this post was submitted on 08 May 2025
113 points (99.1% liked)
chapotraphouse
13822 readers
1034 users here now
Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.
No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer
Slop posts go in c/slop. Don't post low-hanging fruit here.
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Understandable, but probably a slight overreaction.
I think not setting men on fire is an act of great restraint by women.
I have amazing self control, but each day it gets a little more challenging.
I do tend to agree. But I also feel like there's too much we don't know. This guy didn't get a little loaded and suddenly become a prick and she suddenly escalated to having her own personal burning man. They've known each other for years, apparently. This couldn't have been an isolated incident. To me it feels like this was just the proverbial straw. A little liquid courage and marching powder, and we get a crispy Mr Louder.
That all said, I don't actually think this was an appropriate response still. But important to acknowledge what we don't know. Obviously she could just not be friends with the guy, probably.
Yeah I'm going to say this is too much? I could totally see a nice open palm slap to the face or better yet a punch, but setting someone on fire, idk.
I'd mostly agree, but it sounds like the dude just sat there while she poured fuel on him, and when she made the threatening gesture, decided in was in everyone's best interest to continue egging her on. I feel like I would have been fleeing when she started trying to pour the fuel. Or I just wouldn't make a misogynistic comment, but whatever I guess.
I can imagine exactly what kind of slimey superiority complex dude would just sit there and act like he's fucking invincible to the pathetic woman who should be in the kitchen. Just barely reacting or scoffing like it's all something beneath him until he's literally on fucking fire.
They were all drunk or on drugs I think.
Just picture one of Tate's followers in the chair and how they would behave. It all comes together.
Perhaps he was not in the best state of mind to be thinking rationally
neither was she
Yeah I would have bolted out of there when I saw she was serious.
I'm going to say that based on the state they were all in, and that the guy was comfortable with saying this shit, we'd probably be looking at an article about femicide if she'd slapped him over the head (even playfully)
a kick in the nuts, not dousing the guy and then setting him on fire ffs
Kick in the nuts sounds about right.
I gotta say I'm a little unsettled by all the people acting like it's a proportional response
I think a lot of people are assuming a history of this sort of behaviour. If this was the only time this guy acted like this, then yeah, it would be an extreme overreaction, but this guy has probably been a massive douchebag for years, and pushed this woman to her breaking point. Still doesn't make it ok, but I think it makes it understandable why some would be pushed that far (and the alcohol and drugs probably helped dull any inhibitions as well)
A lot of people seem to be disagreeing with you
I think most of the people are just joking. Or experiencing schadenfreude thinking about how satisfying it would be to see the misogynistic assholes in their life face some consequences for their actions.
people like mr loader are responsible for every rape, genital mutilation, etc. women have ever faced across the world so i suggest no holds barred until they each individually back up, reflect and apologise for their attitudes
Slap him, kick him in the nuts, sure, but nearly killing him doesn't seem right.
Honestly baffling, I think most people either didn't read the article or don't understand how awful being set on fire is.
I think you're grossly underestimating how much and how many women have to put up with this shit. You're thinking of this as a single incident where a man told a women to get in the kitchen, when it's actually years of that abuse.
it's FAFO because he said "go on, do it", i think we'd be more horrified if he made any attempt to flee or deescalate before he was on fire.
According to the article he was "heavily intoxicated", not really a good time to be making life changing decisions like if you want to have 5 gallons of petrol poured on you and lit on fire. Even then, just because someone doesn't flee or deescalate doesn't mean they deserve to be lit on fire, holy shit.
no part of this is "deserve".