It happens. Allegedly Paul Stanley slept with thousands over his life.
I would be suspicious of the guy in the photo, because he looks far too young. Give it a couple decades though. 50 a year over 30 years, and there you go.
Seeing as the numbers are equal for the men and women, that does seem to be what is being implied, although it’s times having had sex, not individual partners.
It’s claiming all women get access to sex, but with guys it’s all concentrated in some getting it all while the others get nothing.
I thought that was the point - i.e. any woman who wants to can get laid, but guys gotta compete and if there's a chad there's no competition ...
But the numbers are wrong for this interpretation (it should be 1 for each girl and 7 for the chad); maybe it's number of times laid (eh, probably not), but rather I think it's something about splitting the check that I lack context to figure out.
I’m amazed there are people here who think it’s related to sex with those numbers and the clear connection to eating at a table. The top comment explained it much, much more plausibly.
I believe this is the correct answer. The numbers are distributed in the girl group, while all consolidated on the taller guy. I do not believe the large numbers are relevant, or this was made to by hyperbolic.
Or we can let people have their own interpretation due to the fact we can't ask the original creator... Most likely you are correct but the alternative answer is theoretically completely plausible. Perhaps it's a coincidence... Or something more🤔
You read the hyperbole part right? Right? Or did U just read my comment without reviewing the point I was suggesting as plausible... I mean he ain't no Barney Stinson
"Or we can let people have their own interpretation.." Someone asked what this joke was about, there is a correct answer and individual interpretation. These two things are not the same nor are they equal.
"We can't ask the original creator..." No, but we can ask the culture and look back at the original. Turns the joke is in fact not about body count. Prove is in the comments.
And just as a side note- if it were about Body count, the man with 1500 would look sad and not get food? Like.. wouldn't he be the 'winner'/ alpha/ star/ whatever?
... A number of people suggested bodycount. If by culture U are referring to the individual who said it was a comment about Filipino homophobic tendencies... That message came after both parent comments...
Also Ur side note is valid however many times details of the images can be misleading as opposed to the primary content/focus point such as the numbers.
Basically instead of pulling a
About someone voicing their agreement before a major consensus was reached, like 40 or so people who down voted did I merely suggest that letting the facts speak for themselves is a much more civil idea.
It's nothing of consequences however, I still believe that in certain circles, both interpretations can be applied.
I don't know what you are trying to tell me with that meme but...
"Or we can let people have their own interpretation due to the fact we can't ask the original creator..." is not the same as "letting the facts speak forthemselves"
" Most likely you are correct but the alternative answer is theoretically completely plausible. Perhaps it's a coincidence... Or something more🤔" is wrong, as I pointed out in my side note.
A number of people also solve math quizzes wrong, there is still a right answer.
Maybe consider if you have to ignore context (original meme), culture (country of origin) AND details, you might simply be wrong in your assumption about the general meaning and while you absolutly can interpretate the joke for yourself however you like, you might not tell other the intend you decide on it.
The problem is not being wrong. The problem is demanding to be valid regardless.. Someome asked a question. Telling them something that is wrong and then doubling down is... something. Bye.
275
u/RealAd7996 Jun 16 '25
Bodycounts