Serious You can tell how true a statement is by how people react to it

[tehgymcel420]

Like, if you said something obviously untrue, like claiming the earth was flat, people would just laugh at you.

but if you said that females have stinky roast beef flaps that smell like fermented fish (fesikh), people would get angry and seethe at you.

Why would they get so angry if it was not true?

 

[Rangercel]

While your example is a bit flawed, I think you make a good point in other respects.

For example, why is it that a lot of these people are so hateful and borderline homicidal towards incels? A lot of it is just condescension and viewing us as lesser, which is naturally expected, but the hatred stems from something else.

They know we're right, they know we're onto something and when we 'dare' to speak out against a system that deprives us of the joy of living, we're speaking ideas that soyciety can't allow to be spoken, causing an NPC chain reaction against us

 

[PPEcel]

Not the best example.

Arguing that the Earth is flat doesn't implicate femoids. Arguing that femoids feel like fesikh, well, does.

Violent simps will stop at nothing to defend m'lady.

Issue salience is not really the best indicator of a statement's accuracy.

 

[OwlGod]

this is an altered version of an already existing thread

 

[Kaptain Kirk]

A-ha! That's why people get so aggressive whenever I say women are inferior.

 

[Mainländer]

But people do get angry at flat earth. Especially atheists and even more especially the "muh science" crowd, that metonymically associates it with anti-vaccine stuff and then with people dying.

 

[tehgymcel420]

While your example is a bit flawed

How so?

A-ha! That's why people get so aggressive whenever I say women are inferior.

Ya