the reader's mind's eye must know ahead of time.

the very lens of the reading eye, with enough with enough skill, will recognize the 'cuckoldry' sensation. an internally sound work (the provision, the strength, the thing which should thusly purchase what it wants, claim profit, and take) is instead inverted, used to sell, and interstitially inserts white-knighting to submit. the work provides submission (an oxymoron) to the externally invalid argument foundation building components (presumption of maleness, aka The Good Cocks).

The reader must know ahead of time that the claims of Betterness are hollow. Much like the frame of the child which sees only itself, like the frame of a homeless mah-dick hobo which has nothing of self to give, like the frame of the A-rab arabic "manly" bearded manly man (in this case). All appear, to plants, as "alpha" - but are so only in shell, in simulation, in poverty. All that they have is dependency, and an extreme form at that, with simulated independence to appear otherwise. The use of 'gaul' is essential to selling this; the 'otherness' to the reader (aka ignorance) is relied heavily upon. The reader simply doesn't know, much like the author. All arabic societies are parasites on the west. Always have been, to the point of literal slavery.

As such, this is what you're looking for, but the result is not visible to you. The lens of eyes instantly self segregate, there is no discussion in actuality: it's pretty fucking dead obvious. So the commenters, the ones who pick up any piece and run with it, just don't know: they think theirs is normal.

any sub-decent writer will, like that of the unconscious, like that of a child, like that of a hobo, set the frame-positive and frame-negative of an argument. no piece, no side, no 'positive' nor 'negative' is actually valid: all are built on childishly presumed founding components.

in the shortest words: crazy isn't right. it isn't wrong. it's just plain crazy. the reader must know.