Because they wanted to try and make a point about something but it didn’t get the attention they wanted so now they’re back pedaling and trying to say there was no point or that nobody will listen to their point (despite being directly asked what the point was)
Communication, hilariously, is not their strong suit it seems
The line from that scene is “be a lot cooler if you did”. I was mostly being silly, but also a little bit serious, saying it’d be cooler if you were being misandrist
My guess is not exactly the same; it’s that they’ve made the point they really mean many times, so by now they’re bored of typing it out. Maybe they in fact expect people to understand the point they intend even though they haven’t made it, based on people agreeing with them already, or having seen their posts already.
I am. I didn’t read the title before popping into the post and only realized it after you posted it. I assumed it was generally about communication, but OP made the choice of not only gendering the conversation, but infantilizing the “strawgirl” in their head with it.
It’s especially rich because if there a gender that struggles with communicating their needs and desires it’s overwhelmingly, empirically, men. Any projection of “mind reading” is likely because they lack the emotional intelligence to comprehend something that’s been told to them multiple times to the point of the partner going non-verbal when it happens again.
OK. For the record I couldn’t tell whether you were actually talking about gendered language or something I was missing. I do also think when you purposefully say very little, inevitably people will make assumptions about what you “really meant” whether that’s justified or not. Which I appreciate is annoying.
I wasn’t sure myself why the title was gendered the way it was in relation the image. I still haven’t figured out the connection there amongst all the accusations of misandry being thrown at me.
I would’ve been open to discussion about it earlier, that’s one of the reasons I left the comment to begin with. But I’m not dumb and I can see how this is going to go in the comment section from the reaction I’ve received for a single comment that hadn’t been dissected yet.
I’m so disappointed to see the weird reactive hatred for women (and the gaslighting about it regardless of how obvious it is!) is not exclusive to reddit threads. It didn’t even used to be so prevalent on reddit either back in the day (although the objectification did use to be way worse), so this is signaling to me that it’s actually a cultural shift and young boys are becoming more hostile towards women :(
As for the title, why did it have to be gendered in the first place? And why get so defensive about the gendering? We all know everyone of all genders does this shit. That’s not groundbreaking information.
As for the title, why did it have to be gendered in the first place?
Maybe because OP has a lived experience that they’re posting here as a response to.
To echo my initial response to velma in this thread: “I bet you wouldn’t have complained about how gendered it was if it had said ‘big boy words’ instead of ‘big girl words’”.
And to echo what we’re always told when we complain about misandry in the titles of posts: “If you want to complain about misogyny in a thread about the lived experiences of men, why don’t you make your own post about it, and don’t try to hijack others’.”
You’ve got an entire walled community for exactly that in womensstuff, after all.
Seeing consistency across the 2,000 comments you’ve posted in the past few months isn’t “a single comment that hadn’t been dissected yet”.
But I get it - you didn’t get the inital upvotes you were expecting for attacking OP as a misogynist, and don’t want to argue on the back foot for a comment that’s already unpopular, so you’re falling back on “I was totally just asking questions guys!”
That’s true, and I agree with many/most of them, but my point is that we have more than enough data to interpret the likely meaning of your comments from the ones you’ve posted so far.
And this is without needing to go through your comment history - I started recognizing your name quickly just from your comments like this one on posts on the frontpage.
Why did you repeat the title?
Because they wanted to try and make a point about something but it didn’t get the attention they wanted so now they’re back pedaling and trying to say there was no point or that nobody will listen to their point (despite being directly asked what the point was)
Communication, hilariously, is not their strong suit it seems
I never said there wasn’t a point to my comment.
I’m also not going to indulge in allowing y’all to dogpile me. My comment wasn’t misandrist.
Care to elaborate?
You should try reading their mind instead /s
I have explained the intentions behind my initial comment.
I was just riffing on the theme of the thread; no serious commentary intended. Apologies if my intention wasn’t clear.
It’s all good, I’m being a little defensive in here at this point. Thanks for your other comments, I really appreciate it.
The line from that scene is “be a lot cooler if you did”. I was mostly being silly, but also a little bit serious, saying it’d be cooler if you were being misandrist
Thank you! I couldn’t remember the line from this screenshot.
My guess is not exactly the same; it’s that they’ve made the point they really mean many times, so by now they’re bored of typing it out. Maybe they in fact expect people to understand the point they intend even though they haven’t made it, based on people agreeing with them already, or having seen their posts already.
Well sadly I’m not a mind reader, so…
Damn, could’ve fooled me with how confidently incorrect you are about me.
It was a conversation starter about the gendered language. I wasn’t accusing OP of anything nor demonizing them for it though.
I am. I didn’t read the title before popping into the post and only realized it after you posted it. I assumed it was generally about communication, but OP made the choice of not only gendering the conversation, but infantilizing the “strawgirl” in their head with it.
It’s especially rich because if there a gender that struggles with communicating their needs and desires it’s overwhelmingly, empirically, men. Any projection of “mind reading” is likely because they lack the emotional intelligence to comprehend something that’s been told to them multiple times to the point of the partner going non-verbal when it happens again.
OK. For the record I couldn’t tell whether you were actually talking about gendered language or something I was missing. I do also think when you purposefully say very little, inevitably people will make assumptions about what you “really meant” whether that’s justified or not. Which I appreciate is annoying.
I wasn’t sure myself why the title was gendered the way it was in relation the image. I still haven’t figured out the connection there amongst all the accusations of misandry being thrown at me.
Thanks.
If I had to guess (lots of guessing) it’s like supposed to be a light-hearted expression like “big girl pants”
Is telling a woman to put on her “big girl pants” light-hearted?
All the times I have heard it said, which is not that many, yes. It was said in a light-hearted and, dare I say, kind way :)
Does it matter at this point? Y’all have decided what my comment meant.
I have a guess at what your comment meant but find guessing at people’s meanings error-prone and leads to pointless aggro when you can just ask them.
(Inviting people to guess at your meaning, by being deliberately vague or declining to clarify, I find similarly to lead to pointless aggro)
I would’ve been open to discussion about it earlier, that’s one of the reasons I left the comment to begin with. But I’m not dumb and I can see how this is going to go in the comment section from the reaction I’ve received for a single comment that hadn’t been dissected yet.
I’m so disappointed to see the weird reactive hatred for women (and the gaslighting about it regardless of how obvious it is!) is not exclusive to reddit threads. It didn’t even used to be so prevalent on reddit either back in the day (although the objectification did use to be way worse), so this is signaling to me that it’s actually a cultural shift and young boys are becoming more hostile towards women :(
As for the title, why did it have to be gendered in the first place? And why get so defensive about the gendering? We all know everyone of all genders does this shit. That’s not groundbreaking information.
Maybe because OP has a lived experience that they’re posting here as a response to.
To echo my initial response to velma in this thread: “I bet you wouldn’t have complained about how gendered it was if it had said ‘big boy words’ instead of ‘big girl words’”.
And to echo what we’re always told when we complain about misandry in the titles of posts: “If you want to complain about misogyny in a thread about the lived experiences of men, why don’t you make your own post about it, and don’t try to hijack others’.”
You’ve got an entire walled community for exactly that in womensstuff, after all.
Lemmings should only talk about misogyny in the women’s only community?
Ah, so your top comment was calling OP misogynist?
No it was not. I’m responding to your comment asserting that talk about misogyny should be relegated to the only women’s only community.
Thanks for your comment.
Seeing consistency across the 2,000 comments you’ve posted in the past few months isn’t “a single comment that hadn’t been dissected yet”.
But I get it - you didn’t get the inital upvotes you were expecting for attacking OP as a misogynist, and don’t want to argue on the back foot for a comment that’s already unpopular, so you’re falling back on “I was totally just asking questions guys!”
I comment about a lot of different topics.
That’s true, and I agree with many/most of them, but my point is that we have more than enough data to interpret the likely meaning of your comments from the ones you’ve posted so far.
And this is without needing to go through your comment history - I started recognizing your name quickly just from your comments like this one on posts on the frontpage.