady bits and don't wear skirts) why woman don't do the same, I've heard a lot of complaining about manspreading but never see women do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
33 minutes ago, Tolya Ugajin said:

Ah here we go with people misrepresenting what I said, whether intentionally or not.  The instance you are referring to I specifically said that since you are young you MAY not have experience with long-term committed relationships, which is not at all the same as "incapable of sustaining them."  If you're going to get upset at something I say, you may as well read it accurately, then I will not need to repeatedly splain it to you.

Oh pish tosh. I remember the context well. It was intended to patronise and belittle in exactly the same manner in which you tried and failed to patronise and belittle Theresa earlier in this thread. Even used the same derogatory term, "junior". Apparently, until a couple of hours ago you didn't even realise that most of the millennials are in their 30s? You made assumptions about her age as well. 

Anyway, I don't mention it in order to drag it up. I mention it because you apparently think I need educating about it. 

I'll leave it to readers to decide for themselves what "know how ['ok boomer'] is received" should be taken to mean. "Understand why it causes offence", or "the deepest, most personal form of empathy that cannot be felt by anyone who hasn't had the exact same experience". I'm personally satisfied that I grasp the concept well enough to be able to contribute to the discussion.

And I maintain that not all youthful experiences are the same. The world around you makes a difference.

 

Edited by Amina Sopwith
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, Tolya Ugajin said:

Isn't "masplaining" limited to when men talk to women as if women could not POSSIBLY understand the "manly arts", such as fixing cars, sports, power tools, shooting guns, and surreptitiously scratching your gonads?

While we're on mansplaining, is womanspreading a thing now, too?  I mean, there is a very good anatomical reason men generally sit with their legs spread a bit, and while I can only assume (since I lack lady bits and don't wear skirts) why woman don't do the same, I've heard a lot of complaining about manspreading but never see women do it.

Nope, mansplaining doesn't have to do with the "manly arts" although it can. If a mechanic who is a woman is fixing a car just fine, and an average Joe comes into explain how to fix a car to the "little woman"... then it is mansplaining. Me answering a question like this is NOT mansplaining, nor would it be if you did it if the question were asked of you. Offering the explanation without a question being asked does put one in a possible 'splaining mode. Mansplaining, in its original form, just meant that a man lectures in condescending manner to a woman assuming she has no knowledge of the subject because: woman.

I think I read somewhere that the term came about when a woman PhD and author of some book was introduced to another PhD, a man. The topic of HER book came up, and I believe it was pointed out by someone that she was the author, and yet the guy PhD just went on and on, explaining the concepts of the book to the author like the poor little dear just couldn't possibly understand the concepts. Then I think the woman PhD or a friend of hers wrote an article about it and coined the word. Or I could totally be making this up.

I am not an expert on current things, but I doubt womanspreading is a thing. Sorry. I know that probably disappoints. 

Edited by Seicher Rae
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Tolya Ugajin said:

While we're on mansplaining, is womanspreading a thing now, too?  I mean, there is a very good anatomical reason men generally sit with their legs spread a bit, and while I can only assume (since I lack lady bits and don't wear skirts) why woman don't do the same, I've heard a lot of complaining about manspreading but never see women do it.

Women have been taught not to do it.  It's been hammered home to them that bad things will happen to them if anyone sees their "lady bits" I find manspreading threatening and I resent feeling scared.  It's a hell of a lot more comfortable to spread.  I just do in in the safety of my own home and never when anyone else can see me.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posture. Men tend to be more expansive in their posture, and more open – taking up more space. This is associated with dominance. Women, on the other hand, tend to take up less space and be more constricted. For example, consider how men cross their legs while seated, while women will often hold their legs tightly together. Expansive positions are associated with power and dominance and constricted positions with submissiveness. Moreover, there is research evidence that a more open, “forceful” posture will actually make you feel more powerful and confident.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/cutting-edge-leadership/201211/the-nonverbal-power-cues-men-and-women

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Tolya Ugajin said:

Isn't "masplaining" limited to when men talk to women as if women could not POSSIBLY understand the "manly arts", such as fixing cars, sports, power tools, shooting guns, and surreptitiously scratching your gonads?

Mansplaining (a blend word of man and the informal form splaining of the gerund explaining) is a pejorative term meaning "(of a man) to comment on or explain something to a woman in a condescending, overconfident, and often inaccurate or oversimplified manner".[1][2][3][4] Author Rebecca Solnit ascribes the phenomenon to a combination of "overconfidence and cluelessness".[5] Lily Rothman, of The Atlantic, defines it as "explaining without regard to the fact that the explainee knows more than the explainer, often done by a man to a woman".[6]

In its original use, mansplaining differed from other forms of condescension in that it is rooted in the assumption that a man is likely to be more knowledgeable than a woman.[7] However, it has come to be used more broadly, often applied when a man takes a condescending tone in an explanation to anyone, regardless of the age or gender of the intended recipients: a "man 'splaining" can be delivered to any audience.[2] In 2010, it was named by the New York Times as one of its "Words of the Year".[8] American Dialect Society nominated Mansplaining as the “most creative” new word in 2012.[9]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, kali Wylder said:

Women have been taught not to do it.  It's been hammered home to them that bad things will happen to them if anyone sees their "lady bits" I find manspreading threatening and I resent feeling scared.  It's a hell of a lot more comfortable to spread.  I just do in in the safety of my own home and never when anyone else can see me.

I don't think most men understand how women are socialized on so many levels not to take up much space, even today.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
58 minutes ago, Amina Sopwith said:

I'll leave it to readers to decide for themselves what "know how ['ok boomer'] is received" should be taken to mean. "Understand why it causes offence", or "the deepest, most personal form of empathy that cannot be felt by anyone who hasn't had the exact same experience". I'm personally satisfied that I grasp the concept well enough to be able to contribute to the discussion.

It really seems to depend on the person as to their ability to transfer empathy. More concrete types or personalities feel more of a need to have the exact same experience to understand another's experience, whereas more poetic types can transfer feelings of empathy more easily.

 

Edited by Luna Bliss

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tolya Ugajin said:

Actually, the only way you could truly understand it, Amina, is to have someone with half your life experience say it to you.  It's sort of like how a white person can claim they understand how the "n word" (far more offensive, obviously) makes a black person feel, when they really cannot.  On the flip side, Gen X-ers (or whatever), boomers, etc. CAN in fact understand how millennials feel being dismissed as "millennials", because the same thing happened to them 20 years ago, 40 years ago, etc.

Here's the thing...

If you're right, you're right. What somebody says to you won't change that. If you tell somebody something and they dismiss you, but you're right, they'll still eventually find that out. You can just smile quietly and wait for that to happen (assuming, of course, it isn't some sort of mission-critical task.)

Taking umbrage at a phrase like "Okay, Boomer," sounds more like being offended at the possibility that you could be considered wrong. Experience isn't always a good teacher; in fact sometimes it can lead you astray because you don't do the work necessary to make sure you're correct because you're relying on experience that may not be as valuable as you think it is.

However, as far as umbrage goes for this topic the bar has been set extremely high, thanks to a college professor who said that "Boomer" was a slur as bad as the "n word" despite his working at the university where the fight song is titled "Boomer Sooner."

https://time.com/5782812/oklahoma-professor-ok-boomer-racial-slur/

 

 

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about we all get together and target our anger where it belongs? Be angry at the year 1991. That seems to be when two books were published - one coining the word Millennial, and the other assigning Gen-X to the post-Baby Boomers. THAT is when all this crap really took off and suddenly we had to define and label people by when they were born. We'd used terms to describe other generations before, but it was mostly used for statistical purposes (I'm pulling that out of my butt because I'm too miffed to look it up but before then I can't recall the labeling of the generations ever being a thing before then). 

The fact of the matter is younger generations have always looked at the older generations as being out of touch and arrogant and all those things, and older generations have always looked at younger generations as being nothing but a bunch of young whippersnappers who are too full of themselves. 

It's not going to change. In 30 years the Millennials are going to be griping about Gen Alpha for being disrespectful and lazy and talking about 'back in my day' and the Gen Alpha kids are going to be griping about the Millennials being so out of touch with reality. 

It's the circle of life.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Beth Macbain said:

The fact of the matter is younger generations have always looked at the older generations as being out of touch and arrogant and all those things, and older generations have always looked at younger generations as being nothing but a bunch of young whippersnappers who are too full of themselves. 

Only in our sick culture and time. I vote we go back to the times (or look at other more healthy cultures) when our elders were respected and revered, and when the elders felt a deep commitment to help the young have a better future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

Taking umbrage at a phrase like "Okay, Boomer," sounds more like being offended at the possibility that you could be considered wrong.

While I think that such umbrage happens as you describe, I think that generally, the way OK Boomer is currently being used, it is more like being offended if someone gets in your face and says, "Eff you, as5hole." I think it is just that gut level at this point. Again, that is for the current nasty usage of the phrase by the majority of those slinging it. Yours is probably more correct for those using the phrase in its original sense.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

Taking umbrage at a phrase like "Okay, Boomer," sounds more like being offended at the possibility that you could be considered wrong.

That may be what you think it sounds like, but as someone who has had "Okay, Boomer" said to them (I'm Gen X, damn it) it feels dismissive and demeaning. My opinion is still valid no matter what age I am. I've learned from the Silent Generation (my parents) and the Boomers (my siblings) and Millenials (my coworkers mostly) and Gen Z... actually, no. I don't know if I actually know any Gen Zers, but I'm sure I'll learn from them as soon as I meet some of them. Every generation has knowledge and things to learn from. No one single generation has all the answers, either. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tolya Ugajin said:
4 hours ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

Says the man who has been known to pepper his posts with really generous and expansive terms like "SJW" . . .

Actually, that is not at all a redefinition.  SJWs loudly proclaim they are fighting (which is what warriors do) for "social justice", so it's an apt term which, I suspect, they originally applied to themselves, as conservatives tend to be dullards when it comes to making up terms (although they really do meme far better than liberals).  I'm not sure why you would be insulted at the term.  It's sort of like being insulted by being called a card-carrying member of the ACLU - who isn't for civil liberties?  You really should own it.  Some actual redefinitions:

"Social justice warrior" (SJW) is a pejorative term for an individual who promotes socially progressive views, including feminism, civil rights, and multiculturalism.[1][2][3] The accusation that somebody is an SJW carries implications that they are pursuing personal validation rather than any deep-seated conviction, and engaging in disingenuous arguments.[3][4]

The phrase originated in the late 20th century as a neutral or positive term for people engaged in social justice activism.[1] In 2011, when the term first appeared on Twitter, it changed from a primarily positive term to an overwhelmingly negative one.[1] During the Gamergate controversy, the negative connotation gained increased usage over-shadowing its earlier origin.[1][2]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

The phrase originated in the late 20th century as a neutral or positive term for people engaged in social justice activism.[1] In 2011, when the term first appeared on Twitter, it changed from a primarily positive term to an overwhelmingly negative one.[1] During the Gamergate controversy, the negative connotation gained increased usage over-shadowing its earlier origin.[1][2]

And that is a good example of how things morph on the Internet, sometimes incredibly quickly--as I think was the case with OKBoomer. And if one doesn't stay current (and that is damned difficult) it is easy to use a phrase one way in meaning and have it taken a totally different way and have both people be right, sort of. I had the same thing happen with my use of "special snowflake" which was never really a positive term, but it too has morphed into a meaning I did not know. I had to be lectured, but not mansplained, on the new meaning.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Huh. This whole time I thought it was just another way of calling someone a ‘snowflake’

God. I hate that term. But that’s a discussion for another day. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But aren't all snowflakes special?  I thought the term originated from the fact that snowflakes are unique never exactly the same as any other snowflake.  Then I guess the right decided that the left were too attached to the idea that each individual is unique and that generalizing the right way was better.  But that's my own very reductionist generalization and so of course it's prolly wrong.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think "snowflake" broke down from "special snowflake" and they originally meant the same thing, as in: A person who is easily offended and has a feeling of entitlement. Special Snowflakes/Snowflakes gasp in horror at opinions they don't like, and they feel they have to be protected from anything distasteful. Then around 2016 or so (?) it got politized by the right to deride anyone to the left of them. And like most things political it got nastier from there.

I did read where snowflake originally was a positive term, and related to kids in particular that had special needs. So, along the lines of every snowflake is special.

And now there is the derisive, generational slur of "Generation Snowflake" which means people who came of age in 2010 (?) so... Milennials. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, I think a lot of it just depends on the person. Some people get wiser and better with time, and some get worse. Sometimes a bright, youthful outlook is what does it, and sometimes a more experienced one. It's almost as if we should all be listening to each other. Nobody's ever going to be entirely right or wrong based on their age alone. It's probably fair to say that if you denigrate someone for their age, be they younger or older than you, they're likely to do the same in return. Live by the sword and all that. 

There used to be a men's magazine over here who had an agony uncle (they probably used a different term) whose main qualification for the role was that he was 100 years old. Young and relatively young men wrote to him in droves for his advice. Which was fantastic. 

And my preschooler son sometimes comes out with lines that are wiser and more profound than anything I've ever said in my life. You may not think that's very difficult, and you may be right, but I have about 30 years on him. 

And yes, I agree that the whole generations thing is largely bollocks. 

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Seicher Rae said:

Gensplaining goes both ways. Millennials, Xenials, Gen X, Boomers, are all guilty of having 'splained. (And women can mansplain :) )

as a internets older person might say: kk pups

 

jejejejje 😸

 

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
55 minutes ago, Amina Sopwith said:

There used to be a men's magazine over here who had an agony uncle (they probably used a different term) whose main qualification for the role was that he was 100 years old. Young and relatively young men wrote to him in droves for his advice. Which was fantastic. 

That reminds me of something that has been happening for the past couple of years. This is from Salt Lake City (a long, long way from where I live), but there are some of these starting to spring up all over and I believe my city's farmer's market now has a group. :)

ETA: And NO, I'm not on the panel! ffs  I'm not a coot yet. Maybe an old fart, but not a coot.

 

 

Edited by Seicher Rae
  • Like 2
  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

Taking umbrage at a phrase like "Okay, Boomer," sounds more like being offended at the possibility that you could be considered wrong. Experience isn't always a good teacher; in fact sometimes it can lead you astray because you don't do the work necessary to make sure you're correct because you're relying on experience that may not be as valuable as you think it is.

However, as far as umbrage goes for this topic the bar has been set extremely high, thanks to a college professor who said that "Boomer" was a slur as bad as the "n word" despite his working at the university where the fight song is titled "Boomer Sooner."

Um, no, that's not quite it, Theresa.  I take umbrage at a reply of "OK Boomer" not because it says I might be wrong but because it says "You are wrong simply because of who you are; I don't even need to consider or debate your point of view."

And, I happen to be a graduate of that university too.  The "Boomer" in the fight song is not a "baby boomer".  According to William Savage, " In the late 1870s, Boomers, notably led by David L. Payne until his death in 1884, were so named because they were “booming,” or making considerable noise, about opening Indian Territory to Anglo settlement. Payne led groups of Boomers – would-be settlers in search of a homestead – into Indian Territory where they camped until they were seen, reported, and arrested for the crime of trespass upon Indian land."

So, this type of "boomer" wasn't a member of the Baby Boom generation, but a type of criminal.  So, too, were the Sooners.  Sooners were people who sneaked into the Indian territory that was eventually to become Oklahoma in advance of the official land rush, in order to obtain the best land.

It's a bit mystifying why Oklahomans are proud to be called "Sooners" or "Boomers" but bridle at being called "Okies".  Nevertheless, I'm glad to have lived in that state for a number of years, made friends with many fine people there, and I got a degree out of it, too.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Seicher Rae said:

That reminds me of something that has been happening for the past couple of years. This is from Salt Lake City (a long, long way from where I live), but there are some of these starting to spring up all over and I believe my city's farmer's market now has a group

This was GREAT, Seicher!

And a super counter-example to polarizing, dismissive put-downs.  It appears that we CAN communicate across the generation gap.

Thank you.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 90 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...