Having scrolled through a couple years of her comics just to see for myself I think she’s mostly just anti-MAGA and occasionally overshoots a little into common men’s issues she has a blind spot for.
I don’t think she’s misandrist she’s just not perfect.
I have you tagged “the reason women choose the bear” over your behavior the last time that came up - you have a long long history of being an incel and claiming any criticism of a man is criticism of all men, which you’re doing yet again in this thread.
PieFed offers user tagging in both its web UI and in the API so that any app using it could pull from them, although regarding the latter I am not sure which ones actually do or not (Mlwm reportedly does, surely I would think that Blorp would as it touts itself as offering greatest compatibility with PieFed, etc.).
Blorp dev here. Blorp does have user tagging, but it actually stores all that data client side. I had no idea PieFed had user tagging built in. It would be nice to integrate with the PieFed API, but it would be a little tricky.
Currently, if you tag a user in Blorp, that tag is stored at the app level. You can login to your app with a Lemmy and a PieFed account simultaneously. If you tag a user from your PieFed account, you will still see that user tag after you switch to your Lemmy account.
If we did tagging at account level instead of app level, the user tags you see would change base on which account you switch to.
What a random mischaracterization, feels like I’ve been mistaken for somebody. Theres really nothing to even respond to, here, except point out ad hominem.
Criticism of a person’s behavior when that’s the subject at hand is not an ad homeniem, it’s the argument. You’ve got a long history of misapplying logical fallacies and taking these sorts of commentaries where a man is portrayed negatively incredibly personally and then poorly defending your claims.
For example: elsewhere in this thread, where you’ve refused to back up your claims that the author is a “well documented” misandrist. If it’s well documented, it should not be a burden for you to provide evidence, and yet you refuse repeatedly.
Saying it does not make it so. It seems to me that referencing your prior behavior and attacking your lack of sources are both relevant and productive for discussion, while misusing fallacies to shut down arguments you don’t like is, ironically, a rhetorical fallacy. They aren’t deflecting by randomly bringing up some unrelated characteristic (for example: you shouldn’t trust this influencer’s opinion on food, I have it on good authority that they’re a terrible parent!), they’re calling back to your previous behavior in similar situations (for example: you shouldn’t trust this influencer’s opinion on food because they have a history of giving people food poisoning!). That isn’t ad hominem, or whataboutism.
If your character and actions might be damming to your arguments, attacking them is attacking your argument, especially when also attacking your sources! Ironically, continuing to attack the comic artist without citing sources is ad hominem, by definition.
Sources?! You need fucking Data? You need a scientific study to discern the precise level of sexism of Pizzacake? Did you ask for sources when Kanye West was in the news for chanting “Heil Hitler”? If not does that mean you need a news article about it from the New York Times or some shit? Did you ask for sources on altright comic artist StoneToss?
I have, multiple times now, demonstrated that a very large number of people recognize this artist as sexist with specific examples going back many years.
I’m pretty sure it’s not men, it’s just men exactly like you
She’s made multiple comics making fun of men’s mental health issues, she very much seems to have it in for men in general.
Having scrolled through a couple years of her comics just to see for myself I think she’s mostly just anti-MAGA and occasionally overshoots a little into common men’s issues she has a blind spot for.
I don’t think she’s misandrist she’s just not perfect.
No, but she’s a woman on the Internet and if she isn’t perfect, dipshits like @Ilovethebomb@sh.itjust.works will make sure she knows all about it.
You would lose that bet.
I have you tagged “the reason women choose the bear” over your behavior the last time that came up - you have a long long history of being an incel and claiming any criticism of a man is criticism of all men, which you’re doing yet again in this thread.
Does voyager app have this tag feature?
I think so… but also PieFed has it innately.
What? Where? How? App or web UI?
PieFed offers user tagging in both its web UI and in the API so that any app using it could pull from them, although regarding the latter I am not sure which ones actually do or not (Mlwm reportedly does, surely I would think that Blorp would as it touts itself as offering greatest compatibility with PieFed, etc.).
Blorp dev here. Blorp does have user tagging, but it actually stores all that data client side. I had no idea PieFed had user tagging built in. It would be nice to integrate with the PieFed API, but it would be a little tricky.
Currently, if you tag a user in Blorp, that tag is stored at the app level. You can login to your app with a Lemmy and a PieFed account simultaneously. If you tag a user from your PieFed account, you will still see that user tag after you switch to your Lemmy account.
If we did tagging at account level instead of app level, the user tags you see would change base on which account you switch to.
What a random mischaracterization, feels like I’ve been mistaken for somebody. Theres really nothing to even respond to, here, except point out ad hominem.
Criticism of a person’s behavior when that’s the subject at hand is not an ad homeniem, it’s the argument. You’ve got a long history of misapplying logical fallacies and taking these sorts of commentaries where a man is portrayed negatively incredibly personally and then poorly defending your claims.
For example: elsewhere in this thread, where you’ve refused to back up your claims that the author is a “well documented” misandrist. If it’s well documented, it should not be a burden for you to provide evidence, and yet you refuse repeatedly.
Criticism of the criticism of a person’s behavior, via attacking the person and not the argument, is Ad Hominem, and also Whataboutism.
Saying it does not make it so. It seems to me that referencing your prior behavior and attacking your lack of sources are both relevant and productive for discussion, while misusing fallacies to shut down arguments you don’t like is, ironically, a rhetorical fallacy. They aren’t deflecting by randomly bringing up some unrelated characteristic (for example: you shouldn’t trust this influencer’s opinion on food, I have it on good authority that they’re a terrible parent!), they’re calling back to your previous behavior in similar situations (for example: you shouldn’t trust this influencer’s opinion on food because they have a history of giving people food poisoning!). That isn’t ad hominem, or whataboutism.
If your character and actions might be damming to your arguments, attacking them is attacking your argument, especially when also attacking your sources! Ironically, continuing to attack the comic artist without citing sources is ad hominem, by definition.
Sources?! You need fucking Data? You need a scientific study to discern the precise level of sexism of Pizzacake? Did you ask for sources when Kanye West was in the news for chanting “Heil Hitler”? If not does that mean you need a news article about it from the New York Times or some shit? Did you ask for sources on altright comic artist StoneToss?
I have, multiple times now, demonstrated that a very large number of people recognize this artist as sexist with specific examples going back many years.