> I refuse to see the term as a neutral-term applied equally to both genders for three reasons. One being the term itself is gender-loaded (includes "man" in it) [...]

I agree here. In my mind there is no question that the 'mansplainer' is a man and the 'mansplainee' is almost certainly a woman.

I read the first bit of the Wikipedia article, seems like one of those cases where Wikipedia is going out of its way to be 'neutral' on a one sided subject.

It is clearly a gendered term, not universal.