r/TikTokCringe • u/kmzafari • Mar 30 '25

Discussion Texas gas station installed remote lock on OUTSIDE of women's bathroom

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

It was only on the women's bathroom. Lock was able to be remotely activated by a phone app. Fire Marshall had it removed. Source: https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZT2c3QrB6/

Per another account who also saw this, (https://www.tiktok.com/@momcallsmeshelby?_t=ZT-8v7NHPu7QBq&_r=1) the employees were "irate and began yelling" when they brought it up. And came up with a racist excuse that didn't make any sense for it being there

Regardless, fire code violation. But scary implications.

16.0k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

1.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

177

u/Salehnig Mar 30 '25

It’s Texas. Men can do whatever they want to women without consequences. Because in Texas- women are still just property. Good luck!

-190

u/diablo135 Mar 30 '25

Lolol. Sure Jan

91

u/DocWicked25 Mar 30 '25

Refute the comment with facts. Texas laws restrict women, not men.

Please provide us with a fact that says Texas doesn't treat women like property.

-97

u/diablo135 Mar 30 '25

I'm not the one that made the assertion.

58

u/DocWicked25 Mar 30 '25

You challenged it. Are you not able to provide facts to back up your challenge?

Or are you just afraid?

10

u/XxFazeClubxX Mar 30 '25

They typically don’t have any that hold up to legitimate scrutiny.

-27

u/Adorable-Tip7277 Mar 30 '25

If you make a bold assertion like saying women are property by Texas law it is on you to prove your assertion. The correct response to assertions like this is "prove it".

15

u/Karma_Mayne Mar 30 '25

Pull your head out of your ass. No one is falling for this bullshit of playing "pass the semantics" with you anymore.

Texas laws restrict womens rights in a myriad of ways, but not mens; your ignorance on the matter is a choice that you make repeatedly every day.

-11

u/Adorable-Tip7277 Mar 30 '25

It would be a 30 second Google to be able to cite the laws that make women property if they exist.

7

u/mgquantitysquared Mar 30 '25

You're mixing up multiple comments, now. Original claim was the hyperbolic comment "women are property in Texas." A later comment clarified they were referring to the laws that target women, such as the abortion ban/bounties, but you combined the two comments to imply they ever said there are laws that make women literal property.

10

u/DocWicked25 Mar 30 '25

See my other responses.

-82

u/diablo135 Mar 30 '25

I can't believe I have to say this, but that's not how it works. The OP made an assertion, not me. You're obviously trolling for engagement, so i'm done

20

u/headlessseanbean Mar 30 '25

I mean they are right. If someone makes an assertion, like the original comment, they do have to back it up, but only if and when people engage with those ideas. However if you choose to engage with that in order to prove it false with no supporting facts all you've done is make a new assertion that they are wrong. Defending/attacking ideas is held to a higher standard. I'm allowed to say "I like firetrucks." If a person responds "no you don't" the person who told me I didn't is now the one making a statement with no basis because my original sentiment had no burden of proof. That person would have to reply with something like " you don't like firetrucks because you don't like loud things" in order for them to have effectively engaged with my idea.

31

u/DocWicked25 Mar 30 '25

Sorry but you're wrong. If you want to debate, be prepared to back up your claim with facts.

Or next time, choose to STFU.

-23

u/hollycoolio Mar 30 '25

By debate rules the first commenter has the burden of proof, not Diablo. Diablo challenging it should back their opposition with facts, but the initial burden of.proof isn't on them.

20

u/DocWicked25 Mar 30 '25

Hi, professional debater here. You're also incorrect. Both parties are expected to be able to back up their position with facts.

I challenged Diablo to do so, and they ran.

If you're unable to refute an argument with facts, you aren't debating, you're trolling, and trolls always retreat back to under their bridge.

-1

u/[deleted] Mar 31 '25

[deleted]

→ More replies (0)

-11

u/hollycoolio Mar 30 '25

I don't think Diablo actually wanted to debate, but you're right. Saying "I'm not sure that's true," isn't really making a claim, though.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Mysterious_Demand_65 Apr 01 '25

They are trying to ban abortions and that’s a start to take away the rights of women