Nope, let me explain.
As
@thereheis identifies,
@GiGi applies a double standard in her black-and white comparisons, which she deceptively neither recognizes nor concedes in any of her replies (this may be ignorance, but I think it's dishonesty). Instead he/she twice ignores the accusations and says, "we agree", which isn't remotely true as the posts go. To expound,
@thereheis identifies the "cacs protect individual black females" argument GiGi uses to counterargue thereheis' "where is the cac protest at, i love they loved yall" as a duplicitous and dishonest attempt to refute thereheis' claim. In truth, the "cacs protect individual black females" claim is merely an irrelevant "similar-but-different" deflection. In other words, a red herring. The troll tries to use the deflection as a way to undermine the fact that thereheis is right and the overwhelmingly majority of cacs don't give a shyt about blk females like they do about white or other women, which is why there's no palpable outrage (this fact is obvious to all sane people, but not so to the likes of GiGi). But instead of conceding the obvious,
@GiGi resorts to red herring and double standard fallacies to silently distract and undermine thereheis' with hasty generalization irrelevancy. The troll only succeeds further implicate itself as malevolent (in which case reason is futile) or stupid (in which case reason is futile).
Going back to the different standard issue, the fact GiGi applies a double standard to the same question with different groups--substitute "black" for "cac" when it comes to the question of why X males aren't outraged and GiGi attacks the former while excusing the latte with red herring bullshyt--is evidence of racialized cognitive dissonance delusion (involuntary stupidity) or plain intellectual dishonesty (voluntary malevolence) . This dichotomy in standards--where a person always attacks black men and defends/excuses cacs for the same behaviour--is akin to the ignorance white racists typically show.