• Jimmycrackcrack@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Sounds romantically intended with some really fucked up and distorted ideas mixed in. I’ll take as given that she doesn’t actually hold any of the racism she expressed as sincere beliefs. Part of you twigged that though she seemed to be trying to be nice in a really weird way, something seemed off and it is a bit off. If you imagine she mailed you a knife and a key to her house and said now you have the power to attack me and I’m vulnerable you’d probably see much more clearly and obviously how unromantic and off-putting and psychotic that is despite following a very similar logic.

    In both these scenarios she’s putting her life in your hands to demonstrate trust, but there’s an implicit suggestion there that you would or could ever do something like that and only don’t because of your undying devotion. There’s a kind of twisted view of humanity there that that ruining someone’s life on purpose with kompromat is something people generally do to one another but for the power love to zovercome it. It’s sort of a red flag that she might think that way but really you know her better than any of us and also whether you think she’s good for you. That she decided this would be a good idea and a nice birthday gift is disturbing enough that it’s probably worth bringing up though. I think if it was me I’d probably express appreciation for the sentiment but also delete the video and tell them I had done so. Unfortunately you could never prove that you have deleted it so her messed up little game will always work in the manner that she intended but the extent to which this is something to worry about long term is something you can evaluate from her reaction to this news and your explanation of why it didn’t feel right. Sometimes people do dumb shit, especially when they think they’ve spotted an opportunity for comedy and can’t see their actions in a different light until after they’ve done the stupid thing. There’s a chance here for this stupid thing to be a memory between just the two of you that neither of you has to worry about again so long as you point out that it wasn’t as romantic as she thought it was and also delete whatever email or communication was used to send the video plus the video itself. If she’s able to feel a bit embarrassed and move on you’re probably fine, if she digs in and gets offended and tries to play similar fucked up games, then you might want to consider getting out before things escalate.

    • bane_killgrind@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      I think the crux of it will be, would she respect OP’s refusal to have that kind of power over her, and would she expect some sort of reciprocal act for some MAD outcome.

      I’d wonder where she got ideas like that and find out if it’s an integral part of her life.

  • Atlas_@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    First, 100% a red flag. Even if they wanted to give some sort of “I trust you with my life” sort of video, there’s a bunch of better ways to do it. Going for a racist rant makes me think that they’re a racist.

    Secondly, this is deeply submissive - they’re giving you the power to ruin their life. If you want to do that sort of stuff as a couple you should really talk about it first and be on board with receiving that sort of power and responsibility. Entirely possible+reasonable for the receiver to find this shitty because they don’t want to make a choice like this, especially if these are truly held beliefs.

    The healthy response to this is to send them to a therapist. And definitely dump them if they’re actually racist.

    • Clent@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      I don’t see how someone could do a racist rant and not be racist. That it is a rant is an important word here.

          • ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            I think taking any random problem and putting blame on a group of people would be racist. I could spruce it up with the term “nipper” or “kike” and most people would find it racist

            I suppose you just don’t find anything racist if you can’t come up with it

            • Clent@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 month ago

              I supposed you just don’t find anything racist

              I am arguing the exact opposite.

              • ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                30 days ago

                You’re saying a non-racist person couldn’t say anything racist

                The only way to argue that is if they don’t know what is racist

          • gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            I can (and have, many times) dropped a hard-r for comedic effect, even around my black friends, as they have the context to know that I’m not actually the kind of person to use that word normally

            If I was recorded and shared to the internet doing so free of context, I would be labelled as a racist shithead immediately and forever

            • Clent@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 month ago

              Is that the situation here? It is not.

              Everyone wanting to give the benefit of the doubt here gives racists room to exist.

              • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                30 days ago

                That’s how I read it, yes. But we obviously don’t have enough context to say whether the GF is actually racist or just pretending to be as a crazy trust exercise. I’m taking it as a crazy trust exercise because that’s the only way this could fit any definition of “romantic.”

  • oleorun@real.lemmy.fan
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    Bright, shining, blinking, scrolling, red LED-illuminated flags m’dude.

    She needs some therapy on boundaries and impulse control by the sound of it. Then again I’m going off a 5 second read and not a lifetime of experience so I am conceding that I do not know anything for certain.

    I would say ‘hey, out of respect for you I am deleting this video, thanks for the gift, please get me a gift card to XYZ next time’. But yeah, first time? Give her the pass. If it happens again, GTFO.

  • lath@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Sounds like a red flag with a white circle and a black symbol within. But also romantic. They’re not mutually exclusive.

    As some say, romance is death…

    • DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Nah, if it was real they’re either fucked in the head about romance or feeling them out with deniability. Just a red flag in superposition between different warnings.

      Plus you’ll note there isn’t anything in there about not believing what she said. Just the nonsense about trust.

  • JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    In Germany it’s actually illegal to just say some things? Freedom of speech really needs better protection.

    “I may disagree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”

    • Player2@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      It’s illegal to say you have a bomb at an airport and often to just generally seriously threaten people. Should that be covered under freedom of speech?

      • JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        It should be illegal to have a bomb, not to say you have a bomb. If you say you have one and you don’t, that’s annoying, but it shouldn’t be illegal.

        • Rhaedas@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          The two should have different consequences. Maybe look at it like the joking statement of having a bomb in certain places isn’t illegal itself, but causing extra concern and panic requiring actions to ensure there isn’t a threat has its own penalties. The intent of what you say or do is very important. Shouting fire in a crowded area when there isn’t a fire is another example of the misuse of the freedom that could cause harm to others.

          The original source of the “fire in a theater” example comes from a court case where a defendant was charged with passing out flyers opposing the draft into the first World War. The case was later overturned because it was not analogous to causing immediate panic or lawless action like a riot. I do wonder how social media’s ability to directly influence people into action holds up to this ruling. As an example, one can post an opinion or call to action for something and be covered under the 1st, but imagine a streamer in real time inciting people to riot. Where’s the line? Maybe it falls under what I said at the top, it’s determined by the consequences and not by some perceived “future crime” that it could cause.

        • skulblaka@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          It’s a huge waste of time and resources and mass panic while everyone searches for this bomb that doesn’t exist, and if you want to sneak in a real bomb, it’s super easy to do if you just have 6 other people claim fake bombs first. It’s not illegal right?

    • Nollij@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Germany passed a number of laws in the wake of the Third Reich and the Holocaust. The idea being that if such speech was banned, it could prevent the next one from getting a foothold. It definitely sounds like this is what they’re referring to

    • Justin@lemmy.jlh.name
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      It’s illegal to say things in the US too, buddy. The fact that you guys let people endorse slavery and idolize the confederacy, is more of a you problem.

      • JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        I live in the UK, where I know there is also some illegal speech except in Hyde Park Corner. I still think things should be different and the government shouldn’t be penalising anyone for things they say. Things they do are a different matter, but banning some speech leads to oppressive regimes.

        • GregorGizeh@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          It isn’t that you can’t say things, just certain parts of “the message” are illegal. You can’t deny the holocaust for example or call to sterilize immigrants

      • BlueFootedPetey@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Slavery and racism is not a America only problem. We are just very loud and proud about it. (Not me personally, but I ain’t blind to history and the people in my country).

        • Justin@lemmy.jlh.name
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          Sure, but it’s an example that’s specific to the US. You can’t go around in Germany praising Hitler and endorsing genocide, so why can you praise Lee and endorse genocide in the US?

      • Rhaedas@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Those problems are deeper than a freedom of speech, and controlling that speech won’t and has not fixed the problems that cause them. It’s better to keep the openness of expression and tackle the systemic causes of racism and hatred, not try and hide them and let them fester.

        • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          Why not both tackle the systemic issues while not allowing people to poison everything with their vile rhetoric.

          Out and about Nazis emboldened to do their thing is not a good thing.

          • Rhaedas@fedia.io
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            The problem with drawing lines is that lines can then be moved. The most obvious gets censored first, then the next, and at some point people can’t talk about anything because it is offensive to someone in power. Who decides what is and isn’t censorable? If the counter to vile speech is its opposing view treated also openly, hate and violence won’t grow under a censorship. Again, it’s not the freedom of speech that creates these problems, but other issues in society that make hating others attractive. Ignorance and segregation and pitting one group against another for power purposes.

            • Pup Biru@aussie.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 month ago

              so you’re saying it’s a slippery slope?

              because that’s not a good reason not to do something

            • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 month ago

              The argument is flawed. As the vile rhetoric out in the open, normalizes it. This in turn causes it to be used more, snowballing out of control. It deserves to be in the shadows… skulking… it belongs there… it will never go away.

              Countering speech with more speech, might work in an honest conversation, but when one side blatantly lies and has no shame… when we are in a post truth situation… with alternative facts and NO consequences… while the billionaire class hold the reighns to all the media you consume…

              The speech with more speech will not work.

              Next to that… saying Nazi shit and a plethora of other things deserve a punch in the mouth… the US should have a law that anyone calling a black person the N word can be punched in the mouth by said black person or a designated representative… that would be a just law.

              • chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 month ago

                What about the other part of their argument though? Do you really think censorship powers can be withheld from those who are eager to abuse them? If the incoming government in the US was constitutionally able to be sanctioning vigilante violence against racist speech, I’m pretty sure one of the first things they would do with that is to classify people protesting the Palestinian genocide as being valid targets, under the logic that criticizing Israel is racist, for example.

                Even if it was true that censorship is a more effective way to control toxic rhetoric than honest discourse, it would still be the case that it is an incredibly dangerous weapon. If we can’t ensure that untrustworthy malevolent people never get the power to use it, there’s no way it does more good than harm.

    • Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      If you have trouble telling the difference between free speech and hate crimes, you’re very much part of the problem.

    • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Germans are bootlickers of authority hence why they got a nazi regime, same thing with Russians.

      American bootlicker is too dense to understand how this behavior will result in their dread “fascism” more so than idiots saying stupid shit in public.

  • shoulderoforion@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    They say never stick your dick in crazy, but from my experience, that’s where the best stuff is, but you gotta know, there’s a shelf life to flirting with insanity, you gotta know when to get out, or else you’re just in for life changing pain. This sounds a bit outside comfort levels for me, and I’d be looking for the out door.

    • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Still, the one thing worse than sticking your dick in crazy is almost sticking your dick in crazy, so that the negative effect were still there, but you wouldn’t have fun memories at lonely evenings.

  • superkret@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    This is kinda unhinged in my opinion.
    But then again, I grew up before social media, maybe this is the ultimate proof of love now? I don’t know.

    Anyway, putting herself completely at your mercy is not a good start into a healthy, mutually respectful relationship.

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Yup. I don’t want blackmail on them, and I don’t want them to have blackmail on me, because if the relationship goes south, one of us (or both!) will resort to the nuclear option.

      Protect yourself and build a relationship based on respect. Trust is earned, not ransomed.

      • Waraugh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Idk, I have shit (emails and texts) that could be considered blackmail on my ex wife of 15 years (not legal but would trash her relationship with her family which for all our faults she values and depends on as much as anything in life) and I would never open that can of worms. I also have video sent to me that would cost my current girlfriend (she shared them) massive headaches and likely thousands in lawyer fees and support. I can’t imagine a scenario where I would leverage it for anything. I value that my ex and current GF know they can trust me, entirely, without consequence. Relationships are hard and things don’t always become or remain what one would like but I can’t imagine purposefully hurting someone like that. My ex wife and I can’t stand each other but theirs comfort in knowing we can trust each other. I wouldn’t go to her funeral but I’d help her bury a body and I know she feels the same.

  • hissing meerkat@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    A red flag.

    Sharing dangerous ideas with somebody to show that you think they are safe is an honest signal of trust, but only if the dangerous ideas are genuine.

    Someone who attempts to buy trust disingenuously is not to be trusted.

    Someone who thinks in terms of kompromat and manipulation is dangerous to be around.