Goose is the only non-passerine emoji I have

  • Frostbeard@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 hour ago

    Ok ok ok. Now that the comment section has been explained “insta thot”, do anyone have source!?

  • Saapas@piefed.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    4 hours ago

    He might’ve been fine with railing her for two years for whatever money she got out of it. I guess that would’ve been a win-win

  • lauracor@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    4 hours ago

    Internet stories get exaggerated fast. Real people and relationships are always more complex than a single viral narrative.

    • Virtvirt588@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      4 hours ago

      That is true. To be fair, Lemmy had its times where apparent “experts” deduced insane claims from quick glances of images. But it shows that judging the book by its cover is a real thing, and it applies to anything.

  • GreenBeanMachine@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    edit-2
    4 hours ago

    Please explain to someone who never had an insta account, what is an insta thot?

    Also, please explain to a poor person, what is a 2 year prenup pension?

    Edit: thanks everyone. I feel highly educated now.

    • OshagHennessey@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      43
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Insta = Instagram

      THOT = That Ho Over There

      Prenup = Prenuptual agreement, which is a contract two people sign before they get married, usually to determine who will get what in the event of a divorce. It’s usually used to avoid lengthy and costly divorce proceedings.

      Pension = An older type of retirement account

      So, that ho on Instagram stayed married to him for two years, fulfilling the terms of their prenuptial agreement, entitling her to full divorce benefits, which will be about half of this guy’s fortune, which should be enough for her to retire on.

      Thank you for coming to my TED talk.

      • Rooster326
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        5 hours ago

        Why was the prenup 2 years? Do most prenup have a minimum time till you get all their money?

        • boonhet@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          17
          ·
          5 hours ago

          Prenups can have whatever in them. Common is for the poorer person to get nothing or a limited part of the other person’s wealth. Idea is to avoid giving away 50% of your shit if you’re rich. But there’s no set rules about what the terms can be.

          I’m assuming Dilbert guy just wanted to have at least 2 years worth of sex if he was gonna give her a bunch of money in a divorce.

          • Rooster326
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            4 hours ago

            Oh that’s wild. So it’s his own fault in a way.

            He put a timer on his marriage.

            • boonhet@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              2 hours ago

              Oh he must’ve known she wouldn’t stay for long. It’s all in him lol

              Why get married then is beyond me. He’s got money, could just pay for the girlfriend experience and have one high end girl on retainer for that.

    • TheLowestStone@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 hours ago

      An instance thot is a lady who posts lewd pictures of herself on Instagram.

      A 2 year prenup meant that she had to be married to him for 2 years before getting access to the Dilbert money.

    • Hadriscus@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 hours ago

      Here’s the explanation from someone who doesn’t know either : an insta thot is a girl who lives on the instagrams, and is hot. The T is silent.
      A 2y prenup pension is a roof over your head for 2 years before you start doing either pullups, or pushups (your choice).

  • Akasazh@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    10 hours ago

    Non-passerine

    Apparently the passerines are the largest bird group, but I fail to see the relevance here, somehow.

  • Fleur_@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    51
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    16 hours ago

    Well, he at the very least, probably didn’t refer to her as an “insta thot”

    • rumschlumpel@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      6 hours ago

      We don’t know that. He could totaly have talked to an acquaintance and referred to her as an “insta thot”.

    • Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      11 hours ago

      As a man, I have heard people (men and women) talk about “pretty” people and how they want to date them. I have seen many people date many people.

      But weirdly, while i have seen people call other people thot, I haven’t heard anyone call their gf an insta thot. Strange… it is almost as if it is jealousy.

      • boonhet@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        9 hours ago

        It’d have to be insta thoh because thot stands for that hoe over there

    • tomiant@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      30
      ·
      15 hours ago

      No you don’t see, this is about female empowerment! Woo, go girl, get that money selling your body!

      • Bgugi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        4 hours ago

        I mean, if she finds it less degrading and more reliable than selling her body in other ways (stacking boxes in a warehouse or occupying a desk chair for 4400 hours), yeah.

    • borari@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      76
      ·
      18 hours ago

      I mean it’s just a thing two people agree to and sign before they get married. You could have your lawyer put anything in a prenup, it’s just most people only give a fuck about the money and assets.

        • wabasso@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 hours ago

          Wait really, sexual stuff? Couldn’t they use contracts to make prostitution legal then?

          • Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            3 hours ago

            You can’t use a contract to make something illegal, legal. But in all but name you kind of can make it legal. You have to have sex with me everyday, after 2 years you get a fifth of my stuff.

            Also it’s almost impossible to get courts to actually enforce the sexual part of a contract. They just won’t get involved in that stuff for the most part.

    • Instigate@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      40
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      12 hours ago

      Sex work is work. As long as a person enters into that work wilfully and can legally consent to it, it’s functionally no different than a labourer selling their body in labour constructing a building, painting a house, or digging a trench. Denigrating sex workers serves no purpose beyond needlessly moralising the choices of consenting adults.

        • Senal
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 hours ago

          She entered into the agreement of her own volition (as far as we know) and was of an age to do so.

          If her intention was to provide sex (and companionship, because that’s sometimes and important component) in exchange for the payday after the 2 years then I’d classify that as sex work, though a more long term contracting kind of work.

          If she was in it for the relationship and it just didn’t work out then no, it’s just a failed relationship with a bonus payout.

          But i’ll concede that my perspective isn’t necessarily the norm, as i put quite a bit of emphasis on intent.

          To me it’s weird to classify sex work as something different to any other job from a labour perspective.

          I understand there are unique challenges, but i think a lot of that could be solved with decent regulation and support.

          The fact that there’s a whole bunch of legal (and cultural) moralising around it is a big part of the problem, though not all of it.

          All of that said, this isn’t even close to my area of expertise so I’ll assume there’s a whole bunch of things I’ve not taken in to consideration.

    • Senal
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      41
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      14 hours ago

      Pretty sure the (arguably) oldest profession of humanity is pretty much all out of fucks to give for peoples opinions of it.

      but hey, some basic-ass bad-faith drive-by statements might just be the thing we need to turn this all around, keep it up, i expect the tide to turn any day now.

          • 🦄🦄🦄@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 hours ago

            There are also a lot of trans exclusionary people that call themselves feminists. Telling women hat they can and can’t do with their body is inherently anti-feminist.

            • rumschlumpel@feddit.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              4 hours ago

              I found that having no-true-scotsman discussions generally doesn’t lead anywhere. These kinds of “feminists” suck, but they’re still distinct from regular misogynists.