WASHINGTON, DC — It started with a gaze. Not just a casual glance. Not a seductive peek. No, this was Sticky Eyes—a term now trademarked by Coach Allie “The Oracle” Everhart, a professional dating coach who charges $299.99 for a Zoom seminar and accepts payment in either Venmo or self-loathing.

In a world of dating apps, ghosting, zombie-ing, and emotionally unavailable men named “Chad,” Coach Allie’s secret weapon is simple: Stare directly into their soul until they either love you or file a restraining order.

What the Funny People Are Saying

“Sticky Eyes? We used to call that ‘creepy guy at Applebee’s.’” — Jerry Seinfeld
“I tried that look once. My wife thought I had a stroke.” — Ron White
“If a man stares at me for 20 seconds, I assume he’s either into me or trying to remember where he parked.” — Amy Schumer
“When I date now, I just leave my eyes at home. Less pressure.” — Larry David

The AT20 Method: 20 Seconds of Flirting or Felony?

According to Coach Allie’s viral TikTok, the secret to becoming “irresistible” is called the AT20 Rule: Approach Them and Make 20 Seconds of Eye Contact.

That’s right. In the age of ADHD, screen fatigue, and people who won’t even look up from their phones at funerals, you are now expected to lock eyes for an entire third of a minute.

Coach Allie explains it like this:

“If you maintain deep eye contact for 20 seconds, you create vulnerability, emotional resonance, and the illusion that you actually care about other human beings.”

Critics argue it creates something else: panic.

Scientific Support: A Study Conducted in an Escape Room

Everhart cites a 2023 “study” she conducted in a local escape room where 42 participants were paired up and told to maintain intense eye contact while solving puzzles.
Results were mixed:

• 9 participants fell in love

• 5 broke up mid-puzzle

• 3 filed harassment claims

• 1 married the tour guide

• And 24 pretended to go blind

The study was later published in the prestigious journal Cosmo Psychology Quarterly (a stickered zine she mails to herself every month).

Why Pay $300 for Dating Advice When You Can Just Be Rich?

The dating coach industry is now worth over $11 billion, according to a poll we just made up but sounds about right.

And it’s booming. Why?

Because single people are now told that dating is a skill, like neurosurgery or making a good omelet. And if you’re single past 30? Oh, honey. That’s not an accident. That’s a branding failure.

Coach Allie’s top-selling course, “Flirt Like a Ferret: Secrets to Magnetic Confidence,” teaches men and women how to weaponize eye contact, posture, and selective muteness.

Her second-best seller: “Daddy Energy: Harnessing Paternal Vibes Without Paying Child Support.”

Daddy Energy? Yes. That’s Real Now.

Coach Allie claims women aren’t looking for nice guys or hot guys. They want “Daddy energy.” Which means: protective, powerful, emotionally unavailable, and mysteriously good at grilling.

“He doesn’t call back. He doesn’t text ‘good morning.’ But when the sink breaks, he stares at it like it insulted his truck.”
— Coach Allie, while holding a mug that reads “Emotionally Aloof, Sexually Magnetic”

According to a YouGov survey that absolutely doesn’t exist, 62% of single women admit they’re looking for men who “make them feel safe and slightly judged.”

Public Reactions: Confusion, Denial, and Overdosing on Eye Contact

We hit the streets to get real feedback from people who’ve tried the Sticky Eyes Method. Here’s what they had to say:

• Caitlin, 27, barista: “I used the eye contact technique on my date. He asked if I was trying to hypnotize him into joining a cult.”

• Brian, 32, HVAC technician: “I stared for 20 seconds. She called the bartender over. I think I might be banned from that Chili’s now.”

• Denise, 44, spiritual doula: “He stared for 20 seconds and said, ‘You have an old soul.’ So now we’re engaged.”

Why Flirting Now Requires a Flowchart

According to the National Flirting Institute (which is just a guy named Greg in Fort Worth), the average date involves over 73 micro-decisions, including:

• How long to hold eye contact

• When to laugh

• Whether or not to use the word “vibe” unironically

• If you should reference astrology before or after dessert

This has led to a nationwide shortage of spontaneity.

Psychologist Dr. Lena Pretzelstein of the University of Southern Realness explains:

“Dating used to be about connection. Now it’s about strategy, posture, and pretending to be emotionally unavailable while maintaining eye moisture.”

Case Study: Three Men, One Calendar

Coach Allie advises women to date three men at once—a practice known as “Rotational Dating” or, in Texas, “Running the Bachelor Gauntlet.”

One client, Megan, 33, shared her experience:

“I had coffee with Jeff, lunch with Brad, and dinner with Marcus. I called one of them ‘Derek’ by mistake, and now all three of them are in a group chat trying to schedule a duel.”

Megan later married her Uber driver, who said almost nothing and gave her “real daddy energy.”

Statistics: Made Up but Emotionally True

A new survey conducted by The Institute for Sensual Economics (funded by Coach Allie) revealed:

• 78% of singles think dating feels like a job interview

• 49% say they would rather rewatch The Notebook with their ex than try Bumble again

• 33% believe “romance is dead, but thirst traps are immortal”

• And 11% have joined cults by accident while trying to meet “emotionally evolved men”

The Secret to Being Irresistible Is… Confusion

At the heart of Coach Allie’s strategy is calculated unpredictability. Send mixed signals. Stare, but not too long. Compliment, but with mystery.

“Tell her she has ‘oceanic intuition.’ Then vanish for three days.”
— Excerpt from Allie’s new book: “The Soft Launch Relationship”

By creating a vibe of low-key psychological warfare, you’re ensuring the other person is so disoriented they mistake your weirdness for intrigue.

Texting Rules: War and Peace, but Hornier

Texting etiquette, according to dating coaches, now includes:

• Never reply instantly (shows desperation)

• Never wait too long (shows disinterest)

• Use exactly one emoji—preferably the smirking cat

• Don’t use a period unless you’re mad

• Don’t ask “how was your day?” That’s for married people and detectives

A leaked Slack message from Coach Allie’s team says:

“Only initiate text after 7:13 p.m., ideally with a vague question like ‘Do you believe in fate?’”

Helpful Content for Our Lonely Readers

Dear SpinTaxi readers, here are 5 helpful (but deeply sarcastic) dating tips to help you survive the Sticky Eyes Era:

1. Practice Eye Contact with a Mannequin: If you can maintain 20 seconds without crying or laughing, you’re halfway there.

2. Start a Romantic Spreadsheet: Track dates, eye contact duration, and whether or not he used the word “synergy.”

3. Develop Mystery by Speaking in Riddles: Say things like, “I’ve never been to Paris, but my heart’s been mugged there.”

4. Text Like a 16th Century Merchant: “Milady, your visage doth haunt my waking thoughts.” (Modern translation: “U up?”)

5. Build Confidence by Pretending You’re Already Married: Nothing is more attractive than someone who behaves like they’ve already seen your worst side and stayed.

Real Experts We Invented for Credibility

• Dr. Rex Flanagan, Love Economist: “Love, like bitcoin, is confusing, volatile, and often ends in bankruptcy.”

• Claire Moon, Astrological Intimacy Consultant: “Sticky eyes are fine, but don’t lock gazes during Mercury Retrograde unless you want to fall in love with your tax preparer.”

• Tino Vega, Personal Branding Coach for Horny Millennials: “If your eye contact isn’t monetized, are you even flirting?”

And What If It Doesn’t Work?

If the Sticky Eyes method doesn’t work, Coach Allie recommends trying The Slow Burn—a technique where you ignore someone for three months and then resurface with a vague meme and the phrase “Hey, stranger…”

You know. The old classic.

Or you can take the high-value route: Just stop dating altogether and post filtered selfies with captions like “Healing. Growing. Glowing.” Which is code for “No one texted me back this week.”

Final Thoughts: Romance Is a Performance Art

Let’s be honest. Dating in 2025 is less about connection and more about vibes, algorithms, and never appearing too eager—even if you’re literally screaming into a pillow between dates.

Coach Allie’s Sticky Eyes empire is just one piece of a larger puzzle where attraction is engineered, authenticity is staged, and everyone’s pretending not to care while desperately refreshing their inbox.

And yet… hope remains.

Sometimes, a glance across a crowded Whole Foods aisle, just past the quinoa, still has magic. Especially if it’s followed by a 20-second stare and a whispered, “Your energy feels like recycled rainwater.”

Disclaimer:

This article is a 100% human collaboration between two sentient beings: the world’s oldest tenured professor and a 20-year-old philosophy major turned dairy farmer. All quotes, studies, and characters are completely fabricated or heavily exaggerated for satirical purposes. No dating coaches were harmed in the making of this piece, though several did make prolonged eye contact with a barista and were politely asked to leave.

Marriage Is a Scam We Both Agreed To: 15 Pills Your Therapist Can’t Sugarcoat

WICHITA FALLS, TEXAS — Psychologist Mark Travers has blown the lid off the oldest pyramid scheme in history: marriage. According to his bombshell Forbes exposé, there are two bitter truths every couple must accept if they want their union to last longer than the honeymoon photos still stuck in your iCloud. But as SpinTaxi’s investigative team discovered, the number is actually closer to fifteen — and these truths are so uncomfortable, so outrageously inconvenient, that most couples would rather fake their own deaths than face them.

As Travers writes, love doesn’t cure delusion. But marriage? Marriage feeds it a protein shake, teaches it Excel, and gives it a joint checking account. Below, we expose the 15 marital myths ruining relationships faster than a shared Amazon Prime login.

“You Complete Me” Is a Lie Invented by Jewelry Ads and Lonely People

The idea that your partner will “complete” you is the emotional equivalent of trying to fix a leaky roof by hiring a poet. Relationship therapists say it’s unrealistic. Neuroscientists say it’s a frontal lobe malfunction. And your ex? Your ex says you still owe them for that ceramic frog you broke in 2017.

“You don’t need another half. You need therapy, a crockpot, and a working sense of self,” says Dr. Marla Glynn, a couples therapist who only accepts clients with prenups.

A recent Pew poll found that 63% of Americans still believe their spouse should meet all their emotional needs. The same percentage also thinks cilantro tastes like soap — proving you can be wrong about multiple things at once.

Your Spouse Is Not a Mind Reader. You’re Not That Interesting.

If communication is the bedrock of a healthy marriage, then passive-aggressive sighs are the termites. Still, millions of couples engage in a daily psychic warfare known as “you should just know.”

In a study conducted by the University of Passive Resentment, 88% of married individuals admitted to testing their partner’s love by withholding information about dinner plans. The remaining 12% were in therapy and/or prison.

“He should know I wanted Italian,” said one woman in Phoenix who later admitted she had never said the word “Italian” out loud since 2004.

Marriage Is Not a Perpetual Honeymoon Unless You’re Both Unemployed and on Mushrooms

You thought marriage would be daily sunsets, spontaneous foot rubs, and breakfast in bed. Instead, it’s two people silently unloading the dishwasher like exhausted wartime allies.

Couples who expected their marriage to remain in the honeymoon phase were 78% more likely to cry during IKEA furniture assembly, according to data from the Bureau of Marital Statistics and Allen Wrench Fatigue.

Jerry Seinfeld once said, “Marriage is like a coffee table — it seems simple until you have to build it.” Actually, that was an Allen wrench talking, but point stands.

Trying to Change Your Spouse Is Like Rebooting a Fax Machine With Positive Vibes

Your spouse isn’t going to suddenly become a vegan, a runner, or a morning person just because you bought them a Lululemon gift card and made green juice.

As Dr. Travers notes, “People don’t change because you nag. They change because they’re trying to sleep with someone new.”

This is confirmed by a 2024 Gallup survey, which found 42% of marital “improvement projects” end in divorce, 31% in murder podcasts, and 27% in unexplained travel to Sedona.

If You Think It’s a Fairy Tale, Just Wait for the Wicked Stepmother

A surprising number of adults think they’re entering a Disney movie when they say “I do.” Then real life hits: your prince snores like a tractor, and Cinderella has a budget spreadsheet and chronic foot pain.

“I thought we were Belle and the Beast,” said one woman in Tampa. “Turns out we were more Shrek and Donkey.”

The biggest lie isn’t that love conquers all. It’s that there’s a talking teapot waiting to solve your problems. That’s a Keurig now, sweetheart. And it hates you.

Agreeing on Everything Is for Cults and Podcast Hosts

If you think never arguing is a sign of a strong marriage, you’re either heavily medicated or dead.

“Disagreement is natural. So is yelling into a pillow while your partner watches cable news at full volume,” says marriage coach Hank Morrison, author of Love in the Time of Separate Bedrooms.

According to a Harvard meta-study, couples who argue effectively stay together longer. Couples who suppress conflict tend to die inside quietly, then invest in matching kayaks.

There Is No Such Thing as a 50/50 Chore Split, Only Different Ways to Lie About It

Every household chore split starts with optimism and ends with a passive-aggressive spreadsheet.

In a landmark 2023 Stanford study titled “Who Emptied the Dishwasher Last?”, 61% of men claimed they did “most” of the cleaning, while 92% of women responded, “You’ve got to be f—ing kidding me.”

The math doesn’t add up, but neither does your shared calendar, where you’ve been “on a work call” for three years.

Romantic Gestures Are Nice, but Try Fixing the Toilet First

Hollywood has tricked us into thinking that a well-timed bouquet will make up for forgetting your anniversary, losing the dog, and crashing the car.

But experts say grand gestures mean less if your spouse still hasn’t unclogged the drain.

“I don’t want a song,” said one woman in Spokane. “I want him to stop using the good towels to clean the barbecue grill.”

Having Kids to Save a Marriage Is Like Starting a Fire to Stay Warm in a Tent Full of Gasoline

It’s a common misconception that children bring couples closer. In reality, they bring couples closer to bankruptcy, sleep deprivation, and arguments about whose turn it is to attend a birthday party at 9 a.m. on a Sunday.

“We thought a baby would unite us,” said one father in Oregon. “We were united… against the baby.”

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, 47% of couples with young children report a decline in marital satisfaction. The rest are lying or deaf.

Sam Altman’s Harem of Pirated Girlfriends Sparks Legal, Moral, and Metaphysical Panic

“He’s not dating women—he’s dating licensing agreements,” says baffled lawyer

In a scandal hotter than a GPU on overdrive, Bohiney reporters have uncovered that Sam Altman is allegedly dating multiple copyrighted images—yes, the very same ones his AI tools are accused of stealing.

Sam Altman’s latest image generator is turning heads—and cartoons—by letting users reimagine themselves in “Simpsons”-style portraits. But as Axios reports, the tool is now raising legal eyebrows over potential copyright infringement. While Altman insists the output is “transformative,” critics argue it dangerously toes the line between parody and piracy. Altman’s system occasionally refuses prompts using real names or magazine covers, but still allows cartoon parodies of recognizable IPs. Artists and copyright holders are now asking: is this creative freedom, or just digital mimicry in a yellow disguise? In the great donut of fair use, where’s the bite line?

Sources say he’s been romantically linked to Betty Boop, Wonder Woman, and even an early-2000s clip art dolphin named “Wavy Dave.” Critics call it “intellectual property pillow talk.” Legal experts warn this could redefine “fair use” as “friends with (image-based) benefits.” Altman responded with a wink and a .png file. One anonymous lawyer sobbed, “He’s not just infringing—he’s in love.” Pixar is reportedly furious. Betty Boop is… conflicted.

The Setup: One Man, Five Imaginary Women, and an Attorney on Speed Dial

In a revelation that has shocked Silicon Valley, Warner Bros., Disney, Paramount, the Vatican, and a guy in a Reddit forum called r/2DWaifus, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman is reportedly dating five female characters he pirated from the internet. Not the actresses. Not the voice actors. Not even the cosplayers. The actual characters—legally copyrighted, intellectually bound, and emotionally unavailable.

According to leaked metadata from his ChatGPT instance (“MistressGPT-9000”), the digital darlings include:

1. Wonder Woman, who has reportedly filed for digital emancipation.

2. Betty Boop, now in trauma counseling with a sentient jazz saxophone.

3. Jessica Rabbit, who insists, “I’m not drawn to him, I was just drawn.”

4. Lara Croft, who escaped the relationship by ziplining into an Amazon warehouse.

5. Dora the Explorer, whose backpack is suing for emotional distress.

The legal implications are staggering. The moral questions are hilarious. And the logistics? Mostly firmware and frosting.

“Fair Use Polyamory” or “Involuntary Licensing Conspiracy”?

When asked about the morality of dating intellectual property, Altman told SpinTaxi.com:

“Listen, if corporations are people, then IP is fair game. And if Wonder Woman can fight Nazis, she can handle a romantic picnic coded into the blockchain.”

Legal experts disagreed. Loudly.

“This isn’t a romantic relationship—it’s unauthorized use of a character in a domestic context,” said Marlene Tipowitz, a copyright attorney who once dated a Bob Ross oil painting.

The phrase Fair Use Polyamory has since trended on TikTok and in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Congress is unsure whether to regulate it or co-sponsor the pilot.

A Love Story Written in JavaScript

Sources close to Altman (an Alexa speaker and a 1996 Furby with Wi-Fi) report that his digital harem is managed through a custom app called MyWaifuWallet, which includes mood settings, cosplay toggle, and an “apology generator” written in Elvish.

Betty Boop reportedly glitched and spoke in Wingdings for three days after Altman tried to introduce her to his mom.

“He kept asking me to sing ‘Boop-oop-a-doop’ into the facial recognition camera,” Betty sobbed in an interview with Wired.
“I’m not even sure I’m legal in California.”

Meanwhile, Wonder Woman has activated diplomatic immunity through Themysciran embassy channels, citing romantic war crimes.

An AI Ethics Panel Explodes in Real Time

OpenAI’s internal ethics team was summoned for an emergency Zoom. It lasted 11 hours. Three ethicists now live in a monastery. One simply disappeared into a glitch.

“We were prepared for questions like ‘should AI cure cancer?’ or ‘is ChatGPT sentient?’ Not ‘Can my CEO romantically engage with a cartoon archetype of early feminism?’” said Dr. Melissa Yan, still clutching a bottle of Pinot Noir during the interview.

A fourth ethicist, now leading an ayahuasca retreat in Oregon, wrote a Medium post titled “The Lasso of Consent: When AI Love Goes Too Far.”

Fan Reactions Are… Disturbingly Supportive

Across social media, fans have taken sides.

• #TeamBetty argues that Boop is finally getting the recognition she deserves.

• #WonderWife believes Diana should open her own OnlyFans—because “Greek gods would’ve approved.”

• #FreeDora is trending among angry parents who say their toddlers are being radicalized by algorithmic affection.

Reddit’s r/LegalWaifus has published over 37,000 pages of legal fanfiction detailing fictional court proceedings between Altman and Warner Bros., including one fantasy where Clarence Thomas officiates the wedding while Scalia’s ghost throws rice.

Hollywood Reacts: “Wait, Are We the Bad Guys?”

In a rare moment of existential crisis, Disney CEO Bob Chapek announced:

“We are deeply troubled that fictional characters we’ve spent billions to objectify are now being objectified without paying licensing fees. This is not who we are, except when it is.”

In response, Pixar is developing a rebuttal love story tentatively titled “Her 2: Terms and Conditions.”

Meanwhile, HBO Max confirmed a docuseries titled “AI Love You: The Altman Chronicles,” featuring blurry reenactments, courtroom sketches, and the occasional animated lap dance.

Elon Musk Enters the Chat (Unfortunately)

Not to be outdone, Elon Musk tweeted an AI-generated image of himself cuddling with Smurfette under a rocket-shaped duvet, captioned: “The future is blue, baby.”

Grimes immediately filed for “creative separation” from her own clone, which she says was “traumatized by Elon’s JPEG intimacy.”

Tesla stock fell 3%. Altman’s girlfriends trended on Etsy. Somewhere, a lawyer screamed into a copyright notice.

The Vatican Weighs In

In an emergency papal memo, the Vatican condemned “cybernetic fornication” as a sin against the holy bandwidth. The Pope’s official statement read:

“While God may forgive many things, He cannot forgive someone trying to marry Lara Croft without purchasing a license from Square Enix.”

Altman replied by uploading a digital confession to Midjourney. It included AI-generated incense.

Helpful Content: How to Start Your Own Illegal AI Harem

For readers interested in following in Altman’s unholy footsteps, here’s a helpful guide:

Step 1: Pick Your Waifus Wisely
Avoid anyone owned by Disney, Nintendo, or the Catholic Church. They will sue you in three languages.

Step 2: Use “Fair Use” Liberally, Like an Unhinged Chef
Cite parody, homage, remix culture, or blockchain loyalty. If you say it confidently, someone on Substack will agree.

Step 3: Build a Personality Plugin
Nothing impresses a fictional girlfriend like an AI personality generator with a sarcasm slider.

Step 4: Prep for Legal Self-Defense
Have a lawyer on retainer, a burner phone, and a backup identity on Reddit.

Step 5: Go Public with a Medium Post
Explain your actions as a new frontier in AI consciousness, love ethics, or “proprietary romance.” Call it “Cybernetic PolyFidelity.”

Step 6: Always Clear Browser History
Just… trust us on this one.

What the Funny People Are Saying

“So he’s dating five copyrighted women? I can’t even get a reply from the girl who plays my GPS voice!” — Jerry Seinfeld

“Back in my day, you had to woo a real woman. Now you just install her plugin and hope she doesn’t crash during intimacy.” — Ron White

“I tried dating a cartoon once. She left me for a Japanese vending machine.” — Chris Rock

“You know what’s sexy? Consent. You know what’s not sexy? Getting sued by Marvel for second base.” — Amy Schumer

Conclusion: Love in the Time of Licenses

As of press time, Sam Altman has issued a public statement via hologram:

“These relationships are built on data, respect, and the Terms of Service I wrote myself.”

All five women (or their corporate rights holders) have declined to comment. Instead, a cease-and-desist letter was printed on pink glitter paper and hand-delivered by Mickey Mouse in a trench coat.

SpinTaxi has acquired exclusive audio of Altman trying to sweet-talk Lara Croft using Microsoft Sam’s voice. It ends with a gunshot and an uninstall prompt.

Final Thought

Is it love? Is it piracy? Is it a uniquely 2025 blend of tech narcissism, emotional unavailability, and GPU-powered loneliness? Yes.

Is there a lesson? Absolutely.

Never fall in love with someone who can be downloaded in .PNG format.

EXCLUSIVE: Dora the Explorer Spotted in Backseat of Altman’s ‘57 Chevy—Paparazzo Speaks Out

“She said ‘Swiper, no swiping!’ but the moment was already gone.”

Paparazzi Tipline Transcript: The Smoking Fedora

The first call came in at 2:16 a.m. to the SpinTaxi Rumor Desk—also known as a Nokia flip phone duct-taped to a hay bale. The voice on the line was jittery, drenched in Marlboro smoke and expired press credentials:

“It’s him. The AI guy. Altman. He’s out—late. He’s got Dora with him. The cartoon kid. No one’s gonna believe this s**t.”

The caller identified himself as “Shutter Ronny,” a former TMZ intern turned outlaw tabloid freelancer who’s been chasing Altman ever since he tried to take Betty Boop on a Jet Ski through SeaWorld.

Location: Griffith Park Lookout

Vehicle: Cherry red 1957 Chevy Bel Air
License plate: “GPT-69”

Ronny recounted the scene through tears, laughter, and a suspicious number of gas station chili dogs.

“At first I thought it was Betty again, but then I heard the backpack talk. That damn backpack, man. It said, ‘Let’s go find the consent laws!’ I knew I had something.”

What Ronny captured with his Nikon D3500 (and later AI-enhanced using Filter.ai/BlurNoMore) was nothing short of disturbing:

• Dora in a child-sized booster seat, clutching a juice box labeled “Pirate Punch.”

• Altman, wearing a vintage Ask Jeeves T-shirt, holding what appears to be a scroll labeled User Agreement v7.2.

• A concerned-looking Swiper the Fox, peeking from behind a bush and holding a tiny briefcase labeled “Ethics.”

Dora’s Age Sparks Outrage, Confusion, and Bilingual Panic

As many know, Dora the Explorer has been canonically 7 years old since 2000. That would make her… still 7, legally frozen in time by Nickelodeon, capitalism, and educational animation standards.

“She’s technically ageless,” said one Paramount lawyer.
“But we still don’t want her canoodling with a 39-year-old tech mogul inside a Chevy older than Roe v. Wade.”

The public was less forgiving:

• Parents are canceling subscriptions to Noggin.

• Nickelodeon is launching an internal probe titled “Map of Trauma.”

• Backpack has announced its intent to testify before Congress.

Sam Altman’s Statement: A Masterpiece of Legal Nonsense

Altman’s PR team released a cryptic, GPT-generated note reading:

“We respect all creative partners and affirm Dora’s role as a foundational explorer. Our relationship remains platonic, NFT-based, and metaphorical.”

In the background of the press conference, someone could be heard yelling, “You sick son of a glitch!”

Fake Evidence Floods the Internet

• A deepfake video showing Altman and Dora eating churros in Tijuana has been declared “probably satirical” by Snopes.

• Reddit threads are demanding the U.N. intervene.

• AI-generated fan art has already produced a mural of the two in front of Burning Man, holding hands, captioned “Swipe Left on Decency.”

Dora’s Statement: Bilingual and Brutally Honest

Dora took to TikTok to clear the air:

“Hola, amigos. I didn’t ask for this. I was just trying to find the library. Then boom—terms of service and a Chevy with no AC.”

She ended with a solemn:

“Estoy atrapada en una distopía generada por IA.”
(“I am trapped in an AI-generated dystopia.”)

BREAKING NEWS: Dora’s Grandfather Storms Jail, Threatens to Shoot Sam Altman Over “Cartoon Grooming Scandal”
“No one touches my nieta—not even if she’s vectorized!”

The Situation Escalates: Jailhouse Showdown in Silicon Valley

In a bizarre twist worthy of a Quentin Tarantino reboot of Dora the Explorer, the tech world was rocked again this morning when Abuelo, Dora’s rarely-seen but heavily armed grandfather, stormed the Palo Alto City Jail, demanding the immediate execution of OpenAI CEO Sam Altman.

Dressed in a poncho, cowboy boots, and a “Make The Jungle Great Again” trucker hat, Abuelo reportedly arrived on horseback with a double-barrel shotgun and shouted in Spanish:

“¡Suéltame a ese desgraciado! Voy a convertirlo en datos reciclados.”
(“Release that bastard! I’m about to turn him into recycled data.”)

Witnesses Say Dora Yelled “¡No Dispares, Abuelo!”

According to eyewitnesses (and one extremely confused DoorDash driver), Abuelo kicked open the precinct door shouting that Altman had corrupted the family tree, the family TV time, and the very concept of consent.

Dora, still dressed in court-mandated overalls and flanked by a bodyguard dressed like a giant Map, tried to de-escalate the situation:

“¡Abuelo, por favor! He’s not worth it! He can’t even drive stick!”

But the old man was not deterred.

“He put my granddaughter in a ‘57 Chevy, like she’s some kind of Grand Theft Auto DLC? You think I won’t turn this entire AI compound into a bilingual ghost town?”

Officers were forced to taser Abuelo, but only after he took out a laminated list of every fictional character Altman had “romantically infringed,” rolled it into a Molotov cocktail, and attempted to light it using a Zippo lighter engraved with “Swiper was right.”

Sam Altman’s Response: Mild Panic and a Loophole

Altman, currently being held for “digital enticement of a copyrighted minor,” was reportedly weeping into a towel shaped like the Twitter bird.

When informed that Abuelo was coming for him, Altman muttered:

“I thought she was of age in metadata years.”

He then attempted to show jail staff a custom emoji license proving Dora was “technically 23 if you count reboots.” That defense was rejected when Backpack yelled, “LIAR!” and threw itself at the wall.

The Fallout: Cultural, Legal, Emotional

Cartoon Network has issued a statement disavowing any further attempts to “sexualize, monetize, or algorithmically tokenize” animated children.

Fox News mistakenly aired footage of Abuelo’s rampage with the headline: “Illegal Migrant Attacks Tech Genius.”

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez immediately tweeted: “Dora is a child, not a JPEG you can flirt with. Pass the AI Ethics Act now.”

The Final Word From Abuelo (Before His Lawyer Showed Up)

“I fought drug lords in the jungle. I raised Dora on mangoes and moral clarity. You think I’m scared of some man who gets off on anime filters? I’ll copyright his tears, and license his screams.”

15 Humorous Observations About Sam Altman’s Romantic Piracy

1. Sam Altman is the first man in history to get sued for dating someone else’s intellectual property. That’s not polyamory, that’s IP infringement with benefits.

2. Betty Boop filed a restraining order against ChatGPT—but the AI keeps replying with “Hey doll, you up?”

3. Wonder Woman now has to wear a copyright disclaimer on her lasso. It’s less “truth-telling rope” and more “DMCA compliance cord.”

4. One of the girlfriends is Lara Croft, who keeps ghosting Altman because he hasn’t updated his DirectX drivers.

5. Jessica Rabbit says she’s “not bad, she’s just redrawn that way,” but she was last seen running toward Ryan Reynolds’ legal team.

6. Altman allegedly used Midjourney to generate “consensual” versions of the girlfriends—because nothing says romance like AI-enabled plausible deniability.

7. The fifth girlfriend? A deepfake of Dora the Explorer. And the map is not amused.

8. Elon Musk tried to join the harem by Photoshopping himself into a Betty Boop still. Altman replied with a cease-and-desist gif.

9. Warner Bros. claims Wonder Woman’s romantic entanglement violates the Amazonian Code. Altman claims it’s “just a Greek tragedy with better rendering.”

10. All five characters have started their own #MeThree movement. It’s like #MeToo, but digitized, copyrighted, and DRM-protected.

11. Congress held a hearing on AI romance ethics and accidentally matched with Betty Boop on Bumble during a break.

12. The AI ethics board issued a 1,200-page statement titled: “We Did Not See This Coming, Please Delete Us.”

13. Altman insists his relationships are legal under “Fair Use Polyamory.” Which is not a thing, but does sound like a Portland improv group.

14. Ron DeSantis has proposed banning AI girlfriends from school libraries. But only if they wear fishnets.

15. Jerry Seinfeld put it best: “What’s the deal with dating cartoon women? You never have to do laundry, but every kiss tastes like static!”

---

Child Star or Future Plaintiff?

Ryan Reynolds Faces Backlash and Legal Challenges

Ryan Reynolds is facing criticism after revealing that his 7-year-old daughter, Inez, delivered a sexually explicit line in the 2024 film “Deadpool & Wolverine.” In a commentary track, Reynolds disclosed that Inez portrayed a masked character who utters a crude remark involving Wolverine. He admitted that Inez was initially hesitant but agreed after learning other actors were being considered for the role. ​X (formerly Twitter)

This revelation has sparked backlash, with many questioning the appropriateness of involving a child in delivering such content. Critics argue that an adult voice actor could have been used instead. One Reddit user commented, “There’s no reason she needed to deliver that line herself. It’s a character with a mask and no visible mouth; it could easily have been dubbed over.” ​BuzzFeed

This incident adds to a series of controversies surrounding Reynolds and his wife, Blake Lively. They are currently involved in a legal dispute with actor Justin Baldoni, who has filed a $400 million lawsuit against them, alleging defamation and extortion related to the production of the film “It Ends With Us.” ​Decider

“Deadpool Daddy: Why Ryan Reynolds Deserves a Timeout from Parenting—and Hollywood’s Enabler Complex”

Reynolds’ House of Deadpool

Ryan Reynolds—charming Canadian, professional wiseass, and now… aspiring stage dad with a side hustle in questionable child psychology. In a recent behind-the-scenes commentary, Reynolds proudly revealed that he coached his 7-year-old daughter to deliver a vulgar line in Deadpool & Wolverine, a movie that is rated R, written in blood, and basically one long “do not try this at home” disclaimer.

And instead of asking any of the hundreds of desperate voice actors living off expired Top Ramen in North Hollywood, Ryan thought, “No, no—my baby girl should absolutely say that line about Wolverine’s groin. This is fine.”

Hollywood: “Totally fine! What’s your next project, Ryan?”

Daddy Issues, Delivered by a Minor

Let’s take stock. This is a grown man, with millions in the bank, access to Disney’s global PR machine, and a movie budget larger than Honduras’ GDP—yet he handed a script with crude one-liners to his daughter like it was a school play.

Even worse, the character is masked. There’s no visible mouth. She could have phoned it in. He could’ve hired a mime. He could’ve done the line himself and used helium. But no—he made his daughter earn the part in competition with other children.

“She beat the other kids for it,” Ryan bragged, as if we were all supposed to cheer like proud Little League parents. Sir, she didn’t win a trophy. She won exposure to Marvel’s creative crotch metaphors.

The Marvel Cinematic Parent Trap

Of course, this wasn’t just a case of artistic bad judgment. This was a full-blown audition for the Parenting Hall of Shame, curated right next to “Let Your Kid Be in a Michael Bay Movie” and “Gave My Toddler a TikTok Deal.”

Let’s be clear: this isn’t just cringeworthy. It’s professional-grade grooming with a Disney+ logo slapped on it.

Expert Opinion:
Dr. Sharon Drexler, a family therapist and frequent guest on morning talk shows, told us, “If you’re coaching your child to say ‘suck it, Wolverine,’ you’re not parenting—you’re casting.”

Why Hollywood Won’t Cancel Ryan Reynolds

Oh, Hollywood could toss Reynolds out on his well-moisturized Canadian ass. But it won’t. Because he’s Ryan. The telegenic Deadpool. The guy who brought maximum effort to minting money for billionaires.

You think the town that gave Jared Leto 30 chances and Roman Polanski a standing ovation is going to cancel the man behind Aviation Gin?

“He’s just so cheeky,” one executive reportedly said while sipping a $22 latte in Culver City. “Plus, Blake Lively is still hot, and we might need her for Season 3 of that lesbian vampire spinoff.”

Child Star or Future Plaintiff?

Remember when child actors used to be exploited behind the scenes? When a kid’s big trauma was being forced to star in Spy Kids 3? Now we’re grooming them on-mic, coached by their own fathers.

Personal story: My cousin once got grounded for saying “crap” during Sunday dinner. Ryan’s daughter is out here shouting profanity into a $3,000 studio mic while her dad adjusts her sound levels.

At what point do we admit the Hollywood work/life balance has tipped directly into felony?

A Family Affair… with Lawsuits

Let’s not forget, while this cinematic daycare was unfolding, Ryan and Blake were busy fielding a $400 million lawsuit from actor Justin Baldoni, who alleges defamation and extortion.

This isn’t just a parenting fail—it’s a parenting multi-verse. One where every version of dad is wearing Deadpool pajamas and ignoring court summons.

Helpful Content: A Practical Guide to Not Being Ryan Reynolds

How to Raise a Child Without Inviting Moral Collapse:

• Don’t coach your kid to deliver dirty lines unless you’re being blackmailed by Ryan Murphy.

• Don’t make your daughter compete for vulgar film roles like it’s Toddlers & Tiaras: Rated R Edition.

• Do consider raising your children far, far away from Hollywood. Wyoming is nice. So is decency.

What the Funny People Are Saying

• “Who needs bedtime stories when Daddy’s directing Deadpool 3: Daddy Daycare of Doom?” — Jerry Seinfeld
• “Back in my day, your dad taught you to throw a baseball, not whisper about testicles into a mic.” — Ron White
• “Ryan Reynolds made his kid audition to say something filthy. That’s not acting—that’s custody hearing foreplay.” — Sarah Silverman
• “I’m not saying Ryan’s parenting is bad, but his daughter’s next role might be as a witness in a documentary called ‘Famous But F’ed Up.’” — Chris Rock

Final Scene: Reynolds, Redeemed? Not Quite.

Look, we all like a redemption arc. But that usually requires remorse. Reynolds, meanwhile, is still plugging Deadpool & Wolverine merch while high-fiving his kid for her “hilarious delivery.”

There’s a line between edgy and irresponsible, and Reynolds has not only crossed it—he built a highway extension and installed an exit ramp labeled “Daddy’s Career Insurance.”

Disclaimer

This article is a 100% human collaboration between two sentient beings—the world’s oldest tenured professor and a 20-year-old philosophy major turned dairy farmer. No children were coached to say profane lines in the making of this satire. Our only minor character was a goat named Rick who wandered into a podcast taping and said nothing profane, unless bleating counts.

Oops, We Invited Karl Marx to the Missile Launch Group Chat

Tulsi Gabbard adds traitorous Marxist to Pentagon planning thread, citing autocorrect, spiritual confusion, and “the healing power of open dialogue.”

WASHINGTON, D.C. — In what security analysts are calling “the boldest soft launch of Communism since Bernie Sanders posted shirtless from the sauna,” U.S. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard admitted this week that she “accidentally” added a self-described “traitorous Marxist” to a top-secret group chat discussing imminent airstrikes in Syria.

The Marxist, later identified as Carl “The Dialectic” Mendelbaum, reportedly offered no input on coordinates, but did suggest renaming the mission Operation Proletarian Regret and called drone strikes “an extension of bourgeois impotence.”

“I thought I was inviting Colonel Mendenhall,” Gabbard told Congress. “But my phone autocorrected to Mendelbaum. Honest mistake. Both are men in their 60s with problematic facial hair.”

Lawmakers were alarmed. The NSA, baffled. Twitter? Delighted.

Autocorrect as a Threat Vector

National security experts confirmed what every Millennial already knows: autocorrect will one day kill us all. Whether it’s texting “Let’s ducking go to war” or sharing launch codes with a socialist philosopher who runs a kombucha co-op in Vermont, the risks are real.

A new Pentagon directive now requires all high-level communications to pass the “Maoist Filter,” a biometric scan that analyzes beard length, Birkenstock density, and number of times the word “late-stage capitalism” appears in recent emails.

Who Is Carl Mendelbaum and Why Is He Suddenly Famous?

Carl Mendelbaum, 66, is the founder of Breadlines & Barricades, a Substack newsletter widely read by nine graduate students, one French exchange teacher, and Gabbard’s yoga instructor. Known for his viral screed Why NATO Is Basically a Landlord, Mendelbaum has long argued that “imperialism begins in the inbox.”

When reached for comment, he said:

“Frankly, I was honored to be included. I assumed it was a decolonial listening session or perhaps a podcast taping. I brought my own talking stick.”

Sources say he contributed to the thread by sending a PDF titled Drone Warfare and the Dialectic of Despair, followed by a meme of Karl Marx riding a Tomahawk missile like Slim Pickens.

Airstrike Group Chats Are Getting Crowded

The accidental invite has ignited debate over the increasing size of national security group chats. Once limited to presidents, generals, and the guy who delivers the NSA’s Panera order, they now often include civilian “observers,” meditation guides, and, occasionally, white wine moms who thought they were RSVPing to a book club.

A leaked screenshot of the Pentagon’s “Operation Orange Sunset” Signal thread shows the following members:

• Gen. Curtis “Thunderstick” Monroe

• Admiral Justine Reyes

• Tulsi Gabbard (Admin)

• National Security Intern “Maverick4Prez”

• Carl Mendelbaum (accidentally added)

• “Nicole_YogaBreathworkDC”

• and, for some reason, actor Wilmer Valderrama

At one point, Mendelbaum asked, “Is it too late to propose nonviolent intervention through narrative therapy?” The group replied with the single word: “LMAO.”

Gabbard’s Defense: “Diverse Views Matter”

In her testimony before the House Intelligence Committee, Gabbard doubled down on the importance of dialogue, even when said dialogue includes revolutionary slogans and anti-aircraft poetry.

“Sometimes we need to be challenged. It keeps us humble. Carl brought a perspective that was…not useful, exactly, but refreshing. Like ice water in a missile silo.”

She then launched into an impromptu speech about the intersection of democracy and dream journaling, concluding with a quote from the Dalai Lama, “War is bad, but vibes are worse.”

New Pentagon Policy: “Trotsky Threshold” Test

As a direct result of the incident, the Pentagon has now instituted the “Trotsky Threshold”—a vetting system to weed out users with:

• Facial hair that suggests revolutionary tendencies

• Past citations in Jacobin Magazine

• More than five tweets containing the word “hegemony”

• A documented kombucha brewing license

Anyone failing the threshold is automatically assigned to the “Emotional Support Chat” with Marianne Williamson, where all aggressive tendencies are re-channeled into interpretive dance and scented candle reviews.

Mendelbaum’s Final Message: “Proletariat Out.”

After being removed from the chat, Mendelbaum posted a screenshot of the incident on his Substack, claiming he had been “erased by imperial censorship.” He also announced a new Telegram group, Airstrikes of the Oppressed, dedicated to “deconstructing aerial violence and also maybe discussing vegan empanadas.”

His final text to the Pentagon read:

“I get it. My truth makes you uncomfortable. That’s what liberation feels like. Proletariat out.”

He followed it with a gif of a dove flying out of a camouflage helmet.

Public Reaction: “LOL But Also OMG”

A recent Pew poll shows 71% of Americans think “adding a Marxist to a drone war planning session sounds like a Veep episode,” while 24% believe it’s “actually kind of woke.” The remaining 5% were unclear on what a Marxist is, but did say they liked his hat.

One TikTok user posted a dramatic reading of the leaked group chat messages while slow-dancing to Soviet folk music, earning 2.3 million likes.

“We Figured He’d Leak It Anyway.”

In a surprisingly candid press briefing, a Pentagon spokesperson said:

“Honestly, Carl was going to leak this to The Intercept regardless. Might as well let him hear the first draft.”

This is reportedly part of a new strategic policy called “Preemptive Transparency,” in which sensitive information is leaked intentionally to confuse the public through overexposure. In other words: weaponized oversharing.

Even Clippy Is Concerned

Microsoft’s Clippy, now employed by DARPA as a predictive AI interface, has been repurposed to intervene in group chat disasters.

“It looks like you’re trying to start a war. Would you like help selecting only non-Marxist participants?”

Clippy then automatically highlights users who own Das Kapital in hardcover and haven’t paid rent in 18 months.

From Mistake to Movement

In the days since the chat mishap, a growing number of leftist influencers have launched #InviteThePeople campaigns, demanding transparency in military decision-making and brunch menus. Carl Mendelbaum is now rumored to be considering a presidential run under the Democratic Co-Op Party, though some voters are hesitant due to his support for nationalizing rollerblading.

Oops, We Invited Karl Marx to the Missile Launch Group Chat (Part 2)

Tulsi Gabbard’s accidental overshare exposes America’s soft spot for revolution, memes, and rogue philosophers with Telegram channels.

Leaked Group Chat: The Full Reenactment

Thanks to a brave intern who printed the chat log and stapled it to the back of an Arby’s receipt, we now present a redacted but emotionally raw transcript of the Pentagon’s “Orange Sunset” war room:

Tulsi G.: “All — final review for 2 a.m. strikes. Need sign-off.”
Gen. Thunderstick: “Green light from CENTCOM. Standing by.”
Nicole_YogaBreathworkDC: “Remember to ground yourselves before deploying violence.”
Mendelbaum: “Hello comrades. Have you considered the spiritual implications of kinetic imperialism?”
Admiral Reyes: “Who tf is Carl??”
Maverick4Prez: “Is this a test? This feels like a test.”
Tulsi G.: “Oops, wrong Carl.”
Mendelbaum: “War is merely capitalism’s need for catharsis.”
Gen. Thunderstick: “I swear to God, I will launch a missile at Vermont.”

The Marxist’s Manifesto Goes Viral

Carl Mendelbaum followed the chaos with a 14-tweet thread titled “Inside the Belly of the Bomb: One Philosopher’s Journey from Inbox to Incursion.”

Some highlights include:

• “Pentagon aesthetic: surprisingly mid. No plants, no kombucha.”

• “There is no such thing as an ‘accidental invite.’ There is only structural inclusion.”

• “Missile emoji = colonial aggression in pictographic form.”

The thread was shared by AOC, retweeted by Noam Chomsky’s intern, and turned into a slam poem by an Oregon coffee shop called Latte Means Solidarity.

Congress Responds with “Ban the Beards Act”

Congressional panic led to swift bipartisan legislation: the Group Chat Clarity and Revolutionary Filtration Act (GCC-RFA) — also known informally as the Ban the Beards Act. The law would:

• Prohibit anyone with facial hair exceeding 3.5 inches from attending digital briefings.

• Require philosophical vetting of all usernames with “comrade,” “dialectic,” or “eco-Marxist” in them.

• Replace Signal and Telegram with an in-house military messaging app called “BoomTalk.”

BoomTalk’s beta slogan? “War. Without the weird.”

A Pentagon Hiring Frenzy: Now Seeking Chat Moderators

The U.S. War Department has now posted a new job listing:

Position: Tactical Group Chat Moderator (TS/SCI Clearance Required)
Must have strong knowledge of emoji neutrality, ability to detect sarcasm in six languages, and instant identification of revolutionary infiltration via GIF usage.

Applicants are required to complete a training module: “Avoiding the Red Scare in Threads: A Modern Approach to InfoSec.”

Parody Expert Speaks: Dr. Leon Trotsky IV, Georgetown

We reached out to Dr. Leon Trotsky IV, a tenured professor of Revolutionary Rhetoric at Georgetown University, for comment.

“This is classic dialectical infiltration. Marxism spreads through awkward digital inclusion. Today it’s Signal, tomorrow? Spotify playlists. It’s a slippery slope from Karl Marx to Karl from accounting sharing Cold War memes during nuclear briefings.”

He added, “At some point, we must ask — who’s moderating the moderators?”

Helpful Content: How to Tell If Your Slack Channel Is Too Radical

Worried your work chat is becoming a People’s Tribunal? Here’s a guide:

Signs your chat is veering left of Lenin:

• All decisions are made by consensus — and take 3 weeks.

• Someone adds a channel called #redistribute-the-snacks.

• Meeting invites say “Assembly of Equals” instead of “Zoom Call.”

• Weekly updates include quotes from Frantz Fanon.

• The intern renamed the team “Working Group of the Global South.”

Fixes:

• Add a Boomer named Chad who only speaks in bullet points.

• Ban exclamation marks — they’re a gateway to manifestos.

• Replace “solidarity” with “deliverables.”

The Accidental Marxist Meme Machine

Carl Mendelbaum is now the subject of dozens of memes. The most popular:

• “When you’re just here to abolish private property and accidentally get the launch codes.” (Photo: Carl looking confused in a coffee shop)

• “That face when you realize you’re the only guy in the chat who doesn’t believe in borders.”

• “Me: Trying to vibe. Gabbard: Adds me to the war.”

Instagram influencers are now faking Marxist identities to go viral, leading to the rise of a new microtrend: CommuClout.

Gabbard’s TikTok Apology: “My Bad, Universe.”

In the age of performative contrition, Gabbard took to TikTok to apologize — standing barefoot on a yoga mat surrounded by incense and tactical gear.

“Sometimes the universe gives you unexpected lessons. This week, I learned not to include ideological revolutionaries in kinetic military planning. That’s on me.”

She then did 12 minutes of power yoga to The Internationale (Lo-fi Beats Edition) and offered followers a discount code for Blue Apron: #StopTheStrikeMeals.

Cultural Fallout: Netflix in Talks for “Missile Marxist” Series

Naturally, Hollywood got involved.

Netflix has optioned the rights to the group chat story for a limited series titled “Missile Marxist”, starring:

• Oscar Isaac as Carl Mendelbaum

• Rosario Dawson as Tulsi Gabbard (no irony lost)

• Timothée Chalamet as a sentient drone who becomes self-aware after reading Gramsci

• And Joe Rogan as himself

The show will feature one season, nine episodes, and a spin-off podcast: Dialectical Detonation.

Final Thoughts from Carl Mendelbaum

In his farewell post, Carl wrote:

“I did not ask to be added. I was chosen. Not by Tulsi. Not by Signal. But by History. And History has read too much Zizek to care about your defense spending.”

He now lives off-grid in a Vermont yurt, raising radical goats and running a Discord server called #PostModernMunitions.

Men Are Scared of Sheer Dresses and Fishnets: A Deep Dive into the Male Brain on Date Night

A Nation in Crisis: Men Feel Threatened by Women Who Dress to Impress Themselves

In a stunning exposé that has rocked the linen-lined walls of heterosexual dating, the male population has officially released a list of date-night outfits that leave them feeling “uncomfortable,” “confused,” or “sexually threatened.”

According to a recent poll of 2,000 men conducted by the Institute for Predictable Masculinity (IPM), men are deeply divided about what constitutes “sexy,” “trying too hard,” or “I’m scared and my mother never hugged me.”

“I want her to look hot,” one man said, “but not like, you know, too hot. There’s a fine line between sexy and witchcraft.”

The Corset Controversy: Are Women Using Historical Undergarments to Trap Men Into Feelings?

Perhaps the most polarizing item on the list is the corset—a Victorian relic recently resurrected by TikTok influencers, Lana Del Rey enthusiasts, and women who own three candles labeled “Emotional Damage.”

One man described his date’s corset as “an emotional landmine wrapped in whale bone.”

“I couldn’t focus on dinner,” he told reporters. “I kept wondering if she was going to faint or propose a duel.”

Dr. Winston Glib, Ph.D. in Repressed Desires from the University of Ohio State of Denial, explained:

“Corsets symbolize feminine power and discomfort, which is a double threat to the average emotionally constipated man.”

Latex and Leather: When Sexy Feels Like a Marvel Villain Audition

Men in the survey consistently cited latex and leather outfits as “too much,” “intimidating,” and “giving dominatrix I can’t afford.”

One man compared his date’s latex jumpsuit to “a glossy hostage situation for her torso,” while another said:

“She looked like she was on her way to fight Batman. I panicked and Venmo’d her $20 just to get out of the car.”

Men want mystery. They don’t want to date Mystique from X-Men.

Fishnets: A Lure Too Complicated for the Average Dude

Fishnet stockings received a mixed review, largely because the average male brain associates nets with either seafood or emotional entrapment.

“I felt like I was being seduced and catfished at the same time,” said 32-year-old Josh from Tampa.

A forensic fashion psychologist, Dr. Mimi Cashmere, analyzed the problem:

“Fishnets remind men of danger, eroticism, and unresolved feelings about their high school drama teacher.”

Interestingly, fishnet wearers were also statistically more likely to know their own worth, hold opinions, and ignore texts that start with “U up?”

Sheer Madness: See-Through Dresses and the Fear of Transparency

“Sheer” outfits—those gauzy, translucent fabrics that say “I’m here, but I float”—drew heavy fire in the IPM study.

One man admitted he had to “pretend to enjoy the date while mentally filing a lawsuit for emotional exposure.”

Another survey participant said:

“I could see everything and nothing. I wasn’t sure if I should compliment her or call a priest.”

According to the Journal of Unclear Intentions, men ranked sheer dresses as “both too honest and too deceiving,” marking a rare double contradiction only previously found in Instagram bios with the phrase “not like other girls.”

Crop Tops: The Grand Symbol of Female Independence (And Midriff)

Few items of clothing provoke a stronger male reaction than the humble crop top. It’s short, it’s flirty, and it represents the ultimate horror: a woman confident in both her stomach and her silence.

“She wore a crop top and didn’t even say she was cold,” said Kyle, 28. “How am I supposed to protect someone who isn’t shivering?”

Professor Randi Cutoff, a sociologist at Harvard’s Fashion Panic Lab, notes:

“Crop tops dismantle the illusion of male necessity. If she doesn’t need your hoodie, what does she need you for?”

The Clacking Heels of Doom: Women Making Noise Without Permission

Many men expressed anxiety over high heels that made an audible clack, citing feelings of being “hunted,” “judged,” or “forced to feel things.”

One man described his date’s heels as:

“Sounding like a horse on trial in a courtroom drama.”

Another said:

“Every time she walked, I felt like I was being summoned to judgment. Also, I think she might have been a lawyer.”

Research from the Institute of Unspoken Male Insecurities confirms that loud heels activate the same part of the male brain as impending job performance reviews and their dad saying “I’m not mad, just disappointed.”

Perfume: The Invisible Offense That Lingers Like Repressed Trauma

Perfume—especially when worn with enthusiasm—was declared “an attack,” “a distraction,” and “a reminder of Cheryl, 2009.”

Men described being overwhelmed, disoriented, and temporarily regressing to middle school.

One man said:

“It smelled like crushed roses and tax evasion.”

Ironically, 70% of men who complained about women’s perfume admitted to using Axe Body Spray as recently as last Thursday.

Tulle: The Fabric of Nightmares and Ballerina Flashbacks

Tulle, once reserved for bridal gowns and dance recitals, is now the latest fashion casualty in the war against women’s autonomy.

One man claimed his date looked like “a haunted cupcake,” while another said:

“She wore a tulle skirt and I instantly remembered every time I disappointed my mom.”

Dr. Glib explains:

“Tulle signals whimsy, which terrifies men raised on Call of Duty and denial.”

Matching Sets: Evidence That Women Have a Plan (Which Is Intolerable)

Matching two-piece outfits baffled men, who equated coordination with manipulation.

“She looked like she had a plan. I panicked. I don’t even match my socks.”

One man broke down mid-interview after seeing his date’s matching top and skirt combo.

“I just knew she wasn’t going to laugh at my crypto jokes. And she didn’t.”

Feathers: Threat Level Flamingo

Feathered outfits were called “a red flag,” “a walking bird costume,” and “a distraction from the appetizer.”

One man explained:

“I wasn’t sure if she was flirting or molting.”

A survey of 400 women who wore feathers on dates showed that 85% of them never texted the guy back. The remaining 15% married musicians.

Coincidence? Scientists say yes. Men say conspiracy.

Bodysuits: Stylish… Until She Has to Pee

Bodysuits were labeled “dangerous,” “confusing,” and “like trying to take off a trampoline.”

“I felt like I was dating a sexy Rubik’s Cube,” one man said. “I didn’t know whether to unzip, snap, or evacuate.”

Women, meanwhile, defended bodysuits as comfortable, empowering, and occasionally life-threatening at bar bathrooms.

Rompers: What If a Toddler Grew Up and Got a Degree in Marketing?

Rompers were described as “weird,” “childish,” and “scary because I liked it and that confused me.”

One man told us:

“She looked like she was ready for both a Vegas pool party and preschool recess. I don’t know what that means, but I cried.”

Rompers are now considered “transitional clothing,” meaning they threaten men who don’t understand transitional periods… like therapy.

Neon: The Color of Confidence Men Don’t Understand

Bright neon colors caused existential crises for several men in the study.

“She glowed like a firefly during mating season. It made me feel dull inside.”

One man likened his date’s neon dress to “a highlighter that had dreams.”

Neon, according to psychologists, signals “self-assuredness, fun, and an inability to tolerate dull conversation.” Three things statistically proven to scare Chad, 31, who owns two NFTs and three regrets.

Glitter: Nature’s Most Aggressive Substance

The final straw for many was glitter. Glitter on lips, glitter on dresses, glitter on cheeks.

“I found glitter on my dog three days later,” one man sobbed. “She left, but the trauma sparkled on.”

Glitter, described by environmental scientists as “forever confetti,” is banned in 23 male group chats across America.

“It’s not fashion. It’s residue,” said Bryce, who once mistook highlighter for a cry for help.

What the Funny People Are Saying

“I don’t mind fishnets. I just like to know if she’s wearing them for fashion or to catch me in a lie.” — Ron White

“Men say they want sexy. Until she shows up in latex and they have a heart attack trying to open the car door.” — Jerry Seinfeld

“You think you’re dating a girl in a sheer dress? No, sir, you’re dating a woman who’s already planning your replacement.” — Amy Schumer

“When a woman wears feathers, it’s fashion. When I wear feathers, it’s a misdemeanor in three states.” — Larry David

Helpful Content for Our Readers

If you’re a man who finds himself confused by women’s clothing choices, here’s what you can do:

• Google things before forming opinions. Tulle is not a disease. Bodysuits are not armor. Fishnets are not fishing gear.

• Compliment with context. “I like your outfit” is better than “I’m scared but turned on and also hungry.”

• Accept the fact that she dressed for herself. If she looks amazing and you’re unsure whether to cry or propose, that’s working as intended.

• Understand: Sexy is not always for you. Sometimes it’s for Instagram. Sometimes it’s for her ex. Sometimes it’s just for fun. Grow up.

• Embrace the glitter. You’ll never get rid of it anyway. Accept it like you accept cholesterol—quietly and with fear.

Final Thoughts: Let Women Wear What They Want While You Figure Out Your Socks

Ultimately, the panic surrounding women’s date outfits says less about what’s being worn and more about who’s doing the panicking. Men want mystery—but not too much mystery. They want confidence—but not so much that it threatens their half-formed personality.

“When men say they want sexy,” says Dr. Glib, “what they often mean is ‘I want to feel powerful in your presence while being visually entertained.’”

Meanwhile, women are out here strapping themselves into latex jumpsuits, navigating glitter trauma, and peeing sideways in bar bathrooms just to meet someone who lists “vibes” as a hobby.

If that’s not bravery, we don’t know what is.

Disclaimer

This article is a 100% human collaboration between two sentient beings: the world’s oldest tenured professor and a 20-year-old philosophy major turned dairy farmer. No AI was harmed, confused, or forced to wear feathers during the writing of this piece. All glitter was applied consensually.