Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
No bio...
User ID: 297
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
2d ago
This rant comes up quite often, in literary spaces, on social media, and on reddit. On reddit, unsurprisingly, it is generally not received well (probably why your post was removed). The usual feminist response is "Boo hoo, fiction catered to men forever, now it's our turn" and/or "Boo hoo, we had to grow up reading about boys, why can't boys read about girls?"
Both of those arguments are of course very disingenuous, but you shouldn't really expect much better on reddit.
(I personally have given up trying to shop my Heinlein-inspired YA teens-in-space novel around.)
That said, I do think "Nothing to read for boys" is overstated. Even "Nothing published recently for boys" is not entirely true. But it's hard, man. You pretty much have to go looking for small, niche publishers or indies... and if your tastes don't happen to run towards Christian homeschoolers or right-wing nutjobs, the selection is even sparser.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
2d ago
Dude, any time someone says something that is (arguably) wrong, the options basically boil down to "You're mistaken" or "You're lying." But it is quite belligerent to follow "I think you're wrong about this" with "So did you misunderstand or are you a liar"? I find your argumentation in this thread very obnoxious because you're doubling down on "Well, either he's stupid and doesn't know what he's talking about or he's making the whole thing up." Neither of those framings are charitable or conducive to good discussion, and you do not seem to actually be interested in fostering good discussion, but rather, seeing how much you can needle people. I've told you once and I am now underlining it: stop this. I don't mean stop being pedantic about exactly what "fraud charge" means- by all means, be pedantic and argue whether that was an appropriate term to use. I mean stop using fangs over word choices and pedantic details.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
4d ago
"Fraud" can mean punitive damages for being deceptive, which is not technically "fraud" as a criminal charge but is something juries are allowed to take into account in a civil trial. You could have accused him of being imprecise rather than going to "You are making this up."
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
4d ago
While I do not like MKC's snarky rebuttal, I have to agree that you seem to be doing a reverse-karen: "This poor guy got screwed because all the ladies were on Team Woman and too stupid or emotional to consider evidence." But the evidence is that this guy is dumb, irresponsible, and basically handed over his paycheck to his girlfriend to run his life, was terrible with money, the relationship imploded predictably (after they had two children!) and guess what, he's now responsible for the aftermath of that. We could quibble over the specific dollar amounts she should or should not be entitled to, but yeah, the case really was quibbling over how much he owed. Like, my dude, you have two kids with a woman you couldn't be bothered to marry to hook up with almost-free medical coverage? Yeah, that's gonna cost you. On deployment, you go out and drink like a sailor (because, duh) and ask her to pay for your bar tabs? Yeah, you're gonna owe her for that.
Agreed that fraud should not have entered the discussion, and it sounds like Chad's lawyer was terrible (are we surprised that Chad is as good at picking lawyers as he is at picking baby-mommas?), and I don't doubt the chicks were biased, but you have to be pretty much on Team Pump-And-Dump-The-Bitches-Deserve-It to think Chad should have escaped responsibility here.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
4d ago
or perhaps the story itself is fabricated
I (as a mod) do not appreciate the low-key insinuations that the OP is lying, and while I'd have let "your framing might be missing any more details in her favor" go (because yes, that is certainly possible), you have no reason to be accusing him of outright making up this entire story. Do people make up stories to post here? Yes, I'm sure they do, though less frequently than on reddit - I have certainly raised my eyebrows at a few implausible just-so stories posted here - but "maybe this is all made up" is a shitty thing to say just by way of disagreement with the thesis.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
5d ago
Jesus wept. Simple math, people. I like AI but stop using it because you are too lazy to break out a calculator and the sort of deductive reasoning you'd give an undergrad interviewing for his first internship.
Current spot price of gold is about $4,350/troy ounce.
An avoirdupois pound is 14.583 troy ounces, or $63,436.05. So $1B in gold would be about 15,764 lbs, or 7.88 tons.
There are cargo planes that can carry over 100 tons. So I don't know how you posed your question, but it is clearly not "physically impossible" for a cargo plan to carry billions of dollars.
(I don't know if the UAE has literal tons of gold on hand, or if that's how they'd transport cash. Supposing they have a vault full of US bank notes, each bill is about 1 gram so $1B in $USD100 bills would be 10M x 1 gram = 10 metric tons/9.8 tons. So whatever form the "cash" takes, yes, it's physically possible to carry billions in a cargo plane.)
Mild mod rebuke:
Who is "we"?
This is about as literal an example of consensus-building as I've seen. You just assume everyone here on the Motte is on your side here. You're posting, literally, about opposing sides in the Culture War and just taking it as a given that one side is "us."
And you're not wrong that defenders of either Woke 1 or Woke 2 (whatever that is) are pretty scarce here. If I had to pick a side, yes, I'm a disaffected anti-woke like (almost) everyone else.
Still. We may be skewing further and further in one direction, but the Motte itself is not intended to be a partisan platform and we will not be "claimed" and you will not assert that only one side is "us."
More options
Context Copy link