▲ 1095 ▼ Can't get that metallic taste out of my mouth (slrpnk.net) submitted 2 years ago by Track_Shovel@slrpnk.net to c/lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world 127 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[+] ameancow@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone -2 points 2 years ago* (1 child) No I'm saying that using that term implies an expectation for those women that they are failing to meet. I am asking why he has an expectation for random women to not get those piercings. Re-read my comment omg 🙄 You also accused me of not knowing how to speak English while seemingly not understanding what the word dissappointed means. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] ameancow@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone -1 points 2 years ago* (2 children) He didn't say someone in particular. He said he was "disappointed so many girls" are getting those piercings. That doesn't imply specific women, it implies women in general. It's fine for him not to like them, I'm calling out his use of language and how it implies that all women are beholden to some expectation he has for them. The rest of your comment is genuinely bizarre and I have no idea what you're even talking about. Read through the comment tree again. I never said anything about who the commenter was. Just calling out something he said and the implication inherent in it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] ASeriesOfPoorChoices@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago (1 child) and we're calling out your use of language and the implication inherent in it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Youre mischaracterizing what I said as though I made some comment about the commenter having preferences. Which is not and never was what I said. If you're going to call out something I said and the implication in it, at least tell me what I said that you're calling out and what the implication was in what I said. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ASeriesOfPoorChoices@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago (1 child) I for one, am disappointed in you. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone -2 points 2 years ago Cool. You're so brave. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Spectrism@discuss.tchncs.de 1 point 2 years ago "it implies women in general." No, it implies a specific group of women, namely those with such piercings. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone -2 points 2 years ago* (1 child) No I'm saying that using that term implies an expectation for those women that they are failing to meet. I am asking why he has an expectation for random women to not get those piercings. Re-read my comment omg 🙄 You also accused me of not knowing how to speak English while seemingly not understanding what the word dissappointed means. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] ameancow@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone -1 points 2 years ago* (2 children) He didn't say someone in particular. He said he was "disappointed so many girls" are getting those piercings. That doesn't imply specific women, it implies women in general. It's fine for him not to like them, I'm calling out his use of language and how it implies that all women are beholden to some expectation he has for them. The rest of your comment is genuinely bizarre and I have no idea what you're even talking about. Read through the comment tree again. I never said anything about who the commenter was. Just calling out something he said and the implication inherent in it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] ASeriesOfPoorChoices@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago (1 child) and we're calling out your use of language and the implication inherent in it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Youre mischaracterizing what I said as though I made some comment about the commenter having preferences. Which is not and never was what I said. If you're going to call out something I said and the implication in it, at least tell me what I said that you're calling out and what the implication was in what I said. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ASeriesOfPoorChoices@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago (1 child) I for one, am disappointed in you. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone -2 points 2 years ago Cool. You're so brave. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Spectrism@discuss.tchncs.de 1 point 2 years ago "it implies women in general." No, it implies a specific group of women, namely those with such piercings. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] ameancow@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone -1 points 2 years ago* (2 children) He didn't say someone in particular. He said he was "disappointed so many girls" are getting those piercings. That doesn't imply specific women, it implies women in general. It's fine for him not to like them, I'm calling out his use of language and how it implies that all women are beholden to some expectation he has for them. The rest of your comment is genuinely bizarre and I have no idea what you're even talking about. Read through the comment tree again. I never said anything about who the commenter was. Just calling out something he said and the implication inherent in it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] ASeriesOfPoorChoices@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago (1 child) and we're calling out your use of language and the implication inherent in it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Youre mischaracterizing what I said as though I made some comment about the commenter having preferences. Which is not and never was what I said. If you're going to call out something I said and the implication in it, at least tell me what I said that you're calling out and what the implication was in what I said. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ASeriesOfPoorChoices@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago (1 child) I for one, am disappointed in you. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone -2 points 2 years ago Cool. You're so brave. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Spectrism@discuss.tchncs.de 1 point 2 years ago "it implies women in general." No, it implies a specific group of women, namely those with such piercings. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone -1 points 2 years ago* (2 children) He didn't say someone in particular. He said he was "disappointed so many girls" are getting those piercings. That doesn't imply specific women, it implies women in general. It's fine for him not to like them, I'm calling out his use of language and how it implies that all women are beholden to some expectation he has for them. The rest of your comment is genuinely bizarre and I have no idea what you're even talking about. Read through the comment tree again. I never said anything about who the commenter was. Just calling out something he said and the implication inherent in it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] ASeriesOfPoorChoices@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago (1 child) and we're calling out your use of language and the implication inherent in it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Youre mischaracterizing what I said as though I made some comment about the commenter having preferences. Which is not and never was what I said. If you're going to call out something I said and the implication in it, at least tell me what I said that you're calling out and what the implication was in what I said. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ASeriesOfPoorChoices@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago (1 child) I for one, am disappointed in you. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone -2 points 2 years ago Cool. You're so brave. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Spectrism@discuss.tchncs.de 1 point 2 years ago "it implies women in general." No, it implies a specific group of women, namely those with such piercings. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ASeriesOfPoorChoices@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago (1 child) and we're calling out your use of language and the implication inherent in it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Youre mischaracterizing what I said as though I made some comment about the commenter having preferences. Which is not and never was what I said. If you're going to call out something I said and the implication in it, at least tell me what I said that you're calling out and what the implication was in what I said. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ASeriesOfPoorChoices@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago (1 child) I for one, am disappointed in you. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone -2 points 2 years ago Cool. You're so brave. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Youre mischaracterizing what I said as though I made some comment about the commenter having preferences. Which is not and never was what I said. If you're going to call out something I said and the implication in it, at least tell me what I said that you're calling out and what the implication was in what I said. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ASeriesOfPoorChoices@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago (1 child) I for one, am disappointed in you. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone -2 points 2 years ago Cool. You're so brave. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ASeriesOfPoorChoices@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago (1 child) I for one, am disappointed in you. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone -2 points 2 years ago Cool. You're so brave. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone -2 points 2 years ago Cool. You're so brave. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Spectrism@discuss.tchncs.de 1 point 2 years ago "it implies women in general." No, it implies a specific group of women, namely those with such piercings. permalink fedilink source parent
