Categories
a new woman to hate aggrieved entitlement empathy deficit entitled babies evil widows men who should not ever be with women ever MGTOW misogyny reddit

The absolute worst take on the death of Navy SEAL Ryan Owens, courtesy of Reddit’s MGTOWs

Carryn Owens at Trump’s Joint Session address last week

The most memorable moment in #SecondPlacePresident Trump’s speech to Congress last week came when he spoke directly to the widow of slain Navy SEAL Ryan Owens.

Some saw Trump’s tribute to Owens as supremely presidential, others saw it as a “crassly manipulative” ploy to absolve himself from blame for the bungled raid that led to Owens’ death. Some thought he had truly honored the visibly grief-wracked Carryn Owens; others thought he had cynically exploited her for his own political self-aggrandizement.

The regulars in Reddit’s Men Going Their Own Way subreddit have a rather different take on the whole thing.

As they see it, the real issue is that Carryn Owens is an “attention seeking whore [who] most probably cheated on the poor guy like almost all military wives do.”

In a post with several dozen upvotes, the Reddit MGTOW who calls himself No-M3rcy tears into Carryn Owens for her imagined infidelity and alleged attention-seeking.

Ryan fought and died in Yemen while the woman comes on camera and gets all the attention. She becomes a “national hero” and this becomes one of the “best political moments in U.S. history” for doing nothing but crying on camera. Women sure do know how to put up an act. Give it some time and you’ll see her pop up like many military widows on interviews and other things. So much for private grief and respecting your husband.

Trump is the one who turned the whole thing into a political spectacle; Carryn committed no crime other than having feelings in public. How showing her obviously genuine grief is supposed to be disrespectful of her husband I have no idea.

After the Trump speech, everyone forgets about the poor guy and she gets all the media attention for days. The guy is disposable just like all of us and the woman is always the victim. He served his role and now no one gives a shit about him.

Really? Because when I do a Google News search of his name I get this:

This story is not going away, and until we get to the bottom of why the raid failed it shouldn’t.

But the saddest thing is that this attention seeking whore most probably cheated on the poor guy like almost all military wives do. And there he is fighting for her freedom and providing for her. It’s disgraceful how male vets get treated and cheated on.

There is of course zero evidence that she cheated on him; this is just straight up misogyny.

Sometimes they even get Booed when they come back home.

Yeah, that did happen sometimes — during the Vietnam war.  Well, there was one case 5 years ago in which a gay soldier was booed at a Republican debate, though he was booed for being gay, not for being a soldier.

And worst of all, even though she is a post-wall hag (her husband was mid 30’s so she’s probably the same/younger), some Beta simp will probably step in to “save her” from her misery and marry her regardless of the fact that she is a rapidly aging single mother full of wrinkles.

Only a MGTOW could look at a conventionally attractive and not-actually-old-at-all woman insensate with grief and think “yeah, I bet she’s got wrinkles, what a hag, she should die alone!”

Given their bizarre fixation on the alleged “rapid aging” of women and the evils of showing any signs at all of age, I can only wonder what’s going to happen when all these MGTOWs start getting wrinkles themselves.

I hate to tell you this, MGTOW dudes, but men age too, and they don’t all age like fine wine.

She will forget all about her husband and latch onto the new Beta.

Most widows and widowers do move on, which may or may not involve dating or marrying someone else, but they never forget the partner they lost.

What a Gynocentric society we live in. Women will just use you as a resource. Even if you are dead, they will still use you for attention.

Trump is the person who turned everyone’s attention to her; he’s the only one using anyone here.

I think that if she really cared about him she would have stayed home and grieved in private and not use him for sympathy points.

Well, it’s good that no one but your fellow MGTOW losers gives a shit what you think.

114 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Handsome :Punkle Stan: Jack

For the curious, we actually do know (for fairly certain, at least) why Trump ordered the suicide mission – he got a golf course out of it. “War crime” is putting it mildly.

…Donald Trump went through with the Yemen raid, even though it predictably resulted in the deaths of a Navy SEAL and several unrelated civilians, and the target wasn’t even there.

comment image

Ohlmann
Ohlmann
7 years ago

(meanwhile, Trump prove that he is an oppressor at the very least. I am nearly whishing for the secret services to depose him for endangering the planet)

Ooglyboggles
Ooglyboggles
7 years ago

@Ohlmann
Considering he is antagonizing absolutely anyone and everyone, it’s seeming to be more of a “when” then “if.”

Meanwhile Trump continues to fire anyone who can possibly reign him in.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/10/us/politics/us-attorney-justice-department-trump.html
And still can’t provide evidence for wiretapping on Obama’s part.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/03/10/a-reporter-asked-donald-trump-repeatedly-for-evidence-of-wiretapping-he-didnt-answer/

The fact that there is no less than 5 solid grounds for impeachment and he still is around is a testament to how lamentable the GOP is.

mywall
mywall
7 years ago

@Ohlmann

This guy chose to fly halfway round the world with the specific aim of killing Yemeni people (including children by some reports); I think we can safely deduce racism from these actions.

dlouwe
dlouwe
7 years ago

@mywall

This guy chose to fly halfway round the world with the specific aim of killing Yemeni people (including children by some reports); I think we can safely deduce racism from these actions.

When you say he “chose” to do that, which choice are you referring to, specifically?

Handsome :Punkle Stan: Jack

@dlouwe

Well, as you know, Navy SEALs plan out their own mission with no oversight, just like Spectres from Mass Effect. The government just gives them unlimited money to do whatever they please and don’t give them order or anything because, as we all know, all the onus is on the grunts and jarheads, who are taught they can say no with no repercussions to their commanding officers and are just given free reign to do whatever to their hearts’ delight.

It’s a really sweet gig.

Scented Fucking Hard Chairs
Scented Fucking Hard Chairs
7 years ago

Seriously, I think Mywall’s been playing too many video games, and that’s coming from somebody who’s currently building a friendly robot trader with a screaming monster skull for a head and dual laser cannons.

Brony, Social Justice Cenobite

The US military does a great many things that are dishonorable. Our hands are bloody. That should be reflected in the culture if we are to fix anything. The military is part of our culture. They can’t be left out of any attempt to change society but there are right and wrong ways of doing this. It’s an efficiency thing.

That was a political event. That dead soldier was made into a symbol. That matters. The widow should be respected unless she starts being political and destructive. As for critisizing the dead soldier personally, I don’t know. I can’t do it.

But there are those that can. Non-US citizens probably have an opinion too. Many have good reasons to dislike our military.

I don’t see simple solutions here.

Handsome :Punkle Stan: Jack

As for critisizing the dead soldier personally, I don’t know. I can’t do it.

Honestly, once someone is dead, I can’t understand why we should have criticism directed at them. Criticism is suppose to be constructive and help change something; the dead can’t change. What should be criticized is not a specific Navy SEAL but the concept of Navy SEALs, their actions, and the glorifications of military culture, and using a dead man to be a symbol and stand-in for an entire structure isn’t gonna do that because it’s putting the problems on the shoulders of few rather than the shoulders of everyone actually involved.

But mostly fucking Dump. He ordered the fucking thing. If there was no order put out, no one would have died, so he’s the one responsible here, not Owens.

Brony, Social Justice Cenobite

@Handsome :Punkle Stan: Jack
I agree that Tdump is the one that should get a socially severe reaction. He will be toxic to military actions and he’s the social figurehead. That’s smart strategy.

I have no personal issues with the soldier because I know little about them or the mission. I don’t know what they did. So until I read more I would not personally critisize the soldier and I’m not trying to here.

But there are people who could critisize a dead soldier. It’s an “elimination of targets” thing for me because of the sorts of things I do to account for privilige and I’m honestly still actively thinking about best ways for ths kind of situation. In a situation with similar elements I defended people critisizing David Bowie for some of his past.

There will be be many targets. People using this soldier as a social symbol are going to be targets. I won’t spare my family. I roasted them over Benghazi. Government officials, there will be many good targets of criticism.

dlouwe
dlouwe
7 years ago

@Handsome Jack

Honestly, I think it’s fine to criticize the dead. People don’t get a pass just ’cause they stopped living. The living can still learn from the mistakes of the dead, and we do that through healthy criticism.

However I side-eye anyone who uses a death as an opportunity to turn that person into a symbol for something they want to criticize. Nobody was calling out Owens while he was still alive, because he wasn’t noteworthy. His death doesn’t change that; anything about him that’s worth criticizing is shared by countless others in the US military, so why is he being singled out? Sticking it to a dead dude because they held a relatively low rank in an organization you have beef with is just crass and opportunistic.

Nobody Special
Nobody Special
7 years ago

Ooglyboggles
March 10, 2017 at 2:14 pm
@Nobody Special
Said hypothetical is pointless under the fact that the US has and is not in any position where any country can do the same to the US as the US did to other countries. Last time I checked, Vietnam, North Korea, Russia and all Middle Eastern countries haven’t done or is capable of invading US soil. That line of thinking is left to power fantasies of Homefront.

Said hypothesis is not pointless, though maybe the example of a full invasion was a bad one, so let’s change the scenario to one that America is vulnerable to. A large-scale, well-organised series of terrorist attacks. One of the terrorist ops sees twenty or so well-trained and heavily armed terrorists entering Dalillama’s workplace or maybe a shopping mall where Dalillama just happens to be. It’s a common enough tactic; so many cover the entry points to prevent escape whilst the main force casually move from room to room or store to store killing everybody they find. Would Dalillama be quite so dismissive of ‘those fuckers’ in that situation?

WE’RE the invading imperial force fueled by a military industrial complex and racist zealots. Don’t even attempt to paint virtue in this situation.

I’m not attempting to paint virtue; I’m not even sure what the bloody phrase means. I’m genuinly interested in how Dalillama would react if it were their life in danger. In my experience, and from those of my family members who served in Northern Ireland, it rarely matters how much people hate or claim to hate the military; when the shit hits the fan they’re yelling for help along with everybody else, even if they do return to hating once the danger has passed.

mywall
March 10, 2017 at 2:16 pm
@Nobody Special

You do understand that this guy WAS the invading army, right? He was the enemy with bullets and bombs sent to mass murder the civilians because of racism. No part of what he was doing had any connection with defense.

Of course, but that doesn’t mean that his unit’s next role won’t be one of defending US citizens, even the ungrateful ones..

Handsome :Punkle Stan: Jack

But there are people who could critisize a dead soldier. It’s an “elimination of targets” thing for me because of the sorts of things I do to account for privilige and I’m honestly still actively thinking about best ways for ths kind of situation. In a situation with similar elements I defended people critisizing David Bowie for some of his past.

The thing is is that while people might be lured into the military because of money issues, college, traveling, even racism (I guess?) what they do is still, ultimately, up to their superiors.

It’s not soldiers who start wars, it’s not soldiers who plan strikes, it’s the upper managment. Might as well yell at the person at the drive through for company policy, to kinda be flippant about it.

Yes, there is some personal accountability. Maybe Ryan Owens could have protested or quit and not done the things he did but another would have taken his place, and likely a similar result would have happened, so it isn’t Owens fault in this situation.

All we know is the raid involved Yemen allies and 29 civilians plus Owens died in the raid. The travel ban was also signed a day before the raid happened, which may or may not have affected things. That is what we know or, at least, that’s all that I really know of the case.

Dump not only is a fucking idiot for doing a would fail raid in the first place but 30 people would still be alive if he didn’t sign off on it.

However I side-eye anyone who uses a death as an opportunity to turn that person into a symbol for something they want to criticize. Nobody was calling out Owens while he was still alive, because he wasn’t noteworthy.

Well, I don’t think who’s in SEAL Teams is public information for reasons but, yes, that’s what I mostly mean when I say it’s useless to criticize the dead but they say hindsight is 20/20. They are using Owens as a way to criticize SEALs when they can just…criticize the SEALs.

And don’t get me wrong, I don’t blame people who only have the courage to criticize someone who had done them or others wrong after they’ve died but it’s a different matter entirely when it’s a botched military raid that shouldn’t have been done. Owens was the not the one at fault for this, or at least, he wasn’t the one who planned the mission, a mission that people knew was likely to fail and it did.

And it was all likely done for a golf course.

Fuck Dump.

numerobis
numerobis
7 years ago

Ohlmann:

France tend to do less stupid wars,

Hahahahaha!

Elle est bonne 😉

Remember Libya? Hollande couldn’t even wait for the no-fly zone to get announced before sending in bombers… for a no-fly zone.

France is very active in the world, clinging like the U.K. does to the memory of empire.

The US has more budget, so you notice it more.

Sinkable John : Pansy Ass Pinko, Regicidal Beast-of-Burden
Sinkable John : Pansy Ass Pinko, Regicidal Beast-of-Burden
7 years ago

@dlouwe & Jack

You can still aim your criticism at a person’s memory. As long as others are there to hear it, it doesn’t matter that the dead person isn’t, since they’re dead anyway. It’s only a waste of breath if you’re all alone in a graveyard yelling at a tombstone – and even then, that might be pretty liberating if nothing else.

Sticking it to a dead dude because they held a relatively low rank in an organization you have beef with is just crass and opportunistic.

There’s a line somewhere between that and what’s going on though. I mean, seriously, the adoration and all, come on. That’s the kind of hero cult that ends up justifying pretty much anything – make people feel like the military is actually fighting their war, whatever that is, and not, say… expanding or protecting the interests of a few assholes.

That said, not worshipping the dude as a hero doesn’t mean denying that his death was wrongful. For starters, it coulda been avoided by not sending him to commit a war crime.

@Ohlmann

The reason we lose less soldiers is ’cause we’re apparently more careful with them. Can’t exactly afford to lose truckloads of them like the US, since we don’t have that many bodies. Though that changed after the Dubya years, what with Obama being less belligerent (and relying on drones strikes more).

But meh, our wars are just as dumb. Might’ve something to do with the entire concept of war, maybe.

@Nobody Special

I’m not attempting to paint virtue; I’m not even sure what the bloody phrase means.

Uh, not knowing what something means doesn’t mean that you can’t do it. Otherwise a lot of assholes would be a lot less smug about it.

it rarely matters how much people hate or claim to hate the military; when the shit hits the fan they’re yelling for help along with everybody else, even if they do return to hating once the danger has passed

So you mean, we should start loving them ’cause you never know if they might actually fit their own job description for a while ?

Yeah, nope.

Ooglyboggles
Ooglyboggles
7 years ago

@Nobody Special
Okay let’s break this down.

Said hypothesis is not pointless, though maybe the example of a full invasion was a bad one, so let’s change the scenario to one that America is vulnerable to. A large-scale, well-organized series of terrorist attacks.

I guess we need to screen the Muslims more, oh wait our system makes it too much of a hassle and nearly impossible to do. I guess we should be wary of the white terrorists. But the media says they’re “lone wolves” and nothing more on the matter. The Oregon Incident with armed white terrorists was a long, drawn out process where they were given so much time, time that the military wouldn’t even give to say any other form of ethnic terrorist. And that incident was with poorly thought out Sovereign Bigots.

Your revised scenario is a strange one. We never had that before, and due to Trump’s presidency alot of bigots are emboldened to act out. However not only is this one has its own flaws. A common theme you find is that white terrorists in the US get a fuck ton more leeway and sympathy. They don’t even get the label of terrorist by mainstream media. They also have a trend of not being shot on sight and given hours of negotiation. Or how in the countless events by white terrorists none of them are anywhere close to your hypothetical.

Dalill would be fucking dead in your scenario while the military and local law enforcement spends hours and hours trying to settle them down. Yeah Dalill would totally appreciate the “Oh I saved your life but I’m going to continue voting in ways to hurt you for the rest of my life.”

In my experience, and from those of my family members who served in Northern Ireland, it rarely matters how much people hate or claim to hate the military; when the shit hits the fan they’re yelling for help along with everybody else, even if they do return to hating once the danger has passed.

http://www.indexmundi.com/ireland/demographics_profile.html

Irish 84.5%, other white 9.8%, Asian 1.9%, black 1.4%, mixed and other 0.9%, unspecified 1.6% (2011 est.)

Oh fucking gee I wonder why you all get along.

BOINKBOINKBOINK
BOINKBOINKBOINK
7 years ago

Such a ridiculous argument. That’s like saying police officers killed in the line of duty don’t deserve any respect because obviously they are all racist murderers because the institutions they serve need an overhaul in dealing with racist murdering police officers.

Once you start judging people as a faceless institution and not indviduals, you’re done. It’s the same twisty logic used to judge everyone by one gender, or one sexuality, or one skin color, or one religion.

dlouwe
dlouwe
7 years ago

@Sinkable John

There’s a line somewhere between that and what’s going on though. I mean, seriously, the adoration and all, come on. That’s the kind of hero cult that ends up justifying pretty much anything

Oh, absolutely. To clarify, that paragraph was pretty much exclusively directed at mywall; I feel they were commenting in bad faith. I generally agree with Dali’s original argument that we shouldn’t simply assume that military service is by default honourable.

Axecalibur: Middle Name Danger
Axecalibur: Middle Name Danger
7 years ago

Well, that’s what I get for showing up late *groans*

@Dali
You were being an unbelievable ass. I don’t care about your philosophical stance right now, you were out of line. Nobody needs you to pick a fight here, cos that’s what you did. I’m deliberately not going to respond to anything you said in particular. None of your points matter. You don’t hafta be right, and this isn’t fuckin about you, OK?

@Special
Play gotcha someplace else. Also

it rarely matters how much people hate or claim to hate the military; when the shit hits the fan they’re yelling for help along with everybody else, even if they do return to hating once the danger has passed

Take a gander at the next thread over. Fuck off…

@mywall
Nah, David said all that needed saying…

@BOINK

Once you start judging people as a faceless institution and not indviduals, you’re done. It’s the same twisty logic used to judge everyone by one gender, or one sexuality, or one skin color, or one religion

Utter nonsense. Military service is not the same as ethnicity or orientation. Not remotely close. It’s a fuckin job. Comparing the two is the most heinous bullshit. Quit trivializing actual discrimination and bigotry

you’re no better morally than any MGTOW or Red Piller who judges people by gender and sexuality instead of individual merit

comment image

@Ellesar

this isn’t about honourable deaths or even about Trump’s terrible decision, but how a grieving widow is being attacked for nothing other than being a woman

Perfect. Thank you <3

That should cover itcomment image

Ohlmann
Ohlmann
7 years ago

By “involved in less stupid wars”, I meant “involved in a lesser amount of stupid war”, not “involved in wars that are less stupid” (also, it’s for the XXth century only)

And Mywall did not encounter any actual soldier and it show. I have encountered several soldier. The worse one (an ex-foreign legionary, as one would expect) was a racist shithead and looked like he was utterly unconcerned with the life of others and had no empathy, he never was close to make me think he enjoyed killing people or specifically tried to go in and kill peoples who did not do harm to him. The other were as far as I can tell undistinguishable from the average citizen, were keen on avoiding useless bloodshed, and weren’t asocial or dumb.

Nobody Special
Nobody Special
7 years ago

Sinkable John : Pansy Ass Pinko, Regicidal Beast-of-Burden:

Uh, not knowing what something means doesn’t mean that you can’t do it. Otherwise a lot of assholes would be a lot less smug about it.

If I’m being accused of attempting to do something it would be nice to be told what it is I’m attempting. ‘Painting virtue’ makes no sense to me; I understand the individual words but as a phrase it’s meaningless, nothing more than a device to shut down a debate without having to actually address the other person’s argument, just like the ‘intent isn’t magic’ nonsense that had a brief popularity recently. They might sound clever and are clearly designed to make their targets think that they’re comitting some grave error, but anything more than a superficial glance reveals the emptiness behind the phrases.
So, if you know what ‘painting virtue’ actually means then please tell me, because in my fifty-odd years I have never seen or heard that phrase.
As for the ‘smug’ comment, have a read through your words I’ve quoted above because kettle and pot seem to be making an appearance.

So you mean, we should start loving them ’cause you never know if they might actually fit their own job description for a while ?
Yeah, nope.

Only that isn’t what I said, is it? Not even close. Where did you learn your debating skills? Pharyngula comments?

Ooglyboggles, you think only Muslims and rednecks can be terrorists? Or do you think that’s what I had in mind?
Your President is on a mission to insult every nation on Earth, and your country is home to immigrants or descendants of immigrants from pretty much every nation on Earth. The crime cartels of Mexico have created decent-sized private armies of highly-skilled guerilla fighters, and South America generally has plenty of countries still harbouring deep resentment against America for the way it has continuously shafted them for the last 70 years or-so. And Trump”s wall won’t be going up any time soon.
There are plenty of people closer to home who are champing at the bit to exploit a chink in America’s armour, but I think you know that really, don’t you?

Your revised scenario is a strange one. We never had that before…

And I didn’t say that you had; I said that you had experienced a co-ordinated series of terror attacks. My revised scenario, however, is a tactic favoured by terrorists and rebel forces Worldwide. Just because it hasn’t happened in America doesn’t mean it hasn’t happened anywhere.
All of which makes your following scenario kind of redundant.
As for your final shot, you need to read up a bit on Ireland in the 20th Century. The resentments go back as far as Oliver Cromwell, but the modern ‘troubles’, as it was euphemistically referred to, began during WWI. Colour had no part to play, the hatred was about politics, religion, and nationality; it cost untold lives, military, militia and civilian, and the deep divisions are nowhere near healed today, so please cut out the veiled suggestions of racism; not everything is about colour.

Axecalibur: Middle Name Danger,

Play gotcha someplace else.

Another silencing tactic. All I wanted to know was if Dalillama would accept the assistance and protection from ‘those fuckers’ they despise so much in the unlikely event it was needed to save their skin. No ‘gotcha’, just wondered how deep that resentment ran, that’s all.

Take a gander at the next thread over. Fuck off…

I did; it’s got the cube root of fuck-all to do with this. Grow up.

Viscaria, product of 20,000 evolution
Viscaria, product of 20,000 evolution
7 years ago

Haha, okay. Just a couple of things, Nobody Special:

Said hypothesis is not pointless, though maybe the example of a full invasion was a bad one, so let’s change the scenario to one that America is vulnerable to. A large-scale, well-organised series of terrorist attacks. One of the terrorist ops sees twenty or so well-trained and heavily armed terrorists entering Dalillama’s workplace or maybe a shopping mall where Dalillama just happens to be. It’s a common enough tactic; so many cover the entry points to prevent escape whilst the main force casually move from room to room or store to store killing everybody they find. Would Dalillama be quite so dismissive of ‘those fuckers’ in that situation?

I’m not attempting to paint virtue; I’m not even sure what the bloody phrase means. I’m genuinly interested in how Dalillama would react if it were their life in danger.

Maybe if you want to know about Dali’s thoughts, feelings, and reactions, you should ask Dali, not Oogly? That shit is dismissive and silencing.

just like the ‘intent isn’t magic’ nonsense that had a brief popularity recently

That phrase dates back to a blog post from years ago, but okay. Intent isn’t magic is shorthand for the concept that not intending to commit harm does not prevent one from committing harm. If I’m throwing baseballs all around the place willy-nilly and someone gets hit in the face, saying “but I didn’t meeeeeean to” won’t un-break their nose. I have a responsibilty to apologize for the harm I’ve caused, and to take steps to prevent causing such harm in future.

Intent isn’t totally meaningless, because, in theory, if one is causing harm unintentionally and someone lets one know what one is doing, one should be motivated to ameliorate what damage one can and to prevent further damage. This stands in contrast to someone who means to hurt people, who would have no reason to change their behaviour. But if one claims to have good intentions as a way of escaping moral condemnation for their actions, but makes no amends and continues to behave as they were before, their supposed good intentions are without value.

Elizabeth Regina
Elizabeth Regina
7 years ago

@Ooglyboggles, you do realise that you linked to the statistics about the Republic of Ireland rather than Northern Ireland when @Nobody Special specifically said that was where his relatives served?

The two countries being separate (due to the legacy of colonisation by the British, compounded by issues around religious and national identity) is kind of the whole point of the civil conflict and terrorism in Northern Ireland – so to cite the population statistics of the Republic of Ireland (where the conflict largely wasn’t) ignoring the separate province of Northern Ireland (where thousands of deaths occurred) is tone deaf at best and ignorant at worst.

Citing the racial make-up of a (wrong) country to make some point against why people hate the army until they need the army, is particularly stupid when the conflict was based on a peculiar mix of sectarianism, national identity and post-colonial politics, between 2 sets of white Christians.

Even more so when we consider that the racial mix of the British army deployed was likely to be more diverse than the local population.

“Y’all get along because you’re all white” is the stupidest comment I have ever heard about Northern Ireland in my life, and that is saying something quite, quite special.

Axecalibur: Middle Name Danger
Axecalibur: Middle Name Danger
7 years ago

@Special

Another silencing tactic

Not a tactic. I literally, explicitly suggested you leave the thread. Twice. So, yes, please, shut up. Also, I’ll just point out that calling something a silencing tactic… is a silencing tactic

I did; it’s got the cube root of fuck-all to do with this

Let the record show that the thread to which I referred is about a MGTOW using a lame ass meme to forward the idea that women shouldn’t ‘mistreat’ men lest civilization collapses and they need those men’s mayunly strength and weaponry to survive the apocalypse. Let the record also show that Special here used 2 lame ass hypotheticals to forward the idea that @Dali shouldn’t talk smack about the military lest Bad Guys show up and she needs the military’s mayunly strength and weaponry to survive the invasion. No connection surely -_-

Grow up

And do what? What do I need to do that can only do if I am, or act, older than I am? Pretty vague there, buddy. Also, nah. My boyish charm has carried me pretty well thus far…