[ahoyhere]

You think we're having a big debate, but we're not. Your central thesis: "Most couples are like this. Women are like x. Men are like y." You have zero evidence for this. We're not having a discussion at all. I am saying "There's no evidence" and you're arguing with tautologies -- "If women don't CHOOSE to be with men like this, then either A) women are with men like this, but not by choice, or B) women aren't with men like this, by choice." That false binary choice includes a big assumption. Do you see it?

I never claimed that narcissism like in the video is prevalent… nor did I claim that it isn't. What I said was "This video is from a wholly narcissistic viewpoint."

I didn't say THIS company was disregarding ethics. I made no judgment other than "this is narcissistic" and (in that twitter conversation you extracted) "This video isn't guy-focused, it's narcissist-focused. If I was a guy, I'd find Couple's apparent opinion of me insulting."

The tweet you excerpted was from from a separate, subsequent conversation:

DANIEL: I meant my original tweet slightly in jest: Could a company potentially be OK with their sexist video if it got them results?

ME: well no point in asking THAT, since avg corporate ethics is clear for all to see. :) q: do they KNOW what they're doing?

You COULD rebut the idea that the average corporation will gladly use sexism to sell things, but it would be a waste of your breath.

My question: "Do they KNOW what they're doing? Do they SEE what they're portraying with their video? Do they know what narcissism is?" is a useful one, on the other hand.

You said:

> If most women aren't like this, who's the company's marketing aimed at? A tiny minority?

Tautology. "It must work, or else why would they do it?" This is not a safe assumption. See again my useful question above.

[jonathanconway]

> You think we're having a big debate, but we're not

True, because you're not coming out and saying what you think is true; you're just attacking my statements.

> That false binary choice includes a big assumption. Do you see it?

Just one? I think it includes several, but I tried to narrow it down to what I guessed you would think the most likely possibilities are.

Maybe you don't think women have a choice. Maybe you don't think there's such a thing as free will at all.

I don't have time to second-guess every possible opinion you might have; I'm offering my own opinion and trying to ferret out what yours is.

> If I was a guy, I'd find Couple's apparent opinion of me insulting

And you never say why. Is that a moral judgement on your part?

> My question: "Do they KNOW what they're doing? Do they SEE what they're portraying with their video? Do they know what narcissism is?" is a useful one

Is it one you intend to find the answer to?

I think it's pretty clear, from having observed a whole range of marketing material and cultural artifacts (TV shows, etc) that this really is how people think about relationships, and that this company is appealing to that thinking in this ad.

I don't have a massive amount of statistical data to prove this, but I don't have a high regard for statistics anyway. I think it's better to consider as evidence things you can observe directly, rather than having faith that some bean-counter is getting his stats right.

Sorry if I come off as a whiner, but I think human beings generally like to express themselves when something in life is upsetting/depressing to them, and I don't see why I should have to shut up and put up just because I'm a guy.

[ahoyhere]

>> You think we're having a big debate, but we're not

> True, because you're not coming out and saying what you think is true; you're just attacking my statements.

Yes. I don't have to have a position, nor do I have to share it with you. Why? Because I'm not trying to describe 100% of all humans, walking around, with my own little pet theory. If I were, the burden of proof would be on me.

> Maybe you don't think women have a choice. Maybe you don't think there's such a thing as free will at all.

No. The enormous hidden assumption is that 3 billion+ people can be jammed into your tidy little binary choice. You've seen it all… you've figured it out. You don't have "a massive amount of statistical data to prove this" -- you have zero data to prove this.

But still, you think you know. Enough to dare to say to the world: "This is how men are. This is how women are."

Oh good! Jonathan Conway figured it out. Stop the presses, everybody! Trim the wicks and lower the shades… we're done here! Everybody out of the pool!

What sheer, monumental gall.

By the by, nobody asked you to "shut up and put up just because [you're] a guy." Nobody asked you to shut up and put up at all, in fact. They merely pushed back against your labeling of the entire human race, because well, that's what people do when they see idiotic things on the internet. They push back.

[jonathanconway]

> I'm not trying to describe 100% of all humans, walking around, with my own little pet theory

Neither am I, I'm just trying to describe the majority of humans, based on my own experiences.

> The enormous hidden assumption is that 3 billion+ people can be jammed into your tidy little binary choice.

And you're assuming there aren't traits that are common among most of those 3 billion+ people. But I think this marketing video indicates that there are certain common traits, which marketing is designed to appeal to.

> Jonathan Conway figured it out.

I'm not the first person to make these claims.

> nobody asked you to "shut up and put up just because [you're] a guy."

Fine, not here, but on many other forums (e.g. feminist) that's what I'd be told in an indirect kind of way.

[ahoyhere]

> Neither am I, I'm just trying to describe the majority of humans, based on my own experiences.

Oh, that makes your impotent intellectual assertions suddenly defensible again. My mistake.