You're viewing a single thread.
Why not tell him? Who wouldn't love that?
Someone who makes assumptions about women and confidently tells them how they should be doing the things they are already doing.
Just sounds to me like he's passionate about something. I guess he could be an ass, but to jump to that conclusion from just "you should train high milage" and then providing analysis is really a bit much.
My dad would be that guy, but he's a running coach and was a marathon runner for like 50 years, so he loves talking about it.
There definitely wouldn't be any thought of, "you're a woman so you need advice," since he'd do the same thing to a man.
In fact, if we actually accept this completely unbelievable story, the fact that he's pulling stats from Women runners shows he's not being sexist.
Your dad sounds like an asshole and id avoid bringing up running. I'd enjoy talking about it. But I wouldn't want a teaching lesson from someone who has, as far as I know, no credentials or authority on the topic because, if we assume it's like the post, none were given. Plus I'd rather they find out my level of knowledge before they assume I know nothing. Basic respect. Your dad has none. And you don't either.
Edit: most running plans aren't gendered so he may not even know it's from a woman. Many plans get shared, gasp, through social media and credit can be lost. You're actually fucking awful at drawing logical conclusions. Take a college course in logic once you reach there as I can't imagine you're that old or experienced with your approach to communications.
Probably more along the lines of "I found this amazing program, check this out"
Not really. Unsolicited advice can be very condescending. You're telling them that info because you don't believe they know it. Just ask them how familiar they are on the topic if it's truly from a place of passion. Cause passionate or not, if they already know the info, it's annoying to listen to someone just spout about something you already know. And it's worse if they just assumed you didn't know.
Edit: also, I'd take her opinion on the situation over yours any day. She decided that it would have someone not gone over well for the guy, so I'd imagine she had a reason. You're the one assuming she acted without reason which is truly odd.
So, tell them about yourself. They're a stranger, they're going to get a lot of assumptions wrong, so what? Conversations can't begin without making some assumptions. It's only a problem when they start to ignore what you say.
She was under the impression he wouldn't take it well. Why would you know the situation better than her?
There may well be other context not communicated in the post that changes things. All I'm saying, is that based off this, it just sounds like he's passionate about something and maybe she missed out on a good conversation. Of course, I could be wrong and more context may change things.
You do have context. Hers. But for some reason you aren't taking her context into account. WEIRD
The context we have: "On my flight was talking to a guy next to me & it came up that I run. He starts telling me how I need to train high mileage & pulls up an analysis he'd made of a pro runner's training on his phone. The pro runner was me. It was my training."
I don't see how I haven't taken all that into account. No doubt context was left out of that post. I'm not taking that into account because I don't know it. If I did, my opinion would probably be different.
I don't see why I'm not allowed to think it would have been better for her to tell him.
You didn't take into account that she was there and chose how to respond. She has more context than you. But you still don't see that. I honestly don't know how else to spell it out. You're saying her perspective of an event that she was present for is incorrect and your perspective of an event that you weren't there for is more correct.
You're questioning her judgement when there's literally no reason to. And then you're defending that. So why should your judgement be above questioning but not hers?
My judgement isn't above question. I don't know why you think that I think it is.
You’re saying her perspective of an event that she was present for is incorrect and your perspective of an event that you weren’t there for is more correct.
I never said that. I don't believe that.
I think that, given the context provided, he was excited about a topic he was passionate about, nothing more. If there's more context, I may well be wrong. But we don't have that and in the absence of more information, my opinion is my opinion.
I have offered an alternative that believe is more compelling. I might be wrong, but given the information provided, I think my reasons are good.
She had more context, and she might be right. But that hasn't been provided to us, so I can't respond to any of that.
BECAUSE MEN ARE BAD OF COURSE
I take it you're not a woman or afab presenting then? Go ask a woman you trust to tell you what it means when a man starts explaining her hobbies to her as if she doesn't understand them.
Man, guys do this to everyone because they care about what they do. I've had guys do it to me and I love it because we can have a passionate conversation then.
Look, if after she revealed who she was he dismissed her, then yeah, he's an ass and the conversation is a waste of time. But, I know a lot of guys who would do exactly this and then be really excited to talk to her and learn about her experiences, myself included.
No, there are guys who absolutely talk to women as if they know nothing about the topic no matter what the woman stated before hand. I've seen guys do that to my coworker who's been a developer for years and if they have to tell her some sort of critique on her code, they'll explain from like a intro comp sci point and detail everything and then finally just mention their critique at the end. All that was needed was the criticism itself, not the full history of programming. When I get a critique, it's just "hey, try XYZ because of ABC."
Happens at the gym too. Hell, I've literally been next to a woman who brings up a topic they like that the other guy likes and then they just start talking to me and I didn't even mention I enjoy the topic.
Just because you don't do it, don't pretend it doesn't happen. Women react the ways they do because of experience. Also, I highly doubt you've seen guys talk to someone interested in the same topic in the same way as if the other person knows nothing. It's disrespectful regardless of gender.
I've seen it happen.
Edit: let's keep in mind, this whole time you're correcting a woman on a topic that you've yet to show any experience in, plus weren't even present for and all you have is her perspective, and you still said it's wrong.
Of course it happens. I never said it doesn't. I said it sounds to me like he's just passionate about something in this case. I even said if he ignores her expertise after he finds out who she is, then he's an ass and ignore him.
let’s keep in mind, this whole time you’re correcting a woman on a topic that you’ve yet to show any experience in, plus weren’t even present for and all you have is her perspective, and you still said it’s wrong.
Dude, it's a conversation with a stranger. Why do you act like I've never had any experience talking with a stranger?
You're doubling down on correcting her and saying her interpretation is worse than yours. And I need to point out again, you weren't there and she was. Yet you still are committed to saying your interpretation is better. Wow. Just wow, buddy.
So, we aren't ever allowed to suggest that another course of action was better if we weren't there? Really?
MEN BAD MEN BAD MAN BAD MAN BAG
This doesn't sound like a mansplain scenario to me, I think the guy was just happy to talk running (and also might not exist). So if a woman says they run I should say "well I'm sure you know everything there is to know about that. No need for further discussion." ? Sounds fucking dull.
This thread is full of mountains of projection trying to explain why it’s fine and probably great that the guy in the OP did this.
But of course only one person involved in the whole post was actually there: the woman who made the tweet. Do you think that tweet is coming from someone who had to deal with a friendly-but-passionate dude explaining training techniques?
Could be, but the language of her tweet suggests annoyance.
Also your suggested response is equally obnoxious. It’s pretty simple: if she says she runs you ask more about it—“oh what kind of running do you do?”
What you definitely do not say is “you should be doing X” without asking what kind of training they already do. Seems obvious.
You can ask about experiences before launching into a 3-year training regimen, you know.
I mean, if the recommendations were prompted, sure. But if he just starts telling her what she should be doing without prompting, its that whole "mansplaining" thing I heard about.
Admittedly we only have her context, he could have just been passionately recounting his own routines and she may have misinterpreted it, or exaggerated for effect and humor.
Permanently Deleted
Running plans are not gendered for the most part. It's possible some exist, but they are not common, especially amongst enthusiasts as opposed to elite athletes.
Any person unsure about their safety sitting next to a stranger with no options for escape. I wouldn't feel particularly comfortable in such a situation.
UPDATE: I don't understand the downvotes. I have read many comments saying similar things in response to the story: give this man the benefit of the doubt, not every behavior is mansplaining, you're all judgmental and jumping to harsh conclusions, and so on.
I used to be in that chorus until my wife explained to me one thing: when the cost of failure is high enough, constant vigilance and suspicion is necessary for protection and maybe even survival. And I could either accept that or not.
It felt grim and I felt disappointed by the whole conundrum, but I had to accept it as it is. From there, my view of these kinds of situations changed.
Because it isn't true. It's pretty much statistically impossible.
Statistically improbable