Anonymous #2 1d

Who is twootters?

-2

Anonymous #2 1d

No

-4

Anonymous #3 23h

Free

6

Anonymous #3 23h

It is exactly what tone policing is

-4

Anonymous OP 23h

What do you think tone policing is? And I swear to god you better not spam the goddamn AI overview again

9

Anonymous #3 23h

Criticizing someone on how they say something rather than what they’re saying

-3

Anonymous OP 23h

Congratulations, you’re wrong. About multiple things! That’s not what tone policing is, AND no one was doing that to you! Your arguments were rejected, THEN you hurdled playground insults, and THEN you were clowned on for doing so :)

9

Anonymous OP 23h

Please delete this app.

1

Anonymous #3 23h

The criticism of my tone was being used to reject the arguments premises

-4

Anonymous #3 23h

You have a perspective problem

-3

Anonymous OP 22h

No, it wasn’t.

10

Anonymous #3 22h

Yes it was

-3

Anonymous OP 22h

No, it really wasn’t. I’m sorry it felt that way ig, but you’re just wrong. Why did you respond so fast 😭 do you have nothing better to do? Go to a movie or chat with some friends or something, this is not healthy.

7

Anonymous #3 22h

The premise: women are socialized to be passive in courtship. In a sapphic context, a woman who breaks that script and pursues another woman would beat out a man competing for the same attention. Her defiance of gender norms carries more weight than a man following the script he was already handed, especially since women already filter out an oversaturated pool of men, many of whom they're wary of to begin with. That premise was rejected because you think that i said women dont put effort at all

-4

Anonymous #3 22h

That’s an example of tone policing. You want me to acknowledge that women are trying, because you’re assuming that my critical tone toward women in the premise means I think they aren’t.

-3

Anonymous OP 21h

So, that THAT STILL ISNT TONE POLICING And, that wasn’t your premise, that was a thing you added 20 hours AFTER you made your post And, your post’s argument is built on the misogynistic assumptions that 1) women are passive in courtship (they aren’t) and 2) women choose their partners based on your abstract concept of “weight” And, you’re misrepresenting my argument, because, you know, you did say that women don’t put in effort. I brought that up way after

8

Anonymous OP 21h

AND. I never said your tone was critical towards women. Where the fuck is that coming from? Your tone towards women has been INCREDIBLY condescending the entire fucking time, but I haven’t brought that up until now.

8

Anonymous #3 21h

That was my entire premise… and yes, it is ton policing because you think I’m saying something that I’m not because I’m using a critical tone…. The patriarchy socializes women to be passive in courtship….. I never said women don’t put effort. I I said that multiple times you kept ignoring you that’s why you don’t remember.

-3

Anonymous #3 21h

I never said women don’t put effort in. I never said women don’t put effort in. I never said women don’t put effort in. I never said women dope effort and I never said women don’t put effort and I never said women don’t put effort, and I never said women don’t put effort in.

-2

Anonymous OP 21h

How old are you???? I’ve seen middle schoolers compose better arguments than this nonsensical, hallucinatory crap. I’d believe you were an AI if you didn’t ADMIT TO USING AI.

12

Anonymous #3 21h

I don’t know exactly who you are. Some people on that thread said I had a critical tone toward women, and that meant I was tone policing them specifically. Now you’re doing the same thing by calling me condescending, and I’m not condescending anyone. I don’t think I’m better than anyone here. I’m not placing myself above women right now. I’m doing the exact opposite.

-2

Anonymous OP 21h

That’s NOT WHAT TONE POLICING FUCKING MEANS Thats NOT WHY I DISMISSED YOUR ARGUMENT Jesus Christ you can’t fucking read

8

Anonymous #3 21h

I used ai to look up sources not to make my arguments… and your not talking about the point again

-2

Anonymous #3 21h

To say start trying doesn’t mean they weren’t already trying… but you could’ve asked whether I meant that and then I would’ve clarified

-2

Anonymous #3 21h

You dismissed my argument in several different ways one of the ways that you dismissed my argument was through tone policing…. I can read it was either you or someone else underneath that comment thread that use the fact that I had a critical tone of women to dismiss my entire argument.

-1

Anonymous OP 21h

I was three on that post. As the only person that composes sentences like this, I feel that’s fucking plain to see. You are in fact, being condescending to women when you say they could outcompete any man “if they put effort in.” That’s the “nerdy girl takes off her glasses and becomes pretty” school of condescension. And as the screenshot says, it’s not tone policing. Because your argument was already dismissed. Here’s the screenshot again. Feels relevant.

6

Anonymous #3 21h

You know you’re not right all the time either by the way

-2

Anonymous OP 21h

I talked about the point, at length. Do you lie for fun, or do you get points for it? Like a sport?

6

Anonymous #3 21h

You won’t even agree to the fact women are socialize to be passive in pre-relational courtship so I don’t even know why I can’t even start the discussion there with you before you start calling me condescending… if we can agree to that specific point we can actually get some really really important… whether it’s to highlight the way that I’m wrong or highlight the way that I’m right

-2

Anonymous #3 21h

What is one part of my point that you agree with

-2

Anonymous OP 21h

YES IT FUCKING DOES MEAN THAT. Words have meaning, believe it or not, reread your sentence.

9

Anonymous #3 21h

You cannot tell me what I meant by what I said.. I’m clarifying what I meant to you right now… just ask and then we can have the conversation after the clarification. That’s all I’m asking you to do.

-1

Anonymous OP 21h

No, I dismissed it. Then I criticized you for doing misogyny. Those were two separate things. No one on that thread dismissed your point on tonal grounds. Tonal criticism was always done AFTER dismissing your argument (and after you called people “bitch” or told them to “eat a dick”)

8

Anonymous OP 21h

I know that? Like. You keep saying that like it’s a gotcha but like. You’re the one doubling down on a stupid, incorrect post.

8

Anonymous #3 21h

You dismissed it on false assumptions…. Others dismissed it criticism of tone…,, for example, I believe #6 said that me being critical towards women and dating was misogynistic specifically

-2

Anonymous #3 21h

Tell me one thing you agree about with my post we can start from there and actually get somewhere productive

-2

Anonymous OP 21h

Here’s a comment from above. The middle paragraph is most relevant here.

3

Anonymous #3 21h

True or false is it not true that women are socialize to be passive?

-2

Anonymous OP 21h

I DID NOT TELL YOU WHAT YOU MEANT. I TOLD YOU WHAT YOU SAID. And “we can have a conversation” LOL, lmao even. The last person to try to have a conversation with you got called a “bitch” and got told to “eat a dick” for doing that.

6

Anonymous #3 21h

I already apologized for that, and I would like to talk about the conversation instead of mistakes that I made in having it

-2

Anonymous OP 21h

6 criticized you for that, but dismissed you for other reasons: and never said that criticizing dating was misogynistic, no one said that.

6

Anonymous OP 21h

Oh I agree with nothing about it. Why would you think I would agree with it lol

8

Anonymous OP 21h

Not in the context of dating, no.

8

Anonymous OP 21h

You never fucking apologized for the “eat a dick” comment, lol lmao even. You doubled down so much on that comment

8

Anonymous #3 21h

They said that criticizing women in dating was misogynistic. The “and” was a typo. They didn’t dismiss my argument for other reasons; they just raised a concern about transphobia in my sources, which I addressed. Then when you asked me to cross-reference it with trans affirming documents using the talking points in my source, I said I can’t guess what specific things you’re quoting, and I’d like to know so I can cross-reference it with trans affirming sources.

-2

Anonymous #3 21h

The baseline women are socialized to be passive in pre-relational courtship because of the patriarchy… is that something that you disagree with

-2

Anonymous #3 21h

Are you saying that women are not socialized to be passive in pre-relational courtship

-2

Anonymous #3 21h

You won’t even agree on the baseline of what my argument is, which is that women are socialized to be passive in pre-relational courtship… which is the objective fact that I’m basing the entire argument on you’re the five-year-old

-2

Anonymous #3 21h

Because I don’t have to apologize for it and why do you keep bringing it up anyway if it doesn’t help the discussion at all

-2

Anonymous OP 21h

Okay okay. You have no memory of shit. They did not say that, you’re misinterpreting them or just lying. They did dismiss you for other reasons. That was a different person that asked you to try finding other sources.

6

Anonymous OP 21h

You did not adequately address the transphobia. You denied that it was there on shaky ground. And the reason you couldn’t find other sources is because there aren’t any, because you’re wrong

8

Anonymous OP 21h

Hi that not your argument, you child

6

Anonymous #3 21h

#6 very specific criticism of me was that I was being critical of women in my tone and that the sources that I was using were trans phobic or using trans phobic language… I remember that very correctly actually

-2

Anonymous OP 21h

You are such an asshole, and your failure to recognize that is sad.

8

Anonymous OP 21h

That was not their only criticism

8

Anonymous #3 21h

I can’t address the transphobia effectively if you won’t quote what’s transphobic. All I can tell you is that from a broad assessment of what I gathered from the sources, it wasn’t, and that the same language I think you’re referring to is the same language used to affirm trans people. But I can’t guess what you’re trying to quote, so I’m asking… please quote it.

-2

Anonymous #3 21h

The baseline is that women are socialized passive… that’s the baseline that’s what’s the foundation of the argument because it affects everything else after it…. No it is not my entire argument. It is the baseline of my entire argument, dumb ass.

-2

Anonymous #3 21h

Highlight the others

-2

Anonymous #2 20h

If I clarified what I meant, then go by the clarification

-2

Anonymous OP 20h

People did try going by that clarification and then you verbally attacked them

8

Anonymous #2 20h

That is a gross Mischaracterization of events

-2

Anonymous OP 20h

Someone did try to go with your clarification (which was very different than the original post) and you called that person a bitch. You also kept refusing to actually have a conversation with anyone who brought up valid points by accusing them of not wanting to have a conversation with you

8

Anonymous #2 20h

Again, that’s a gross mischaracterization of events. I responded very directly to everybody, even those with the most minuscule input into the conversation, even when it completely detracted from the point I was trying to make. And even after I apologized for calling that person the B word, I engaged with their argument. Don’t say I ignored anybody.

-2

Anonymous OP 20h

Oh my god. Saying you have the memory of a goldfish would be an insult to all aquatic life. Saying you can’t read is an insult to concept of non-spoken communication. Saying this is like ragebait would be an insult to both the emotion of anger AND the little worms and crap that you on a fishing line. Saying you ignored people would be an insult to the concept of ignorance.

4

Anonymous OP 20h

Please, seriously, delete this app. What are you doing. You’ve clearly never been held to the standards of an adult. You need to stop this, seriously.

5

Anonymous #3 20h

I'm talking to you right now, asking you to weigh in on this argument, and I'm still engaging with you. I'm not saying you can't read. I'm not insulting you right now. I'm asking you to contribute something beyond semantics to this conversation, and I'm still engaging with you. I'm proving my own point just by continuing to try to get you to understand the point I'm making

-2

Anonymous #3 20h

Again, I’m still engaging with you and I’m asking you to engage with the argument. Something you’re still not doing.

-2

Anonymous OP 20h

Wow, I’m not doing something I’ve already done, repeatedly. I wonder why that could fucking be.

6

Anonymous #3 20h

You’re talking about the conversation instead of having it

-2

Anonymous OP 20h

Here’s a screenshot that I’ve already used. Of a comment I wrote. On this fucking thread

6

Anonymous #3 20h

And I addressed that specifically by telling you. That it is objectively true that women are socialized to be passive... point 2 is contingent upon point 1 ... and I told you that l did not say women don't put in effort... those are all direct responses to your argument against me in the picture

-2

Anonymous #3 20h

And you are childish

-4

Anonymous OP 20h

That’s not objectively true, ie true regardless of context. Point 2 isn’t solely contingent on point 1. You did say that, though. They kinda aren’t, and they certainly aren’t GOOD responses.

10

Anonymous OP 20h

Look in the mirror, glass houses, pot meet kettle, yadda yadda.

8

Anonymous #3 20h

Alright, blocking now. Reporting the post first, it is spam imo.

8

Anonymous #2 19h

🚬 two otters… now there’s a name i haven’t heard in a very long time…

5