• Senal@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    8 months ago

    To me this reads as:


    < preemptive justification for saying something controversial and/or indefensible >

    < controversial statement with no justification or reasoning >

    “Not going to explain because it’s obvious”


    Probably not how it was intended, but that’s some weak sauce

    • TheFrirish@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      8 months ago

      My sauce is that it is not how a teacher should act period. Also it’s not private she also has some pornhub which is publicly available website. no matter the pay.

      • BreakDecks@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        that it is not how a teacher should act period.

        C’mon dude, just say the sexist parts out loud. We all know that’s where this conversation is headed anyway.

        It’s the only reason you keep sticking to circular logic to defend yourself. You know if you say what you really mean here, it isn’t going to go over well.

        • TheFrirish@jlai.lu
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          What is there sexist about this mate ? It doesn’t matter whoever does it a teacher should not be making porn on the side.