5 ms·

I agreed with the first sentence, but then the second one had me scratching my head. Could you clarify/expand on what you’re saying there?

by latexr 1y ago

zkmon 1y ago
>> expand on "men turning into drama queens" Men sounding too sentimental, emotional, girly, too much talking, making lots of facial expressions, trying to please or convince someone,... even though it is not hard it see it's fake. The talk was all about millions, not family silver.
- latexr 1y ago
  What’s wrong about that? Why shouldn’t a man be emotional, make facial expressions, or try to please someone? Why is that “fake”? I’m asking in general, since your original comment looked to be a general complaint and not only specific about this case.
  - zkmon 1y ago
    In this case, it is fake because they didn't value the very sentiment they were talking about. In general, those attributes in men make them drama queens.
    - llm_nerd 1y ago
      That doesn't follow. I could be incredibly sentimental about something and still very happily part with it for millions of dollars. You are inventing a dichotomy that doesn't exist. Further, saying that men shouldn't have emotions, or display the same emotions, lest they be labeled "drama queens", is absolutely gross behaviour. It's one of the contributors to the male loneliness / suicide epidemic, and you really should do better.
      - zkmon 1y ago
        Having irrational and excessive emotions and the associated negative feelings is the primary cause of extreme actions. You can do better at knowing things.
        llm_nerd 1y ago
        Having and expressing are two wildly different things. Your misunderstanding on this is the root of your ignorance.
- JKCalhoun 1y ago
  What's out of place in your comment is probably "men" and then "drama queens". It makes it sound like you have some rigid idea of how men are supposed to be. Perhaps you meant to imply that it is society that pigeonholes men this way.

I agreed with the first sentence, but then the second one had me scratching my head. Could you clarify/expand on what you’re saying there?

by latexr 1y ago

I agreed with the first sentence, but then the second one had me scratching my head. Could you clarify/expand on what you’re saying there?

zkmon 1y ago

>> expand on "men turning into drama queens" Men sounding too sentimental, emotional, girly, too much talking, making lots of facial expressions, trying to please or convince someone,... even though it is not hard it see it's fake. The talk was all about millions, not family silver.

latexr 1y ago
What’s wrong about that? Why shouldn’t a man be emotional, make facial expressions, or try to please someone? Why is that “fake”? I’m asking in general, since your original comment looked to be a general complaint and not only specific about this case.
- zkmon 1y ago
  In this case, it is fake because they didn't value the very sentiment they were talking about. In general, those attributes in men make them drama queens.
  - llm_nerd 1y ago
    That doesn't follow. I could be incredibly sentimental about something and still very happily part with it for millions of dollars. You are inventing a dichotomy that doesn't exist. Further, saying that men shouldn't have emotions, or display the same emotions, lest they be labeled "drama queens", is absolutely gross behaviour. It's one of the contributors to the male loneliness / suicide epidemic, and you really should do better.
    - zkmon 1y ago
      Having irrational and excessive emotions and the associated negative feelings is the primary cause of extreme actions. You can do better at knowing things.
      - llm_nerd 1y ago
        Having and expressing are two wildly different things. Your misunderstanding on this is the root of your ignorance.
JKCalhoun 1y ago
What's out of place in your comment is probably "men" and then "drama queens". It makes it sound like you have some rigid idea of how men are supposed to be. Perhaps you meant to imply that it is society that pigeonholes men this way.