Oh no, a woman is sexually open on the internet because… she might want to? Calling every sexually open woman on the internet “naive” is actually kinda misogynist ngl
You said that you cannot be into consensual degradation, be out and proud about that, without being either naive or a honeypot, if I’m reading your post correctly.
Clarify what? You haven’t asked me anything. You throw baseless accusations based on a terrible read of what I said and then want me to bend over backwards for you? Troll behavior, I expect better from this community.
It’s a profiling of something in context, much like how the original post I made was about profiling something in context, not me making a generalizing, universal statement about all women in all contexts. So far, you have yet to ask me what exactly you want clarification on. I’m not a mind-reader.
I want you to clarify why you think it is relevant to whether they would be a honey pot or not to address their kinks. Imo their politics is enough to be on c/srs and trying to talk about their kinks just derails criticism of their politics into argumenta ad hominem that in the end benefits nobody.
Oh no, a woman is sexually open on the internet because… she might want to? Calling every sexually open woman on the internet “naive” is actually kinda misogynist ngl
This is reminiscent of Twitter in the older days, tbh. Obviously did not read clearly what I wrote and attacks me for something I didn’t say.
You said that you cannot be into consensual degradation, be out and proud about that, without being either naive or a honeypot, if I’m reading your post correctly.
No, that is not what I said.
Ok then clarify what you said :p
Clarify what? You haven’t asked me anything. You throw baseless accusations based on a terrible read of what I said and then want me to bend over backwards for you? Troll behavior, I expect better from this community.
I misunderstand what you say, you point that out, and I ask for clarification. How in any way is that “trolling”?
It’s a profiling of something in context, much like how the original post I made was about profiling something in context, not me making a generalizing, universal statement about all women in all contexts. So far, you have yet to ask me what exactly you want clarification on. I’m not a mind-reader.
I want you to clarify why you think it is relevant to whether they would be a honey pot or not to address their kinks. Imo their politics is enough to be on c/srs and trying to talk about their kinks just derails criticism of their politics into argumenta ad hominem that in the end benefits nobody.