Parental nightmare YouTuber Andrew Tate busted - and you won't believe by whom!

[Quint]

When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’

[Dung_Beetle]

As a lifelong member of the Itty Bitty Titty Committee, I feel your small dick pain. Well, except times a million.

[Riemann]

AALMOTIBTC (aal-mo-tib-tuk) is a way cooler acronym than ASWASD.

[Banquet_Bear]

@outlierrn

I’m not

…then whatever it was that Greta Thunberg says will have no consequence on anything you, or anyone else, decides to to.

@eschereal

In a way, one’s “dick energy” is as much a part of one’s body as the very genitalia that it evokes, and denigrating it is not significantly different from physiognomous body shaming.

“Dick energy” isn’t real. People don’t really have auras. “Big” or “small” dick energy isn’t about the size of the member in question but entirely about what the person that is boasting about it wishes to project.

Because none of us here have actually seen Andrew Tate’s dick, right? We aren’t talking about the literal size here but the perception of the level of “energy” that Tate is trying to project.

@Acsenray

What if we started describing women as having “tight pussy energy” or “big tit energy” (whatever those might be expressions for)? As someone with a small dick (yes, I’ll admit it here and now),

I mean, whatever floats your boat? If you want to go around saying that women have “tight pussy energy” then I’m not going to stop you.

But Thunberg didn’t give you licence to call women that. That isn’t on her.

@Acsenray

I’m not happy with the general existence of the term “big dick energy.”

I’m not happy that the movie “Freddy Got Fingered” exists. But there isn’t very much I can do about it.

@Quint

Gotta say the whole “big dick energy has nothing to do with dick size” effort seems spectacularly disingenuous.

Its quite amazing how a thread about a sexual predator who is currently locked up for a series of quite appalling, disgusting crimes, has turned into a tone-policing exercise of a teenage girl who dared to speak up in the face of harrassment from that person. That seems spectacularly out-of-tune.

[Riemann]

@Banquet_Bear

a tone-policing exercise of a teenage girl

Is it? Not that I can see. Pretty much everyone seems to be agreeing that he got what he invited and deserved here. It is possible to hold the opinion that Greta did nothing wrong under the circumstances while also expressing the view that in an ideal world it would be better if we didn’t have genitally oriented disparagement.

[Banquet_Bear]

@Riemann

Is it?

…yep.

[Riemann]

If it is, then I disagree with it.

But I find it a little surreal that you are basing your defense of her on an exegesis of the nuances of the complex philosophical principle of Big Dick Energy, and how only a crude simplistic interpretation would assume that “big” modifies “dick” rather than “energy”.

[Banquet_Bear]

@Riemann

But I find it a little surreal that you are basing your defense of her on an exegesis of the nuances of the philosophical principle of Big Dick Energy, and how only a crude interpretation would assume that “big” modifies “dick” rather than “energy”.

…I find it surreal that my actual defence of her was this:

@Banquet_Bear

…because in the real world we need to recognize the real-world power differentials between the harasser and the person being harassed. And that Greta Thunberg at the time was still a teenager, and has been subject to constant misogynistic attacks and threats since she was 15 that have never let up and never-ever-will end.

On the one-hand we have a young climate change activist who is striving to make the world a better place, whose life is constantly in the spotlight and has been mocked by some of the most infamous people in the world.

On the other hand we have a misogynist arsehole who is currently locked up in Romania on charges of human trafficking and forming an organized crime group, who has been credibly accused of rape and repeated strangulation.

Why exactly are you asking Greta to “do better” here?

But this is the most important point.

Andrew Tate is literally a hero to many. And when he (or people like him) set their cross-hairs on someone they get brigaded.

One of the lessons from Goobergate was that you can’t just ignore the harassment. And what Greta did here was go on the offensive in a way that not only shut down Andrew Tate, but also shut out his “army of followers.”

In context, it was the perfect response.

Greta is not the person that needs to “be better.” We need to be better.

We are living in a world where we knew how bad Andrew Tate was back in 2015. And instead of dealing with him back then, he was allowed to build a misogynist platform and raised an army of thousands of hateful, misogynist trolls.

Andrew Tate thinks that “women belong in the home, can’t drive, and are a man’s property.” We can’t allow this kind of nonsense to prevail. Thunberg shut both him down and his army of followers with a harmless bit of snark. A single sentence cut them off at the knees. This is effectively the only weapon vulnerable people online have at their disposal. Remember that Tate was banned from Twitter until the new-guy decided he could come back. As soon as the racists and the misogynists and the transphobes were allowed to return to the platform, the amount of attacks on marginalised people escalated. When you’ve got the likes of Tate and his army coming after you and the owner of the website effectively says “yeah, that’s fine”, then what do you expect people do to?

And yet, all you seem to be able to see is this:

@Riemann

an exegesis of the nuances of the complex philosophical principle of Big Dick Energy, and how only a crude interpretation would assume that “big” modifies “dick” rather than “energy”.

The discussion about “the nuances of the complex philosophical principle of Big Dick Energy” was an aside. But my defence of Thunberg is primarily focused on the power differential.

[Riemann]

@Banquet_Bear

all you seem to be able to see is this:

It’s not all I can see, it’s just the most entertaining part.

[Spice_Weasel]

I think she was trying to hoist the guy by his own petard. Doesn’t mean she was endorsing his view that cock size matters. The fact that he thinks it does is the point of the joke. People aren’t out there right now universally making fun of people with small dicks. They are making fun of an asshole who thinks that it matters.

[Banquet_Bear]

@Riemann

It’s not all I can see, it’s just the most entertaining part.

…and in the context of this conversation it certainly isn’t the most important part.

The important part is that Andrew Tate got to the position of being able to influence thousands of young men around the world because most of us dismissed what he did as mere “entertainment.”

[Acsenray]

@Banquet_Bear

I’m not happy that the movie “Freddy Got Fingered” exists. But there isn’t very much I can do about it.

This is quite astonishing. We spend a lot of time on this board discussing what kinds of terms have damaging implications. Among them in recent memory have been terms like “retard,” “spazz,” “gypped,” and “welshed.”

@Banquet_Bear

has turned into a tone-policing exercise of a teenage girl

I reject this implication, at least in my posts. I have defended Thunberg’s statements while also commenting on the term generally as a broader issue, because that issue has come up. It is very possible to have both opinions and for both to be valid. And it is also quite common to have one incident produce multiple lines of discussion.

[Riemann]

@Spice_Weasel

I think she was trying to hoist the guy by his own petard. Doesn’t mean she was endorsing his view that cock size matters. The fact that he thinks it does is the point of the joke. People aren’t out there right now universally making fun of people with small dicks. They are making fun of an asshole who thinks that it matters.

I think that’s an excellent summary of the situation.

(And it doesn’t rely on the implausible claim that the concept of Big DIck Energy carries no connotation of the size of a man’s genitalia.)

[Quint]

Well I am willing to concede that a thread about a sexual predator and monster is probably not the right place to discuss the merits of the whole “Big Dick Energy” phenomenon. Sorry if I was the cause of the hijack, I will now recuse myself.

[Banquet_Bear]

@Acsenray

This is quite astonishing. We spend a lot of time on this board discussing what kinds of terms have damaging implications. Among them in recent memory have been terms like “retard,” “spazz,” “gypped,” and “welshed.”

…and yet you just used all of those words.

In context: the usage here is fine.

But you still used them.

Context changes everything.

@Acsenray

I reject this implication, at least in my posts.

I stand by what I said. I think this conversation is ridiculous. In the context of what was happening at the time, there was nothing wrong with what she said.

[Acsenray]

@Banquet_Bear

In context: the usage here is fine.

In context: I also said the usage here is fine.

@Banquet_Bear

I think this conversation is ridiculous. In the context of what was happening at the time, there was nothing wrong with what she said.

I have made clear in my posts when I am addressing the context of Thunberg’s usage and when I am addressing a more general context.

[Riemann]

@Banquet_Bear

I think this conversation is ridiculous. In the context of what was happening at the time, there was nothing wrong with what she said.

The conversation is only ridiculous to the extent that you insist on strawmanning that anyone is being critical of Greta.

[Banquet_Bear]

@Acsenray

I have made clear in my posts when I am addressing the context of Thunberg’s usage and when I am addressing a more general context.

…I’m not sure “general usage” belongs on a thread about Andrew Tate. I’m only addressing what Greta said here because it relates to the harassment from Tate.

@Riemann

The conversation is only ridiculous to the extent that you insist on strawmanning that anyone is being critical of what Greta said here.

There is no strawmanning going on. Not from me. If you wan’t to address anything specific that I’ve said, then feel free.

[Acsenray]

@Banquet_Bear

I’m not sure “general usage” belongs on a thread about Andrew Tate.

Sometimes one thing prompts a thought about another thing. That shouldn’t be too difficult to handle on a forum like this one. Indeed, I would think it’s kind of the point on a forum like this one.

[Banquet_Bear]

@Acsenray

Sometimes one thing prompts a thought about another thing.

…I mean, I’m perfectly capable of handling it. But if you want to discuss the “general usage” then I have no qualms to bring it back to the topic of discussion of this thread as a primary example of why context matters. There is a power differential between the harasser and the person being harassed. And in this case and in this instance, I think what Greta said was absolutely fine, justified, and appropriately protected her from further harassment.