Except when a lady friend wants a big dick, then all the big dick energy in the world isn’t going to do a lick of good, that’s when you have to bring out the lick of good.
Big dicks hurt women, most seem to prefer average sizes. Plus, penetration is often less effective at bringing women to orgasm than oral or fingering, which nearly anyone can learn to do well.
No reason not having a big dick should stop anyone from having a good time.
It does literally refer to penis size. Hiding it behind the word “energy” is just obfuscation. It reminds me of racist people defending the N word by saying, “there’s black people, then there’s Ns. Black people are fine, Ns aren’t.”
You’re just kicking the can down the road. It’s the exact same idea, phrased differently. You just wanna say “small dick” and get away with it, that’s all.
Lmao you have such debate lord energy, the meme i shared literally says your pp size doesn’t matter. The fact that you equated BDE with using the N word shows how out of touch with reality you are.
Yeah, you say dick size doesn’t actually matter, but you’re still talking about dick size. The word “energy” is just an excuse, so you can say “small dick” without being called out.
See, you still show no evidence you have any clue what I’m saying, so how can I take you seriously? I never said it is “like droping hard Rs”. Seriously, get up to speed or get lost.
Here’s an actual, completely serious input for you: If you want people to take you seriously and actually engage, don’t start by comparing them to outspoken racists. People will prefer to roast you
I’m not. I didn’t realise people would be so confused by analogies.
I compared the rhetoric. That’s the point of such devices. You don’t have to be a racist to use similar logic to them.
This isn’t complicated whatsoever.
The guy is hiding behind semantics, so I described another instance of hiding behind semantics. I deliberately used an extreme example so the error was more clear. Basic reductio ad absurdum.
Explain how the comparison is “dumbass”, or admit you’re just wrong.
Anyone can just make claims without justifying them. I claim trees speak German. I will elaborate no further!
pretend I’m smart by invoking latin shit too:
Um, you think that’s all I was doing there? Just saying random Latin?
You do realise this is just… you admitting you don’t know what reductio ad absurdum is?
And you’re acting like that proves anything other than that you’re ill-equipped to discuss rhetoric?
I’ll explain: reductio ad absurdum is a common rhetorical device whereby you take someone’s logic, and apply it to the most extreme example, to show how the logic fails. It literally means “reduction to the absurd”.
Here’s an example:
What you just did now? Saying “I can invoke random Latin shit”? That’s like you, in court, objecting to a lawyer using the term “mens rea”, and saying they’re just “invoking latin shit”, because you don’t realise it is in fact a common term in that context, and instead think they’re just showing off.
Psst, let me share a little secret. What I said wasn’t random it’s another phrase debatelords like yourself use to pretend they are very cool and logical, but I love how eager you were to flaunt your knowledge of something with a very obvious meaning. I thought it was poignant to someone trying to argue some of the most stupid shit I’ve ever heard, and you can say ad hominem to that.
What I said wasn’t random it’s another phrase debatelords like yourself use to pretend they are very cool and logical
What? “I can invoke latin shit too?” You were trying to wield that against me in a “look, this is how you look” kinda move? When I never did that or anything like that? Well, cool. I hope you had fun, but it was a waste of time.
I love how eager you were to flaunt your knowledge of something with a very obvious meaning
I’m not “flaunting” I’m explaining, because it appeared to be a roadblock for you. You didn’t respond to it, but simply point at it and the fact it was Latin. You gave every indication of being stumped. Should I instead have just mocked you and allowed the conversation to come to a standstill? I was trying to explain my point to you.
This isn’t a fucking fight. It’s a conversation. I’m trying to be even-handed and fair, here.
I thought it was poignant to someone trying to argue some of the most stupid shit I’ve ever heard, and you can say ad hominem to that.
I’m not sure you’re using “poignant” correctly, there. But nothing about this comment I’m responding to makes any sense whatsoever in context, so that’s just par for the course, it seems.
Also, why would I call that an ad hominem? Your guesses and estimations about me thus far have been completely off the mark, so what makes you think this one will hit?
All that said, are you ready to get back on topic?
The guy is hiding behind semantics, so I described another instance of hiding behind semantics. I deliberately used an extreme example so the error was more clear. Basic reductio ad absurdum.
The guy is hiding behind semantics, so I described another instance of hiding behind semantics. I deliberately used an extreme example so the error was more clear. Basic reductio ad absurdum.
I think it’s analogous to referring to balls the size of wrecking balls or something. I don’t know of anyone who thinks bigger physical balls are superior to smaller balls, but the phrase is still common to denote courage. I think big dick energy is not as decoupled from people’s biology as big balls, but it’s still mostly decoupled in common usage.
I could see how the phrase implies that, however this meme subverts that by saying that dick size doesn’t matter as much as your energy does. And the meme literally says that small dick energy is bad, not having a small pp.
Bruh the only time I’ve ever used the term BDE is to imply that the size of your pp doesn’t matter with this meme. Im sorry its upset you, but i dont really care. Trans men can have BDE without even having a dick. YOU are the one implying that small dicks are bad, not me.
Honestly your whole argument is very reminiscent of people in the early 2000s using the word “gay” synonymously with “bad” and insisting it’s not only inoffensive to gay people but that anyone who thinks otherwise is the real homophobe.
The whole “big/small dick energy” things is inherently rooted in body shaming for reasons that have already been pointed out. It doesn’t matter that you didn’t mean it in that way or that you’re trying to flip the script by saying your energy doesn’t necessarily reflect or corporate to your penis size.
Calling someone gay in the 2000’s was not synonymous with calling somone bad, it was synonymous with calling somone homosexual. Gay originally meant lighthearted or carefree. I got called Gay all the time in the 2000’s when I was in high school, the kids never implied it was bad just that I was a homosexual, to which my defense was that I was a Lesbian trapped in a Man’s body so I wasnt gay cause I was attracted to women. The church I went to sure as shit implied that being gay was a sin, but calling somone gay was NOT synonymous with calling them bad. It was used for calling peers out for acting outside of accepted social norms, such as homosexual behavior largely was at the time and still is in some places.
Were you not a (pre-)teen in the 2000s? Because the phrase, “nah, that’s gay” was bandied about quite a lot by teenage boys and men with the mentality of teenage boys quite a lot.
I graduated High School in the 2000s. And yeah I heard, “nah, thats gay” ALOT but its was almost always in reference to things boys didnt want to do cause they thought it would make them look gay if they did it. ie.
Add comment