This. What you just wrote here is what I've always understood the definition of "mansplaining" to be...which is why I have no issue with usage of the term per se.

My issue is the misappropriation of the term. Many women take your cited meaning (as quoted/excerpted, above) of "mansplaining" -- and they extrapolate it to refer to any instance where a man contradicts a woman, or even merely disagrees with a woman's position, on anything whatsoever.

That's why I find the dictionary term you'd quoted (earlier in your exchange with Jake) to be especially problematic. By emphasizing the "condescending" part -- while OMITTING the part about how the man is trying to act superior when he has less knowledge about the topic-at-hand than the woman does -- it essentially creates a scenario where any man can be accused of "mansplaining" anytime he disagrees with or contradicts a woman...simply because the woman-in-question wishes to weaponize it against him.

This would run counter to Rebecca Solnit's original definition and description of the "mansplaining" dynamic, it seems?