“It’s Called Gaslighting”: Women Recalled Their Worst First Dates—From Excessive Farting to Going to Jail 271 Times 33%

By Reni60%

8/2/2026, 4:23:00 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 21 faulty reasoning types, including Availability Heuristic, Self-Serving Bias, and Representativeness Heuristic, with Anecdotal as the most egregious example at 33.6% saturation with 172 hits. Analysis detected 719 faulty-reasoning hits from 512 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 34% and a BS Rank of 33% (20,738 of 30,584 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 67.80% of the article peer group.

Women on Reddit recalled their worst first dates that made them certain there wouldn’t be a second. 
The stories were simply wild! 
Redditors shared stories of excessive flatulence and jail time to weird fetishes. 
The renowned SubReddit ‘Ask Reddit’ has featured yet another mind-boggling question that prompted a wide range of wild stories. 
The user @AggressiveAccess7386 asked women on Reddit to recall the moment they knew there wouldn’t be a second date. 
Women of Reddit: What did a guy do on the first date that instantly made you decide there wouldn’t be a second? 
by u/AggressiveAccess7386 in AskReddit 
With over 1,300 upvotes and the same number of comments, the stories were nearly endless. 
A user kicked off the thread by recounting the time their date “farted a bunch” and lowered the lights. 
This triggered a banter among Redditors about the situation with lighting. 
One user mentioned, “Classic mistake, you lower the lights first so you can’t tell where the farts are coming from.” 
Another responded to the comment, adding, “And since it’s dark and she can’t see where the farts are coming from, you convince her that she’s the culprit. 
It’s called gaslighting.” 
The fart jokes and puns continued on the thread, but not for long. 
Another Redditor mentioned that her date apparently went to jail 271 times. 
The user started off another thread and told users that for each time he went to prison, it wasn’t his fault. 
by u/AggressiveAccess7386 from discussion 
Redditors on the thread were unable to fathom the sheer number of times the date had allegedly been to prison. 
Although many joked about it, a user claimed that it was actually a valid conversation to have. 
They explained, “In fairness, when you’re the type of person who regularly gets arrested, dealing with that and the legal issues is a big part of your life and occupies a lot of space in your mind…” 
Women on Reddit Had Other Weird Dates Too… 
As previously mentioned, the SubReddit comment section was flooded with a range of answers apart from farting on a date and being forthcoming about jail time. 
A woman recalled her date indirectly informing her about a feet fetish. 
by u/AggressiveAccess7386 from discussion 
The user mentioned that he initially stated he wasn’t into feet and wouldn’t have stayed on the date with her if he did. 
But at the same time, he looked at the woman’s feet. 
To which she thought that perhaps her feet weren’t cute enough for him.” 
One commenter described a date who arrived with his entire family in tow, while another said her date brought kitchenware and personal belongings  leading, according to the post, to the landlord becoming involved in the situation. 
Sign up to receive the Daily Dot’s Internet Insider newsletter for urgent news from the frontline of online. 
The post “It’s Called Gaslighting”: Women Recalled Their Worst First Dates—From Excessive Farting to Going to Jail 271 Times appeared first on The Daily Dot . 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 5.3%Reni: 3.1%dailydot.com: 3.5%Confirmation Bias5.3%This article: 0.0%Reni: 0.8%dailydot.com: 0.8%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 15.6%Reni: 3.3%dailydot.com: 3.5%Availability Heuristic15.6%This article: 7.4%Reni: 0.8%dailydot.com: 1.0%Representativeness Heuristic7.4%This article: 0.0%Reni: 0.4%dailydot.com: 0.6%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Reni: 0.6%dailydot.com: 1.3%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 3.9%Reni: 3.8%dailydot.com: 4.1%Framing Effect3.9%This article: 0.0%Reni: 0.7%dailydot.com: 0.5%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Reni: 0.3%dailydot.com: 0.5%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Reni: 0.2%dailydot.com: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 7.2%Reni: 1.1%dailydot.com: 1.1%Optimism Bias7.2%This article: 3.9%Reni: 0.6%dailydot.com: 1.1%Pessimism Bias3.9%This article: 6.8%Reni: 7.6%dailydot.com: 7.5%Negativity Bias6.8%This article: 8.6%Reni: 1.7%dailydot.com: 0.9%Self-Serving Bias8.6%This article: 6.4%Reni: 1.9%dailydot.com: 2.2%Fundamental Attribution Error6.4%This article: 0.0%Reni: 0.3%dailydot.com: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Reni: 0.9%dailydot.com: 1.2%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Reni: 0.6%dailydot.com: 1.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Reni: 2.4%dailydot.com: 1.8%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Reni: 0.2%dailydot.com: 0.3%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Reni: 0.0%dailydot.com: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Reni: 0.6%dailydot.com: 0.6%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Reni: 0.3%dailydot.com: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Reni: 0.2%dailydot.com: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Reni: 0.8%dailydot.com: 1.7%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Reni: 0.4%dailydot.com: 0.3%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Reni: 0.8%dailydot.com: 1.6%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 0.0%Reni: 1.0%dailydot.com: 1.8%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Reni: 0.2%dailydot.com: 0.6%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.6%Reni: 0.1%dailydot.com: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.6%This article: 3.7%Reni: 5.5%dailydot.com: 7.6%Hasty Generalization3.7%This article: 0.0%Reni: 0.1%dailydot.com: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 2.9%Reni: 3.5%dailydot.com: 2.0%Bandwagon2.9%This article: 3.3%Reni: 7.2%dailydot.com: 5.7%Appeal to Emotion3.3%This article: 5.3%Reni: 0.9%dailydot.com: 0.8%Begging the Question5.3%This article: 0.0%Reni: 1.0%dailydot.com: 1.2%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 4.1%Reni: 0.1%dailydot.com: 0.2%Tu Quoque4.1%This article: 0.0%Reni: 1.1%dailydot.com: 1.5%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Reni: 0.0%dailydot.com: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Reni: 0.1%dailydot.com: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 33.6%Reni: 7.0%dailydot.com: 6.5%Anecdotal33.6%This article: 0.0%Reni: 0.0%dailydot.com: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 6.4%Reni: 1.3%dailydot.com: 1.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)6.4%This article: 0.0%Reni: 0.0%dailydot.com: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Reni: 0.1%dailydot.com: 0.2%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 3.9%Reni: 0.4%dailydot.com: 0.2%Personal Incredulity3.9%This article: 4.5%Reni: 0.2%dailydot.com: 0.1%Special Pleading4.5%This article: 0.0%Reni: 0.0%dailydot.com: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Reni: 2.4%dailydot.com: 4.2%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 3.3%Reni: 2.4%dailydot.com: 2.7%Quote-first Misdirection3.3%This article: 0.0%Reni: 3.2%dailydot.com: 3.4%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%Reni: 0.6%dailydot.com: 1.4%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Reni: 0.0%dailydot.com: 0.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Reni: 0.1%dailydot.com: 0.6%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 3.5%Reni: 1.7%dailydot.com: 1.6%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…3.5%

512 words analyzed.

Speakers

No attributed speakers were identified in this analysis.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.