Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

All the top comments are simping and replies are immediately asking why is the foid's safety the moid's responsibility and there is no answer.

:marseygiggle:

Good bait.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

It's because traditional masculinity, which includes protecting any foid nearby, has unparalleled utility in low security environments. The police were an attempt to nationalize the benefits of traditional masculinity by making guardianship and retributive violence into a state funded position. Even white people don't trust the police any more and there was a burger crime spike so we're seeing a return of the demand for the privatized police force of traditional masculinity. Neighbors be getting spooked by true crime podcasts and social media to the point of feeling they need a scrote in their corner with a tire iron because the police are evil and won't help them.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

The foids responses in that thread map onto Claudia Card's concept of patriarchy as men running a security racket/cartel in a pretty funny way.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

:#andrewtate:

The best part is people talking about his "feelings of being rejected" being why he doesn't want to be around her so much.

This psychological nonsense is cope to mask the inherent transactional nature of moid/foid relationships.

She wants his muscles, he wants her kitty.

Simple.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

It's even dumber, because let's say they are right and he's just mad because he got rejected: so? he still is not obligated to walk this girl home.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Also the safety argument is r-slurred, he's probably more likely to get mugged going home by himself than her getting r*ped.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

best part is people talking about his "feelings of being rejected" being why he doesn't want to be around her so much.

Why would that even be considered a wrong thing? Many frienships end or drift apart after one of the friends declares having romantic feelings for the other while not being reciprocated (at least taking a break for a while and going back to hang out after getting over it is a healthy option), I think that's understandable, or do redditors want the guy to remain in a perpetual state of simpery?

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

or do redditors want the guy to remain in a perpetual state of simpery?

Well, yeah, that's exactly what they want.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Link copied to clipboard
Action successful!
Error, please refresh the page and try again.