A form of verbalsplaining where you declare someone's argument "bullshit" and then proceed to explain why it's bullshit, again without engaging with the actual content. Bullsplaining is sensesplaining's more aggressive cousin—it doesn't just claim the argument lacks sense; it claims the argument is intentionally deceptive, manipulative, or worthless. The bullsplainer isn't just correcting you; they're exposing you, revealing your supposed deception to anyone listening. It's the rhetorical equivalent of calling someone a liar and then giving a speech about why lying is bad, without ever addressing what they actually said. Bullsplaining is beloved by online commenters, political pundits, and anyone who's ever felt that "you're wrong" wasn't dismissive enough.

Bullsplaining Example: "He posted a thread about economic inequality with sources and data. The first response was a bullsplaining essay about why his entire argument was 'bullshit'—no engagement with his sources, no counter-evidence, just a lengthy explanation of his supposed deception. The thread died. Bullsplaining had done its job: ending discussion without requiring thought."

Bullsplaining by Abzugal February 16, 2026

Get merch

Bullsplaining

A hybrid of Bullslighting and Digitalsplaining: the perpetrator explains to the target why their own words are “bullshit,” often in a condescending, pseudo‑educational tone. Instead of simply dismissing, they offer elaborate, often incorrect “explanations” of why the target’s statements are nonsense, while ignoring the target’s actual points. Bullsplaining allows the perpetrator to appear helpful and rational while systematically undermining the target’s credibility. It is a common tactic in online debates about controversial topics.

Example: “He wrote a 500‑word thread ‘explaining’ why her lived experience of discrimination was actually a misunderstanding of statistics—bullsplaining, using faux‑expertise to erase her reality.”

Bullsplaining by Abzugal Nammugal Enkigal March 25, 2026

Get merch

Shuffle