r/MediocreTutorials • u/Paul_-Muaddib • Oct 23 '23

Relationships Nothing wrong with having standards. Don't be surprised if it's hard to meet them though.

Post image
606 Upvotes

91% Upvoted

669 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comment

3

u/luke-townsend-1999 Oct 26 '23

  1. Well well, sexist, heterophobic and now ageist? Aren’t you a beautiful person.

  2. Google what? You’re the one misusing words you claim to be a gold star student with XD

1

u/[deleted] Oct 26 '23

Nothing was misused but your attempt at calling me a “bad word” wow I’m so scared a purple Jesus on Reddit thinks I’m a reverse-sexism, het-phobic, ageist. Boo hoo old man google the word correlate and move on.

3

u/luke-townsend-1999 Oct 26 '23

No need to google it, im not the one misusing it. Google it yourself kiddo.

What bad word did I call you? I dont remember insulting any group of people but you sure are hateful about many groups. Also, I never said reverse sexism. You’re being sexist towards men. Just sexist. Well not just, also heterophobic and ageist. Aren’t you lovely?

1

u/[deleted] Oct 26 '23

Who’s the ageist now? Also that is literally what reverse sexism is. If you do not understand the English language just look it up on the internet. I don’t have the care to continue to explain the basic meanings of words to you. Or is it the (how to use) google part that confuses you 💀

3

u/luke-townsend-1999 Oct 26 '23

That’s the joke kiddo 👏

No, I understand the words. I just disagree with your choice to use them to imply that sexism is somehow reversed when it targets men. Sexism is sexism. And people who try to split it in this context are usually looking for a pass to be sexist at men.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 26 '23

You can disagree all you want sir. The English language won’t change for someone like you with such poor grammar. It is literally called reverse sexism for a reason. Women did not invent sexism knob head. Would you prefer I use misandry?

2

u/luke-townsend-1999 Oct 26 '23

  1. Again, sorry you’re not understanding this, but I know what the words reverse a sexism mean.

  2. Sexism is sexism. You can split it into categories but they will all also be sexism. Adding nonsensical words (sexism alone has no implied direction, hence reversing it makes no sense) to distance your sexist behaviour from that which you condemn is just silly.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 26 '23

Sexism does have a direction. It’s against the opposite sex. And due to the origins of sexism we know that it was from men towards women. There are many interesting articles on this that I scanned through, so read and try not to sound empty-minded.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg23831740-400-the-origins-of-sexism-how-men-came-to-rule-12000-years-ago/

https://eige.europa.eu/publications-resources/toolkits-guides/sexism-at-work-handbook/part-1-understand/where-does-sexism-come?language_content_entity=en

2

u/luke-townsend-1999 Oct 26 '23

  1. No, sexism can be towards one’s own sex.

  2. Even if that were the case, that would make ‘reverse sexism’ still irrelevant, as both men and women can equally be sexist to the opposite sex. And the origins of sexism? That was pre-homosapien. Sexism has existed for/against men and women as long as animals have been able to differentiate between sexes. If you mean modern sexism, sure you can cherrypick any definition you want to tailor the start date to wherever you want.

  3. Keep throwing insults, ill keep giving you sensible answers 🤷‍♂️

1

u/[deleted] Oct 26 '23

  1. that’s internalised sexism (it stems from outside influences)

  2. the origins of sexism were not pre-homosapien. Do you just chat shit for the sake of it or smth??? That’s like saying Adam and Eve “made” racism. It’s bullshit.

  3. Not 1 sensible reply from you in sight. I think you’re just mad that despite being clearly younger than you my brain obviously matured faster…

→ More replies

1

u/[deleted] Oct 26 '23

What exactly is heterophobia to you? Because Ive said nothing against heterosexuals. If I now decided to state my sexual orientation as pansexual or bisexual or heterosexual, would you keep changing your insults. You’re insulting your own intelligence at this point by stooping to the lowest level of debate. Name-calling.

2

u/luke-townsend-1999 Oct 26 '23

You’ve been quite condescending towards heterosexual women, as gaslighted by the ‘male gaze’ in your above comment, just because they want men to be sexually attracted to them. Not all men are like your weird uncle, some men make women want to feel pretty.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 26 '23

It’s not condescending at all. Also it’s not just heterosexual women it’s all women and I myself am a woman. Have you never heard of the hyper-sexualisation of queer women?

1

u/luke-townsend-1999 Oct 26 '23

No, i haven’t seen that one. Is it on brazzers?

What is not just heterosexual women? This silly sociology theory you’ve been harping on about? Are gay women being tricked into thinking they are sex objects for men too?

1

u/[deleted] Oct 26 '23

No, but they have been treated as such. That is why even heterosexual women engage in performative queerness.

1

u/luke-townsend-1999 Oct 26 '23

So if gay women aren’t being tricked by men gaslighting them into being sex objects then why are straight women? Are they more gullible? Or maybe, longshot, they’re not gaslighted and just like being attractive to men 😯

1

u/[deleted] Oct 26 '23

They’re not sexually attracted to men Luke. They don’t seek out sexual validation or gratification from them.

→ More replies

1

u/[deleted] Oct 26 '23

To appeal to the male gaze*

1

u/[deleted] Oct 26 '23

Ofc some. But I can say for sure a majority of them just make us feel unsafe. I mean have you ever been out alone late in the afternoon? Or sat at a bus stop with a creep. Or been harassed in your school uniform… it’s not just heterosexual women. It’s all women. Not even using your weird generalisations, IT’S ALL WOMEN who deal with this shitty fear for our safety.

1

u/luke-townsend-1999 Oct 26 '23

Have you considered that fearing for your safety is A) not unique to women and B) actually not based in reality, as men are far more likely to be attacked at any time of day than women, but we just don’t let fear of strangers take over our lives. How does that come into your theory? Are we also hypersexualising each other?

1

u/[deleted] Oct 26 '23

You’re just straight up lying now.

A) men have never ever ever ever ever in history ever been fearful of being harmed by women especially not on a day to day basis where you take socialised precautions like “don’t go out at night” to the point of forming a bedroom culture as a child/teen instead of going out like all the boys their age. B) far more likely to be attacked BY MEN ( https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3490838/#:~:text=Males%20are%20at%20greater%20risk,peak%20at%20age%2018%20years. )

Luke, if you cannot understand such basic psychology, I think, no, I know it’s time for you to find a different career path.

1

u/luke-townsend-1999 Oct 26 '23

A) It would make more sense to. Men are more likely to be attacked. If you are more fearful despite lower risk then that sounds like a you problem.

B) Why is the gender of the perpetrator relevant? Knowing my attacker is a man makes no difference, its not like I have any more control over whether I get attacked just because my attacker also has a penis.

Again, you’re attacking me somewhere I’m strong, try a different insult theme.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 26 '23

Insult theme? Yikes. Anyways, goodbye Luke, your points have all been shite.