[Traditional Enneagram] 6w5 and 'Mansplaining'

[Kingu Kurimuzon]

Data does it a lot on Star Trek TNG, albeit in a very innocent and childlike manner. Unless I'm misunderstanding the term.

 

[five sounds]

I'm gonna get back to this one because I think you're saying valuable things and i have some questions

That's kind of my thinking



Communication is always a two way street. I am probably guilty of this leturuing on occasion. If I feel I have something important to say, I can go on about it. It doesn't matter if it is a male or female. It's that passion that drives you to keep on talking. As to 6s, they can be a bit of contrarians. Is it something to do with them disagreeing on a point or position you are making? Is part of it that it's in front of others and affects their perceptions? I'm just trying to understand.

I think in these types of situations, it's a person pushing your specific buttons. There was a book I read - "Thank You For Being Such a Pain". It talked about how God is going to put these people in your life that you will have difficulty with and if that doesn't work, you'll be thrown a harder example, then a harder one, till you figure it out. It was a pretty insightful book.

Why does it make a difference if it is a peer? What if it was a subordinate? A boss? A person you just met? Why does it matter who the message comes from? The reason I ask is that I'm of the mind that I'll listen to what anyone says and consider it. I won't discount it because who they are or how they communicate. I might think they are an ass or a fool but if they have something worthwile to say then i'll listen. All that matters is the idea. An idea from a 5 year old can be 10x better than an idea of a 40 year old. My 5 year old once instructed me on how to pack my suitcase which I could't get stuff to fit. I was like no - i travel for a living and know how to do this but thank you. She did it anyway and fixed it in 30 seconds. Then I was like, "how did you do that!!". So yeah, important ideas and points can come from anywhere.

If don't like being lectured to it tends to be because I get bored or don't have time. Iin verbal conversations, I tend to be about the collaboration and dialogue. I know an INTJ Enneagram 5 who does this formal lecturing thing and I have the hardest time listening to him. He's brilliant. It's just his form of communication is very ineffective with me. I will tend to interrupt him but that just breaks up the monologue into smaller parts. Most of the time this technique works with others.

 

[the state i am in]

i see it, in best case, as coming from a place of really wanting to contribute and, at the same time, not really trusting yourself to listen to others and still be able to do so.

i do think e5s and maybe e8s can be pretty bad at it. with e5s tho, it can be more about just being so attached to your ideas and then being a bit awkward in general interactively. one of my intp e5 friends used to frequently start sentences, after someone had finished talking, with "Actually, ____." it was painful to watch. it's a weird thing when you spend so much of your life organizing your assumptions, and then e7s just fucking race past you, and you're like, wait a second, do you even test this at all? and they're just like, um, i let LIFE test it. i can't even begin, in comparison, to explain how much energy that frees up... and how much more NOW there is.

i think, too, some people who just really identify with their writing and don't have an audience sometimes kind of push other people to listen to them. it's kind of like the opposite orientation of "the venters." just w extra bombast, like super annoying SUVs rolling up with ridiculous, look at me rattle the earth subs. just kind of a choice to feel strong when really you feel weak, to talk in a movie trailer guy voice, to proclaim your arrival with horns and trumpets, etc.

it does kill the aliveness of the moment. sometimes, i know, i need someone to shake me by the shoulders and say, shut up! play with me!

 

[the state i am in]

YES! So is this like impossible with people like this? The struggle is so real to me lol. I'm feeling more and more like a whiny baby in this thread, but the feeling I feel that she's talking *at* me is so real and undesirable to me.

P.s. Thank you for understanding. I am doing a terrible job of conveying my situation/feelings and you seem to have nailed it.

do you think in any way it also has to do with shifting from real experience to general knowledge?

i think keeping a footing in both aspects at the same time can be quite challenging. us J types definitely live in general knowledge space more, bc we rely on it more in a way that is less situated by interactive events and the radical uniqueness of each moment. in this way, we sometimes skip over the energy sources, go in straight lines rather than zig zagging, and don't pay as much attention to quality of experience.

i know there can also be this sense of Je's way of trying to ESTABLISH context, which can also be the opposite of inquisitive.

 

[Sinmara]

I am a 6w5 sp/sx and I am guilty of coming across as a know-it-all. It can seem like I'm assuming my audience is an idiot or I'm being a snob, but really, I have a large range of interests, and I get excited when I get to share what I know about things. The excitement can get in the way of me noticing the telltale signs that I'm making my conversation partner(s) uncomfortable.

This is how I deal with it: Before I launch into my monologue, I say to the person, "I don't know if you know anything about this, so tell me if I touch on something you know so I can skip ahead." This gives them permission to interrupt me so they don't feel I'm talking down to them or unfairly explaining things like they're 5.

The problem can be knowing when I need to say this, because conversations that happen organically can turn into a monologue without me realizing it. I try to catch myself and speak my disclaimer when I can, though.

It's equally frustrating for me when the person feels like I'm being demeaning but doesn't say anything. A simple, "Oh yeah, I know about that," when I'm touching on something they have experience with is enough to steer the monologue back into a dialogue. Polite silence causes as many problems as it avoids.

 

[five sounds]

That's kind of my thinking



Communication is always a two way street. I am probably guilty of this leturuing on occasion. If I feel I have something important to say, I can go on about it. It doesn't matter if it is a male or female. It's that passion that drives you to keep on talking. As to 6s, they can be a bit of contrarians. Is it something to do with them disagreeing on a point or position you are making? Is part of it that it's in front of others and affects their perceptions? I'm just trying to understand.

I think in these types of situations, it's a person pushing your specific buttons. There was a book I read - "Thank You For Being Such a Pain". It talked about how God is going to put these people in your life that you will have difficulty with and if that doesn't work, you'll be thrown a harder example, then a harder one, till you figure it out. It was a pretty insightful book.

Why does it make a difference if it is a peer? What if it was a subordinate? A boss? A person you just met? Why does it matter who the message comes from? The reason I ask is that I'm of the mind that I'll listen to what anyone says and consider it. I won't discount it because who they are or how they communicate. I might think they are an ass or a fool but if they have something worthwile to say then i'll listen. All that matters is the idea. An idea from a 5 year old can be 10x better than an idea of a 40 year old. My 5 year old once instructed me on how to pack my suitcase which I could't get stuff to fit. I was like no - i travel for a living and know how to do this but thank you. She did it anyway and fixed it in 30 seconds. Then I was like, "how did you do that!!". So yeah, important ideas and points can come from anywhere.

If don't like being lectured to it tends to be because I get bored or don't have time. In verbal conversations, I tend to be about the collaboration and dialogue. I know an INTJ Enneagram 5 who does this formal lecturing thing and I have the hardest time listening to him. He's brilliant. It's just his form of communication is very ineffective with me. I will tend to interrupt him but that just breaks up the monologue into smaller parts. Most of the time this technique works with others.

ok so here's what i was thinking about after i read your post. i was watching jeapordy on tv and getting like angry at all the commercials (stupid corporate con artists making flimsy emotional manipulations that are so transparent and apparently work and make billions of dollars for everyone involved - it's depressing) and at the contestants on the show (this guy is a smarmy know-it-all white boy from a wealthy family who could afford this great education and is being a dick about his intelligence and trying to fake humility when he remembers to), etc.

so i don't normally watch tv, but after my like 20th negative thought in a row i was just like, WHOA! what's wrong with me that i'm getting so bothered and feeling so much hate in my heart toward others? then i thought about your response here, and was like, hmm does this apply? like what kind of shift within myself do i need to make not to care if the commercial is successfully manipulating millions of apparently-too-brainwashed-to-see-outside-of-it people, or to not be bothered by someone's priviledged, prideful display, or not be bothered by someone assuming i don't know something which i understand as being basic and simple...

so those are like the things that are put in my life that you're talking about, right? how do you flip to the other side? how do i look at a commercial and say "hey this might be a great fucking product that will be a good use of my resources and assist me in life!" or "hey this person has a lot of good things to say and it doesn't bother me at all that they didn't think i knew our president's name"?

i hope i'm making enough sense to you here. i might not be. but that adventure in TV was what made me really assess what you had said to me, and i just wonder what the source of that anger is and how or if i should be concerned with gaining a more enlightened perspective on those things.

 

[five sounds]

do you think in any way it also has to do with shifting from real experience to general knowledge?

i think keeping a footing in both aspects at the same time can be quite challenging. us J types definitely live in general knowledge space more, bc we rely on it more in a way that is less situated by interactive events and the radical uniqueness of each moment. in this way, we sometimes skip over the energy sources, go in straight lines rather than zig zagging, and don't pay as much attention to quality of experience.

i know there can also be this sense of Je's way of trying to ESTABLISH context, which can also be the opposite of inquisitive.

well i think it definitely can have to do with concrete versus abstract subject matter for sure. if someone was lecturing me on something super spacey, i'd probably just sit there wide-eyed and have a lot less of a hard time with taking it. even if i couldn't interrupt (which would still bother me) and even if they assumed i didn't know something i perceived to be a little offensive to assume that about (which would also still bother me), i don't think i'd be making this thread.

maybe that's the thing right there. the source of sensitivity. the subject matter is not in my comfort zone. it's about things, facts, concrete whatevers, and i know that's not my area of expertise and definitely not my area of greatest interest. so i get EXTRA offended and put out feeling because i'm already feeling like a rookie. and also like i'm not able to flex my strength which makes me fear being viewed as not possessing any.

EDIT: ok! yeah i need this one final point to tie it in i think. so it's not the subject matter necessarily, but the plane on which we're discussing it. i feel like i have abstract knowledge that isn't recognized and just because i don't know the facts, doesn't mean i don't know *about* it. but i'll be damned if i can convey that to someone, espeically if they're not native to intuitive language. and when i try to, it comes off as someone speaking in meaningless generalizations that only futher prove that they don't know their shit and also imply that they're trying to pretend that they do.

 

[the state i am in]

well i think it definitely can have to do with concrete versus abstract subject matter for sure. if someone was lecturing me on something super spacey, i'd probably just sit there wide-eyed and have a lot less of a hard time with taking it. even if i couldn't interrupt (which would still bother me) and even if they assumed i didn't know something i perceived to be a little offensive to assume that about (which would also still bother me), i don't think i'd be making this thread.

maybe that's the thing right there. the source of sensitivity. the subject matter is not in my comfort zone. it's about things, facts, concrete whatevers, and i know that's not my area of expertise and definitely not my area of greatest interest. so i get EXTRA offended and put out feeling because i'm already feeling like a rookie. and also like i'm not able to flex my strength which makes me fear being viewed as not possessing any.

i love the assuming about the assuming thing. just last week, i ran into an enfp i know from school, and watching us each scratch our heads as if we were the hobbes to our own calvins, while also interacting with each other, was REALLY ridiculous. a perfect self-consciousness recital.

EDIT: ok! yeah i need this one final point to tie it in i think. so it's not the subject matter necessarily, but the plane on which we're discussing it. i feel like i have abstract knowledge that isn't recognized and just because i don't know the facts, doesn't mean i don't know *about* it. but i'll be damned if i can convey that to someone, espeically if they're not native to intuitive language. and when i try to, it comes off as someone speaking in meaningless generalizations that only futher prove that they don't know their shit and also imply that they're trying to pretend that they do.

so some kind of inner e1 implied self-criticism? maybe charged with some resentment for not having others appreciate and understand native N? for feeling like your voice has been squashed?

i ask those bc that's what comes up for me when i relate to your post, which i do love for how exactly i know and fucking HATE that feeling. when i'm spitting out landmines for myself to avoid walking on, and it's making me dance like a puppet with the saloon pistols going off under my feet.

with that said, w the mansplaining, if its semantic instead of episodic, experiential, interactive, i was wondering if there's a j quality too it. bc to me, sometimes it shifts to this kind of Act of Establishing, which is kind of an efficiency move (except when it's clearly not) and also sometimes just a kind of personal attachment to the context i am committed to. like, i have worked to boil it down, and now you want a fucking omelet? with that said, with other N types, being interrupted with a related, searching question actually feels most lucrative. like i must have just sunk your battleship.

 

[Eluded_One]

oh, i get what "mansplaining" is now.

You mean it never had anything to do with gender in the first place?

 

[Thalassa]

I do this too sometimes and I'm a 6w7. My mother used to call me "walking encyclopedia"...it comes often from being around ignorant people who didn't have a clue what you were talking about at a young age, in my case. I remember experiencing a great deal of frustration with a lot of people except for my closest friends and a couple of family members until I discovered the Internet. It was only after going on line that I realized I wasn't alone. Then I realized I wasn't unique. Then eventually there were as many ignorant people on the Internet as in real life, and so I came full circle. Also my grandfather was condescending and easily annoyed by people (likely a 6w5 ISTJ SP/SX and phobic rather than CP).

Another thing is that I've repeatedly been encouraged or applauded by family or roommates for my ability to handle bullshit or cut the crap, when other people are afraid to. It does NOT mean that I think I know everything (I'm terrible at math, physics, chemistry. ..I'm mystified by people who can fix machines and build bridges...even in areas of interest, like ecology, I defer to environmental scientists over myself)...but yeah I'm real "explainy."

 

[á´…eparted]

Another thing is that I've repeatedly been encouraged or applauded by family or roommates for my ability to handle bullshit or cut the crap, when other people are afraid to. It does NOT mean that I think I know everything (I'm terrible at math, physics, chemistry. ..I'm mystified by people who can fix machines and build bridges...even in areas of interest, like ecology, I defer to environmental scientists over myself)...but yeah I'm real "explainy."

I'm no 6, but this definitely describes me. It's interesting how the same sort of disposition can emerge for completely different reasons.

When I was younger in particular, I was often called a "know it all" because I would frequently give extra details about a topic, and in particular correct people who were factually wrong. It wasn't until I was around 18 that this was even brought to my attention, and then I began to notice people having a problem with it. It wasn't born from not feeling understood, or seeing everyone as an opposition to fight against, but merely things were wrong, and it was wrong of me to withhold corrections. With time I've learned to be mindful that this can upset people or make them feel belittled/minimized, as such I don't always act off the impulse.

The whole reason I began to emass information was purely because I was curious, and it often could have a niche utility that others frequently didn't have. Thus, I'd be useful when these situations came up and would't be "replaced" by someone with the same knowledge.

 

[Thalassa]

You mean it never had anything to do with gender in the first place?

Ehhh...No, I'm pretty sure it is more traditionally associated with men. In fact I wonder if women have adapted to mansplaining to avoid being cut off, talked over or laughed at in circles of men in environments like school, church, sports, or because the way jackasses from Reddit and 4Chan act on the rest of world wide web.I majored in literature and minored in language, and I think it helped me to be able to shift my "tone" online eventually to match the most obnoxious of mansplainers on forums. I was a lot nicer ten years ago.

 

[Coriolis]

I just smile, interrupt, redirect the conversation to the parts where I want more explanation with questions.

I do something similar. I will interrupt and say something like, "I've read about that. I know [X, Y, Z] about this topic, but my understanding ends [here]. Could you explain that part for me?" Interrupting isn't the best, I'm sure, but I try to turn it around quickly by expressing genuine interest in being educated on the part of the topic I don't know. I will repeat this tactic if needed as the conversation progresses. And I do make it a conversation, as it is usually necessary to interject with other questions to get an adequate explanation.

I don't think it's related to 5 core or 5 wing.

The whole core of 5-ness revolves around avarice, which can manifest as a reluctance to engage with others for fear of depletion of resources. I have some 5-ness in me, and I don't steamroll people with info or talk down to them, at least not IRL. Ironically, I've observed a 7 I know do something like this, which makes way more sense if we wanna attribute this to type.

Well, 5's are known for being rather pedantic, once we get onto a topic that interests us and we know alot about.

It's equally frustrating for me when the person feels like I'm being demeaning but doesn't say anything. A simple, "Oh yeah, I know about that," when I'm touching on something they have experience with is enough to steer the monologue back into a dialogue. Polite silence causes as many problems as it avoids.

Exactly, as I mentioned above. I still can't wrap my head around why people won't speak up when something is bothering them, especially something as simple as this.

so i don't normally watch tv, but after my like 20th negative thought in a row i was just like, WHOA! what's wrong with me that i'm getting so bothered and feeling so much hate in my heart toward others? then i thought about your response here, and was like, hmm does this apply? like what kind of shift within myself do i need to make not to care if the commercial is successfully manipulating millions of apparently-too-brainwashed-to-see-outside-of-it people, or to not be bothered by someone's priviledged, prideful display, or not be bothered by someone assuming i don't know something which i understand as being basic and simple...

Probably the same kind of shift needed to not care that thousands of innocent people are getting killed in Syria, or folks in the neighboring state don't even have safe drinking water, or [whatever problem in society you usually care about but are now trying not to care about].

Don't stop caring. Don't let the emotions of caring wreak havoc on you, but apathy and numbness are not the answer.

 

[Elfboy]

am I the only one who hates the word "mansplaining"?

 

[SearchingforPeace]

am I the only one who hates the word "mansplaining"?

Nope. It is sexist, but hey, who cares about how the matriarchy punishes, demeans, and shames men, right?;

 

[Kingu Kurimuzon]

Nope. It is sexist, but hey, who cares about how the matriarchy punishes, demeans, and shames men, right?;

My problem with that word is that it describes a condescending way of talking down to people that I've seen exhibited by douchebags of both sexes yet it creates the impression that this type of condescension is limited to one gender. I've had a lot of bosses of either sexes talk to me in this manner, as well as a lot of cops (many of whom act like their position gives them a greater understanding of politics, law and government than anyone else). Bottom line: don't be a dick.

I've probably been guilty of it at times, and I'd like to be called on it, even if it might temporarily hurt my feelings, rather than have the behavior written off as my patriarchal instinct to correct women. I was probably worse about it when I was younger but now I've learned to admit the extent of my understanding of a topic and will usually say, "I don't know more about this, I'm probably wrong," or "please explain so I can get an understanding of the context." It's a lot easier to avoid being shamed for doing it if we don't do it to begin with.

It's best to preface all explanations with "correct me if I'm wrong..."

 

[SearchingforPeace]

My problem with that word is that it describes a condescending way of talking down to people that I've seen exhibited by douchebags of both sexes yet it creates the impression that this type of condescension is limited to one gender. I've had a lot of bosses of either sexes talk to me in this manner, as well as a lot of cops (many of whom act like their position gives them a greater understanding of politics, law and government than anyone else). Bottom line: don't be a dick.

I've probably been guilty of it at times, and I'd like to be called on it, even if it might temporarily hurt my feelings, rather than have the behavior written off as my patriarchal instinct to correct women. I was probably worse about it when I was younger but now I've learned to admit the extent of my understanding of a topic and will usually say, "I don't know more about this, I'm probably wrong," or "please explain so I can get an understanding of the context." It's a lot easier to avoid being shamed for doing it if we don't do it to begin with.

Then the term is merely a sexist reworking of condescension. As such, it is unnecessary and hateful.

Additionally, most times when people feel like they are being condescended to, it is the receiver getting butthurt because someone else knows more than them. Even the OP started this thread because a woman who knew more than her, tried to explain something to her, which OP didn't know and hadn't taken the effort to study herself, was offended, even though the OP was ignorant on the subject at hand, no matter her other general knowledge....

Now, truly arrogant assholes who condescend everyone usually have no basis for their arrogance. They usually puff themselves up because they are messed up themselves and need to bully others.... like too many police officers (not all, of course, as I have known many humble cops, too).

But if someone takes offense that someone else merely possess greater knowledge???? That isn't condescension.... that is arrogance of the ignorant, which is why they employ unnecessary and sexist terms, to soothe their ego and calm their butthurt....

 

[OrangeAppled]

I can be a know-it-all, I know.

My ISFP step-dad goes off on long monologues, but he is not relating factual stuff that is impersonal like he is teaching you. He might be telling you about something in a long-winded way, but you are welcomed to interject. My mom complains he talks "at" her, but I dont experience him that way. What I notice is she interrupts him in a dismissive, impatient manner and doesn't make an attempt to get the purpose of what he is saying, so then he gets annoyed.... He is looking to explore a concept and my mom wants to "settle" it. Seems pretty classic P vs J to me.

Whenever I start going off on some speech on something that fascinates me, I WANT someone to give me some new ideas, new facts, new perspective - SOMETHING. I am probably not going to ask "what do you think" because I am not a very formal conversationalist. I grew up in a family where if someone says something interesting that triggers a thought for you, then you are free to interject and add your thoughts. So maybe you are welcomed to pipe up and contribute with what you know? Why assume the person WANTS to talk "at" you? I mean, it is not that hard to say, "Yeah, Ive read about that also and I find it really interesting" and then add your viewpoint. The person may be excited that you have heard of it; perhaps they were only "teaching" because they wanted to share something they like but their experience has told them that others likely do not share the interest.

It is actually more of a Fi thing to mistakenly assume a person DOES know something, such as using special terminology without explaining it. At least, I saw some INFP profile mention that. Perhaps this ISFP is hyper-aware of a tendency to do that and is trying to compensate. Over-explaining can come from worrying that you are unclear, not that someone else is stupid.

 

[Santosha]

Could just be an se/ni axis thing, with this isfp.

I was talking with a bunch of other isfp's one time, and we were discussing how much data we can collect within our fields and hobbies. The thing about se is, it can take in massive amounts of data with another program running in the backdrop, that it just isn't very conscious of (tertiary ni) ... until it is.

And so, off in the distance, this thing is still analyzing perspectives, identifying patterns and parallels.

So sometimes, when we reach a 'root', all the dots connect, this understanding then exists as a type of chunk, or 'knowledge-ball.' And because isfp's have inferior Te and no real conscious access to Ti, not only is it incredibly difficult to articulate the 'all that was collected', but it also takes a seemingly impossible amount of effort to break it down in any kind of linear/sequential manner.

Now, I am socially aware enough, to understand who I can get this in-depth with, and at what times. (Few and rare).

I also know that, unless someone is very genuine in their interest of it, they are not going to be able to 'hang' or geek-out on this level.

People will talk about all kinds of things with a passing interest, their main goal and focus really being more about the interaction itself, the socialization.

Edit: Ya, the more I think about it.. the more I believe it is about having a direct (external) relationship with sensory data, then making the connection when it is moved to indirect, hazy, outside of real-time, place. And I would imagine, that this might be more visible in enneagram 6's (especially 5 wing) rather than say, a 9 or 4.. because 6w5 is heavily in the thinking triad, over-thinking usually, and then 5 collecting and 6 pushing its ideas out for validity checks.

 

[Cowardly]

am I the only one who hates the word "mansplaining"?

I hate most modern portmanteaux: I look up their meaning and try to have them pushed into the back of my mind. There they can be accessed when necessary and don't bother me as much.