The U.S. 1st amendment actually does have some implications for your speech even though you’re in Europe and (presumably) not a U.S. citizen.

Your questions aren’t horrible and the do have actual answers. However, your tone suggest that you don’t actually give a fuck so it’s not worth wasting time answering them. Let me know if you were actually being genuine…

I really don’t care

Are you sure? You’d fit right in with a lot of proudly ignorant Americans… “Duh… I don’t know which I’ll proudly declare a badge of honor and commit to remaining stupid.”

Fair - added a note to my comment. Thank you.

You switched gears in the middle of your statement. Either photography from the public spaces is legal or it isn’t. The only reason I don’t consider these take-downs a first-amendment violation is because Google is providing the mechanism to do it. They legally have every right to take the picture of your house and tell you to go pound sand if you don’t like it.

Yes and some people would do away with the 1st amendment right to public photography entirely. That doesn’t make it right…

EDIT: Yes - my comment about 1st amendment only applies to U.S. I have no idea if other countries protect public photography in the same manner.

Everyone does know that the front of your house is visible from the street, right?

But it is useful to identify perspectives generally

To what purpose? We humans love to pigeon-hole everything. For example, there is no such thing as race for humans at a biological level.

You have your sexuality, I have mine, everyone has their own.

You love who you love. You have sex with whomever you have sex with. You remain human in any case. What value comes from trying to define a ‘straight perspective’?

Trump as president? and again?

We would tell you, but you really shouldn’t know…

If you have the money to spend, then probably yes.

deleted by creator

Both scenarios occur

True

I don’t think it’s [not] reasonable to say this “strongly” suggests one in particular.

Disagree. He had a choice to either hear that she was experience pain/duress or that she’s exaggerating and/or misunderstanding. In either case, if he truly cares about her then he could/should seek to understand, communicate, and (if appropriate) compromise. That he immediately dismissed her and only talked of himself makes it clear that he’s an uncaring narcissist.

I appreciate that you want to give him the benefit of the doubt. Narcissists depend on this. When they show you who they are, believe them.

If one is too shallow to understand that ‘video games’ is a stand-in for a much broader problem, leave them. They are either really fucking stupid, a narcissist, or both.

He would absolutely say that he’s dumping her and tell her how fucked up she is for even bringing HER problem to him in the first place. He wouldn’t get in any hurry to actually leave, though. The longer he can keep her in her head and wondering what is actually going on, the better.

Narcissist for being the abuser, not giving a fuck about her, and making it all about himself.

One would assume, since the guy in this case couldn’t hear the message at all, that the guy didn’t hear the prior attempts to be more nuanced.

An expert display of narcissism. He completely dismisses how she feels and then tells her that she is the problem.

More satisfied racists…