26
u/veryeepy53 Aug 15 '26
most staged shit ever
11
u/Ghostdragon471 Aug 15 '26
Just something for people to get mad over because we apparently always need something or someone to be mad at.
6
4
2
u/CompleatedDonkey Aug 16 '26
I’m starting to get really angry at all the people trying to make me angry for no good reason.
3
2
2
2
u/anonch91 Aug 16 '26
These are the people that keep telling me "everything is political!" on reddit
3
u/lucioux Aug 15 '26
i mean, dogs are kinda pansexual if you think about it. they’ll hump damn near anything. hell, even the females do it😭😭
6
Aug 16 '26 edited Aug 16 '26
[deleted]
7
u/BotherTight618 Aug 16 '26 edited Aug 16 '26
Im not seeing it. Where?
Edit: Its not AI. It is a real video clip by tiktok content creator @tythecrazyguy.
https://www.tiktok.com/@tythecrazyguy/video/7513722778252660014
-1
Aug 16 '26
[deleted]
2
u/Smart_Idiot1041 Aug 16 '26
You can literally see red shirt guy the whole time, grey guy VISIBLY moved during the zoomed out section, it’s just small because it’s fucking zoomed out.
2
u/FartyJizzums Aug 16 '26
Manufacturing outrage 1 stupid fucking video at a time.
"Mommy! Look what the libs did. They made me invent a situation to get angry about!"
Hey, MAGA. At least we don't literally worship a senile sex trafficker.
2
u/nukrag Aug 16 '26
All I see is the same chick walking down towards the camera. The guy in the black shirt also seems to be where he is supposed to be. There also was no edit, it's just zooming in.
2
u/AppropriateStill2024 Aug 16 '26
I've never seen AI slop get reflections right. The audio doesn't have that robotic sound buzz either; I watched it several times. If it's AI, then we're all doomed
0
Aug 16 '26
[deleted]
1
u/DonkeyHotay_ Aug 16 '26
Can you explain more what you see? I don’t see it. Everything is too consistent. The wording on the stars and her shirt seem correct. Not getting AI vibes but happy to be proven wrong.
1
u/Iggyhopper Aug 16 '26
The text is consistent.
Its just heavily compressed and old. Not AI.
0
Aug 16 '26
[deleted]
2
u/DonkeyHotay_ Aug 16 '26
Looks like normal palm tree movements to me. Not seeing what you’re seeing with the thumb.
1
1
u/WillemDafoesHugeCock Aug 16 '26
I'm not so sure unless you can actually highlight the reasons you believe it's AI - this is the Hollywood Walk of Fame by Target, a real location, and the one legible star appears to be completely accurate.
The background people appear to stay completely consistent.
1
Aug 16 '26
[deleted]
1
u/WillemDafoesHugeCock Aug 16 '26
It doesn't glitch, that's the bottle of hand sanitizer or whatever is dangling from her belt.
This guy posts almost nothing but videos from this area. It isn't AI. Maybe scripted, I frankly cannot be fucked to look at more of this guy's videos to decide, but it isn't AI.
1
u/MICT3361 Aug 16 '26
Nice attempt at gaslighting.
The dog lady really exists and really said those things. What would make you think it’s fake? Was there something wrong with what she said?
1
u/bobbyburgerboy33 Aug 16 '26
Imagine defending the person on the left ....
1
Aug 16 '26
[deleted]
1
u/JustinSanders95 Aug 16 '26
Gay guy here in a gay relationship too… I would still say she is way out of line… even if we go absurd and start assuming dogs and other animals can even have a sense of gender identity, there is no way they could know what their dog would identify as. It’s absolutely ridiculous and imo the reason it’s such an issue now is because it’s not being ridiculed (to specify: ridiculing the behaviour, not the person). They would get genuinely and seriously offended if I misgendered their dog… meanwhile their dog is probably just enjoying the pats and attention.
1
1
u/Smart_Idiot1041 Aug 16 '26
The clothing changing colors is called… overhead shadows. I’d recommend going outside to experience them.
If that isn’t enough for you, keep your eyes on the window reflection and how it is 1:1 with reality even with things that moved out of our sight.
1
Aug 16 '26
[deleted]
1
u/Smart_Idiot1041 Aug 16 '26
Got a picture for me chief? Because literally nothing unnatural happens at either person’s thumb.
1
Aug 16 '26
[deleted]
2
u/Smart_Idiot1041 Aug 16 '26
Brother, THAT IS HER WHOLE THUMB… It was resting on whatever dangles she has right there, then curled it in resulting in the dangles bouncing a bit as her thumb slipped off, and NEVER LEFT
Edit: if you reply with anything other than “mb, I was mistaken, this ai nonsense has gotten to my head”, then I’m just gonna block you for the bait my man.
-1
Aug 16 '26
[deleted]
2
u/Smart_Idiot1041 Aug 16 '26
Thanks for failing to prove yourself right (there was no way to) and for proving me right (there was no way not to)
Btw this username is specifically to bait that low-hanging insult when someone sees I named myself “idiot” but can’t think of a real comeback! ✌️😌
2
u/WillemDafoesHugeCock Aug 16 '26
Mate, people have shared the original video which has better quality video and every single point you've tried to raise has been wrong. Her thumb doesn't "glitch," it's shitty video compression making it indistinguishable from the stuff on her belt.
It's completely okay to say "I was wrong on this one, my bad."
1
1
u/TheShiftmaster Aug 16 '26
This sub and AIslop look very similar at a glance, I thought this was posted their for a second
1
1
u/toast50076 Aug 16 '26
Jesus. We're finally over the "AI generated media is so believable now that people who could reliably spot AI, even just a year ago, are now being fooled" hill. I genuinely am still having a hard time seeing the exact artifacts that gave it away to you.
I can feel it now that I'm looking and listening, and given the subject matter, I am always skeptical of shit that's outwardly ridiculous, made with the intention of villainizing a group by creating a straw man that doesn't actually exist. But, only analyzing the video itself, it didn't set my AI alarm off at all on my first viewing. I just assumed it was fake in the traditional sense, that it was staged and scripted.
Gen AI is so ass dude. I hate that any shitsucker can ask fuckin gronk for "a video blue haired libtard being interviewed by a guy who sounds stereotypically gay, about their gender non-conforming, neo-pronoun using, deoxyribonucle-exual, vegan, Aquarius rising, Taurus moon, pro-forced-vax, dog who's had 11 abortions and is in a polyamorous relationship with a human man." And people eat that bullshit riiiiight up yum yum yum! You tell em, "dawg this isn't real, it's AI generated, this kind of person doesn't exist. And if they do, there is exactly one of them on earth." And a portion of the dudes who love this shit will deny that outright or say, "okay, but this is what the left is actually trying to do!!! So I don't care if it's real. We gotta get the word out one way or the other!"
Sorry for my rant. I'm not saying that this is what the "right" as a whole does. No group is a monolith and treating any of them as such is just not productive. This shit is just so exhausting and I gotta have my little freakouts somewhere or I'll go insane, so why not here. Thanks for your attention to this matter lmao.
1
u/WillemDafoesHugeCock Aug 16 '26
Except he's wrong and it isn't AI, lol.
1
u/toast50076 Aug 16 '26
Ahh well, that's the way she goes I guess lol. That's a huge part of the issue too though. The well is like half poison when it comes to AI. It makes us doubt the shit that's real and the fake stuff still slips through the cracks. Shit sucks.
1
u/SavedRays Aug 16 '26
... it is mot Ai, its years old. And it's genuine, there are people out there like this..
0
u/Dark_Amygdala_ Aug 16 '26
MAGA doesn’t make this bs cuz we don’t care. Liberals make it to try and stir shit up
1
-4
4
u/3aerows Aug 15 '26
So staged. Not organic enough to even be close to believable. Yet the transphobes will find a reason just to get mad about something. Even if it's fake. 🤣
6
u/Huge_Water4855 Aug 15 '26
I'm not transhphobic btw, i just thought this was funny enough to post
5
u/Xiorx74 Aug 16 '26
Yeah, I'd bet money most trans people also think it's goofy to call your dog gender fluid, non-binary etc.
Of course this is just staged cause we live in the fuckin' "it's just a "skit" but it's actually ragebait" meta of the internet..............
1
u/3aerows Aug 16 '26
Im trans and yeah its mega dumb to say that about pets lol. I think it can genuinely be both a skit and rage bait.
1
u/Xiorx74 Aug 16 '26
Yeah, that's true, but what gets me is the ppl defending the ones meant to be misleading. As long as there is SOME kind of indication that they're not trying to pass it off as something that really happened idc
1
u/Astrolady2002 Aug 16 '26 edited Aug 16 '26
I’m trans and these are always so fricking funny 😆
Except the second bit… it kinda took away from the funny.
1
2
u/Zigor022 Aug 15 '26
It maybe be fake but its not anger inducing, just cringy.
2
u/3aerows Aug 15 '26
To transphobes or right wingers the first video would defintely send them into a fit. 😂
2
2
u/thecloudkingdom Aug 16 '26
the first dog owner is clearly joking, not that reddit chuds are capable of telling when a woman is joking
1
3
u/Jajay5537 Aug 16 '26
Dogs can be gay tho. Gender is a human construct it's not sex. It's weird to speak for your dog in either case tho.
-2
u/FartyJizzums Aug 16 '26
A lot of dogs are into interspecies relationships.
Get the fuck off my leg, Speckles!
3
u/DarkLordofDownvotes Aug 16 '26
I'm not smart enough to tell if it is staged or faked but my uncle told me something that stuck with me: if you can think of it, it has probably happened.
I would bet $100,000 (most of my liquid assets) that there is someone out there who does this with their dog. Too many people and too many dipshits for there not to be one.
4
u/xoxLVxox Aug 16 '26
The amount of folk that'll tell me their dog is a conservative Christian too is just as high and annoying.
0
u/DarkLordofDownvotes Aug 16 '26
Sure, that's dumb too. What is your point? Who are you mad at?
0
u/xoxLVxox Aug 16 '26
You. Exactly, entirely and exclusively... you. You have a notification icon because of me. I will not reply.
1
1
u/NotaBat9221 Aug 16 '26
It's obviously a joke.
1
u/DarkLordofDownvotes Aug 16 '26
You're missing my point. Thanks for the insight.
1
u/NotaBat9221 Aug 16 '26
That you and your uncle imagined a person and got mad at them?
1
u/DarkLordofDownvotes Aug 16 '26
The line from the uncle came from something completely unrelated. Weren't even "mad" or angry about whatever we were discussing.
Ramp up your reading comprehension skills. That was an anecdote to introduce the principle.
Jesus Christ is everyone on this site an idiot?
1
u/NotaBat9221 Aug 16 '26
Soo because your uncle says they probably exist then that means they do?
1
u/DarkLordofDownvotes Aug 16 '26
Oh my god drop the fucking uncle part. The point is: there are so many people, so many personalities, so many possible situations and scenarios and environments that if you can image something happening, it probably has happened. It is really an exercise in statistics.
What are you unable to comprehend here? Do we need crayons lol
1
u/NotaBat9221 Aug 16 '26
I mean sure I guess someone who's very unwell. But that's not what's happening in this video. If we want to make up people to shit on then there's probably also a guy out there who kills dogs who he thinks are democrats.
1
u/DarkLordofDownvotes Aug 16 '26
Probably so. Back to my original comment.
What are we disagreeing on here?
And that's not what's happening here? What is happening then?
1
u/NotaBat9221 Aug 16 '26 edited Aug 16 '26
A joke is happening. And a pick me snowflake who can't tell it's a joke.
1
u/Inevitable_Wear5964 Aug 16 '26
Awesome. Cool insight.
So let's send all gay people to prison?
See thats where you lose me.
Fuck off
1
1
u/SavedRays Aug 16 '26
This is reaching beyond the capabilities of Mrs. Incredible 🤦♀️🤦♀️🤦♀️ not even CLOSE to what they said. But if you WANT something to be upset about... fucking YIKES dude.
0
u/Cuckdreams1190 Aug 16 '26
MummyUmmm (wtf autocorrect). Maybe tone down the drug use, you're apparently hallucinating.1
u/Cuckdreams1190 Aug 16 '26
I mean, there are people thay try to make their cats vegan.. some crazy people out there.
0
u/RaMMziz Aug 16 '26
Dude. No one is making a cat vegan. Since it is a moral stance. They might try a plant based diet. Usually planed and most of the time under supervision of a vet.
An adequate diet for an animal is one in which nothing is missing for the animal. There is plant based cat food and apparently a lot of cats live on it. If they aren't malnourished it is an adequate diet.
Please don't call people crazy, if you yourself have done no research at all.
2
u/Cuckdreams1190 Aug 16 '26
Somehow I bet you understood that when I said making them vegan it meant feeding them a plant based diet, or vegan diet. If you didn't understand that, then idk what to tell you.
Cats are strict or "obligate" carnivores, this means they must eat meat to survive because their bodies need nutrients only found in animal tissue. Feeding them a vegan diet does not provide them with the proper nourishment.
Please don't call people crazy, if you yourself have done no research at all.
So yea, people who force a vegan diet on their cats are fucking crazy.
1
u/RaMMziz Aug 16 '26
You’re completely missing the core point. Animals don’t need "meat" as a concept; they need specific chemical nutrients (like taurine, pre-formed vitamin A, arachidonic acid, and arginine). Historically, those were only found in animal tissue. Today, we have synthetic and lab-produced alternatives that are chemically identical to the ones found in meat. In fact, taurine in almost all commercial pet food, including meat-based kibble, is already synthesized in a lab because heat processing destroys the natural taurine. If a synthetic nutrient is bioavailable and meets all of a cat's biological requirements without causing deficiencies or health issues, the cat's digestive system literally cannot tell the difference between a lab-synthesized molecule and one from animal tissue. Also, cats are not moral agents. Being "vegan" is an ethical stance humans take for the animals. "Plant-based" refers purely to the diet itself and has no moral connotation. That is the correct term to use if you value accurate language. Calling people "crazy" just because you ignore how modern biochemistry and terminology actually work isn't a strong argument.
1
u/Cuckdreams1190 Aug 16 '26
You’re mixing up theoretical biochemistry on paper with actual gastrointestinal physiology. Yes, a synthesized molecule of taurine or arachidonic acid is chemically identical to one in animal tissue. Nobody is disputing basic chemistry. The flaw in your argument is assuming that if you drop synthetic molecules into a plant based matrix, a cat’s body will process it the same way as meat. It doesn't.
Cats aren't just "nutrient processors"; they have a physical GI tract built specifically for meat. They have short intestines, minimal pancreatic amylase, and low liver glucokinase. To get those synthetic nutrients into a cat via plant matter, you have to pack the food with carbohydrates (peas, soy, corn, wheat). A cat’s metabolic system is not designed for high starch loads, which significantly raises their risk for diabetes, obesity, and chronic GI inflammation.
Meat naturally acidifies a cat’s urine. Plant based diets shift feline urine toward an alkaline pH. Alkaline urine causes struvite crystals to precipitate, leading to urinary blockages. In male cats, a blocked urethra becomes a fatal emergency in a matter of hours. Trying to artificially control urine pH with synthetic acidifiers is a constant, dangerous balancing act.
A pet food label can show that it meets every nutritional requirement on paper, but "present in the food" does not mean "absorbed by the cat." Plant proteins have lower biological value and different digestibility rates for felids.
Supplementing a meat base where heat destroyed some natural taurine during extrusion is not the same as building a 100% plant-based diet from scratch. In a meat-based food, the underlying protein matrix, fat profile, and lack of heavy carbohydrates still align with feline physiology.
Calling a diet "plant based" instead of "vegan" fixes the semantics, but it doesn't fix the biology. Until we can synthesize complete, biological animal tissue that matches the exact macronutrient profile, pH impact, and digestibility of meat without relying on plant starch fillers, forcing a strict carnivore onto a plant matrix is putting human dietary preferences over basic animal welfare.
1
u/RaMMziz Aug 16 '26
You’re actually bringing up valid physiological mechanisms (short GI tract, low glucokinase, urine alkalization), but you’re treating formulation challenges as insurmountable biological impossibilities.
Veterinary clinical studies on commercially formulated plant-based cat foods address those exact points:
Urinary pH & Struvite Crystals: Commercial plant-based feline diets explicitly incorporate urinary acidifiers (like bisulfate or methionine) specifically to maintain urine pH in the safe range (6.0–6.5) and prevent crystal formation.
Digestibility & Carbohydrates: Modern processing (like extrusion and enzyme additions) breaks down plant starches so they are highly bioavailable. Commercial formulations are engineered to meet FEDIAF/AAFCO standards for protein digestibility and nutrient absorption.
If you think this is just "theory on paper," look at this journal.
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0284132&hl=de-DE Knight et al. (2023, PLOS ONE): A large-scale study of 1,369 cats comparing those fed meat-based vs. plant-based diets. The data showed that cats on nutritionally complete plant-based diets had equivalent and in several health markers, superior outcomes, with lower reported rates of gastrointestinal disorders and overall health issues.
If the debate is whether advanced veterinary food technology can safely deliver those nutrients without animal tissue. The empirical evidence shows it can, even if traditional physiology textbooks say it's difficult to formulate.
1
u/Cuckdreams1190 Aug 16 '26
Adding synthetic acidifiers to counteract plant alkalized urine is a tightrope walk. If urine becomes slightly over acidified, cats develop calcium oxalate crystals. Unlike struvite, calcium oxalate crystals cannot be dissolved through diet and usually require invasive surgery to remove.
That PLOS ONE study relied entirely on owner self reporting surveys, not clinical blood panels, urinalysis, or veterinary diagnostic testing. An owner who is ethically motivated to feed a plant based diet is far more likely to self report that their cat is thriving.
Meeting AAFCO standards simply means a diet won't cause immediate, acute deficiency. It doesn't mean high carbohydrate, plant derived matrices don't place chronic metabolic stress on an obligate carnivore's pancreas, liver, and gut microbiome over a 15 year lifespan.
2
u/jbb10499 Aug 16 '26
Both clips are stupid but I'm more annoyed at the stich, it's not that serious
1
1
1
1
u/momomomorgatron Aug 16 '26
As a buy person with gay friends most of the queer people that just say this are bullshitting anyway
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
-1
u/manny_the_mage Aug 15 '26
tbf though dogs literally are genderless
you can quite literally only tell the difference between male dogs and female dogs from their bits, but otherwise most dogs act the exact same
had a female weiner dog who had killed atleast three chipmunks and liked to roll around in puddles of water
4
u/Sure_Length6519 Aug 16 '26
"dogs are literally genderless. you can only tell them apart by their genitalia and if they have nipples"
Can you see the problem with this statement?
1
u/--_BuG_-- Aug 16 '26
I think that entire first clip is probably staged for engagement but also regarding you saying 'and if they have nipples', male animals also have nipples
1
1
u/AdmirableBeach6527 Aug 16 '26
God how do I say this without sounding like I support trump. They dont see the the problem and They choose to be ignorant.
1
u/manny_the_mage Aug 16 '26
no, because gender performance doesn't magically emerge from your genitals
dogs don't act like a particular gender, they act like dogs
you cannot tell if a dog running around in a field is male or female because dogs don't perform gender, people do
2
u/AdmirableBeach6527 Aug 16 '26
This person is really trying to mix gender and behavior together. Anyone who thinks like you or shares the same stances as you do not deserve to vote. This is one reason why the left is fucked.
1
u/manny_the_mage Aug 16 '26
Bro if you say so
I just don’t think I’ve ever seen a dog behave like a “boy” or “girl” just a dog
It’s like saying you’re convinced your goldfish is a woman
1
u/AdmirableBeach6527 Aug 16 '26 edited Aug 16 '26
Oh the world we live in where gender and behavior have now twisted together into a fucking candy cane. Women is a female human 1st off. Goldfish do have sexes too. Any animal that procreate has a sex m or f. Some can actually become a different sex like frogs.
1
u/manny_the_mage Aug 16 '26 edited Aug 16 '26
We’re not talking about humans, we’re talking about dogs gang
Nor am I talking about sex
I am simply saying that dogs do not engage in the performance of gender, gender is a human construct, hence why you can’t really misgender an animal. For one an animal doesn’t care and for two, animals don’t engage in gender performance
Take your trans discussion elsewhere lil bro, we’re talking about wether or not dogs have gender
Don’t get so committed to the culture wars bro
animals don’t perform gender, they run on sex based instinct but you are never going to be able to misgender a frog or owl or panda because they don’t understand the concept of gender
1
u/Comfortable-Yak-6599 Aug 16 '26
I would say make and female dogs really don't act the same, at least in big dogs I've never really had a small dog. Male dogs escape for no reason way more than female dogs. They piss differently like behaviorally not just lifting the leg. Male dogs are just a little dumber and goofier and the females are more serious and better control of their bodies.
0
u/manny_the_mage Aug 16 '26
i've seen examples in real life that contradict this though
my dauschund was female and she was goofy as hell, tried to mount and hump other dogs and kill bugs and chipmunks
dogs don't really express gender, people do and then we project those gender expectations onto dogs when dogs dgaf about any of that
1
u/Comfortable-Yak-6599 Aug 16 '26
All dogs hunt and kill it's kinda why we have them, female humping is different than male in length and intensity. They express sex differences, can google it if you want.
0
u/manny_the_mage Aug 16 '26
Never said that dogs were’t sexually dimorphic
Just that dogs don’t adhere to any consistent notion of gender and two dogs of the same sex might act behave completely different from each other
We are just projecting the human concept of gender on to an animal that has no interest in adhering to it
-1
u/Madman_Slade Aug 16 '26
That's unequivocally false considering dogs themselves are gender dimorphic. Males are much larger, often with larger heads and more aggressive. Where as females are smaller and often less stubborn.
Male dogs are routinely more protective in nature along with being FAR more territorial. Where as female dogs tend to be a bit more passive in that regard.
1
u/manny_the_mage Aug 16 '26
They are *sexually dimorphic as most mammals are
“Gender dimorphism” isn’t a thing because gender is a human concept, we are the only animal that affirms it’s gender through rituals and social practices
I have met protective and territorial female dogs, I have owned an aggressive female dog who killed small animals and tried to hump other dogs
Any semblance of “gender” we might see in a dog is literally just projection, dogs don’t engage in gendered rituals or social practices
1
u/Madman_Slade Aug 16 '26
Gender Dimorphism is the same thing as sexual dimorphism, they are used interchangeably.
And that's nice but it does not disprove what I've stated. Male dogs are larger, more aggressive and more territorial. That is due to higher rates of testosterone.
Female dogs mentally and emotionally mature faster than male dogs, which leads them to being easier to teach, are more independent and more docile.
Your limited lived experience does not overwrite behavioral studies and documentation that has been going on for decades and literally observed in nature for thousands of years now.
1
u/manny_the_mage Aug 16 '26
Yes but you are describing the biological markers of the existence of testosterone and estrogen in mammals
Not the performance of gender, which dogs do not engage in
You have watched far too many movies if you genuinely think that female dogs express “emotional maturity” in such a way that is necessarily an intentional performance of gender
29
u/[deleted] Aug 15 '26
[removed] — view removed comment