this post was submitted on 13 Aug 2026
169 points (90.0% liked)

General Memes & Private Chuckle

1115 readers
256 users here now

Welcome to General Memes

Memes for the masses, chuckles for the chosen.

Rule 1: Be Civil, Not CruelWe’re here for laughs, not fights.

  • No harassment, dogpiling, or brigading
  • No bigotry (transphobia, racism, sexism, etc.)
  • Keep it light — argue in the comments, not with insults

Rule 2: No Forbidden FormatsNot every image deserves immortality on the memmlefield. That means:

  • No spam or scams
  • No porn or sexually explicit content
  • No illegal content (seriously, don’t ruin the fun)
  • NSFW memes must be properly tagged

If you see a post that breaks the rules, report it so the mods can take care of it.

Otherwise consider this your call to duty. Get posting or laughing. Up to you

founded 11 months ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] TranscendentalEmpire@lemmy.today 23 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Pretty sure people like their orange cats?

Also if we're going by your interpretation of what the poster is meaning it's not really needlessly gendered. Most people on the site would be young men, and young men statistically make more dumb and impulsive decisions than young women, it's why we pay more for insurance.

[–] FilthyShrooms@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago (2 children)

The only issue I have is her saying "too many", as if it's a bad thing or something

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

I think that says more about how we view men as a group than anything. Why is "too many men" automatically a negative?

It's funny, I stumbled on this meme in the wholesome community just now that I think is fitting:

[–] notjustlurking@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Because in this context it means there are more men than necessary that exhibit this. Otherwise the statement would be, "not enough men"

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Eh I think it’s neutral personally.

[–] Archimedes@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 week ago

It's a beige alert, your Neutralness!

Eh, variety is the spice of life. Monocultures are bad for the social environment as well.

[–] starlinguk@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

It's why more boys are born than girls! Because, and I quote my uncle (who works in healthcare) "men are really fucking stupid."

[–] SailorFuzz@lemmy.world -4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

Not sure I understand, are you implying that because insurance companies openly discriminate, that means it's not discrimination? So if a capitalist industry says it's true, then it's true?

Or, are you implying something along the lines to say that men are, by nature, dumber and impulsive? Like it's some fact of biology measurable by statistics? And not like, some kind of expected role placed on men to fit into society, encouraging them to be brash and aggressive? Boys will by boys and all that.

But hey, lets abuse statistic and this "by nature" argument a bit more, see how that line of thinking has been used against other groups of people, and see if it feels alight:

"Women are simply not as smart and are meant to be caring and loving mothers, its in their nature".

Hmmmmm, troubling. But statistically, at that time, true. Because women weren't allowed in higher education and were expected to keep house. So crazy thing, that's what a large statistic of women did. The weren't educated and grew up to be housewives as their only skill. And look at that, now I can use the artificially induced statistic as evidence and create this neato little feedback loop until everyone just accepts it an immutable fact of nature.

It's almost like... we have this society built on explicit gender roles and expectations. And trying to use those societal pressures as some kind of proof of nature, is pretty fucking dumb, and inherently sexist af. And flipping the roles so as to say "haha men dumb" doesn't make it any less sexist. And playing this dumb "what do you mean?" game is insincere bullshit.

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 13 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Hmmmmm, troubling. But statistically, at that time, true. Because women weren’t allowed in higher education and were expected to keep house. So crazy thing, that’s what a large statistic of women did. The weren’t educated and grew up to be housewives as their only skill. And look at that, now I can use the artificially induced statistic as evidence and create this neato little feedback loop until everyone just accepts it an immutable fact of nature.

Comparing systemic sexism and centuries of patriarchal suppression of women to a funny tweet that's akin to the "golden retriever boyfriend" trope sure is a thing you can do.

[–] SailorFuzz@lemmy.world -4 points 1 week ago (2 children)

interesting that you flipped the comparative metaphor to a positive one. Why didn't you chose a "funny tweet" that's derogatory? Do they have different connotations and thus are treated differently when discussing issues of discriminatory behaviour?

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

I think being compared to an orange cat is generally positive.

[–] SailorFuzz@lemmy.world -3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

sure man, lets just play pretend that the popularly understood interpretation of a thing is not what's being implied. I think you're a bitch... waitwaitwait, I mean that in a positive way, like how bitches are motherly and loyal dogs. Isn't that what people mean when they say that?

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Come on, name calling is crossing the line and you know it.

[–] TranscendentalEmpire@lemmy.today 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Lol

"I like cats"

"You Fucking Bitch!"

This guy is speed running the Incel mask removal

[–] revelrous@sopuli.xyz 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I like that the title implies this was posted by a man. But this guy saw a feminine profile pic and just had to start calling people bitches. 😬

[–] SailorFuzz@lemmy.world -5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I wasn't namecalling, I was just comparing you to an animal.

Isn't that exactly what was being said by OP? If you interpreted it as insulting or crossing the line, then that's your misunderstanding. I mean, I think being compared to ~~an orange cat~~ a bitch is generally positive.

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I wasn’t namecalling, I was just comparing you to an animal.

If you think being compared to an orange cat is the same as being called a bitch, we have absolutely nothing left to discuss.

[–] SailorFuzz@lemmy.world -5 points 1 week ago (3 children)

I don't think you had anything to discuss to begin with. You just wanted to defend sexist bullshit and be a contrarian when it fits your fancy.

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

If this is sexist, then by all means I am sexist.

[–] SailorFuzz@lemmy.world -5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

you are, but not because of that. But because of the lengths you're willing to go to continue to justify your sexism. Thanks for finally admitting it though. We've made great progress today.

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Tell me you didn't understand my comment without telling me you didn't understand my comment.

[–] SailorFuzz@lemmy.world -5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

If all you have left are twitter meme quotes, you can leave.

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] SailorFuzz@lemmy.world -4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

so, just twitter quotes left. Brain that rotted huh?

Pass. If you can't articulate your own thoughts, then go back to twitter, yea?

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 week ago

Why go to twitter when you're conversing with me right here?

[–] TranscendentalEmpire@lemmy.today 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Lol, your level projection could be used to improve imax technology.

[–] AdolfSchmitler@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

** Christopher Nolan has entered the chat **

Yes, my next film will be presented with the help of technology we harnessed from angry boys we found on the internet. The imagery was worth the constant bemoaning of society and the wailing for chicken nuggies.

[–] AdolfSchmitler@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

Complete misreading of the situation tbh.

I don't know how to make this not sound like some kind of personal attack but I'm going to try. There was a lot you said, I wanna focus on the "calling someone a bitch, but actually I just meant that as a term for an animal" part.

Yes. The word "bitch" can refer to a female dog. That is true. That hasn't been the way people use the word for the last like 500 years tho. It's meant to be an insult.

Imagine if I called you a "fucking bastard". And when you tried calling me out for it my response was "Actually I was calling you an illegitimate heir to a kingdom, duh, you're the one who's bad for thinking i meant it as an insult. "

You don't have to respond. Let it marinate for a minute. I'm not trying to "win". I can see why you saw it as sexist. Orange cat = bad. Men = orange cat. Therefore men = bad. I just wonder how quickly that conclusion was arrived at.

[–] Wren@lemmy.today 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Wow. You're terrible at arguments.

[–] hirihit640@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago

Not a directly response to your comment, a small observation. imo when grandparent comment said:

Comparing systemic sexism and centuries of patriarchal suppression of women to a funny tweet

Then you immediately know they are of the prejudice + power definition of sexism and racism. People on either side of this debate are so hard to convince to the other side that I personally just don't engage further

[–] TranscendentalEmpire@lemmy.today 11 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Not sure I understand, are you implying that because insurance companies openly discriminate, that means it's not discrimination?

Discrimination usually requires proof of unfair treatment. Insurance companies avoid this by proving these metrics are mathematically and actuarially tied to risk rather than intentional bias.

Are you denying that young men are less risk adverse than young women, that young men do not injure themselves and others more than young women?

are you implying something along the lines to say that men are, by nature, dumber and impulsive? Like it's some fact of biology measurable by statistics?

Yes..... Testosterone is well known to effect mood regulation and decision making, including the ability to control and reflect upon impulsive behaviour.

line of thinking has been used against other groups of people, and see if it feels alight:

Yes because falsely equating modern medical science to something like phrenology is totally a legitimate argument....

Women are simply not as smart and are meant to be caring and loving mothers, its in their nature

That is making an absolute claim, which is not what I or the original the original post did.

Also, most all studies agree that women and men both have the same average IQ of around 100, but tend to be better at different aspects of the test.

The second part of your claim is not really something that can be statically measured? "Women are supposed to be loving mother" as opposed to what exactly? How are we quantifying what a loving mother is?

The weren't educated and grew up to be housewives as their only skill.

More women are seeking higher education then men currently?

Even your "pretend" sexism is moronic. So I guess you are being a little orange cat brained today.

It's almost like... we have this society built on explicit gender roles and expectations.

It's almost like you are dramatically over reaching to turn this two sentence post so you can turn this thread into an Incel soapbox about the male loneliness epidemic.