3 ms·

Reading the GP comment made me audibly guffaw. The exact scenario was discussed and corroborating studies were linked. Users that comment after clearly not RTFA

Reading the GP comment made me audibly guffaw. The exact scenario was discussed and corroborating studies were linked. Users that comment after clearly not RTFA should be banned from commenting. It's ironic that the first thing the GP did instead of reading the article was rush to comment on "oppression" and the "patriarchy" in a fervent manner to poorly attempt to discredit the study and it's findings, seeking to stifle debate for the sake of emotional comfort.

readthenotes1 8mo ago
"should be banned from commenting" Apparently more men than women would say they should put up with the ridicule after saying something ignorant rather than outright banning ;)
- throwawaypath 8mo ago
  >Apparently more men than women would say they should put up with the ridicule after saying something ignorant rather than outright banning ;) Apparently more men than women are capable of differentiating decorum and saying something ignorant ;)
  - kittikitti 8mo ago
    Stay seething ;)
    - throwawaypath 8mo ago
      Cope ;)
kittikitti 8mo ago
I did read the article. I didn't even try to discredit the findings, and instead merely pointed out why the data might have shown such a difference. If you understood my comment, you would conclude that there would be no difference if women weren't oppressed. In the article, it posed the question, "So why does such a large gender tolerance gap exist?" Which the author left largely open ended. I believe you should be banned instead for creating such a toxic environment. It's clear to me that your reply is stifling debate more than my original comment.
- throwawaypath 8mo ago
  >I did read the article. Anyone who read your inane comment knows you didn't prior to commenting. >I didn't even try to discredit the findings You didn't know what the findings were because you didn't RTFA. Take the L and move on. If you don't read the article, don't comment. This isn't reddit.

readthenotes1 8mo ago

"should be banned from commenting" Apparently more men than women would say they should put up with the ridicule after saying something ignorant rather than outright banning ;)

throwawaypath 8mo ago
>Apparently more men than women would say they should put up with the ridicule after saying something ignorant rather than outright banning ;) Apparently more men than women are capable of differentiating decorum and saying something ignorant ;)
- kittikitti 8mo ago
  Stay seething ;)
  - throwawaypath 8mo ago
    Cope ;)

kittikitti 8mo ago

I did read the article. I didn't even try to discredit the findings, and instead merely pointed out why the data might have shown such a difference. If you understood my comment, you would conclude that there would be no difference if women weren't oppressed. In the article, it posed the question, "So why does such a large gender tolerance gap exist?" Which the author left largely open ended. I believe you should be banned instead for creating such a toxic environment. It's clear to me that your reply is stifling debate more than my original comment.

throwawaypath 8mo ago
>I did read the article. Anyone who read your inane comment knows you didn't prior to commenting. >I didn't even try to discredit the findings You didn't know what the findings were because you didn't RTFA. Take the L and move on. If you don't read the article, don't comment. This isn't reddit.