So you're circling back and doubling down on the no true scotsman fallacy. So you get to conveniently define and label what a big momma is that's nice.It was implied that in 2025, in order to even be considered big momma status, you had to be at least 85 because real big mommas were born in a certain era(s) that imbued them with certain traits that post generations didn’t receive for the most part…. No one is saying you become a big momma at the age of 85
"A real big momma is 85". Ok OG I hear you. If I say a big Momma can be younger and you saying she has to be older. How do we definitively prove what a "big momma" is OG. How can we stop this circle nikka talk?
What invalidates someone who lets say is 81 from being a big momma I would assume the 85 and 81 grew up in the same time period fate just so happend to have one die earlier. If that 81 year old was doing similar actions to the 85 year old big momma why does she get that label and not the 81?
Talk to me I'm here for it breh. Is it just because "i'm old and I say so?" If that's the case you don't got a leg to stand on. I can assert the opposite baselessly as well.