this post was submitted on 07 May 2026
1167 points (98.7% liked)
People Twitter
10253 readers
426 users here now
People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.
RULES:
- Mark NSFW content.
- No doxxing people.
- Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
- No bullying or international politcs
- Be excellent to each other.
- Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major celebrity, figure or any politician. If you replace the "x" at their site with xcancel (so it beomes xcancel.com), and you're not on mobile, it will save video. https://web.archive.org/save is another great option. Archive.is is no longer recommended because they remove/alter content.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
See, there you go implying that I would blatantly and severely violate someone's consent. That's the same hyperbolic strawman that everyone else seems to use whenever I point out the issue with inconsistent messaging and mixed signals.
I didn't say "forcing yourself on someone who's telling you no doesn't violate consent." I said "if you expect someone to magically know when you're consenting without actually telling them, then you want them to be a mindreader; especially if you also insist that consent needs to be explicitly stated every time."
Those seem like mutually exclusive expectations, so why am I being gaslit that both are valid and that I'm the problem for not intuiting a way past the fundamental inconsistency?