I don’t know with the Harry Sisson thing…I agree being a fuckboy should not be discussed in the same space and tone as sex crimes. On the other hand I think there should be space for women to say “hey other women, you may think due to this guys beliefs and the parasocial nature of celebrity that he’s dming you because you have a special connection but he’s actually just horny. Look at my experience.” Is this “obvious”? Probably! But if Chris Hemsworth dmed me I’d want to believe he genuinely wants to wife me up even though it’s probably just a crypto scam. I think the smaller the celebrity, the more online/approachable the celebrity, and the more respectful the celebrity’s political beliefs the easier it is for women to jump over their doubt for a Wattpad forever. But it shouldn’t become a permanent stain on the celebrity, or jesus Christ something that’s reported in the news. Just a word of caution for the next woman in the fan base he dms for nudes.
Exactly they are being very bad faith here, the women literally said they were played not some kind of sex crime or abuse, it's people outside screeching that they are calling it abuse or sex crime. Some people used predatory but that's definitionally correct in that he used deceit to get what he wants. The scandal is that he's a supposed feminist that is playing women, lying to them to get what he wants. And working with a person he knows is a groomer and sending threats to one of the ladies (this one he did meet and know since teenage years)
Also re your Hemsworth example, this is even a bit different he messaged them in his main account while nothing suspicious was going on with his account.
Guys should be held accountable for this bullshit instead of people shouting "it's just guys being guys" for their worst impulse, you guys are literally arguing that they shoulf never trust men and they were talking for a while before nyde exchanges even if they never met and he was a public figure not some obscure dude. This is just a few steps away from arguing yes, really women should choose the bear cause men really are that untrustworthy and dangerous by default to them.
If you are mostly interested in guys who are perfect 10s on an extremely conventional and widely shared measure of attractiveness, you will not be the only one dating them. Even if they are nice to you when they are actively trying to sleep with you/solicit nudes.
I agree lying about being monogamous when flirting isn’t anywhere near the same level of badness as say a violent rape so your 2/10 rating seems accurate, assuming 10 is something like raping someone under threat of severe physical harm. But that’s mostly because violent rapes are super duper bad, not because tricking people into sharing their naked pictures is okay.
You call it consensual flirting, but by this standard, a scammer defrauding you into giving him your money is just doing a consensual financial transaction. It doesn’t count as consent if it was obtained under false pretences. You point out correctly that it was pretty stupid of the women to believe him, but this is irrelevant. If a scammer is only able to get money because the people he is scamming are idiots, it doesn’t make it less bad. Taking advantage of peoples stupidity to hurt them for your own benefit is still bad. Maybe some of them didn’t actually believe him, but even assuming that if you go around lying to get people to send you naked pictures and the only reason this does not result in anyone being tricked is that nobody believed you this is just you getting lucky, and it doesn’t mitigate your Conduct in any way that your attempt to deceive people was unsuccessful.
I'm not familiar with Harry Sisson or Gen Z internet people in general - perhaps thankfully. But when it comes to basically anything to do with gender relations, I have yet to be failed by the philosophy of "double standards are bad". (Despite many, many conversations with both progressives and tradcons basically becoming 'certain double standards are actually good because oppression/inherent sex differences') If there's some unfairness, look at the double standard involved and decide which attitude is more reasonable and fair to hold towards both men and women...
In this instance, sleeping around dishonestly probably shouldn't be punished with mob execution or shunning, nor with 'attaboy'. Perhaps a mild, reasonable level of social embarrassment, along with the deserved personal scorn from those involved?
I don’t know with the Harry Sisson thing…I agree being a fuckboy should not be discussed in the same space and tone as sex crimes. On the other hand I think there should be space for women to say “hey other women, you may think due to this guys beliefs and the parasocial nature of celebrity that he’s dming you because you have a special connection but he’s actually just horny. Look at my experience.” Is this “obvious”? Probably! But if Chris Hemsworth dmed me I’d want to believe he genuinely wants to wife me up even though it’s probably just a crypto scam. I think the smaller the celebrity, the more online/approachable the celebrity, and the more respectful the celebrity’s political beliefs the easier it is for women to jump over their doubt for a Wattpad forever. But it shouldn’t become a permanent stain on the celebrity, or jesus Christ something that’s reported in the news. Just a word of caution for the next woman in the fan base he dms for nudes.
Exactly they are being very bad faith here, the women literally said they were played not some kind of sex crime or abuse, it's people outside screeching that they are calling it abuse or sex crime. Some people used predatory but that's definitionally correct in that he used deceit to get what he wants. The scandal is that he's a supposed feminist that is playing women, lying to them to get what he wants. And working with a person he knows is a groomer and sending threats to one of the ladies (this one he did meet and know since teenage years)
Also re your Hemsworth example, this is even a bit different he messaged them in his main account while nothing suspicious was going on with his account.
Guys should be held accountable for this bullshit instead of people shouting "it's just guys being guys" for their worst impulse, you guys are literally arguing that they shoulf never trust men and they were talking for a while before nyde exchanges even if they never met and he was a public figure not some obscure dude. This is just a few steps away from arguing yes, really women should choose the bear cause men really are that untrustworthy and dangerous by default to them.
So, the woke puritan angle is actually an old one:
https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/59314719-the-rise-of-the-new-puritans
Good book, and actually compares the woke ideology to actual puritans.
The Sisson thing made me think of West Elm Caleb - https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/caleb-west-elm-dating-saga-1288386/ - similar vibes...
If you are mostly interested in guys who are perfect 10s on an extremely conventional and widely shared measure of attractiveness, you will not be the only one dating them. Even if they are nice to you when they are actively trying to sleep with you/solicit nudes.
I agree lying about being monogamous when flirting isn’t anywhere near the same level of badness as say a violent rape so your 2/10 rating seems accurate, assuming 10 is something like raping someone under threat of severe physical harm. But that’s mostly because violent rapes are super duper bad, not because tricking people into sharing their naked pictures is okay.
You call it consensual flirting, but by this standard, a scammer defrauding you into giving him your money is just doing a consensual financial transaction. It doesn’t count as consent if it was obtained under false pretences. You point out correctly that it was pretty stupid of the women to believe him, but this is irrelevant. If a scammer is only able to get money because the people he is scamming are idiots, it doesn’t make it less bad. Taking advantage of peoples stupidity to hurt them for your own benefit is still bad. Maybe some of them didn’t actually believe him, but even assuming that if you go around lying to get people to send you naked pictures and the only reason this does not result in anyone being tricked is that nobody believed you this is just you getting lucky, and it doesn’t mitigate your Conduct in any way that your attempt to deceive people was unsuccessful.
I'm not familiar with Harry Sisson or Gen Z internet people in general - perhaps thankfully. But when it comes to basically anything to do with gender relations, I have yet to be failed by the philosophy of "double standards are bad". (Despite many, many conversations with both progressives and tradcons basically becoming 'certain double standards are actually good because oppression/inherent sex differences') If there's some unfairness, look at the double standard involved and decide which attitude is more reasonable and fair to hold towards both men and women...
In this instance, sleeping around dishonestly probably shouldn't be punished with mob execution or shunning, nor with 'attaboy'. Perhaps a mild, reasonable level of social embarrassment, along with the deserved personal scorn from those involved?
It feels like cheating to link to any post by the Human Pet Guy.