@kelpfishes: lindsay clancy vs cornell 7 debate and the new world order #kelpfishes

j ur mother :

those 2 cases are not even close to comparable in the first place, even on the point of contention

HZMZ :

“There are always bound to be bad men and women” - as u first referenced those 2 cases, so do u think a woman having postpartum psychosis is considered a bad woman, equivalent to how a man rapes a woman and is a bad man? How are they even equal? One is almost completely out of her control while the guys actively decided to think with their other head and gang rape a woman? Of course not all men are bad, but the fact that 50+ men saw those msgs and remained silent, and that one of the rapists was the victim’s friend, shows you how scary it is for women. Trust me this is not an isolated case in the US, even in SG we had the nasi lemak telegram chat group, and rapes and SA are happening so often here. There are so many men out there just waiting for an opportunity to pounce on a chance to SA and you can’t even figure out who is safe because it could even be your guy friend. As u are a guy I don’t expect u to fully uds the fear we have, but I hope u can try to empathize how it’s not just a dumb or random choice to have “distrust of men”. It is a lived experience that we continue to face even in 2026.

ǝnƃǝnǝ :

unc is done trying to instill discernment in others 😔

najeep :

Social media algorithm's tendency to push polarized content is frying all our brains in real time

Wei Liea :

tbh from reading the comments i think its game set—i did not make any judgement on the validity of each case, nor the severity/weigh—the only agenda is discussing second-order macro socio impact on people (both M and F) no equivalent comparison of the two cases are made. copy pasted context for “these two cases are not comparable!?): @Wei Liea: to add context—both cases are social media gender outrage flashpoints surfacing back-to-back. (coincidentally, before the 3Nov US election..) both cases started a few years ago, lindsay in 2023, cornell 7 in 2024. both were messy cases where attorneys had to really thresh (aka contention)

Wat_is_u_tokin_abt? :

Well said, king. Getting tired of seeing radical views on tiktok all the time. It’s like dumb arguing with dumber. Good to know they are rationale people on the platform as well. 🔥

:DD :

aiya lj lah u

C :

I’ve generally enjoyed your takes but I have to disagree here. While I acknowledge that there are people who wholeheartedly believe in “all men” or “all women”, the claim “all men” in most feminist thinking refers to the notion that misogyny and the patriarchy is ingrained in these men, regardless of what they do. It is imparted the moment a man grows up in a patriarchal, misogynstic society (which will never be eradicated). This is an undisputable fact that men have just socialised these norms (as we have with other societal norms like gender). Discernment, while yes, does apply in terms of specific actions, like yes, I believe that not all men can act in the same extent the Cornell 7 did, but, it does not erase the principal baseline which is that all men are men, and all men are inherently misogynstic (as with women). So while it is important to discern, the conclusion that this discernment can absolve men of their misogyny is not applicable.

ilike rice :

I hate everyone

user03902849394 :

a non-choice vs a choice… what’s the point of putting them “against” each other

balls :

the only lesson u can take away from both cases is that women have it harder in society and society has failed them. lindsey did not get enough help from society and the state and jane doe did not get justice. i dont know what kind of thinking u have to bring gender war into this LOL

Miles :

Wonder if most of the viewers and commenters here even understand what “second order ramifications” means lolol

fishpaper(49%) :

goat ur getting torn up over this oml they didn’t listen past the first 5 sec 😭😭😭

sotomee :

brother what prompted you to even compare the 2 cases?

hagen :

well said

Haze and High cost of living :

Miles :

Some themes that’s apparent here to me: Death of nuance, polarisation, tribalism, cheap manufactured outrage, moral absolutism, dehumanisation of the other. Politically: tyranny of the majority, populism, 2 party systems(?)

LordIroh :

Saraee :

Huh

meem😛😛 :

kiryucynical :

mr sg philosophy back at it again to say a whole lot of nothing while unironically defending misogyny by comparing a nuanced case with a clear cut one

xiaorong :

unfollowed, this is very disappointing

a :

the two cases are like comparing apples to oranges. even if they were directly comparable it doesn’t change the fact that women are the marginalised class in a patriarchal society. while saying things like all men are evil definitely doesn’t add value, it can’t be denied that all men do benefit from patriarchy and it is generally harder to be a woman in this world built for men.

ushy gushy :

what are you even saying