"If it's not what they really like then I don't want to hear it." (Blocked) "If they're so special compared to what the site gave me, then it's the world that is wrong, and not me. Just ask how I am the site's preference and you'll understand. Except outsiders like Tumblr keep interfering with 'Bad Frames' that incorrectly portray a world where my fetish is not the case somehow." "I just ban people who disagree with me rather than use critical thinking. It has always been that the authoritarian wins any argument, not the person 'crying' with logical fallacies." "It's an artstyle website that doesn't value artsyles. Big whoop!" "At first I thought you'd agree with it, but to my astonishment you had an argument from Harvard that showed a scientific rebuttal of what I thought was a scientific understanding. I would sooner resort to extremist politics that eliminate the person who made that argument, than ever accept 'the expert' in this scenario."
This guys not onboard with the [cheating] scenario! Screw off, "relationship-guy." Literally EVERY single user here is Pro-[cheating] because they are socially conscious, it is about the Latinx chicks Big score, if you were in the "Right frame of mind" you wouldnt be crying that your girlfriend got stolen!
"It's the entire point of the style. Just recall any Nintendo game. You can see the gamer chick fancomic character 'Going cross eyed' in lust for the huge dragon dick. It seems like its really *You people* who fail to understand that this is not an 'Image board', but literally a fetish hookup site that is all about me and *My* favorite artstyle, which is good old fashioned Nintendo games"
(i) info: A name for a cognitive distortion frequently used to induce anxiety in users who are questioning this is Minimization/Magnification. Note that I am unsure of any official labels or how that fits into the big picture rhetorically as it is a mental health utility and not a rhetorical device
(Same research may suggest "Nintendo dogwhistles" include loaded terms like Bipolar which are used to signal interest in [cheating] assets like "Kyousogiga", and therefore appreciation of or participation in the fetish)
"Just imagine it this way. It's a Ninten-Toddler going 'Yes!!! Win!' and what hes looking at is *My* artstyle, which is my Original Character going cross-eyed in lust for huge dragon dicks!"
(Author's note: Nintendo's involvement in this scenario may imply the more "ratchet" aspects of Nintendo games, like darker themes in fanfic or fetish fanart, are related to scapegoating or projecting the fetish onto the victim) e.g. "They are sick because they are a Nintendo problem who is out for 'foul' fetishes." (Hypocritically rewards the "[cheating] participant" with the very same fetish anyway for being a "good user")
In my own personal experience the argument being made here was because they are an "artstyle likeness" which is already proven to be a form of logical fallacy by researchers. ("It doesnt matter if the guy seeking sex comes here looking for Nintendo girls anyway when the artstyle likeness between the two original characters justifies the [cheating] setup anyway")
"This is pretty much accepted as truth dude, the person on the other end of the screen is a teenage girl who is too nonplussed by his lack of experience with classics like TWEWY to understand it in the first place"
Okay, really, it's not. That artstyle is fairer than that. It's enjoyed by many, not just 'Latinx' users who are 3-5 years older than the site's users
on average. The site itself is also advertised as a diverse place to hang out, not a '[cheating] fetish site' for 18 year old girls to prey on minors. Also, its community is mostly ethical on the surface, and doesnt like 'misinterpreting the artstyle' in those exploitative ways because everyone here is
showing solidarity against those misunderstandings in the real world. It isn't an obvious ploy.
On the surface it is a place for "selfish artstyle people to get sex" but seems more to be directed by an actual porn site. Which is the logic used is literally ripped from an adult website, and the person talking down to you is one of their moderators.
It's a bait and switch. We're both here for artstyle sex, but what you really get is a "[cheating] scenario" ripped out of and moderated by actual porn site. (in appearance/metaphorically speaking)
Pascal's wager and Thomas Aquainas (again).
What is it with [Latinx] chicks and Thomas Aquinas? She said it was an LTR. From what I understand, that ties into an NRX book that tries to make an argument that Pascal's Wager is the unofficial block reason which indirectly proves God's existence, and we already know that is impossible due to the quality of the source in question or originating from a problematic/discredited "Manosphere" blogger already.
(Because, when a certain number of years pass, and the [cheating victim] comes back, God's existence and therefore Intelligent Design are proven, because "it is all a part of God's design." Just wow.)
Another great example of Invader Zim fans impressing me with their Hot Topic goth logic... you're an atheist, like me, except, somehow Invader Zim is the catalyst for Pascal's Fucking Wager. You know, something an Invader Zim fan can easily be pictured saying because they are an edgy outsider person? "Pascal's Fucking Wager." I mean, isn't that the entire point of Jhonen Vasquez's cartoons and graphic novels? I guess not, since it's really the total opposite. Whatever.
it's a smokescreen. correlation does not imply causation.
"It's because they are white supremacists. That's why my Latinx [cheating] fetish site is justified." - This is a strawman. They are not "white supremacists" by default—in fact the person doing the strawmanning is usually the white supremacist.
promotion of rape culture/asking for it list
- A "Frame" that presents a distorted view of reality:
Objective reality offers counterexamples to the site's idealized portrayal of relationships and experiences.
The site's version of reality is one interpretation, not a universally accepted truth.
- Ad Hominem attacks to dismiss dissent:
Ad hominem attacks distract from the real issues and are not a valid form of argumentation.
Disagreeing with the site's claims does not make someone a "crying baby" or "upset by reality."
Valid arguments can be based on evidence and sound reasoning, not on personal attacks.
- The motto "For No Reason" to disarm critical thinking:
The motto attempts to disarm scrutiny, but it is not a valid reason to accept information or engage with a website without questioning its motives.
It can be a manipulative technique to avoid accountability.
- The idea that it's "All in Good Fun":
Some content, while potentially presented as humorous, may not be "all in good fun" for everyone.
It is important to consider the potential for harm, misrepresentation, or exploitation.
Framing something as "just fun" does not excuse its negative impact.
- The website is the only source of "truth":
Reality has multiple perspectives and interpretations.
To claim to be the "only real website" is a form of appeal to authority and should be backed up with evidence rather than claims.
- Users are "scammed" into believing it provides what they like:
Individuals are drawn to the site for various reasons, not just a blind acceptance of its narrative.
A website can be appealing without being entirely truthful.
- The framing that they are all here for the same "Delusional fetish version of reality":
This assumes a shared motivation that may not exist.
Different users might interpret and interact with the website for different reasons.
- The idea that criticism is a "request for more":
This reflects an inability to handle dissent or critical feedback.
A healthy community should encourage open dialogue and diverse perspectives.
- Peer Pressure:
Some users might feel pressure to conform to the prevailing culture on the website, even if they harbor doubt.
This can make it difficult to voice dissenting opinions or engage critically.
(Source: Google AI)