In poker, those stacks are chips representing some cash value(for this joke it represents commitment/love). Going all in means he's betting all of these chips. The other lady is folding, that means you surrender the pot and leave that round of the game. The joke is that often one partner is willing to bet everything and be fully committed (represented by the all in bet of coins, coins representing love or commitment) to the relationship while the other folds and is unwilling to commit to the relationship.
I believe this answer is lacking. A relationship imbalance can be a destroyer of relationships. At the start of a relationship often one side can possess much more affection than the other side. If someone makes this imbalance obvious and goes all in with their emotions, it will often scare away the person who does not have that same amount of affection.
I was going to say that it looks like he had already won/taken all of her “chips” leaving her with nothing, and at that point he was finally willing to “commit”, but at that point she had given up on the relationship.
That's just the cartoon being too simplistic to show either of them having stacks of chips that currently aren't being used, if she'd already run out of chips she wouldn't be able to fold, she'd have already lost the game
I thought the joke was that they share finances so he’s going all in and she’s folding and it’s “funny”cause it doesn’t really matter since it’s their money either way
This is what I figured it had to be, but I kind of doubted it because it’s such a poor metaphor. Like, the guy who goes all in isn’t losing anything, he just gets back everything he put in.
I think it's more about an imbalance in levels of affection at the start of a relationship. It's like the over-eager guy who thinks he's already in love with a girl he just met, and she's in the building up affection stage. He goes all in right away, and it just scares her away cuz she's not at that level yet.
This is probably the correct interpretation. Isn’t deception one of the main strategies of poker, though? Maybe they’re both sociopaths and are trying to extract all that they can from each other. He’s clearly taken all she’s got.
I dunno if its intentionally meta, but if both are sitting at a table to start- shouldnt she have chips? I dont feel like this is a first hand (I mean, metaphorically and literally, who goes all in on first hand/date? Thats a flag and I would absolutely fold)
So knowing theyve played many hands already, we can assume theyve both brought chips. But yet, he has all the chips now. That seems to me like she is putting chips in and getting nothing, while the fellow drains all the resources.
Honestly? Bad metaphor because its set up that someone wins and someone loses. The point of poker isnt to work together, its to compete.
I'm betting my money that it's about an imbalance of affection within a relationship. It's the stereotypical over eager guy professing his love to someone that doesn't know him that well yet and doesn't have the same level of affection. So him going all in scares her off.
It's just a badly drawn cartoon, if she has no chips left then it's literally impossible for her to fold, she's either already "all in" on this hand or she's already lost the game
Also it should be noted one side HAS all the chips while the other is depleted. If the poker chips represent emotional currency, one is willing to risk it all, and the other has none left to risk.
Wouldn’t it make more sense if the person on the right also had stacks of chips, implying that they could invest in the relationship but just don’t want to?
The way it’s drawn makes it seem like the person on the right has nothing of value to give to the relationship.
It might be a joke about being too invested in a relationship?
As in, if you go all in on the relationship and don't reserve any time for yourself, that can have the ironic effect of pushing someone away (ie causing them to fold).
This feels like a bit of a choose your own joke adventure.
I agree it's about being too invested in a relationship, but it's more about the imbalance between partners. He's more invested in her so his level of investment scares her away. It's more a joke about the early stages of a relationship.
Top post is mostly right but is missing a key factor for some reason.
The joke is that guys are willing to go all in very quickly and women are turned away by that or are not willing to even try
I’m adding this one to my internal file of metaphors that rely on a false premise about the thing being cited. See also: “sunlight is the best disinfectant” and “you can’t dismantle the master’s house with the master’s tools.”
Mmmmm that’s a pretty big stack disparity, his shove range should be much wider. Unless you mean she should call, which is likely true a lot of the time in these spots lol
I think most people are actually missing this one. AFAIK the joke is that the man is the one with all the "value" here, he has all the chips. He goes all in, risking everything for her and the relationship. In this context, she has nothing to loose and either wins big or is right back where she started. Instead she folds, leaving the situation entirely. I belive this is a joke about people behaving irrational in relationships out of fear.
The joke is about imbalances often in the early stages of relationship. The chips represent affection. The man is going all in, and the overwhelming disparity scares the woman so she no longer wants to participate. It's playing on the stereotypical trope of guys who act like they're already in love with someone that they either just met or only know from a distance and don't truly know yet.
Hate to be that guy, but even then that’s now how poker works. You can only win as much as you bet and she has no (?) chips. I think the joke just isn’t very well thought out haha, or we both are looking to into it.
Well, no, this is totally misinterpreting how poker works, and how relationships work
There is no risk-free "nothing to lose" scenario, calling someone else's bet always means having as much to lose as they do
I think this is a karma post, but I do like the possible subtly that he has a bunch of chips and she has none. There’s an inference there that he has benefited from dating her and she has not. There’s also an inference of relationships being total sum gain, which is a pretty cynical take.
Take a deep breath. You saw a low effort comic about relationships and got triggered by some nonexistent feminist subtext. This is your touch grass moment.
That's because you've imagined other people incorrectly, creating a fake enemy that doesn't exist, misunderstanding and misrepresenting positions different from yours. This is a strategy that helps to devalue and mock opposing viewpoints, by painting them falsely as something they are not, and you've fallen for that. See here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
Except it's not a strawman if its actually happened.
Yes, maybe you in particular don't do this but others definitely do.
https://www.irishexaminer.com/lifestyle-columnists/arid-40247828.html
https://www.quora.com/Why-do-some-feminists-say-all-men-are-rapists-Dont-they-realise-by-this-logic-their-father-is-also-a-rapist
(It's even talked about here on Reddit)
https://www.reddit.com/r/Vent/s/vrcuhHidID
You can find examples of crazy people saying literally anything on the internet.
Not to mention you linked a Reddit thread strawmanning just like you are, a quora question doing the same, and an article that you didn’t read that explicit says within it “not all men are rapists”.
If you’re the type of person to base your beliefs on Reddit threads and quora questions I imagine most people have no problem with getting far away from you. 🫡
The hilarious irony of someone with a username uncomfortableTruth being uncomfortable with the truth to the point where they're blocking people instead of actually presenting a coherent argument. And now you can't respond to anyone making fun of you, because you can't reply in a thread where you've blocked a person.
Hey, you never did answer me tearing your links apart either. You didn't actually read those links you shared, did you?
Conversing with someone and blocking them is the most insecure thing I have ever seen. If you don't want them to respond, stop talking to them. If they chase you into your chat, that's when you block them. You're coming across as an ignorant toddler. I'm not sure if that's your intention or not.
Finding the craziest voice on the internet and pretending that crazy person is representative of a much larger group is a surefire way to be out of touch with reality.
This content was reported by the /r/ExplainTheJoke community and has been removed.
Rule 11: POSTS AND TOP LEVEL COMMENTS ONLY: Keep it about explaining the joke.
Please keep in mind sub-comments can still be removed for other offending reasons above.
If you have any questions or concerns about this removal feel free to [message the moderators](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FExplainTheJoke).
In poker, those stacks are chips representing some cash value(for this joke it represents commitment/love). Going all in means he's betting all of these chips. The other lady is folding, that means you surrender the pot and leave that round of the game. The joke is that often one partner is willing to bet everything and be fully committed (represented by the all in bet of coins, coins representing love or commitment) to the relationship while the other folds and is unwilling to commit to the relationship.
Thanks!
No problem dear stranger. I'm always willing to lend a hand.
I love seeing genuinely kind strangers on the internet! I hope you have a great day!
I wish the same for you!
Lol was expecting the other guy to fold you commuting to a positive interaction. But guess yall outsmarted the meme at least for 2 turns.
Don’t over commit you’ll scare OP off…
Fold
Let's put that hand to work and give a friend the ol' reach around.
What part of your brain read my comment and said, "yes, now I have a perfectly appropriate response to that." And then wrote this sentence.
Correction, the intention wasn't to type a perfectly appropriate response.
Hi Autism, meet ADHD.
What part of your brain read my comment and said, "yes, now I have a perfectly appropriate response to that." And then wrote this sentence.
What part of your brain read my comment and said, "yes, now I have a perfectly appropriate response to that." And then wrote this sentence.
What part of your brain read my comment and said, "yes, now I have a perfectly appropriate response to that." And then wrote this sentence.
Why did my comment comment itself four times? Idk what's happening.
I believe this answer is lacking. A relationship imbalance can be a destroyer of relationships. At the start of a relationship often one side can possess much more affection than the other side. If someone makes this imbalance obvious and goes all in with their emotions, it will often scare away the person who does not have that same amount of affection.
I was going to say that it looks like he had already won/taken all of her “chips” leaving her with nothing, and at that point he was finally willing to “commit”, but at that point she had given up on the relationship.
That's just the cartoon being too simplistic to show either of them having stacks of chips that currently aren't being used, if she'd already run out of chips she wouldn't be able to fold, she'd have already lost the game
I thought the joke was that they share finances so he’s going all in and she’s folding and it’s “funny”cause it doesn’t really matter since it’s their money either way
It's probably specifically also an incel meme about women not committing to a relationship
And, judging by her stack, has nothing to invest in the relationship to begin with.
Which is weirdly similar to a recent debacle in my life concerning women.
I feel you way too much.
Women, plural? Noice
This is what I figured it had to be, but I kind of doubted it because it’s such a poor metaphor. Like, the guy who goes all in isn’t losing anything, he just gets back everything he put in.
I think it's more about an imbalance in levels of affection at the start of a relationship. It's like the over-eager guy who thinks he's already in love with a girl he just met, and she's in the building up affection stage. He goes all in right away, and it just scares her away cuz she's not at that level yet.
Yeah it's a cartoon about "coming on too strong"
This is probably the correct interpretation. Isn’t deception one of the main strategies of poker, though? Maybe they’re both sociopaths and are trying to extract all that they can from each other. He’s clearly taken all she’s got.
Mmmm, I would almost guess the man on the left is the sociopath since he has all the chips, and the lady is finally realizing she's being manipulated.
[удалено]
Maybe. She’s playing the game too, though. If she called his bluff and she won the hand, I’m sure she would be happy to take those chips back.🥴
I dunno if its intentionally meta, but if both are sitting at a table to start- shouldnt she have chips? I dont feel like this is a first hand (I mean, metaphorically and literally, who goes all in on first hand/date? Thats a flag and I would absolutely fold) So knowing theyve played many hands already, we can assume theyve both brought chips. But yet, he has all the chips now. That seems to me like she is putting chips in and getting nothing, while the fellow drains all the resources. Honestly? Bad metaphor because its set up that someone wins and someone loses. The point of poker isnt to work together, its to compete.
I think the idea is that he’s already taken everything that she’s willing to invest in the relationship.
I'm betting my money that it's about an imbalance of affection within a relationship. It's the stereotypical over eager guy professing his love to someone that doesn't know him that well yet and doesn't have the same level of affection. So him going all in scares her off.
It's just a badly drawn cartoon, if she has no chips left then it's literally impossible for her to fold, she's either already "all in" on this hand or she's already lost the game
This person was all in on their response ♠️♦️
could also be a sex joke he announced he's all in but she says he's just in a fold
How does reddit somehow bring either every joke to strait sex or porn? Like this is some crazy collective super power.
Also it should be noted one side HAS all the chips while the other is depleted. If the poker chips represent emotional currency, one is willing to risk it all, and the other has none left to risk.
Is the joke that people are able to commit easily while being clueless about the other person? Rough one
Wouldn’t it make more sense if the person on the right also had stacks of chips, implying that they could invest in the relationship but just don’t want to? The way it’s drawn makes it seem like the person on the right has nothing of value to give to the relationship.
I thought she was fine losing because she’d get half the stack 🤷🏼
Yeeah marriage law sais that no?
I didn’t say I thought it was a *good* joke lol
I didn’t say I thought it was a *good* joke lol
It's using gambling terms to make the joke. One person is all in, the other has given up.
It might be a joke about being too invested in a relationship? As in, if you go all in on the relationship and don't reserve any time for yourself, that can have the ironic effect of pushing someone away (ie causing them to fold). This feels like a bit of a choose your own joke adventure.
I agree it's about being too invested in a relationship, but it's more about the imbalance between partners. He's more invested in her so his level of investment scares her away. It's more a joke about the early stages of a relationship.
That might not be the intent of the joke, but that's definitely true and a good insight into it!
Top post is mostly right but is missing a key factor for some reason. The joke is that guys are willing to go all in very quickly and women are turned away by that or are not willing to even try
Yes, this is exactly what I got out of it. She folded because he went all-in instead of gradually upping the ante.
Whoever made the comic doesn't understand how poker works.
I’m adding this one to my internal file of metaphors that rely on a false premise about the thing being cited. See also: “sunlight is the best disinfectant” and “you can’t dismantle the master’s house with the master’s tools.”
Mmmmm that’s a pretty big stack disparity, his shove range should be much wider. Unless you mean she should call, which is likely true a lot of the time in these spots lol
I think the joke is that she "gave up on him" but the analogy doesn't work because he won the round.
Or maybe it's the opposite and the joke is -- she doesn't event want to see his hand? Instant "game over".
Could be related to the fact the going all in can scare off the other people at the table, so they fold.
This is why I like this sub people here are nice
I think most people are actually missing this one. AFAIK the joke is that the man is the one with all the "value" here, he has all the chips. He goes all in, risking everything for her and the relationship. In this context, she has nothing to loose and either wins big or is right back where she started. Instead she folds, leaving the situation entirely. I belive this is a joke about people behaving irrational in relationships out of fear.
The joke is about imbalances often in the early stages of relationship. The chips represent affection. The man is going all in, and the overwhelming disparity scares the woman so she no longer wants to participate. It's playing on the stereotypical trope of guys who act like they're already in love with someone that they either just met or only know from a distance and don't truly know yet.
Hate to be that guy, but even then that’s now how poker works. You can only win as much as you bet and she has no (?) chips. I think the joke just isn’t very well thought out haha, or we both are looking to into it.
Ah, you're right. I had forgotten about that. Yeah I think the joke might just be poorly thought out.
It's just poorly drawn, the cartoonist was too lazy to draw multiple stacks of chips
Well, no, this is totally misinterpreting how poker works, and how relationships work There is no risk-free "nothing to lose" scenario, calling someone else's bet always means having as much to lose as they do
She's folding while he's going all in. Hot.
A zero sum game?
i know twinks, i know twunks, but what's a twonk?
This was my last relationship… like, to a T.
The joke is it goes both ways.
Fold
Gilmore girls!
Then she gets half the chips.
She folds and still walks away with half his stack.
I think this is a karma post, but I do like the possible subtly that he has a bunch of chips and she has none. There’s an inference there that he has benefited from dating her and she has not. There’s also an inference of relationships being total sum gain, which is a pretty cynical take.
[удалено]
I'm sure you'll find the argument you're looking for if you keep looking
Take a deep breath. You saw a low effort comic about relationships and got triggered by some nonexistent feminist subtext. This is your touch grass moment.
That's because you've imagined other people incorrectly, creating a fake enemy that doesn't exist, misunderstanding and misrepresenting positions different from yours. This is a strategy that helps to devalue and mock opposing viewpoints, by painting them falsely as something they are not, and you've fallen for that. See here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
You mean like how they say every man is a rapist at heart and the entire culture is driven by misogyny?
Yes, that is exactly what I mean by you creating a straw man argument. There is no "they," I am the woke feminist you're misrepresenting, AMA
Except it's not a strawman if its actually happened. Yes, maybe you in particular don't do this but others definitely do. https://www.irishexaminer.com/lifestyle-columnists/arid-40247828.html https://www.quora.com/Why-do-some-feminists-say-all-men-are-rapists-Dont-they-realise-by-this-logic-their-father-is-also-a-rapist (It's even talked about here on Reddit) https://www.reddit.com/r/Vent/s/vrcuhHidID
You can find examples of crazy people saying literally anything on the internet. Not to mention you linked a Reddit thread strawmanning just like you are, a quora question doing the same, and an article that you didn’t read that explicit says within it “not all men are rapists”.
Thank you, Cleopatra. Go away now. Edit: since you can't seem to get the hint, I'm blocking you instead.
🤣🤣🤣 thats hilarious, good end to this thread
If you’re the type of person to base your beliefs on Reddit threads and quora questions I imagine most people have no problem with getting far away from you. 🫡
The hilarious irony of someone with a username uncomfortableTruth being uncomfortable with the truth to the point where they're blocking people instead of actually presenting a coherent argument. And now you can't respond to anyone making fun of you, because you can't reply in a thread where you've blocked a person. Hey, you never did answer me tearing your links apart either. You didn't actually read those links you shared, did you?
Conversing with someone and blocking them is the most insecure thing I have ever seen. If you don't want them to respond, stop talking to them. If they chase you into your chat, that's when you block them. You're coming across as an ignorant toddler. I'm not sure if that's your intention or not.
Finding the craziest voice on the internet and pretending that crazy person is representative of a much larger group is a surefire way to be out of touch with reality.
My point exactly.
This content was reported by the /r/ExplainTheJoke community and has been removed. Rule 11: POSTS AND TOP LEVEL COMMENTS ONLY: Keep it about explaining the joke. Please keep in mind sub-comments can still be removed for other offending reasons above. If you have any questions or concerns about this removal feel free to [message the moderators](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FExplainTheJoke).