[flagged]
The proof is in the pudding.
It was built for doxxing and quite potentially spreading lies about men and on top of that, they doxxed all of their users, too. They pretty much doxxed everyone who used the app or was mentioned on the platform.
I don’t see how it is not a doxxing app, but go ahead and find me another PR article that says it is the best thing since sliced bread and the founders should be saints.
The selling point is you sign up and can share, support, amplify fellow doxers. A community for the non-Chan-ish, but Chan-ish, crowd to commune.
But when your in, it looks like your the first sign up.
To you. To the rest of the world all your sign up info is on DoxedMyself.com.
But I don’t have the time. So feel free to Y-combinate to your hearts worth! On me!
Many years ago when newspapers, magazines, or books wrote about someone, at least some of the time they may have tried to verify part of the information.
Today, there’s very little expectation that something on an app or website has been partially or thoroughly fact-checked.
For the sake of argument, let’s say 20% of the data is fabricated.
If 80% of the information on Tea about others being a safety risk were true, would that be worth chancing that 20% would have false information spread about them, mostly quietly to a small percentage of the population in a way that didn’t really affect their lives substantially?
I’m not defending Tea losing their users’ data nor defending those that spread disinformation.
However, if the majority of the data were correct and helped others, and if the incorrect information didn’t destroy or substantially affect someone, then I think it may have been better to have had the 80% truth, if it were to have prevented violent crime.
It's fucked up that you can't have an honest app to keep people safe, but the makers could have known the problems in advance, and probably did.
> One user’s story stands out
In which precisely nothing happened. We don't even know the nature of the alleged violence.
> It's expected that anon is misogynist
Did you just give a negative impression of someone you don't know?
Whether the original intent was honourable or not - or if they decide to spend part of their income to a honourable cause - does not factor in to the nature of the system.
Worse, in some jurisdictions (I’m not certain about the US specifics), this kind of unsanctioned exposure could actively hinder legal prosecution of actual predators. If a person is publicly accused on a non-official platform before trial, any resulting lawsuit might be thrown out on grounds of prejudicial exposure or even perjury. The accused could claim that the testimony is tainted or retaliatory — particularly if the platform enables near-anonymous posting without formal vetting^1.
[1] Yes, the app collects driver’s licenses. But let’s be honest: in the U.S., a fake driver’s license is practically a rite of passage. Entire generations of underage teens have used them to get into clubs and bars. If that’s your trust anchor, you don’t have much of one.
A criminal justice system has to protect even the accused against injustice. If it doesn't, it's not justice, but just a kangaroo court.
How hard would it be to believe that none of that was true and the woman was being vindictive?
People can be shitty, including women.
Western society has become actively anti-dating lately (think: ever since the 1980s). People, especially women, are actively encouraged to scrutinise even minor behaviour for red flags, after all, every man is a potential serial killer. This is so prevalent that we have made movies about that sort of paranoia ... and there are people in treatment over it. Clinically, this is often referred to as hypervigilance/paranoia syndrome, a pattern related to PTSD — both as a consequence of trauma and, paradoxically, as a source of relational dysfunction.
This is not meant to downplay the reality of actual assaults. But it points to a deeper systemic issue: The drive to protect against potential violence has, in some circles, taken on a life of its own - and in doing so, it has poisoned trust.
So - I do not claim your 4 women were not at some point scared by a guy during a date. But what used to be considered 'assertive, reliable, masculine' behaviour in the 1950s has become 'prelude to slaughter' these days, especially when other factors are present (e.g. 'he doesn't turn out to be Prince Charming that I expected' or 'he decided to split the bill').
So ... if there is an actual case of domestic violence, the solution is not to create an instrument that can be badly abused and does not follow rule of law - it is to go to ... law enforcement, and let the courts deal with it. IF the guy is a problem, let them put him away, rather than slandering him online.
Another called (a different woman) a “dirty bitch” when she declined a second date.
Amongst my female friends, I’ve become aware only in my late 40s just how many have suffered sexual assault outside of relationships or controlling and abusive behaviour within them.
I guess what I’m saying is that I think women being vigilant is rational behaviour. In my twenties and thirties I just lacked the imagination to see that colleagues and even male friends would behave in this way, but that can and have.
I don’t think this site is necessarily the right way to fix the problem, but I can totally understand the motivation.
The “sex toy guy” (and yes, I now imagine the most awkward and presumptuous version of that scenario - perhaps with a flourish of presentation) is clearly socially tone-deaf. But if no coercion or violence took place: Should his name and face be broadcast online so he can be branded “The Dildo King” for life?
The “dirty bitch” guy? Rude and vulgar, certainly. But how many women have made disparaging comments about men — their height, their hair, their genitals - sometimes in front of them, sometimes with friends? We should strive for dignity and respect on both sides. If we accept social shaming as a norm, it shouldn’t surprise us when the pendulum swings both ways - and no one wins in that world. Was the woman in this case threatened or harmed beyond a verbal outburst?
Being in my mid-40s, I’ve also witnessed what a false or misguided accusation can do to a man - careers destroyed, relationships severed, even suicides.
What we’re dealing with is a cultural and moral challenge - not a technological one. And cultural problems can only be solved through dialogue, mutual respect, and shared norms - not through factionalism or digital vigilantism.
Second: Tough to say, probably nothing if that's the end of the communication. I hear stories pretty regularly of men being misled into taking someone out on the first date, paying for it, and then finding out a second date or anything beyond that was never on the table for one reason or another. It's definitely rude and vulgar, and people should reserve that for special cases.
Overall, I think people are bitter that dating has such a low probability chance in providing the outcome they desire. But you have to know that going in; "you look good in these 3 pictures and I liked your witty quote" is not necessarily going to lead to a lifetime of happiness. You probably have to expect 1000 failures for every success. But you only need one success.
> That first date that probably won't be a second date is your chance to do your sales pitch.
Is the ideal case, and would be the nature of a good date if those were the parameters within which both parties agreed to go out, but if I was actually bitter about:
> "yeah I'll give it a try, I guess" instead of just saying "no"
I would think that would be a somewhat justified reason to be pissed, maybe, depending on how the circumstances came about and how frequently that occurs, because it's a failure of communication that's quite pervasive and imo insidious outside and inside dating. Conflict avoidance in general leads to ghosting, excessively specific expectations regardless of sex, ambiguity around consent, and not being able to say "no" is a bad thing.
> Overall, I think people are bitter that dating has such a low probability chance in providing the outcome they desire. But you have to know that going in; "you look good in these 3 pictures and I liked your witty quote" is not necessarily going to lead to a lifetime of happiness. You probably have to expect 1000 failures for every success.
This part I mostly agree with. It's at least an admirable level of pain tolerance and persistence that one would hope pays off eventually, as well as a good way to align yourself.
> But you only need one success.
If you get really lucky, one success, but let's be real, it's hard to nail it one go, let alone 2 or 3, so I disagree needing one success.
Ultimately I don't personally have any reason to be bitter, but I have a lot of early 30s single friends that just... aren't really having much luck for a variety of reasons, including those mentioned above. My friends of both genders, at this point in their life, seem to have a perfect image of what they'd want in a partner, or an accumulation of red flags that—some of which—would be relatively trivial to overcome if you had an established friendship prior. Reminds me of Seinfeld a bit, someone gets caught picking their nose and you can't recover.
I think we need to remember that this isn’t a one-way street.
> A growing body of international research indicated that men and women experience Intimate partner violence in some similar proportions. An example might be a recent survey from Canada's national statistical agency that concluded that "equal proportions of men and women reported being victims of spousal violence during the preceding 5 years (4% respectively)."
> The aforementioned surveys indicate that small proportions of men (less than 20% of victims) will tell the police or a health professional about their victimization. This may be due to well-grounded fears that they will be scorned, ridiculed, or disbelieved by these authorities.
Your point that it's "highly asymmetrical" is just wrong.
> Indeed, a recent research paper by Dr. Elizabeth Bates from the University of Cumbria found that the overarching experience of male IPV victims was that "no one would ever believe me."
And it directly contributes to the toxic attitude around male victims of domestic violence.
Homicide rates are still asymmetrical, but I was surprised that also not as much (like 1.5 times difference).
When I was stabbed, I took myself to hospital and said I did it myself, accidentally - she was a trainee barrister and I didn’t want to fuck her career up, plus “my girlfriend stabbed me” is usually going to get you “oh yeah, and what did you do to deserve it?” and police questioning in response.
Trust is a hard thing to come by online, even when people aren't anonymous and speaking publicly (Facebook or any other online place where one might use their real name). Giving people the cover of privacy from the person they are reporting about isn't going to increase the veracity of what's posted.
We already know how people behave online. It's either naive, ignorant or negligent to think otherwise.
the vast majority of posts are speculation on someone being douchey or a cheater. women in their twenties seem to really enjoy browsing through the gossip.
Either use the criminal justice system.
Or form a lynch mob and stand behind your lynching.
But don't cry when you have chosen the route of self organized violence with zero checks and balances, clear examples of lynching the wrong people, then running and hiding back behind "civilized society" when your inept violence backfires.
You are no different to Kiwi Farms, I suggest you look to their site for tips on how to protect yourself while being violent on others.
Kiwi Farms also has a list of sexual abusers they have helped stop, some really horrific people.... but like "Tea" that's not the full story.
Until then it is "ironic"