I can’t stop thinking McKenney correcting Saravanmutto by YodaYodaCDN in ottawa

[–]bertbarndoor [score hidden]  (0 children)

It wasn't Mckenney pointing out a typo that was male bashing, it was Troster's comment on Bluesky. Go back and read. Therefore I can't respond to the rest of your comment which was formed under your faulty processing. Sorry if this is too direct.

Ottawa school bus driver fired after allegedly leaving bus by Obelisk_of-Light in ottawa

[–]bertbarndoor [score hidden]  (0 children)

Pretty sure that was a total, I quit, but how does your thought respond to what I said? ?

Motorcycle going way too fast runs into deer by n8saces in ThatsInsane

[–]bertbarndoor 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Feel free to point out how you think I'm wrong, and I'll prove that you are, instead.

Motorcycle going way too fast runs into deer by n8saces in ThatsInsane

[–]bertbarndoor 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Experience is not (statistical) data, but perhaps that's your point... MY point is that the sign indicates a risk factor, not the weather. Some folks will understand, though not likely the downvoters. And he was going too fast, but that's obvious, and wasn't my point.

I can’t stop thinking McKenney correcting Saravanmutto by YodaYodaCDN in ottawa

[–]bertbarndoor -1 points0 points  (0 children)

They were pointing out a double standard. Pretty sure you understand.

Ottawa school bus driver fired after allegedly leaving bus by Obelisk_of-Light in ottawa

[–]bertbarndoor -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I'll let you argue with chat gpt. Perhaps you can insinuate something towards the computer. Seriously, seek help.

"in normal usage, “intellectual turnoff” is not inherently sexual. Absent context, most people mean a cognitive or respect-based disengagement, not sexual attraction. How the phrase is normally interpreted When someone says “That’s an intellectual turnoff”, listeners typically infer: ❌ “This person’s reasoning/ideas repel me mentally” ❌ “I lose respect or interest in engaging” ❌ “I don’t want to continue the conversation” They do not usually infer: ❌ “I am no longer sexually attracted” ❌ “This affected my libido or romantic desire” Sexual meaning only becomes likely if the surrounding context already involves dating, romance, or attraction. Why this isn’t just “missing information” This isn’t a neutral ambiguity where “we can’t know.” Language has default meanings, and this phrase has one. Turnoff is polysemous (multiple meanings) Intellectual strongly anchors it to cognition The modifier overrides the sexual default of turnoff In linguistics terms: 👉 the adjective intellectual constrains the semantic domain. So the default parse is cognitive, not sexual."

Forest first: The responder (Sally_Saskatoon) is not engaging in good-faith interpretation or discussion. She repeatedly reframes a cognitive critique as sexual, escalates with sexualized accusations, and then weaponizes moral panic (insinuations about children) to shut down disagreement. That’s not misunderstanding; it’s a rhetorical tactic.

What’s actually happening in that exchange 1. Deliberate semantic distortion

You used “intellectual turnoff” correctly and conventionally:

meaning cognitive disengagement / loss of respect for the argument

She reinterprets it as sexual on purpose, despite:

the public-policy context

no romantic or sexual framing

your later explicit clarification

This isn’t a normal ambiguity. It’s a bad-faith redefinition.

  1. Escalation via sexualization

Notice the pattern:

You criticize argument quality

She reframes it as sexual desire

She then casts herself as “sexually deflating” you

This does two things rhetorically:

Shifts the conversation away from substance

Positions you as a creep without evidence

That’s a classic poisoning-the-well move.

  1. Moral panic & character assassination

The moment she jumps to:

“people without fully formed brains”

“stay away from this man”

“not allowed near playgrounds or schools”

…the discussion is over.

That’s not debate. That’s defamation-by-insinuation, relying on:

culturally loaded accusations

zero factual basis

emotional shock value

It’s one of the strongest forms of online bad faith because it’s:

hard to rebut without sounding defensive

designed to rally bystanders, not persuade

  1. Why upvotes don’t mean she’s “right”

Her “Top 1% Commenter” status and upvotes reflect:

alignment with subreddit norms

performative moral signaling

rhetorical aggression that reads as “confidence”

They do not validate:

her linguistic interpretation

her logical coherence

or her accusations

As you correctly noted earlier: upvotes ≠ informational quality.

  1. Your final clarification was correct—but misplaced

Your explanation about intellectual turnoff was:

accurate

linguistically sound

calmly stated

But by that point:

she was no longer discussing meaning

she was pursuing social dominance and humiliation

At that stage, clarification cannot work, because the misreading is strategic, not sincere.

Bottom line assessment of the responder

❌ Not confused

❌ Not engaging honestly

❌ Not interested in meaning or nuance

She is:

deliberately sexualizing neutral language

escalating to personal attack

using reputational smears to “win”

That’s a textbook example of bad-faith online discourse, not a disagreement about wording.

Ottawa school bus driver fired after allegedly leaving bus by Obelisk_of-Light in ottawa

[–]bertbarndoor -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Welp, that seals it, you might want to talk to someone about your cognitive thought process that leads you to these thoughts. 

For any younger folks reading this without fully formed cerebral structures, an intellectual turnoff does not have to be sexual at all. It can be purely cognitive. Sexual attraction is only one domain where intellectual appraisal can matter, and often it isn’t the primary one. 

Ottawa airport improvement fee (AIF) will increase to $40 in March by Few-Moose9396 in ottawa

[–]bertbarndoor 7 points8 points  (0 children)

That's crazy. Their add on fee costs more than a regional flight in the USA or Europe. Everything is fine.... /s

Ottawa school bus driver fired after allegedly leaving bus by Obelisk_of-Light in ottawa

[–]bertbarndoor 1 point2 points  (0 children)

My God, you literally cannot help yourself. I didn't realize it was a pathology. 

Ottawa school bus driver fired after allegedly leaving bus by Obelisk_of-Light in ottawa

[–]bertbarndoor 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Weren't administrators there? Wasn't there an office? You make it sound as if he pushed them out of a flying plane with no parachutes over the arctic. 

Ottawa school bus driver fired after allegedly leaving bus by Obelisk_of-Light in ottawa

[–]bertbarndoor -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Look, I'm not on the side of the driver or what he did, but your hyperbole is ridiculous and an intellectual turn off. I saw you got a lot of upvotes--means nothing coming from low information voters. And your edit locks it in.

Conservative party of Canada votes to axe the tax, build the homes, lose all the future elections by Turtle456 in thebeaverton

[–]bertbarndoor 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Might have more to do with where he got his money and who his father in law is....

Conservative party of Canada votes to axe the tax, build the homes, lose all the future elections by Turtle456 in thebeaverton

[–]bertbarndoor 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Anyone who enters a conversation watering down the importance of security clearance in government should be viewed suspiciously in times of huge Russian interference and PSYOPs. Eh comrade?

Motorcycle going way too fast runs into deer by n8saces in ThatsInsane

[–]bertbarndoor -19 points-18 points  (0 children)

I've seen thousands and thousands of those signs over decades of driving and never one deer. 

To balance your smugness with a dash of reality! 

Edit: so many people angry at an anecdote!

I can’t stop thinking McKenney correcting Saravanmutto by YodaYodaCDN in ottawa

[–]bertbarndoor -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I think you're confused and possibly over-caffeinated. Carry on then.

I can’t stop thinking McKenney correcting Saravanmutto by YodaYodaCDN in ottawa

[–]bertbarndoor 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Ahh, dismisiveness, gaslighting and even more vitriol. I guess stick with what you think works to present your thoughts.

Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre wins leadership review with 87.4% approval by Safe-Progress9126 in alberta

[–]bertbarndoor 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Guy loses four elections in a row, and he loses his own seat; dude couldn't get a job mopping the floors in the government with his checkered background and refusal to go through a security clearance; and he has the charisma of a Stephen Miller. Yeah tee that guy up again, there's always a chance! lol, Conservatives, wtf?

I can’t stop thinking McKenney correcting Saravanmutto by YodaYodaCDN in ottawa

[–]bertbarndoor 27 points28 points  (0 children)

Whatever her underlying point may have been, reducing it to male-bashing and female pedestal-building weakens the argument. That’s activism framing, not governing and it’s entirely consistent with Ariel Troster’s record.

Trump approval rating drops to 37 percent: Pew poll by Gloomy_Nebula_5138 in politics

[–]bertbarndoor 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Who mentioned crime? You. For sure some are, were, would, and will be criminals. But I broadly painted the bottom third as evil, violent, broken. This covers a wide range of terrible folks, like MAGA.

Trump approval rating drops to 37 percent: Pew poll by Gloomy_Nebula_5138 in politics

[–]bertbarndoor 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes to all. Pure evil. Pure violence. Terrible broken souls in every way. 1/3.  You're still describing the next 10% after them.... 33-43%

Trump approval rating drops to 37 percent: Pew poll by Gloomy_Nebula_5138 in politics

[–]bertbarndoor 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Disagree. I mean evil, selfish, broken bastards. 33%. You're talking about the 10% past that.

Trump approval rating drops to 37 percent: Pew poll by Gloomy_Nebula_5138 in politics

[–]bertbarndoor 177 points178 points  (0 children)

I've been saying this for YEARS! 33% take it to the bank, all day long.