How to deal with a mansplainer starring Hillary Clinton in gifs

Sometimes you don’t realize how #bawse somebody is, until you make it into a gif.

So after Secretary of State Hillary Clinton smacked down the Senate and the House yesterday, it occurred to me that what made it magical is that it is an instructional video on how to deal with a mansplainer. And of course, any good tutorial needs to be broken down into gifs for emphasis.

Ladies and gentlemen, “How to deal with a mansplainer starring Hillary Clinton.”

Step 1: Raise your hands up like, “Whoa you guys you can’t be serious.”

Step 2: Make sure to emphasize your points by counting with your hands so that simple tea party Senator mansplainer understands.  Mansplainers like visuals.

Step 3: No, seriously. Fuck this guy.

Step 4: Raise your hands up like, “What’s your point?” and clown the mansplainer for not having an actual relevant point.

Step 5: When Senator John McCain calls you combative and proceeds to rant endlessly, nod with a sly smile.

Step 6: Take the time McCain spends ranting to reorganize the pages in your binder.

Step 7: Rearrange all of the random crap on your desk.  You can never be too organized when getting grilled by angry white dudes.

Step 8: When the rant continues on and on look at the mansplainer with a *blank stare* and put your hand on your chin like, “Are you still talking?”

Step 9: Go home and do this.

and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

22 Comments

  1. Posted January 24, 2013 at 10:14 am | Permalink

    Genius, both Hillary and Zerlina.

    • Posted January 25, 2013 at 4:37 pm | Permalink

      “Testicles are Ovaries that can’t take the Heat”- Eileen Davis
      This article breaks it down

  2. Posted January 24, 2013 at 4:30 pm | Permalink

    love it! ty! gotta have a sense of humor dealing with the AWM

  3. Posted January 24, 2013 at 5:20 pm | Permalink

    Isn’t she wearing Tippi Hedren’s green dress from The Birds?

    If yes – how evocative!

  4. Posted January 25, 2013 at 2:39 am | Permalink

    I know queer persons who wish they could use queer/genderless pronouns because of the way most of our languages are binary and divisive with regard to gender. I can’t fathom why feminists, or anyone who cares about issues of gender equality, would intentionally use words that are sexist and could elicit a defensive reaction from those they most wish would learn to be more open-minded.

    Other than that, nice Hillary GIFs.

    • Posted January 25, 2013 at 4:01 pm | Permalink

      While I definitely see your point, I think the whole point of using the term “mansplainer” is to underline that certain subset of individuals (and while of course some could be women, let’s face it, most of them are men) who talk down to women and treat them like second class citizens.

  5. Posted January 25, 2013 at 9:50 am | Permalink

    This is pure heaven.

    We sometimes need to spell it out with satirical commentary… sadly, too many folks have forgotten what an artform satire truly is, especially in such a volatile political climate.

    Bravo!

  6. Posted January 25, 2013 at 3:40 pm | Permalink

    I’m a strong liberal who respects Hillary. But Liberals are barking up the wrong tree here.

    In this particular instance, Hillary AVOIDED Ron Johnson’s direct question about “a simple phone call,” and in the best universal tradition of political-speak digressed all over the place into obfuscation, testily invoking everything but the kitchen sink. I do think Obama, with the election coming, wanted to make Benghazi look like a random attack incited by the preacher’s video, rather than a failure of his administration to protect the embassy and an admission that Al Quaeda terrorists were not as decimated as he had hoped.

    “Why is this still relevant?” asked Hillary. Answer: Because truth is always better than lies. This performance may come back to bite her if she runs for President. I wish that were not so. She was in a nearly impossible position, admitting to personal responsibility but unwilling to tell the full impolitic truth. Life is messy, but I’ll still strongly choose the Democrats, warts and all…”

    • Posted January 27, 2013 at 2:13 am | Permalink

      How is it Liberals (why the capital, Robert?) who are barking up the wrong tree?
      The Republicans have been trying to manufacture a scandal out of nothing.
      Susan Rice followed orders and said what she was told to say. How is anything to do with Benghazi her fault? Moreover, how is it directly Secretary Clinton’s fault? She made a good point about all those cables coming with her name on them.
      Does anyone seriously believe the Secretary of State reads every single cable that comes through?
      The State Department is a hierarchy, and I am certain that cables regarding security go through a layer or two before they get to the Secretary. They are the ones responsible for ignoring requests to increase security, if anyone is. (And it just so happens two people resigned as a result of the investigation. I presume they were in that layer that filters cables to the Secretary.)

      As for the truth. Anyone who has ever run to the backyard upon hearing siblings fight knows the truth is hard enough to establish with kids. Who started it is often unknowable even with little brats.
      And you expect the Secretary of State to tell you the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth in the aftermath of an organized attack on a consulate?
      Are you serious? Or just a troll?
      A simple phone call? To whom, exactly? Oh, I see what you mean. A simple phone call to the people at the embassy who are probably running around dealing with the aftermath of the attack, with a likely loss of comms with the consulate, trying themselves to figure out what happened, and preparing for a follow-up attack on the embassy.
      Sure, a phone call would have cleared everything right up. Uh-huh.

      As for this so-called failure of the administration to protect the consulate, get a grip, man. No consulate or embassy is ever going to be absolutely secure, unless you turn it into a fortress. (In fact, nearly every American embassy I’ve ever seen in person is in fact a fortress.)
      They did what they could at the consulate, they sent their requests up the chain of command, and unfortunately they got attacked before they got more resources.
      It’s tragic and terrible and everyone there knew exactly what risks they were taking.
      The ambassador in place could have closed that consulate in Benghazi. He chose not to, and we must assume he was not totally stupid and understood the vulnerability. Presumably he thought his diplomatic mission was better served by keeping it open in spite of the risk.
      There’s no scandal here, no controversy, no surprises. The bad guys got a sucker punch in. It happens.

    • Posted January 27, 2013 at 2:45 pm | Permalink

      Robert,

      Did you watch the whole testimony? Because, while, at one point, she did ask ‘why is this still relevant,’ it wasn’t about the simple phone call comment, it was about the continued implication that, somehow the State Department was ‘covering something up.’

      With regards to the telephone call question, she stated that her first priority was getting medical care to the people involved in the attack and that, as soon as that was accomplished, the FBI began their investigation, in which she did not want to interfere. It would have been a breach of protocol and it could have been taken as more ‘evidence’ of a ‘cover up’ if she had contacted these individuals while the FBI and ARB investigations were still ongoing. Didn’t look like a ‘dodge’ to me.

      She finally lost her patience after he had repeatedly asked about why the State Department ‘mislead the public’ because she lost 4 of her colleagues and he’s turning it into a nonsensical talking point. She answered his question three times before she stated that ‘it’s less important today’ to find out ‘why these militants did it’ than to ‘bring them to justice.’ Are you saying that’s a dodge or a lie? Because, to me, it looks like a competent administrator who is totally fed up with the way that these hearings were being used to generate political talking points rather than action items for preventing stuff like this in the future and bringing the attackers to justice.

      As much as I don’t agree with Sec of State Clinton on a lot of policy points, that made a ton of sense to me. Not to mention that it was never suggested that it was a ‘random attack’; both Clinton and Obama called it an act of terrorism the very next day, even though there was a lack of clarity over the exact sequence of events.

  7. Posted January 25, 2013 at 7:50 pm | Permalink

    Thank you for this. It really is so very well done.

  8. Posted January 27, 2013 at 9:52 am | Permalink

    Perhaps you can mansplain to it me. There was an ambassador killed in Libya as well as other people. Somebody needs to get their heads chopped off for screwing it up so badly that people were killed. What’s the mansplation for screwing up so badly? Just waving your hands around is insufficient explanation. Which part of people getting killed that you don’t understand?

    Or is just because Hillary is a woman that we get to give her a free pass? Or maybe she has a brain clot? Somewhere somebody has to be accountable for people getting killed on your watch. Or maybe just saying “I am responsible” is enough for you? Is that the mansplanation?

  9. Posted January 28, 2013 at 3:25 am | Permalink

    So I am new and read the comments policy. Hoping this will be acceptable. i don’t even like Hilary, or support any of the political parties being an Occupy Wall Street person, and i love this video. What a [seemingly?] piece of hard work. And after looking up mansplaining had a great laugh. I always wondered what to call it and how to call it out, differently than “Uhm yes, Ok …uhhuhh…yes…..hmmm…OK …Now tell me something i don’t know but might like to.” Great fun. And don’t take it so so seriously, guys, …have a laugh about it.

  10. Posted January 28, 2013 at 12:54 pm | Permalink

    Bernadene,
    This is not a laughing matter. An US ambassador was killed along with others. When was the last time that happened?

    Why did it happen? Why was nothing done to prevent it? Why was no help sent when the ambassador asked it for explicitly? Why is assuming responsibility the only thing you can do? Why can’t you tell people what will be done to prevent that from happening ever again? Shouldn’t somebody’s head roll up the ladder?

    Or is it because Hilary is there that we have to laugh about it? I am not interested in scoring political points or even bringing the attackers to justice. This is a direct attack on the US and nothing was done about it and we should just accept this because its Hilary and we don’t to upset her chances in 2016?

  11. Posted January 28, 2013 at 2:46 pm | Permalink

    rocinante3d, I understand your concern. i would NEVER laugh about the death of anyone. i am having a laugh at the whole mansplaining rant and roll and getting upset about that. Truly i am not interested in what Hillary did or did not do about what happened in Benghazi. i have had outrage fatigue about the activities of the USA overseas for most of the decades of my life. This is just chickens coming home to roost in my world. What i don’t understand is why most feminists have not had that same outrage, as i am an ardent feminist, which means i am also pro humankind…in all areas of the globe. Perhaps saying i am an Occupy person did not mean to you what i thought it might. [heavy sigh] so many pre-conceived notions of people’s beliefs and ways of being based on a small amount of information. i do it more often than i like. thank s for responding.

  12. Posted January 28, 2013 at 2:58 pm | Permalink

    My favorite Hillary moment is when she told off that mansplainer Saddam and said Iraq had ties to al-Qaeda and then a million people died.

    • Posted January 28, 2013 at 7:08 pm | Permalink

      ?

      • Posted January 29, 2013 at 12:58 pm | Permalink

        In other words, she’s just as much a hawk as any Republican and a fair amount of Democrats. When she was a Senator, she went along with all the horse puckey being dished out to lead us to war.

  13. Posted January 28, 2013 at 9:15 pm | Permalink

    My favorite Hilary moment is when she invested $1,000 in cattle futures which magically turned into $100K.

  14. Posted January 30, 2013 at 7:07 pm | Permalink

    First off, I think Hillary did a fantastic job.

    I just would like to get some feedback on an idea though. Some context: I really dislike the verb “to bitch”. I feel it identifies annoying complainy behavior as a characteristically female thing, which is unfair, and is often used to undermine or dismiss the opinions of women rather than engage with them.

    I have to say, I dislike this neologism “to mansplain” for the same reason. I don’t deny that people do sometimes explain (or “explain”) things in patronizing ways, and I don’t deny that it’s something men do more than women, but I just think, in the interests of kind of taking a step towards mutual understanding, we should limit our use of this kind of negative, implicitly gendered slang. Talking about an certain behavior as being an instance of “mansplaining” or “bitching” (or worse, “PMSing”) makes it harder to see people as individuals and easier to see them as exemplifying the supposed flaws or shortcomings of their sex.

    I’d be interested to hear people’s thoughts. Cheers!

  15. Posted February 7, 2013 at 7:17 am | Permalink

    I agree wholeheartedly with Charles. Please don’t think because I’m a man in a discussion I’m inherantly being condescending or “mansplaining” something. I just like discussing. Sometimes (I hope) I’m right, sometimes (I know) I’m wrong, but it’s very rarely with malice. My Mom is the strongest lady I know after all, I wouldn’t purposely talk down to another gender because I’m a guy. I don’t know if the term mansplaining is overly conducive to gender equality in the same fashion as terms dismissive to other genders. Just my thoughts. As for Hillary, I haven’t been a huge fan of American foreign policy in the past four years, and the Benghazi scandal is just another reason why. Americans were killed, and we deserve answers. It’s not funny, it’s sad and disappointing. Yes Ambassador Stevens and his brave counterparts knew risks were involved, but the failure of our State Department to provide adequate security seems grossly negligent in my humble opinion.

Feministing In Your Inbox

Sign up for our Newsletter to stay in touch with Feministing
and receive regular updates and exclusive content.

244 queries. 0.510 seconds