Former Community – We Moved
🆕 Coached community here, for posts & feedback public community here.
Why Greta's "small dick energy" power move on Tate was very effective: the high-school archetypes
In brief, the story:
- Tate provokes Greta "bragging" about his high-consumption cars (searching for some more publicity)
- Tate tells Greta he can send the "full list of his cars" to her
- Greta replies: "send it to SmallDickEnergy@GetALife.com"
It was very effective.
High power-IQ move
It was effective because Tate's popularity stems, in part, from 3 sources:
- The cool aura of being "anti-establishment"
- The cool aura of the "asshole"
- Breaking this particular mainstream virtue-signaling culture
What many liberals, vegetarians, feminists and various "greens" don't realize is that they feed these personalities themselves.
They've gone too far.
It's because of the extremists in their own camps that Trump and Tate can be extremists while also making plain sense.
When Trump says "Europe should pay for its defense" he's not being an asshole to his allies: he's telling the truth.
When Tate says that (many) women like successful, high-power, and more dominant men than they are, he's not being an asshole: he's also telling the truth.
When people call Trump and Tate idiots or antisocial for saying stuff like the above, it's the liberals who look like idiots.
That's what provides fertile ground for folks like Trump and Tate.
Non-liberals and meat eaters, tired of the liberals's extremisms, latch onto the part of Trump's and Tate's message that makes sense, and support them to provide a counterbalance to the oppressing and equally deformed mainstream culture.
Plus, the Tates and Trumps have the "cool aura" for being underdogs, and high-confidence assholes.
Or, at least, until the leftists confirm those frames.
Enters Greta's power move.
Greta broke that dynamic by effectively attacking, removing, and turning around the "cool auras".
The initial Tate's move was:
- Asshole-style one-up to the obnoxious green extremist who tries to curtail the fun for everyone else
And Greta turned it into:
- Insecure and childish guy who plays (and over-plays) the asshole while chasing social recognition and attention from the girls
That new frame works because people have a social archetype for that type of over-investing, trying too hard guy.
It's the obnoxious schoolyard "wanna be tough guy" who rolls the windows down, blasts his music way too loud, and burns tires in the hope to get some attention, recognition and status.
Except, he tries too hard, his actions far outstripping his true personal value, and he turns into a hot-air braggart -all sizzle and no steak-.
And he's also socially naive because he doesn't realize that it doesn't work and all that effort is only digging his own hole.
Ie.: from the asshole who wanted to poke fun at the girl, the joke is actually on him.
In good part, that's thanks to Greta.
Had she gotten angry, she'd have confirmed Tate as the cool asshole, and she as the girl who gets angry -but may actually be attracted-.
That's the guy that Tate's followers aspire to be.
Had she taken him seriously, she'd have validated his point of view as an anti-establishment hero.
That's the guy that some conservatives aspire to be.
Instead, Greta managed to turn Tate into the obnoxious wanna-be archetype.
And that's the guy that nobody wants to be.
I'd say the mistake Greta made was with that email address, implying she has a small dick. Sure enough, this was used by her opponents against her. Still, she did manage to land a blow for sure.
Hmmm, how would you have phrased it then?
I wasn't aware of her opponents having used it against her as I haven't seen anything of the sort, and personally, I never even thought it referred to Greta herself.
I didn't think of it either because, like you, I immediately understood Greta's valid point. Only after I saw her opponents' counter-attack (If I remember correctly, Tate personally replied to her and got a lot of 'likes' from his followers, of course) did I think it was a valid counter-attack.
I'd have phrased it like:
"Okay. What's your email? SmallDickEnergy@GetALife.com?"
"Are you planning on emailing them to me? Sorry, I've blocked all emails from SmallDickEnergy@GetALife.com."
Hmm I actually liked the original because it's short and to the point -and low investment, often crucial, is even more important when you want to show someone for being a try-hard-.
The original, more neutral tone, also feels more like "flying higher".
As for people liking Tate's reply, that may not say much since many of the "fans" were going to support their idol no matter how good or bad his reply was going to be -supporting their idol as a form of supporting their own ego-.
Great thread; I appreciate you sharing Lucio.
The counterattack by Tate, in my opinion, was weak and forced. His video response took high investment vs Greta's simple response. It felt clumsy and like he was making a weak argument based on an interpretation very few people shared.
Thank you for sharing, Rogue.
I feel the same.
Jokes on another man's dick size are barely just OK as teenagers.
But as a 30-something man, saying that to a girl, plus adding a video, it just felt the exact confirmation of that initial frame: trying way too hard.
If anyone has any further opinion on it, happy to read.
