this post was submitted on 22 Aug 2024
1080 points (94.1% liked)

Political Memes

5511 readers
827 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] SandbagTiara2816@lemmy.dbzer0.com 255 points 3 months ago (2 children)

My personal favorite response to that question is “a person who covers their drink when you enter the room”

[–] satanmat@lemmy.world 73 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

I’m stealing both of these.

Also trying to workshop::

Oh they don’t have them on your planet?

[–] L0rdMathias@sh.itjust.works 59 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I like it, but that's like a 1960s sitcom tier insult. It's too cute to infuriate.

[–] MossyFeathers@pawb.social 31 points 3 months ago

They have 1960s sitcom mentality. Wouldn't hurt to give it a try.

[–] bender223 20 points 3 months ago (1 children)

how about, "a person who doesn't want to have sex with you."

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 36 points 3 months ago (1 children)

That doesn't work. I'm sure plenty of queer men would be too disgusted by them to want to have sex with them either.

[–] TheWorldRolledMe@lemmy.world 17 points 3 months ago (2 children)

What about 'I'll ask your mom what she thinks when I see her tonight'?

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 28 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Better: "I'll ask your dad what she thinks when I see her tonight."

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Gork@lemm.ee 38 points 3 months ago

"Someone who chooses the bear over you."

[–] OldManBOMBIN@lemmy.world 91 points 3 months ago (2 children)

I like "Well, I'm a straight male, so anything that turns me on is a woman, ma'am."

[–] ChronosTriggerWarning@lemmy.world 21 points 3 months ago

Name totally checks out.

[–] dogsnest@lemmy.world 16 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Ooooh, that's so subtle and brilliant, they'll be destroyed for life! Added bonus is it zings for all the alphabet.

[–] lobut@lemmy.ca 77 points 3 months ago (6 children)

Seems like: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning

They're not honestly curiously asking anything.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 32 points 3 months ago

They tried to do a gotcha. Badly. And got gotcha'ed for it.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] bender223 60 points 3 months ago (4 children)

I saw this clip. It was amazing the way that kid just dismisses Charlie Kirk with his response and how he just walked away.

Kirk's face was in shock, cuz he got owned so bad. Mofo couldn't think of anything smart to say except something from another right wing grifter. 🤦

[–] transientpunk@sh.itjust.works 38 points 3 months ago

The right wing really capitalized on the left's good faith approach, for a very long time. Now that younger people that grew up on the internet are a much larger component of the left's base, they don't seem to know how to "own us" anymore. We're used to this sea lioning bullshit, and won't put up with it.

[–] snooggums@midwest.social 20 points 3 months ago

Thank you for the context. I never know what the youtube bigots look like.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] rickyrigatoni@lemm.ee 58 points 3 months ago (2 children)
[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 32 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Nah. There are plenty of women who do not make my dick hard. To paraphrase Richard Pryor, I wouldn't fuck Melania Trump with your dick.

I have no idea why anyone wanted to see her naked. Bleah.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] djsoren19@yiffit.net 12 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Only if you're a himbo on the level of Johnny Bravo.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Kit@lemmy.blahaj.zone 56 points 3 months ago (1 children)

The ftm equivalent is "What is a man?" And the proper response is "A miserable little pile of secrets".

[–] chuckleslord@lemmy.world 20 points 3 months ago

But enough talk... Have at you!

[–] EndOfLine@lemm.ee 52 points 3 months ago (3 children)

Alternative responses:

  • "Yeah, it makes sense that you wouldn't know."
  • "A human. Did you seriously not know that?"
  • "Are you coming on to me?"

Are you coming on to me?”

I've actually used "I'm flattered, but I'm not into guys, sorry." and when immediately he got pissy and insisted he isn't gay and wasn't asking me out, "It's okay, you don't have to hide who you are, I'm simply not interested." and at that point my patience and certainty they wouldnt try to deck me were out the door, along with myself.

A musical theater performance was probably not the best place for the guy to be attempting to ragebait.

10/10 responses, I'd add in "If you have to ask, maybe you should get out more" which I guess is similar to "Makes sense you wouldn't know"

[–] callouscomic@lemm.ee 19 points 3 months ago

Your first option is best. Insulting comeback that isn't open-ended. It ends it so you can move on. The other options are asking for a response, including the OP one.

[–] Altomes@lemm.ee 14 points 3 months ago

You could always go jeopardy style of "what is someone who doesn't want to sleep with you"

[–] knexcar@lemmy.world 40 points 3 months ago (4 children)

Is the answer not “A miserable little pile of secrets”?

[–] photonic_sorcerer@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 3 months ago

Then men are no different.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] BluesF@lemmy.world 30 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Personally I think the "woke" definition of a woman (if there even is one) is much more straightforward than the alternative. This idea that the left "can't define a woman" is absurd projection - the very people who ask this question are the ones who can't define it without having to make 100s of exceptions.

[–] pyre@lemmy.world 21 points 3 months ago (5 children)

yep "someone who identifies as a woman" doesn't need to have caveats. every biological argument has to have many.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] GaMEChld@lemmy.world 25 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (3 children)

Language is an imperfect medium with inherent limitations, intended to convey thoughts from the mind of one person to another. Thus, context is critical. The tragedy of humans not being telepathic.

A large portion of this argument is between two factions trying to have a complex discussion regarding at least four different things using only two words; male and female. The discussion however expands to biology, stereotypes, gender norms, rights, etc.

To me, everyone arguing is a moron for trying to have a discussion without first agreeing on axioms and vocabulary. Male and female are not enough words for a discussion involving this many variables.

It's like, hey, please reconcile general relativity, quantum mechanics, and metaphysics using only X and Y. It just screams absurdity.

[–] OhNoMoreLemmy@lemmy.ml 25 points 3 months ago (2 children)

You might want to look at Wittgenstein.

In his early work he went hard on this approach, and insisted that "hey philosophy is dumb", just agree on the definitions and then chase through the implications.

In his later work he realised that this is impossible. Words have contextual meaning that is revealed by their usage and you can't nail down full and complete definitions in advance.

What you're talking about absolutely can and will never work. We have tried it and seen it fail.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Suavevillain@lemmy.world 23 points 3 months ago (5 children)

It isn't for me to define, and there are more important things in life to focus on.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca 22 points 3 months ago (3 children)

A "woman" is a label. It's a social construct.

As such, while you and I may have some idea of what we think a woman is, it's not really something that can be given a concrete definition the way these people seem to think it needs.

The meta of gender is simply the way we see eachother and not something that can be measured. It's felt.

It's a lot like trying to build a concrete definition for intelligence. What is intelligence? How can it be measured? IQ tests are one way, but they're pretty much universally regarded as inaccurate at best.

Whatever intelligence is, these rage baiters don't have it.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Kowowow@lemmy.ca 19 points 3 months ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Zozano@lemy.lol 18 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (8 children)

Here is the answer to that question:

Until recently, a woman was defined as someone who was born a biological female.

Now, as definitions change, a woman is defined as a person who identifies with the role of the previous definition of woman.

Language is descriptive, not prescriptive.

[–] erin@lemmy.blahaj.zone 24 points 3 months ago (88 children)

That's not what the definition has changed to. Women can be women without identifying with that traditional role. A woman is someone who identifies as a woman. I am a woman, and I certainly don't identify with the role of a traditional woman.

load more comments (88 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] buddascrayon@lemmy.world 16 points 3 months ago

"I'll take someone who wouldn't talk to you if they were trapped in an elevator with you for $500 Alex."

[–] rsuri@lemmy.world 14 points 3 months ago

In my experience it's so they can listen to exactly nothing you say in response and then say "oh you've totally been brainwashed" before refuting points I never even came close to making.

[–] HawlSera@lemm.ee 12 points 3 months ago

"Someone you've never had consensual sex with."

load more comments
view more: next ›