I think the scale of image believability is logarithmic. Going from "believable at a glance" to "believable under scrutiny" requires an exponential increase in performance compared with going from "not believable at a glance" to "believable at a glance". The same principle applies to text generation, facial recognition, sound generation, image enhancement, etc. One of the many reasons AI should not be being integrated in many of the ways world governments and corporations are trying to integrate it.

You'll note I discussed the context subtext and use of the word in my comments. 🙃 that's what this whole thing has been about... sigh

Can you also stop trying to insinuate that I'm not an anglophone person? It's fucking weird

I'm reacting to the comment made by the commenter. Those are not semantically the same statement, though. They literally aren't. It expresses an expectation for others' bodies to be a certain way and a dissappointment when they aren't. The word dissapponted is not interchangeable with preference. "I dislike nipple piercings" is not the same thing as "I am disappointed in women who get them." You intuitively know this too because someone being angry with you implies a direct response to something you've done. Someone being disappointed in you implies they had an expectation for you that you failed to meet. It also takes literally nothing from the speaker to clarify this, which the commenter did not.

I have no feelings whatsoever on the subject of whether the commenter likes nipple piercings or not. I do not have nipple piercings and am entirely uninterested in what the commenter thinks about them. I object to men using language that enforces ownership over women's bodies. As I said in my prior comment, this is an everyday occurrence for us. This happens to us all the time. My body is not your business, and the bodies of random women are not the business of the commenter.

As I said before, how would he materially know how many women have nipple piercings? It's possible to have them and them not be visible in public. If his gripe was with how many women he's hooked up with that have them, he would've said that not that he's disappointed in women who get them.

This entire thing stemmed from a simple call out on something the commenter said. A way that his language implied that women's bodies should be a certain way. It was never a big deal until several men immediately mischaracterized what I said and tried to imply that I am stupid, that I dont know what I'm talking about, that I'm weird, that I don't speak English lol. One commenter rambled on about his dick. I would've left the comment and moved on, that was always my intent. It was the visceral response at the mere suggestion that something he said may have had a misogynistic implication that prolonged this conversation into what it became.

It's not just based on the dictionary it's literally what the word fucking means. Jesus christ. Re-read my comments. I have absolutely no desire to continue this. I've made my fucking point. Leave me alone.

No, I'm not. If you don't know what the word disappointed means, you should look it up.

One minute, you're rambling about your engorged member, and the next you're demonstrating again that you still don't understand what I was saying. Fuck off.

That would be true, but for one, the percentage of women with nipple piercings is statistically insignificant. For two, you don't actually have any measurable way of telling with certainty how popular those piercings are. So it's not really as comparable to hair color, which you can ascertain at a glance. And even then, I would expect some kind of clarification that this has been obtrusive or obstructive to the speaker. "I've been disappointed so many times to find out that my date had their nipples pierced" or something to that effect. Just saying "some women are doing this aesthetic thing to their bodies, and it disappoints me" is not really saying the same thing.

There may be a fundamental disagreement here over whether or not it is valid to feel a sense of ownership over other people's appearances. "Oh no, that guy would've been so cute if he hadn't grown out a mullet I wish he hadn't" would be a strange thing to think, let alone verbalize, about a stranger. It implies that by virtue of that man changing some aspect of appearance the speaker has lost something tangible. It might give the speaker pause in that situation to realize that their language kinda makes it seem like they're entitled to "mullet-less" men. We also have to consider the emphasis that puts on men who do have mullets. The speaker in this case is collectively denigrating all of them for failing to meet their expectation of non-mullet hairstyles, despite those men not knowing the speaker and having nothing to do with them.

Cool. You're so brave.

Yes, here I am, not making any arguments about his preferences. 🙄

I'm not upset with the concept of disappointment. I'm calling out the fact that saying he's disappointed with women for having piercings is a statement about how women's bodies should be. It's saying that women are beholden to an expectation of how their bodies should be, and that when they have nipple piercings they are failing to meet his expectations of them.

You're just petulantly refusing to actually respond to what I have said at this point. I don't care about his preferences.

Youre mischaracterizing what I said as though I made some comment about the commenter having preferences. Which is not and never was what I said.

If you're going to call out something I said and the implication in it, at least tell me what I said that you're calling out and what the implication was in what I said.