This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
How about a different kind of AI culture war? I speak of course of non-consensual pornography generation. The most outrageous article I read about this recently was probably this AP article: Boys at her school shared AI-generated, nude images of her. After a fight, she was the one expelled. The girl in question is 13 and she started a fight on a school bus with one of the boys later charged with a crime for sharing the images.
It turns out that finding apps that advertise this kind of functionality is not hard. In fact, part of the reason I bring this up is it seems this capability is integrated into one of the largest AIs: Grok. There's been some controversy on X over the last couple days after Grok allegedly generated pornographic images of a couple minor girls. Additionally the bot's "media" tab was disabled, allegedly due to the discovery lots of people were using the bot to make pornographic edits of other people's pictures. Though the media tab is gone I did not find it very hard to get Grok to link me its own posts with these kinds of edits.
There is, I think understandably, a lot of controversy going around about this. It's not that it was previously impossible to make this kind of content but the fidelity and availability was much more limited and certainly required more technical skill. Being something you can do without even leaving your favorite social media app seems like something of a game changer.
Frankly I am unsure where to go with this as a policy matter. Should someone be liable for this? Criminal or civil? Who? Just the generating user? The tool that does the generating? As a general matter I have some intuitions about AI conduct being tortious but difficulty locating who should be liable.
If someone did this to my daughter I'd slap the shit out of them. I'd also be proud of my daughter for taking the matter into her own hands and beating the shit out of them.
Conversely, if my son did this I would hope he'd get his ass kicked by the girl and if her father came looking for him I would say I understand bro have at him just don't send him to the hospital.
I think I'm expressing majority feelings about this. Surely we can form rules around this accordingly.
I really hope you're not. "Don't beat up little children" shouldn't be controversial IMO.
Would you beat the snot out of a little girl for being nasty to your son, or is this treatment reserved purely for penis-havers?
Yeah and it's OK that we recognize gendered solutions are appropriate. If a man in a social setting is being aggressively unpleasant you will threaten to hit him and then follow up on it, if a woman is doing the same you will call her an annoying bitch and that everyone thinks she's fat and ugly - it will inflict roughly equivalent damage.
Firstly, beating somebody up i.e. violently assaulting them is not equivalent to calling them a bitch, and I cannot take seriously a frame that considers otherwise.
Secondly, re: gendered solutions, please see my response to @hydroacetylene. If you are willing to apply your 'gendered solutions' fairly, then fair enough. If, however, you advocate for maximum harshness against men while chickening out whenever it is time to apply your 'gendered solutions' to women, then from the recipient's POV that is ultimately indistinguishable from straight-up hatred of men and I'm not going along with it.
Your desire to reframe the issue in your favour suggests that I am more correct than you are comfortable with admitting (Beat up becomes violently assault, "Call a bitch" instead of "Verbal assault, harassed and bullied). These are roughly equivalent because they likely cause temporary harm quickly, and don't have much lasting effect, a quick "Smarten up" if you will.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
no
Definitely. If you scale physical and mental harm either linearly or on some sort of curve, these are within 1 rank of eachother at the furthest (and I think roughly equivalent)
5: murdered
4: permanently maimed (legs amputated, blinded)
3: injury with long recovery (broken hip, ruptured tendon)
2: injury with short recovery (sprained wrist, strep throat)
1: painful injury with no loss of function (slapped very hard, wasp sting)
0: nothing
5: total pariah (exiled, stripped of all social status)
4: fired and shunned (harvey weinstein, permanently life and livelihood altering, sam bankman-fried)
3: humiliating disruption (acrimonious divorce, demoted and forced to change careers, star wars kid?)
2: mild in length or severity of mockery (that lawyer who couldnt turn off the cat-effect on his zoom trial, a local clergyman leaves his microphone on while he uses the toilet)
1: typical bullying (a schoolmate who calls you a fag every week, mean-spirited gossip)
0: nothing
both of these are clearly in the 1-2 zone at worst. Obviously the world is very large and people have different goals, social realities, pain tolerances etc. But I'm quite confident in my assessment. By a week or 2 your bruises from your beating will heal, and everyone will forgot about the party where you got called a fat-slut and ran out crying.
Just because you can assign star ratings to them doesn't mean they will be equivalent. Many injuries, even minor, lead to permanently worse functiioning level.
Those are numbers, not stars, but your objection doesn't disprove anything I said. It's nearly a non-sequitur.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
While I think your argument largely makes sense, I would choose being called a "faggot" over being punched hard in the stomach 1000 times out of 1000
Like it's not even a question I have to think about, the answer is so obvious.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Are you hardcore no-fap? Not that I think the dissemination and whatever other social stuff around this is outstanding, but obtaining nudes of cute girls in your high school would have been considered a high accomplishment for high school boys as long as high school and photos have existed.
Like with all porn the AI nudes are a little queer. Its much higher status and much better behavior to seduce her in real life, but some edits to an already existing thirst-trap image is hardly something you should let your son be beat over. I'd suggest the more appropriate action is the girl is removed from any ability to be online and the boy has to agree to supervised courtship if the girl's father so demands.
I am not, nor ever were, no-fap. I jerked off a lot in my school days. If high school boys today can't fap without having as a visual aid a picture of their classmate's tits, the microplastics situation must be much worse than I thought.
Any high schooler who feels the need to jerk off has plenty of options. He can just fantasize about having sex with a fictional woman. Or a celebrity. While I would not recommend fantasizing about people in your personal life, thoughts are free.
If he wants visual aid, there is this thing called the 'internet'. From the softest softcore to all kinds of kinks and depravities, the net provides enough so that they can jerk off continuously to their favorite genre until they literally die of old age.
Or he can try to use his phone and flirt with a classmate and get her to send them some nudes, nothing wrong with that (unless he shares the photos with his buddies).
But then again, I do not really get the bro culture. As a straight guy, I have never had much inclination to talk about my sexuality with other men. Turning sex into a pure status competition between buddies is utterly alien to me. Sexting with some girl purely so you can betray her and gain status with other guys when you share her pics feels somewhat sociopathic, but technically is some achievement which might impress some people, just like a school shooter making double digits.
Even then, feeding the picture of your victim into an AI undresser is utterly pathetic. I honestly can not even imagine what kind of people would be impressed by that.
More options
Context Copy link
That at least requires the boy to make some effort at seducing the girl into sending him nudes of her. This was an idiot using AI to paste her features onto a nude photo, and hand it around claiming it was of her, so the other idiot boys could laugh at it and mock her. She's 13, she did not consent to any of this.
God's sake, we have enough posters on here criticising women for riding the cock carousel, sleeping with Chads, wanting to cuckold the betas who simp for them with alphas, and the rest of the poisonous discourse. Do you really think nude images of a 13 year old girl are anything but "bitch whore, even at that young they're at it" material? Do you think the teenage boys are being respectful and admiring of empowered sexual equality here?
This is why porn is dangerous; it creates such expectations in society, then normalises them, so 13 year old boys are now faking nudes of 13 year old girls for sexual gratification. And not a stranger or any random 13 year old, someone they know. Someone who will get the reputation among her peers of being easy, a whore, all the negatives that the "coerce women to have sex with men they don't want" posters on here like to throw at women. Creating expectations that she'll agree to sexual activity of some kind with random boys, because hey I've already seen your nudes.
We already saw this shit in the Loudon County case of the girl sexually assaulted by the trans girl/boy in the school bathroom: oh, they used to sneak off to the bathroom and fool around before, so this time so what if she changed her mind and he tried to/did rape her? She agreed by being intimate with him in previous situations, so really it's all her fault.
And this child didn't even agree to any of this, and they are not real images of her, but she is going to get the blame all the same.
I agree! The problem is porn. The problem does not lie with 13 year old boys using the tools provided to them to get quality fapping in.
Yeah, if 13 year olds are routinely using porn, and this is their introduction to relationships between the sexes, and if normies are getting concerned about choking (they're picking this up from porn as the expected thing to do during sex and that women want it, and girls are picking it up that they should be doing this), then something has gone sideways in our society.
Even that 13 year olds are now going to have sexual lives. Yeah, puberty happens, yeah masturbation happens. But that "okay, now you're old enough to get an erection, this is your welcome to adulthood and sex, of course you're going to develop a 'fapping style'", is something that does make me uncomfortable and does mark me out as a dinosaur. We're at the nadir where simultaneously we must not hold 25 year olds responsible for choices since their brains are not fully developed, but we're marketing sex to 13 year olds because that's old and mature enough to jump right in to full sexual activity.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Did you read the story? It was not a thirst trap, it was AI generated. She did not consent to this. If a girl sends nudes to a guy and he starts spreading them around, he's a jerk, but she made her own bed and she has to lie in it. With AI you can make convincing edits of literally anyone. Any picture of your face can be swapped onto a fake body. Any full body image of you can be nudified with realistic seeming body proportions. Even if you've never been online a day in your life a school photo in the yearbook or even just a quick cellphone pic someone takes of you without your knowledge or consent, and there you go.
This isn't sluts getting slut-shamed: as far as we know this is a completely innocent and pure 13 year old girl who was victimized through absolutely no fault of her own. Her only crime was existing as a 13 year old girl, and the only thing she possibly could have done to avoid this is to live in a bubble where nobody can see her face, or disfigure herself so horribly that nobody would want AI nudes with her deformed face on them. We're talking beyond Islamic levels of repression, since even a burka would reveal enough of her face to enable this.
The story is they took pictures already existing and nudified them. I highly doubt they were pictures of her wearing a burka. The point is not that their behavior was good, just that it is expected of teenage boys. Allowing some girls father to beat up your son because he did a thing that father would have done to your sister if the tech existed in the 90s is an absolutely stupid reaction.
What this argument looks like is something like "we shouldn't punish kids for doing dumb cruel kid shit because when we were kids, we were doing dumb cruel kid shit too".
More options
Context Copy link
The pictures could have been literally anything. Are you not aware of how powerful AI has become? I use the Burka as an example not because I think she was wearing one, but because that's all that would be needed. Boy gets picture of girl's face in literally any photo that contains her face, boy gets nude picture of literally anyone else that has nude photos, boy tells AI "put this girls face on that body". Boom, a "nudified" photo. It's not authentic, it's not her real body, but the AI's good enough to make it realistic enough that the boys can look at it and giggle and masturbate to it and tease her about it, and horrify her or anyone who cares about her if they saw it.
Or skip the second photo, just tell the AI "nudify this picture" and it uses the body contour lines and imagines a naked body of an underage girl with approximately the same size and pose embedded into the photo. Again, literally any photo containing her face, and I guess enough of a body (in any amount of clothing) that there's a spot to put the imaginary naked body.
I expect teenage boys to not care about the "authenticity" of a 90% exposed bikini-clad body in order for their nudification to count. I expect teenage boys to not need a thirst trap of a girl in order to get horny enough to want to see her nude. I expect teenage boys to just get horny. I expect teenage boys to see literally any girl and want to see her naked, even if she's ugly, if only out of curiosity. For all we know they could have gone "uggh, Jenny is such a prude, she never shows any cleavage and she always looks scornfully at us whenever we talk about girl's tits. We should make a nude picture out of her, wouldn't that be funny? Hah, and then make fun of her about it, she'd get so mad. Trololol."
I expect teenage boys to get horny, and to learn to control it and not victimize other people in the process. If one boy had, on his own, in private, asked an AI to generate a nude of her and then he masturbated to it and never told anyone, I would have no problem with that. Yes, it probably counts as child pornography in a technical and/or legal sense, but if she wasn't actually involved in the creation of it and she never finds out about it then nobody would be harmed by its existence. Heck, if every single boy at her school entirely on their own initiative had AI generate a nude of her and masturbated to it in private and never told anyone about it and nobody ever found out, this would still be fine. The problem is the social dynamic, the sharing, the teasing, the humiliation. Shame is a valuable tool that society can wield in order to disincentivize anti-social behaviors that the law either can't or shouldn't get involved in. Slut shaming is a valuable tool that society used to use in order to disincentivize slutty behavior. This breaks down when it isn't being wielded against sluts, but against anyone for any reason. This is the same as the wife that gets mad at her husband because she had a dream that he cheated on her. It's a dream, it's not real. I don't think we should send people to prison for AI-faked videos of them stealing, I don't think we should scorn people for AI-faked videos of them saying horrible things, and I don't think we should shame people for AI-faked nudes of them. And because the human brain is wired in certain ways I think that sharing faked nudes of someone is inevitably going to lead to shame and humiliation of the same type as sharing real ones, even if not quite at the same level of magnitude. And that's wrong to inflict on someone who hasn't earned it.
On the contrary, when someone does do something wrong, punishments help correct their behavior so they don't do it again. Someone who incorrectly inflicts this humiliation on an innocent person, needs to be punished in order to correct their behavior. A healthy young man should enjoy his sexuality in a way that doesn't victimize people. Beating the crap out of these boys would help them learn that lesson and become better men.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
This here is the big, giant, difference between male and female attitudes to sex. Guys are all "what's the big deal over some nudes, hey if someone was showing hot nudes of me around I wouldn't care, it's a compliment" and so on. There just is not the same feeling of violation. I see the same thing with regard to stories of boys being sexually abused by older women: "what's the big deal? hey if some hot teacher wanted to fuck me when I was 14 I would have been delighted! it's free sex! this is great!"
And this is part of the entire problem around 'nobody is dating/having sex/getting married'. Why don't women date men? Well, because they don't want to date the 100s of guys who message them. But why don't they? Because women can do without sex more than men, seemingly, can do without it. When women do engage in sex with the same lack of emotional attachment as men, then they get criticised for being whores. Men want sex because of higher libido, and will be happy to just fuck anyone reasonably acceptable, and so can't understand why women would be upset about such images. "But it's not really you, so what does it matter?"
It matters because you'll be the same guy posting on here about women needing to be controlled by their fathers and husbands, because giving women free exercise of choice in romance and sex means they just scatter nudes of themselves around to any stranger who wants them, look at this case of a 13 year old girl sending nudes to her boyfriend without any self-respect or modesty, she'll be sleeping around if not stopped in time.
Are they normally the same people? It seems to be in this case, but that's what's confusing me. Because normally I think it's the "hypocrisy" of different people who believe similar things for opposite reasons.
The liberal, sex positive, man says "no big deal, free sex is great, everyone likes sluts". The conservative, sex negative, man says "women shouldn't sleep around, nobody likes a slut". In most cases of a woman fucking around and finding out, both say "stop complaining, you did this to yourself." If you just read a bunch of comments by people criticizing slutty women you might think they're massive hypocrites, but if half the people believe on thing and half believe the other and they're literally different people then each one can have an entirely consistent worldview internally and just present a united front on this one particular issue. This happens all the time on different issues. I constantly see people who have superficially similar external opinions to me with stupid garbage reasoning underlying them.
But it seems to me like in the AI case that shouldn't happen, and the various sides should strongly disagree, because the woman didn't do this to herself so the conservative wouldn't assign any blame. Any assertions that this could be fixed by a man (father or husband) controlling her and her deferring to his authority make absolutely no sense because that wouldn't have stopped this either. If you think women sharing nudes is bad and want to disincentivize the behavior then it makes no sense to punish someone who didn't engage in this behavior with the same treatment as someone who did. That's not how incentives work.
It's exactly the sort of thoughtless pattern matching I would expect to see from a normie who just parrots party lines, not here on the Motte.
I will press that compliment to my bosom and shed tears of joy upon it. I'm a normie! For the first time in my life, I'm one of the vast mass of ordinary people with ordinary opinions!
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I mean, I wouldn't be happy if nude pictures of me were being widely disseminated.
No more would I, but apparently (1) if there's no legal harm, what harm? and (2) you only say that because you're a woman and you want women to be treated as Wonderful and deprive men and boys of their natural right to masturbate over pictures of naked women.
At least, that's what I'm being scolded for on here, I think?
More options
Context Copy link
The recipients wouldn't be happy if nude pictures of me were being widely disseminated. Ugly privilege!
I have indeed seen photos where my reaction is "put more clothes on!"
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Uh huh. Although it is possible you are so badass as to slap some teenage boy—in recent years, men who are likely wealthier and more powerful than you have suffered larger offenses against their daughters and did fuck all.
One example would be a GS executive who had a daughter (Mayli Wang) deep tonguing ass and getting Facial Abused for but three figures a pop. He spent his last few years buying rights to her content to try and disappear it all, but then he died. One might argue that by dying early, he got away easy compared to someone like Laurence Fishburne.
It really isn't that hard to find news stories about dads beating up their daughter's boyfriends for perceived transgressions.
That doesn't tell you much about how often dads do nothing about perceived transgressions against their daughters. Plus, dads who do such beatings tend to be of quite different demographics and socioeconomic backgrounds than the modal Mottizen. The default for middle class white fathers or higher is not to exact direct retribution, but to only do so indirectly through The Authorities. Hence my pressing [X] to doubt that a given Mottizen would exact direct retribution upon a perceived transgression against his daughter.
Not only that, one can find examples where a father explicitly denounces retaliation or vindictiveness in the aftermath of this daughter's killing:
Sometimes such a father will even shake hands with and campaign for the release of his daughter's murderers. Or when his daughter is raped and murdered by a refugee, request that funeral-goers donate toward helping refugees.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
It has nothing to do with being a badass. I have no choice in the matter. It's just something I would have to do.
Anyway, I'm not surprised to hear some people don't think family comes first, but I still think the feeling to excuse someone defending their daughter's honor is fairly universal.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Yeah its a pretty agreeable resolution to use short, sharp corporal punishment as a deterrent for antisocial behavior.
Good luck getting anyone to agree about what to do with your daughter if she were to start sending actual nudes around the school to a bunch of guys, though.
Bravado tends to fail, there.
I think turning g-rated photos into AI porn is so completely different than voluntary actual nudes pics I'm surprised so many are mentioning that in their replies.
Its a beautiful direct example of my point about the complete contrast in social response to males acting out inappropriately and females acting out inappropriately.
Male antisocial behavior: Beat them up, lock them up, keep them heavily policed.
Female antisocial behavior goes unremarked, often celebrated.
Multiply this out over dozens, hundreds of instances, over their entire childhood and young adulthood, and it explains quite a bit of what we're seeing now.
Do you have any thoughts on how you would regulate your daughter's behavior if she's acting in ways that harm her and others?
Any at all? Or is it just far easier to threaten other males with consequences whilst admitting you lack the ability to threaten her?
Yes. Rely on the subtle nods of disapproval from her family, friends and (future) colleagues which she is hyper sensitive to to cause extreme inner distress to regulate her behavior.
You know, the kind of pressure that a teenage boy is almost completely oblivious to.
More options
Context Copy link
Destroy her smartphones for starters. Not punch her, but use appropriate punishments.
Funny enough I believe that would sort of be a start.
But if she decides she wants to physically leave and, e.g. shack up with the first dude who will take her in, or convince someone to purchase her a new phone (maybe in exchange for favors, maybe not), or (most likely) just relegate her activities to solely when she's in school, what are your real options?
Is there ever a point where physically restraining/detaining her is appropriate?
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I can only assume people are wildly misunderstanding what actually happened, though it seems to me the OP explains it quite clearly. There seems to be a lot of projecting of people's vaguely similar hobby horses going on.
Welcome to
the Motte the internetthe human raceMore options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
The Western agreement would be to track down and punish the guys if they did anything other than preemptively deleting the nudes before they hit their phones.
Western men are generally unable or unwilling to thot-patrol their daughters, but sometimes they’ll try to get the state to ruin the lives of random guys who neglected to help maintain their daughters’ Wonderfulness.
Thanks, Sloot, for defending the rights of paedophiles everywhere to mock up nudes of underage girls because hey, it's the bitch's fault for letting herself be photographed in the first place, if she knew her place and didn't let her face be photographed then it would never have happened.
The girl took action to defend her reputation and got punished for it. How is that an example of Wonderfulness?
Doesn't look like I talk about pedophiles (or even ephebophiles) in the comment you were responding to or elsewhere in the thread. My comment quotes what it was responding to, which itself in turn doesn't depend on the event in the OP.
It does, however, look like you were throwing in discussion of pedophiles as an attempt to poison the well, and used "Wonderfulness" as a self-prompt to launch into a mini-rant.
To the extent it makes snide middle-aged internet women seethe, perhaps going forward I can find it in my heart to be a better ally for the freedom and protections of marginalized and vulnerable communities such as cis-het Minor Attracted Persons. You're welcome!
Men who find they need to use terms like Wonderfulness strike me as failures. It's licking their wounds. It's shifting blame for their inability to navigate adult life onto handy targets "Boo! Wonderfulness! Women are all bitches!"
That you even think "middle-aged" is a put-down shows your immaturity.
(We can swap insults all day if you want and the mods will tolerate it, or we can try to speak without using brain-dead Internet swipes. Your choice).
No, we won't. You and @Sloot both need to knock it off.
That part was hyperbole since yeah, you guys will step in and send this exact message.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Always amusing to see online women reinforce the trope of women resorting to personal attacks against a man’s status when he expresses an opinion she doesn’t like.
“Middle-aged” is not more of an insult there than “women” (or “internet” for that matter), but I see that description appears to have established residency in your head free of rent. The word I was actually most directionally on-the-fence about cutting was “snide,” but after half a thought I decided it indeed was applicable given your behavior in this thread and in general.
If I wished to try to insult you, off the top of my head there could have been the low hanging fruit of deploying impolite synonyms for “poor” and “overweight”—or, more softly, those words in themselves—for poor and overweight are descriptions of which you’ve recounted yourself (perhaps using those exact words, so they may not actually be insults at all). Even to a habitual wrong-thinker like me, it’d feel kind of like punching down just by mentioning without using-as-insult.
You have also expressed dissatisfaction with your career pathway (or lack thereof) and life outcomes in general.
I’m aware that you have time all day for riling yourself up and insulting other forum users, as well as rage-quitting and starting a new account when things don’t go your way.
Just your current account’s posting history is a Top Right Messi when it comes to number of comments on the x-axis and frequency of tantrums as a percentage of comments on the y-axis.
So yeah, when forum poster A tries to malign forum poster B for things such as “failures,” “immaturity”, “shifting blame,” “inability to navigate adult life,” it comes across as a massive case of projection and lack of self-awareness when forum poster A is older; poor; overweight; prone to histrionic, antagonistic outbursts, etc. when she sees a comment she doesn’t like.
Just beautiful apophasis. You absolutely cooked em here. HereAndGone is not recovering from this any time soon. I’m in awe of your mastery Sloot
More options
Context Copy link
Why mention middle-age, since you don't know my exact age? The amount of times men assume "gotta be old ugly hag since complaining about us liking hot young women" is laughable, and you did that exact thing there.
I am old enough to be old ugly hag! Go me, I have survived to live this long! Whether I'm sixteen or sixty-six has no bearing on 'is what I am saying true/sensible/reasonable/not flat-out crazy at least' and reaching straight away for the "middle-aged women" bit is a weakness on your part.
Should I assume you are fifteen, by your writing? I'm going to do you the courtesy of imagining you are a grown adult, without assumptions about your precise chronological state.
How sweet of you:
The mens, they always gots to reach for "DE HYSTERIA" when they can't back up their fronting.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link