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.