Wouldn't he need to have reason to believe (say, by being told she's Signal's president) that she knows for certain before this makes sense? A "no" wouldn't convince anyone without that crucial bit of context I think, setting aside the insufferability of this guy.

Or he could just, you know, hover the mouse over the icon, or perhaps even CLICK on the profile: https://bsky.app/profile/meredithmeredith.bsky.social

We heard you the first time, fanboi.

Of course he does. A mere woman?! Correcting him!? That can't stand!

Sure as eggs is eggs, techfanboi sees women saying things he doesn't like and he ignores all boundaries, all rules, because his opinion is just SO IMPORTANT.

And replies with such a lame "rejoinder" he makes all men look idiotic by association.

Now fuck off out of the channel.

I fight back by using "men's" goods. 🤣

Well, a lot of men write about the breasts as if they're as big as the woman's head.

Since in real life, barring some very extreme surgeries, most times, even the largest of breasts tend to be, you know, smaller than the head, it must mean the women being described have unusually small heads.

(This could explain why they're foolish enough to be in such books, come to think of it.)

Absolutely, some men are very good at writing about (and even from the perspective of) their female characters.

We call those men "good writers".

What I think the pattern is that when you see stuff like that, it's always a male writer doing it. And male editors, in the case of published works, letting it fly.

Yeah, that was an epic smackdown of the too-confident techbrodude poseur, wasn't it?

Methinks someone doesn't know what "mansplaining" is.

Here, let me break down why that's a mansplain:

1. The man made a technical statement about what Signal was planning, talking with unearned (as it turns out) authority.
2. A woman negated said statement saying that the opposite was true.
3. The man, instead of maybe backing down and double-checking his facts, doubled-down instead on his incorrect statement, speaking with a certainty that rivals an LLMbecile's hallucinations.
4. The woman reveals that she is actually the authority and that the man's entire fronting was bullshit.

That's the mansplain. Someone who doesn't know shit corrected a woman who literally knows for certain without at any point considering that, perhaps, the woman is right.

Because when are women ever right?

Now fuck off the channel.

That is a very strong indicator of someone who identifies as male, yes.

Almost all male writers screw up even basic dimensions of women. It's like they didn't know that height and weight charts exist so you can come up with plausible measures.

(Also ... the fact that numbers are being attached is a dead giveaway that this is a male writer.)

In one hobby I used to partake of, people had to write descriptions of characters. You could almost always spot the male writers. First, attaching actual numbers instead of making comparisons. Second, the ideal body type always came across as a broomstick with beachballs stapled to it.

How did this dud ever get mistaken for a genius?