Stories of young men like Harry Sisson dating several women at a time continue to circulate. Is this culture of romantic surveillance doing us any good?
THANK YOU for telling it like it is! As tool-ish as this young man's behavior is, it is not dating. I repeat, this is not dating. I don't quite understand how any woman would assume that her online "paramour" would be exclusive, no matter what he says. And the same goes the other way around, because *News Flash* women do it, too. How about some more IRL experience to truly understand what "dating" is?
My first thought with this is of those Facebook groups in major cities called “Are We Dating the Same Guy?” where girls warn each other of guys with misleading or bad behavior, which is unfortunately sort of the norm now.
It’s not a proportional response but there is a vacuum of accountability in the dating world and the dating apps themselves have really limited mechanisms to report “bad actors” in the dating world. I think of this as an imperfect way to warn others of bad actors more than public doxxing. That the latter is the effect is really just a consequence of the limited means these girls have within the marketplace systems themselves so it leaks out to the public world.
It’s kind of wild when you think about it that we have decentralized blockchains that can verify payments but no social accountability system for ghosting and cruelty.
On a side note I left those FB groups eventually because they were depressing and also making me feel suspicious of everyone I met off a dating app.
The lack of social accountability is key. It's not just dating; people can treat each other as disposable in almost any social situation and face no repercussions from it.
It used to be plausible to think you could rob a bank and not get caught; murder was definitely possible. If anything, technology like the social internet has radically strengthened our ability to impose social repercussions.
Those aren't social repercussions, they're system repercussions. Systems aren't so much concerned with encouraging good behavior between people as they are concerned with enforcing behavior that's beneficial to the systems themselves. Systems care about bank robberies and murders because they disrupt the system itself - and they don't always care about murder either!
I don't believe social and system are different things. What you call social repercussions are imposed by social systems. What we think of as "systems" are just social arrangements of particularly easily-observed hierarchy, usually because they have a more direct command of coercive force.
The solution you're here calling a system repercussion was, in my example, basically skipping town. But in response to my other comment, you used getting run out of town as an example of social accountability. I agree that it's a situation that blurs the line between the two spheres you're referencing, but that's an example of why I don't believe the distinction is valuable.
I think the fact that situations like this are talked about in terms of "accountability" at all is just a sign of how separated we've become from like, normal relationships as human beings. There's no time in which this behavior would incur a formal or informal punishment of note. What we mean when we say "accountability" is "he should feel bad about what he did," which is true, but like, idk. I'm only 30 and part of growing up for me was realizing some people won't and you can't make them. That's always been the case.
"Accountability" didn't mean "get them to feel bad", it meant that people shunned you because you were a bad person. It might mean being forced out of town, which was a serious problem because the next town was going to correctly assume that strangers were trouble.
"Dating panopticon" feels like an understatement. Not to downplay anyone's embarrassment but this is a great example of why everyone needs to log off. The apps need to atrophy. Nobody's sex/romantic life should be mediated through social media. the software model that is actively rotting civilization by incentivizing and instrumentalizing social isolation, alienation and hyper consumption.
I feel like I get your point but this is a terrible example. There’s a huge difference between someone being awkward and making dumb embarrassing mistakes when dating, and actively lying to women to trick them into a sexual relationship (even if it’s just online, it’s still violating). I think it’s def still fair to call out the latter behaviour because it’s not a mistake to trick and lie to people, and we should punish that inauthentic behaviour because *that’s* what causes people to pull away and fear relationships. I find it odd that the moral of your message is essentially that women shouldn’t express their grievances about the men who are using them bc it might make other men too scared to date. Because I guess those guys only know how to date by also lying to women? This isn’t specifically a gendered thing bc women also deserve to be called out for lying/tricking their dates if they do the same, but I find it very concerning that you’re asking for women to put aside their feelings to protect men’s.
I definitely agree that there should be social consequences for bad dating behaviors for men and women alike, and moreover that being lied to digitally for sexual purposes can still be violating. But this co-opted political campaign story is not even for the benefit of these women. Nowhere do I say they should "put aside" their feelings — I say that people should be hesitant to participate in the public spectacle that turns their feelings into a political commodity.
Women make only fans, sleep with 100 men in a day, make TikToks of themselves embarrassing young men with their feminine wiles, and they get nothing but praise from pro-feminist voices, defense of their actions (or even people saying they are the victim) and money. "Social consequences" are only for the few men attractive enough to actually hurt women's feelings.
Why don't we call out women who do things like foodie calls, leading men on to get money and gifts, and divorce loyal men and then take half their stuff and make them pay alimony? This is all naked female self-interest, only male sexuality and sexual misdeeds are subject to censor and "calling-out." This is why young men are foolish if they want anything to do with feminism, it's an anti-male pro-female sexual strategy hate movement.
Wow! Came to read this bc a moot recommended. This is reductive at several points when addressing the violation to these young ladies’ bodies.
Manipulating and deceiving women while leveraging his a pro-feminist image is devious and concerning. Especially given what we know of rape culture. This is a wolf is sheep’s clothing, abusers 101. It’s gyoper behavior with a dem face, which makes it that much more insidious. This young man holds influence and if he is this bold now, imagine him in a few years (esp, if these ladies had remained silent).
Just because their ships were digital relationship doesn’t mean there isn’t material harm. What will this cost this young ladies in the future navigating dating/ships with a damaged sense of trust? Should we not be equally concerned about the implications normalizing and overlooking this behavior towards women has on the dating market?
Also, some people are genuinely this naive and sheltered.
Maybe my perspective is different as a black woman. In my experience, it is dangerous to continue allyship or look the other way when there are bad actors like this. It’s usually indicative of other problematic behavior.
Interesting to see so many reaches to defend this young man, simply because the dems need young men to attract other young men. At whose expense? And is this the kind of young man we want holding influence?? Seems maligned and desperate to worry about losing him when clearly he’s disingenuous. But I guess, who cares because “surveillance state” and it’s just digital dating, and it’s just a lil “send nudes” whoopsie.
If intersectionality has taught us anything, women are likely not the only group he is willing to violate to prop up his ego.
I had a similar thought about the lack of sympathy/empathy for how naive these young women are. Most young people are naive in some way! I think it does everyone a disservice to expect that they be callous and jaded. I'm much older but I having worked in a female dominated industry and being married for a long time I was quite naive about men when I started to date. Luckily I was a quick study but I think for some people like myself and probably these young women who are kind and honest it is hard to conceive that men would treat you so poorly when you'd never think to do the same
Agree! Many young people leaving HS have never dated and college may be their first romantic experience. Some have strict parents and may have no guidance around dating at all. Also, this is post-covid lockdowns. Not everyone is savvy and it seems a huge disservice to young ladies to normalize his behavior.
I agree, it was obviously hard for them to conceive a man would treat them poorly, PARTICULARLY a man who’s made a name advocating for women. Why so many chalk this up as a normal dating life, as if it’s an opportunity for them to sharpen their eye for manipulation or predatory behavior feels like we’re saying yet again it’s on the women to watch their own backs “boys will be boys.”
Mind you, women are watching their own backs by revealing to others his repeated violations. It was 11 people simultaneously being lied to and manipulated, not just one person. He knows what he is doing and will only get better at it.
Odd so many pieces are encouraging the silencing of these women. Have we learned nothing about how manipulation snowballs and proliferates into other forms of abuse?? Where there’s smoke there’s fire?
Yes the piece centers Sisson’s career instead of the people whose trust he violated. And makes a number of assumptions about the women (all digital, not looking to settle down, participating in “call out” culture for their egos). A rare miss from Magdalene
I have a good deal of sympathy with the general point that the pile-on/witch hunt culture that's come to the fore in the past few years is bad. I'd proffer that it's a not surprising result of humans plus social media 2.0 (or is it 3.0?) and some of the continuing hierarchies inherited from the past, in this case patriarchy. But I agree that while understandable the current state of that culture is not the ideal landing point for creating a new, healthier co-existence between the sexes.
But I think you're missing some here too. Huberman gives the easier example. You state explicitly why knowing how unhealthy he is personally is good, then follow that up with how his personal failings aren't a good topic for magazine journalism. Why is that? I mean, I found his content interesting but soured on him pretty quickly because his unhealthy psyche peaked through too often. Dude bro narcissism is something I react strongly against. But for folks less attuned to that, why is it not a public service to expose that a wellness guru with a huge public following is fact really an untrustworthy dick in his personal life and not someone to be emulated or trust?
Why is it never a public service to expose a woman as a gold digger, slut, abusive partner, or manipulator? Why is only shaming and trying to ruin men in the public interest?
If a woman is a wellness guru who is incredibly personally unhealthy then it is right to expose them. But why the manosphere style assumptions and anger? Thinking a woman should be exposed for being a "slut" is pathetic and backwards. If she's sleeping with a half dozen guys and telling all of them they're exclusive then yes she should be exposed.
You have a wellness guru who makes scientific claims about a huge array of various things related to health, motivation, fitness, etc. It's irrelevant that in fact he's a bullshitter and an arrogant narcissist who can't develop relationships in his own life?
The reason women slept with the Harry Sisson guy is because he's good looking and they were physically attracted to him. Not because of his politics or activism.
You misunderstand what he does. He takes suggestive science and extrapolates and builds a lifestyle brand with it centered around his status as a wise guru who will guide you to the good life (while getting rich and famous along the way). That being legitimate rests entirely on his integrity. Things that cast very strong doubt on his integrity are in fact required info for the public to make an informed choice.
Hello there, really enjoy your work . Wanted to point out that your piece ignores two other realities, one emotional and one political.
1. These women are resorting to public shaming because no amount of private grief will deter and disincentivize deceitful behavior. They seek to help buffer their damaged egos, yes, but also put other women on notice before they get played and make sure everyone knows Sisson is an ally in the streets and a liar in the sheets. If you’re a feminist just be honest to women you’re dating? It’s not hard. A lot of women want in on the polycule but yeah it will limit your “options” if you are straight forward. Women in their 20s are also looking to settle down with someone nice or at least be monogamous.
2. If this man is attempting to brand himself as a democratic influencer and influence men to join the party, it just furthers the idea that there’s something rotten in the party where party members aren’t actually walking the walk when it comes to their beliefs. If you believe women are powerful and have agency, why would you go to such great lengths to rob young women of power and agency by betraying their trust? Like, be about it. I’d rather a man was a groyper than a deceitful ally - at least I know what I’m getting. Sorry if reality benefits the conservative cause but it is what it is.
I’m not, don’t put this on me. Men are leaving the party because other men are telling them “come to the dark side and be a dick, it’s appreciated here” - just stop lying to women you date, it’ll be okay.
No they're leaving because "slut shaming" is a mortal sin but blasting a man's private sexual conversations out to the world for him to be mocked and humiliated while his career is ruined is just "calling out bad behavior."
bro, none of this has anything to do with being a democrat or a feminist. these are interpersonal relationships that have almost nothing to do with the larger trends, prescriptions, and demands of feminism as a whole.
he just lied to these girls he was “dating” ON HIS PHONE. even if we wanna call him a dog, that’s debatable. this is barely real life in the first place.
The author brought this up in her piece so I responded to that. It clearly mattered to the women he was sexting so not sure why you’re saying it’s not “real”
I feel like some amount of social shaming for caddish behavior is somewhat appropriate even if it doesn’t deserve the main character of the internet vibes this story has received today.
I just find the idea of sexting 11 women at the same time to be really crappy from anyone.
I like genuinely mostly agree with you. But dismissing neutral standards of good behavior Is bad even when the enforcement mechanism is kind of partisan.
Why is it bad? Any woman can do this on Tinder and many do, many women also leverage it for free food, gifts and even money. There's even a website called seeking.com where women use it to get money and pay their bills!
It’s a pretty severe violation of treating others as id like to be treated. Like I’m not saying it should be a crime or something but most people I know would find the behavior quite unsettling if it were happening to them.
Like having a reputation for being a bit of a cad isn’t a sentence of exile or death or something.
I think the concept of accountability is a bit lost in this conversation, because I keep seeing the word “victims” being applied to these women. Did they not freely choose to send nude photos to someone they’d never met?
This was razor-sharp. I appreciate how you held space for the emotional fallout and pushed back on the spectacle of it all. You're right—this isn’t really about Harry Sisson. It’s about the digital architecture we’re trapped inside, where humiliation is algorithmic and heartbreak gets turned into content. There’s a difference between seeking healing and seeking audience. And as you said, the political machinery—left and right—is eager to exploit personal pain as fuel. What gets lost is the humanity of everyone involved.
Also loved your line about the “decentralized blockchains for payments but no social accountability system for ghosting and cruelty.” That hit. Maybe the question isn’t just how we date, but where. Platforms built to maximize engagement aren't going to nurture trust or truth.
Digital dating panopticon is exactly it. Really well put. It seems to me that so much of this public shaming behaviour (either these Ti kToks or "are we dating the same guy" Facebook groups) comes from a misguided belief that women hold — that they can protect themselves from being hurt. But as you said, heartbreak is inevitable. It's part of love, even in relationships that don't end. And then the belief they can avoid being hurt is disguised as "feminist politics" or "supporting other women".
Let us all acknowledge that this is hilarious. Harry Sisson? Yell-into-camera boy wonder Harry Sisson? Harry "My speaking cadence is so grating it shreds cheese" Sisson? This man, a devil, a rake? Playing chicks like texas hold 'em? An NBA-size roster? Snachat-slanging Sisson? Harry Sisson, West Wing Wilt Chamberlain? Harry "iceberg slim" Sisson?
THANK YOU for telling it like it is! As tool-ish as this young man's behavior is, it is not dating. I repeat, this is not dating. I don't quite understand how any woman would assume that her online "paramour" would be exclusive, no matter what he says. And the same goes the other way around, because *News Flash* women do it, too. How about some more IRL experience to truly understand what "dating" is?
This. So much this. This times a billion. I want every young person to read your comment.
Oh my goodness, thank you so much! I'm grateful that this resonates with you and others! 🙏
My first thought with this is of those Facebook groups in major cities called “Are We Dating the Same Guy?” where girls warn each other of guys with misleading or bad behavior, which is unfortunately sort of the norm now.
It’s not a proportional response but there is a vacuum of accountability in the dating world and the dating apps themselves have really limited mechanisms to report “bad actors” in the dating world. I think of this as an imperfect way to warn others of bad actors more than public doxxing. That the latter is the effect is really just a consequence of the limited means these girls have within the marketplace systems themselves so it leaks out to the public world.
It’s kind of wild when you think about it that we have decentralized blockchains that can verify payments but no social accountability system for ghosting and cruelty.
On a side note I left those FB groups eventually because they were depressing and also making me feel suspicious of everyone I met off a dating app.
The lack of social accountability is key. It's not just dating; people can treat each other as disposable in almost any social situation and face no repercussions from it.
It used to be plausible to think you could rob a bank and not get caught; murder was definitely possible. If anything, technology like the social internet has radically strengthened our ability to impose social repercussions.
Those aren't social repercussions, they're system repercussions. Systems aren't so much concerned with encouraging good behavior between people as they are concerned with enforcing behavior that's beneficial to the systems themselves. Systems care about bank robberies and murders because they disrupt the system itself - and they don't always care about murder either!
I don't believe social and system are different things. What you call social repercussions are imposed by social systems. What we think of as "systems" are just social arrangements of particularly easily-observed hierarchy, usually because they have a more direct command of coercive force.
The solution you're here calling a system repercussion was, in my example, basically skipping town. But in response to my other comment, you used getting run out of town as an example of social accountability. I agree that it's a situation that blurs the line between the two spheres you're referencing, but that's an example of why I don't believe the distinction is valuable.
I think the fact that situations like this are talked about in terms of "accountability" at all is just a sign of how separated we've become from like, normal relationships as human beings. There's no time in which this behavior would incur a formal or informal punishment of note. What we mean when we say "accountability" is "he should feel bad about what he did," which is true, but like, idk. I'm only 30 and part of growing up for me was realizing some people won't and you can't make them. That's always been the case.
"No time" and "always been the case" never met my middle school. Or my high school. Or my college.
"Accountability" didn't mean "get them to feel bad", it meant that people shunned you because you were a bad person. It might mean being forced out of town, which was a serious problem because the next town was going to correctly assume that strangers were trouble.
Do you know of any cases in which a man was ever forced out of town because he led women on
"Dating panopticon" feels like an understatement. Not to downplay anyone's embarrassment but this is a great example of why everyone needs to log off. The apps need to atrophy. Nobody's sex/romantic life should be mediated through social media. the software model that is actively rotting civilization by incentivizing and instrumentalizing social isolation, alienation and hyper consumption.
I feel like I get your point but this is a terrible example. There’s a huge difference between someone being awkward and making dumb embarrassing mistakes when dating, and actively lying to women to trick them into a sexual relationship (even if it’s just online, it’s still violating). I think it’s def still fair to call out the latter behaviour because it’s not a mistake to trick and lie to people, and we should punish that inauthentic behaviour because *that’s* what causes people to pull away and fear relationships. I find it odd that the moral of your message is essentially that women shouldn’t express their grievances about the men who are using them bc it might make other men too scared to date. Because I guess those guys only know how to date by also lying to women? This isn’t specifically a gendered thing bc women also deserve to be called out for lying/tricking their dates if they do the same, but I find it very concerning that you’re asking for women to put aside their feelings to protect men’s.
I definitely agree that there should be social consequences for bad dating behaviors for men and women alike, and moreover that being lied to digitally for sexual purposes can still be violating. But this co-opted political campaign story is not even for the benefit of these women. Nowhere do I say they should "put aside" their feelings — I say that people should be hesitant to participate in the public spectacle that turns their feelings into a political commodity.
Women make only fans, sleep with 100 men in a day, make TikToks of themselves embarrassing young men with their feminine wiles, and they get nothing but praise from pro-feminist voices, defense of their actions (or even people saying they are the victim) and money. "Social consequences" are only for the few men attractive enough to actually hurt women's feelings.
Why don't we call out women who do things like foodie calls, leading men on to get money and gifts, and divorce loyal men and then take half their stuff and make them pay alimony? This is all naked female self-interest, only male sexuality and sexual misdeeds are subject to censor and "calling-out." This is why young men are foolish if they want anything to do with feminism, it's an anti-male pro-female sexual strategy hate movement.
Right. The answer is for young men to start networking and making their own movement (or, more likely), piggybacking on existing conservative ones.
The problem is not the existence of the feminist movement, but the absence of a masculist one.
Yes, amen! This reeks of “boys will be boys”.
Wow! Came to read this bc a moot recommended. This is reductive at several points when addressing the violation to these young ladies’ bodies.
Manipulating and deceiving women while leveraging his a pro-feminist image is devious and concerning. Especially given what we know of rape culture. This is a wolf is sheep’s clothing, abusers 101. It’s gyoper behavior with a dem face, which makes it that much more insidious. This young man holds influence and if he is this bold now, imagine him in a few years (esp, if these ladies had remained silent).
Just because their ships were digital relationship doesn’t mean there isn’t material harm. What will this cost this young ladies in the future navigating dating/ships with a damaged sense of trust? Should we not be equally concerned about the implications normalizing and overlooking this behavior towards women has on the dating market?
Also, some people are genuinely this naive and sheltered.
Maybe my perspective is different as a black woman. In my experience, it is dangerous to continue allyship or look the other way when there are bad actors like this. It’s usually indicative of other problematic behavior.
Interesting to see so many reaches to defend this young man, simply because the dems need young men to attract other young men. At whose expense? And is this the kind of young man we want holding influence?? Seems maligned and desperate to worry about losing him when clearly he’s disingenuous. But I guess, who cares because “surveillance state” and it’s just digital dating, and it’s just a lil “send nudes” whoopsie.
If intersectionality has taught us anything, women are likely not the only group he is willing to violate to prop up his ego.
I had a similar thought about the lack of sympathy/empathy for how naive these young women are. Most young people are naive in some way! I think it does everyone a disservice to expect that they be callous and jaded. I'm much older but I having worked in a female dominated industry and being married for a long time I was quite naive about men when I started to date. Luckily I was a quick study but I think for some people like myself and probably these young women who are kind and honest it is hard to conceive that men would treat you so poorly when you'd never think to do the same
Agree! Many young people leaving HS have never dated and college may be their first romantic experience. Some have strict parents and may have no guidance around dating at all. Also, this is post-covid lockdowns. Not everyone is savvy and it seems a huge disservice to young ladies to normalize his behavior.
I agree, it was obviously hard for them to conceive a man would treat them poorly, PARTICULARLY a man who’s made a name advocating for women. Why so many chalk this up as a normal dating life, as if it’s an opportunity for them to sharpen their eye for manipulation or predatory behavior feels like we’re saying yet again it’s on the women to watch their own backs “boys will be boys.”
Mind you, women are watching their own backs by revealing to others his repeated violations. It was 11 people simultaneously being lied to and manipulated, not just one person. He knows what he is doing and will only get better at it.
Odd so many pieces are encouraging the silencing of these women. Have we learned nothing about how manipulation snowballs and proliferates into other forms of abuse?? Where there’s smoke there’s fire?
Yes the piece centers Sisson’s career instead of the people whose trust he violated. And makes a number of assumptions about the women (all digital, not looking to settle down, participating in “call out” culture for their egos). A rare miss from Magdalene
I have a good deal of sympathy with the general point that the pile-on/witch hunt culture that's come to the fore in the past few years is bad. I'd proffer that it's a not surprising result of humans plus social media 2.0 (or is it 3.0?) and some of the continuing hierarchies inherited from the past, in this case patriarchy. But I agree that while understandable the current state of that culture is not the ideal landing point for creating a new, healthier co-existence between the sexes.
But I think you're missing some here too. Huberman gives the easier example. You state explicitly why knowing how unhealthy he is personally is good, then follow that up with how his personal failings aren't a good topic for magazine journalism. Why is that? I mean, I found his content interesting but soured on him pretty quickly because his unhealthy psyche peaked through too often. Dude bro narcissism is something I react strongly against. But for folks less attuned to that, why is it not a public service to expose that a wellness guru with a huge public following is fact really an untrustworthy dick in his personal life and not someone to be emulated or trust?
Why is it never a public service to expose a woman as a gold digger, slut, abusive partner, or manipulator? Why is only shaming and trying to ruin men in the public interest?
If a woman is a wellness guru who is incredibly personally unhealthy then it is right to expose them. But why the manosphere style assumptions and anger? Thinking a woman should be exposed for being a "slut" is pathetic and backwards. If she's sleeping with a half dozen guys and telling all of them they're exclusive then yes she should be exposed.
Thinking a man should be exposed for being "dishonest" is pathetic and backwards.
You have a wellness guru who makes scientific claims about a huge array of various things related to health, motivation, fitness, etc. It's irrelevant that in fact he's a bullshitter and an arrogant narcissist who can't develop relationships in his own life?
The reason women slept with the Harry Sisson guy is because he's good looking and they were physically attracted to him. Not because of his politics or activism.
Yes, completely irrelevant to his work on human sleep and nutrition
You misunderstand what he does. He takes suggestive science and extrapolates and builds a lifestyle brand with it centered around his status as a wise guru who will guide you to the good life (while getting rich and famous along the way). That being legitimate rests entirely on his integrity. Things that cast very strong doubt on his integrity are in fact required info for the public to make an informed choice.
Hello there, really enjoy your work . Wanted to point out that your piece ignores two other realities, one emotional and one political.
1. These women are resorting to public shaming because no amount of private grief will deter and disincentivize deceitful behavior. They seek to help buffer their damaged egos, yes, but also put other women on notice before they get played and make sure everyone knows Sisson is an ally in the streets and a liar in the sheets. If you’re a feminist just be honest to women you’re dating? It’s not hard. A lot of women want in on the polycule but yeah it will limit your “options” if you are straight forward. Women in their 20s are also looking to settle down with someone nice or at least be monogamous.
2. If this man is attempting to brand himself as a democratic influencer and influence men to join the party, it just furthers the idea that there’s something rotten in the party where party members aren’t actually walking the walk when it comes to their beliefs. If you believe women are powerful and have agency, why would you go to such great lengths to rob young women of power and agency by betraying their trust? Like, be about it. I’d rather a man was a groyper than a deceitful ally - at least I know what I’m getting. Sorry if reality benefits the conservative cause but it is what it is.
I would not prefer a man be a groyper than a Democrat who sexts with several women.
*sexts several women without their understanding or consent
you're exactly why men are leaving the party and will continue to do so, no many should ever vote for women who hate us
I’m not, don’t put this on me. Men are leaving the party because other men are telling them “come to the dark side and be a dick, it’s appreciated here” - just stop lying to women you date, it’ll be okay.
No they're leaving because "slut shaming" is a mortal sin but blasting a man's private sexual conversations out to the world for him to be mocked and humiliated while his career is ruined is just "calling out bad behavior."
bro, none of this has anything to do with being a democrat or a feminist. these are interpersonal relationships that have almost nothing to do with the larger trends, prescriptions, and demands of feminism as a whole.
he just lied to these girls he was “dating” ON HIS PHONE. even if we wanna call him a dog, that’s debatable. this is barely real life in the first place.
The author brought this up in her piece so I responded to that. It clearly mattered to the women he was sexting so not sure why you’re saying it’s not “real”
I feel like some amount of social shaming for caddish behavior is somewhat appropriate even if it doesn’t deserve the main character of the internet vibes this story has received today.
I just find the idea of sexting 11 women at the same time to be really crappy from anyone.
It is bad! But it isn't not worthy of this big politically-spun narrative.
I like genuinely mostly agree with you. But dismissing neutral standards of good behavior Is bad even when the enforcement mechanism is kind of partisan.
Why is it bad? Any woman can do this on Tinder and many do, many women also leverage it for free food, gifts and even money. There's even a website called seeking.com where women use it to get money and pay their bills!
It’s a pretty severe violation of treating others as id like to be treated. Like I’m not saying it should be a crime or something but most people I know would find the behavior quite unsettling if it were happening to them.
Like having a reputation for being a bit of a cad isn’t a sentence of exile or death or something.
His career in the Democratic party may be over. Why are "reputation hits" only for men while "slut shaming" is a mortal sin?
I dont have a problem with promiscuity no matter who does it but do with dishonesty no matter who does it.
Why is one better than the other?
I’m not sure I understand. Being dishonest is wrong and honest promiscuity js neutral.
There’s nothing wrong if he was like telling everyone what was up.
https://open.substack.com/pub/louiseperry/p/diary-of-a-sugar-baby-brook-urick?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=qldfp
If you think seeking.com favors women, you should take a listen
I did that woman is full of shit lol
I think the concept of accountability is a bit lost in this conversation, because I keep seeing the word “victims” being applied to these women. Did they not freely choose to send nude photos to someone they’d never met?
This was razor-sharp. I appreciate how you held space for the emotional fallout and pushed back on the spectacle of it all. You're right—this isn’t really about Harry Sisson. It’s about the digital architecture we’re trapped inside, where humiliation is algorithmic and heartbreak gets turned into content. There’s a difference between seeking healing and seeking audience. And as you said, the political machinery—left and right—is eager to exploit personal pain as fuel. What gets lost is the humanity of everyone involved.
Also loved your line about the “decentralized blockchains for payments but no social accountability system for ghosting and cruelty.” That hit. Maybe the question isn’t just how we date, but where. Platforms built to maximize engagement aren't going to nurture trust or truth.
Thanks for saying the quiet part out loud.
Digital dating panopticon is exactly it. Really well put. It seems to me that so much of this public shaming behaviour (either these Ti kToks or "are we dating the same guy" Facebook groups) comes from a misguided belief that women hold — that they can protect themselves from being hurt. But as you said, heartbreak is inevitable. It's part of love, even in relationships that don't end. And then the belief they can avoid being hurt is disguised as "feminist politics" or "supporting other women".
Really spot on work as always.
Let us all acknowledge that this is hilarious. Harry Sisson? Yell-into-camera boy wonder Harry Sisson? Harry "My speaking cadence is so grating it shreds cheese" Sisson? This man, a devil, a rake? Playing chicks like texas hold 'em? An NBA-size roster? Snachat-slanging Sisson? Harry Sisson, West Wing Wilt Chamberlain? Harry "iceberg slim" Sisson?
Thank you for your sensible take on things, Magdalene.
i don't know if i've ever disagreed with you
Proof that we live in a misandrist culture that panders to women.
Women do this way more than men yet they barely receive this kind of backlash
When the shoe is on the other foot.
For every Harry Sisson, there are 10 women like him having a roster of several men