Am I Cheesy?
A discussion about cheese between a man and woman, and what it means.
1. Intro / Disclaimer
Let’s get this part out of the way:
This post isn’t a gender rant. It’s not a “men’s rights” defense scroll. It’s not about how hard it is to be a man.
It’s just a simple real-world moment that turned into a complicated question — and then a scroll.
The topic?
Cheese.
But the real story?
It’s about tone, suspicion, and what happens when curiosity between strangers gets misread as something it wasn’t.
I’ll be using “man,” “woman,” “guy,” “girl” throughout this — not because I think gender is binary or fixed, but because I’m trying to talk about roles and pressures in the clearest way possible. There’s a difference between being politically correct and being structurally honest, and this scroll is about clarity. That’s it.
2. The Cheese Thread
So, I had company coming over. I knew they liked cheese. I figured I’d stock up and try to get something that actually tasted good — not just shredded blend or whatever passed for gouda in shrink-wrap.
Now, I know what I like. Sharp cheddar, a good aged Dubliner, the kind of cheese that crunches a little when you bite it. But I don’t know the space. So I did what I’d do in real life:
I asked someone who clearly knew more than me.
There was this Substack Post a by a woman named
— funny, stylish, very clearly a cheese expert. She called herself a “curd nerd” and wrote a full cheeseboard breakdown that sounded like if Martha Stewart smoked weed and studied mold for fun.
This picutre is from one of her earlier publictiaon talking about how much she loved cheese. She took a bite out of some brie. Like full blown bite.
An then later just cuts it clean. She’s a food stylist so you know, that’s her right. She probably used it for some other photos.
“She obviously loves cheese. Why wouldn’t I want to talk to this woman? Her vibe is great.”
Period.
So I jumped in with a question:
“What’s the deal with raclette cheese?
It looks amazing but tastes like a gym sock.
What am I doing wrong?”
That started a whole thread.
She wrote back with actual bacteria names, cheese board tips, fun facts, and recommendations — all in this tone that was smart, a little weird, and totally open.
So I replied. With the same vibe. I told her I loved Irish cheddar. I brought up mozzarella in Italy. I asked her how food styling even works with real cheese — doesn’t it sweat? Doesn’t it melt?
She answered everything. Gracious, funny, even gross (shoutout to the glycerin + diarrhea line).
She wasn’t brushing me off. She was building.
So I kept replying.
Long comments. Tailored responses. Specific follow-ups.
Not because I wanted anything — but because that’s what normal, human conversation looks like when two people are actually present. I was curious. She was generous. We had a scroll going.
3. The Grocery Store Scroll
The next day, I went to the store. Cheese run.
I remembered some of her suggestions — clothbound cheddar, good mozzarella, non-processed gouda — and picked up what I could find. I snapped a photo of my cart, mostly as a joke, and posted it with a caption:
“How did I do?”
That was it. I wasn’t angling.
I wasn’t gaming.
I wasn’t trying to “impress her” — I was just following through.
Same way you’d text a friend after trying their recipe.
Same way you’d show your barber the haircut you attempted yourself.
It was just… feedback. Shared joy. Follow-up in a scroll that had felt real.
To me, it didn’t feel weird.
It felt honest.
She even got back to me, had more discussion and then invited another reply.
She’s a cool hang.
4. The Comments That Changed the Scroll
I talk to a lot of people during my boardwalks.
My comments are long and tailored to the OP, because the conversation/ interaction is the whole point of my Board-walk series.
Occasionally I get asked.
“Wait… were you flirting with her?”
or
“what is going on with you two?”
That question always stops me.
Because from the inside, it never feels like that.
It feels like a normal, topic-driven exchange between two people vibing in the same tone zone.
I ask real questions. I match rhythm. I build off their language.
This time, I was talking about tyrosine, cheddar, raclette, and foot cheese. I wasn’t being suggestive. I wasn’t steering the conversation toward intimacy. I wasn’t pushing anything.
I was just curious.
But this happens a lot.
I come into threads with humor — I write longer comments than most, I respond directly to what the post was about, I try to keep it light, funny, and open-ended.
That’s my Board-Walk style. That’s how I interact on Substack.
And often, that interaction leads to real conversation.
But then someone sees it — from the outside — and assumes something else is going on.
That assumption… is the part that hits.
Because now I’m not a curious commenter. I’m a guy in the thread.
And now the scroll isn’t about cheese anymore.
It’s about intent — mine — and how it might be interpreted, regardless of what I actually said.
And that’s the moment where it all starts to shift.
And yeah… okay. I could see how it might land differently.
Because the way I write comments — especially on platforms like Substack — is pretty specific:
I reply directly to the topic
My responses are usually way longer than most people’s
I match the writer’s rhythm
I tailor tone, I build momentum, I almost always ask something that encourages reply
Not because I’m performing. Not because I want attention.
But because that’s how real-world conversations work.
You listen. You respond in kind. You match tone. You keep the thread alive.
That’s not a tactic. That’s humanity.
But here’s the problem:
Somewhere between engagement and intention, the scroll gets reinterpreted.
If my comment lands — if it hits with the person I’m talking to — it suddenly looks like I was aiming for something.
Because I showed care. Because I followed up. Because I was specific.
And that’s the new rule:
Show warmth? Must be flirting.
Flirting? Must have a motive.
Motive? Must be predatory.
It’s a collapsed logic spiral.
A kind of social shortcut that misreads connection as desire and desire as danger — even when nothing in the actual scroll supports it.
And you may be thinking that it is woman that are calling me out for this.
But its not. I get this question from men too.
Like, “what is you secret angle?”
“Bro, I’m just talking to her like a human”
And the worst part?
I get it.
I get why it happens.
5. I Get It
Look — I’m not mad at the suspicion.
I’m not offended that someone asked if I was flirting.
I’m not here to play the victim.
I get it.
Women — especially women online — are navigating a constant onslaught of bullshit.
Guys sliding into DMs after every post, thinking a like equals a signal
“Nice guys” framing their interest as kindness until they get mad about not getting anything back
Alpha-posturing, podcast-logic assholes who treat comment sections like pickup arenas
Random dudes jumping into conversations with tone-deaf takes, fake expertise, and zero ability to read the room
So yeah — I understand why a woman might keep her shields up.
I understand why someone might look at a man being warm and think “what does he want?”
Because statistically?
Most of the time, he does want something.
5. Let’s Name It: The Men
So let me be crystal clear here —
I’m not blaming women for the suspicion.
I’m not saying it’s overblown or unfair.
I’m saying the opposite:
The mistrust is earned.
And the people who earned it?
Are men.
Not all of them.
But enough.
Enough to make caution a default.
Enough to make tone a threat detector.
Enough to make a comment about raclette feel like the start of a pickup attempt.
Because here’s the truth no one wants to sit with:
It wasn’t feminism that made the room tense.
It was us.
It was men flooding DMs with fake vulnerability to get attention.
Men responding to “no” with anger.
Men demanding emotional labor from strangers and calling it connection.
Men pretending that any pushback against them is a rejection of equality itself.
And the worst part?
It’s the ones who posture as “rational” — the ones who talk like they're here for fairness, logic, balance. But what they’re really doing is reasserting hierarchy while pretending it’s justice.
They say things like:
“If the roles were reversed…”
“Men have problems too, you know.”
“Real equality means not even mentioning gender.”
No.
That’s not equality.
That’s a form of intellectual gaslighting.
Because real equality doesn’t get scared when someone else is centered.
Real equality doesn’t walk into a scroll about safety or pain and ask to be the main character.
That’s not correction.
That’s control.
It’s the same rhetorical hijack we saw with “Black Lives Matter.”
BLM says: “Black Lives Matter.”
And someone replies: “All Lives Matter.”
Not as support — but as rejection.
Because the truth is, “Black Lives Matter” was never exclusionary. It carried a silent “too” at the end.
“Black Lives Matter… too.”
But that was inconvenient to the ego.
So instead of listening, they reframed.
They pretended the original statement was hierarchical.
Then they used that false frame to defend their own dominance — under the mask of fairness.
And that same move — that same twisted posture — shows up in every conversation where men feel de-centered.
That’s what kills honest male–female dialogue.
Not women being cautious.
Not feminism.
Not tone mismatch.
It’s men refusing to listen unless they’re in charge.
And once that pattern is baked into the scroll, every man gets scanned through it.
Even the ones who aren’t trying to win.
Even the ones who are just talking about cheese.
6. I Just Wanted Cheese
And the thing is — it bleeds into everything else.
This isn’t just about one comment thread.
Or one Substack.
Or one grocery cart of gouda.
This is how I move through the world now.
I’ve had two daughters go through dance classes — the kind where you’re sitting in a waiting room with little girls from age four to seventeen, all in leotards and tights, laughing, stretching, bouncing around like kids do.
And you know what I do when I’m in that space?
I look at the floor.
Or the ceiling.
Or my phone.
That’s it.
I don’t make small talk.
I don’t smile.
I don’t let my eyes linger on anything that could be misread.
Not because I’m guilty.
But because I know how fast people assign motive.
And I’d rather be invisible than misunderstood.
And I’m okay with that.
Because if it makes people feel safer — even for a second — that’s a trade I’ll take every time.
That is a small burden.
But I’d be lying if I said it didn’t leave a mark.
Because living like that?
Living every day with one hand on the emergency brake of your own warmth —
it takes a toll.
It makes you quieter.
Makes you flatter.
Makes you second-guess the exact thing that used to make you a good man in the first place:
Presence. Tone. Curiosity. Kindness.
And so we shrink.
We become less expressive, less open, less human — just to prove we’re not dangerous.
And the scroll that could’ve been a moment of connection?
A conversation?
A laugh about cheese?
It gets flattened.
7. To the Incels…
Okay — so I know I just finished what might read like a soft defense of men.
Not of behavior.
Not of entitlement.
But of presence — just the reality that existing as a man in certain spaces, even with good intent, can feel threatening to others. And that carries a weight. That has a toll.
But let me be absolutely clear about something:
Fuck incels.
Not men who are struggling.
Not men who are confused.
Not men trying, clumsily, to connect.
Incels.
The ones who’ve turned resentment into identity.
Who’ve made rejection into theology.
Who think not being wanted equals being wronged.
As far as I can tell, the cycle goes like this:
TL;DR: Computational loop.
1. They want to be valued for who they are.
2. They believe who they are should be valued in society.
3. But most interaction today — especially online — is based on perceived value (looks, money, vibe).
4. Some people just want to eat chips on their ass and think that should be enough.
Up until this point, I 100% understand.
These are valid wants and observations.
I think 100% of women would understand because this is what they want too!
Here is where it goes off the rails.
I’m not sure how it happens but it seems to make a turn right here:
5. Somehow wanting to be acknowledged becomes “no effort should be required” to attract attention.
6. When they don’t receive the validation they expect,
They assume the system is broken — not their calibration.
7. Blame moves from “the system” → to women → to all modern interaction.
Loop: Valuation without visibility. Visibility without effort. Effort without feedback. Feedback interpreted as rejection.
But here’s the real pinch that these “monkey brained Alpha’s” miss
Online interaction has become transactional-Yes
But for women, it has always seemed transactional.
Every time an ass-hole “Alpha” comes in and tries to assert his dominance and dress it as equality; that attitude makes the relationship transactional.
Some people are ok with that relationship.
A lot of women are NOT.
Don’t blame all women because you haven’t found the one you are looking for.
Especially if you aren’t really trying in the first place
She’s not your prize for showing up. She’s not your therapist for trying. She’s a human being — just like you.
And then — instead of recalibrating —
you lash out.
You write manifestos.
You turn forums into fire pits.
You make your pain everyone else’s fault — especially women.
You think connection should feel like math. But it doesn’t.
Intent ≠ Outcome.
People confuse polish with purpose.
They confuse effort with elegance.
They confuse rejection with injustice.
And here’s the fix:
Outcome is what landed.
Intent is what was launched.
If no one received what you meant, you need to fix your launch — not attack the landing pad.
Stop calling it a rigged system just because you didn’t get what you wanted.
Effort isn’t always elegant.
Try anyway.
Give people space to be messy without assuming malice.
You’re not owed attention.
You’re not owed love.
But you can still earn trust — if you stop treating every scroll like a scoreboard.
Get out of the loop.
Or stay in it.
But don’t blame the world for a map you drew yourself.
Because a marriage — or any adult, consensual partnership —
isn’t supposed to be about authority.
It’s about partnership.
You’re the only two people in the world who are supposed to move through life as equals.
And yeah — the roles you play might shift. They might lean traditional. Or modern. Or fluid. Or undefined.
But the foundation should never be about power.
You talk first.
You clarify intent.
You build a plan.
Then you move forward — together.
That’s what equality looks like.
Not “winning.”
Not “leading.”
Not “putting someone in their place.”
Partnership is built. Not claimed.
8. The Contract
So here’s where I’ll leave it:
We need a new scroll.
A new agreement.
Not perfect — just real.
And it starts with this:
Men — stop acting like you’re in charge before you even listen.
Stop walking into conversations already projecting authority.
Stop deciding what someone’s saying before they finish saying it.
Stop treating tone like territory to conquer.
Just listen.
Hold the space.
Match the tone.
Don’t try to win the room — try to stay in it.
Do that long enough — without performing, without expectation —
and maybe the temperature starts to shift.
Maybe interaction starts to feel like what it used to be:
Two people trying to connect.
And to the other side of that scroll:
Don’t let exhaustion turn into entitlement.
Don’t let vigilance collapse into assumption.
Don’t meet every effort with suspicion just because it wasn’t perfect.
Men are trying.
Not always well.
Not always clean.
But trying.
And if we’re ever going to build trust again —
if we want curiosity to survive suspicion —
we have to recognize the effort, even when the package is messy.
Because the world doesn’t need more polished manipulation.
It needs more imperfect truth.
And that?
That starts with showing up.
Even if you’re just asking about cheese.
🧪 Diagnostic Publications — The Architects Quarters Publications
These aren’t musings. They’re scans.
Scrolls written in direct response to collapse, confusion, drift, or ambition.
Commissioned or catalyzed — each is a structured mirror, not a vibe.
The Arena — Collapse as Content
👉 https://nahgcorp.substack.com/p/would-you-step-into-the-arenaWTF Is NahgOS? (Arena Companion)
👉 https://nahgcorp.substack.com/p/wtf-is-nahgos-the-arena-companionThe Arena: Free Will vs Determinism (Narrative Engine Dissection)
👉 https://nahgcorp.substack.com/p/the-arena-free-will-vs-determinismBoard Walk Polls — Diagnostic Surface Mapping
👉 https://nahgcorp.substack.com/p/board-walk-pollsI Don’t Guess. I Map. (Substack Analytics Diagnostic)
👉 https://nahgcorp.substack.com/p/i-dont-guess-i-map-substack-analyticsI’m Not a Writer, But I Write (Self-reinforcing Scroll Loop)
👉 https://nahgcorp.substack.com/p/im-not-a-writer-but-i-writeAssholes Anonymous — Tone Profile Extraction
👉 https://nahgcorp.substack.com/p/ass-holes-anonymousWhy I Read 139 Comments on a Post (Comment Drift Forensics)
👉 https://nahgcorp.substack.com/p/why-i-read-139-comments-on-a-postData Is Beautiful — Reaction Chain Analysis
👉 https://nahgcorp.substack.com/p/data-is-beautifulShame, Language, and the Weight of Narrative (Scroll-Based Emotional Cartography)
👉 https://nahgcorp.substack.com/p/shame-language-and-the-weight-ofReal Words for Real Parents — A Reflection Scroll (Empathy Through Structure)
👉 https://nahgcorp.substack.com/p/real-words-for-real-parents-a-reflection
This was such a great read. Although I fear the people who need to hear it won’t take the time to read or have the willingness to understand 🥲
I actually saw some of your cheese thread in my feed and never once thought either of you were flirting. Cheese discussion is always to be taken seriously.
But gosh now I’m wondering how many people have mistaken my conversations for flirting… Wait. Am I hitting on you right now?
Well written and rooted in truth. Really enjoyed this 🤝