Warning: Some posts on this platform may contain adult material intended for mature audiences only. Viewer discretion is advised. By clicking ‘Continue’, you confirm that you are 18 years or older and consent to viewing explicit content.
he’s an incel who got laid. philosophically, psychologically, socially, he still is. he just got his dick wet a few times. as much as they whine about it;the difference isn’t big enough to waste valuable bandwidth defining.
just because he’s fucked, doesn’t mean he’s gotten any better. doesn’t mean he doesn’t hate women any less. probably resents having to fuck one for his public image.
And I never implied any of that. Just that it’s silly to call someone a thing with a literal meaning as though words don’t matter. And yes he’s not any better off, just different.
brevity, especially in explicitly political messages, matters. nuance WILL be lost, communication has two sides, and sometimes you cannot convey perfect truth, you need to lose a little fidelity. so “JD vance is an incel” is true enough for literal government work.
Ugh yeah I don’t agree that defying definitions of words makes something “poetic”. The fact is that this entire thread indicates the issue, and the upvotes I got indicate I’m not alone
It would be so easy to compare him to incels without saying he is one.
he’s an incel who got laid. philosophically, psychologically, socially, he still is. he just got his dick wet a few times. as much as they whine about it;the difference isn’t big enough to waste valuable bandwidth defining.
There is a big difference in a virgin and someone who fathered children.
And no I’m not defending him. He’s a total piece of shit. Just not involuntarily celibate even if he shares some views with those who are.
I mean just as one example of how they’re different: level of sexual frustration.
just because he’s fucked, doesn’t mean he’s gotten any better. doesn’t mean he doesn’t hate women any less. probably resents having to fuck one for his public image.
And I never implied any of that. Just that it’s silly to call someone a thing with a literal meaning as though words don’t matter. And yes he’s not any better off, just different.
brevity, especially in explicitly political messages, matters. nuance WILL be lost, communication has two sides, and sometimes you cannot convey perfect truth, you need to lose a little fidelity. so “JD vance is an incel” is true enough for literal government work.
“JD Vance is a misogynist”
Brief and accurate. Less confusing. Didn’t need to make up anything untrue or stretch any definitions to something they aren’t.
incel is more poetic and gives more a sense of scale. ‘misogynist’ without elaboration feels smaller, less accurate.
its a compression issue, dear. sorry.
Ugh yeah I don’t agree that defying definitions of words makes something “poetic”. The fact is that this entire thread indicates the issue, and the upvotes I got indicate I’m not alone