Wedge

and the building makes it very clear that AIs were immune to the spell.

Peter: Hi, I'm Peter! Nice to meet you!

Tony: Hey, Friday. Zoom in on that building over there.

Friday: Old man protocol activated, boss.

Tony: What the fuck did you just say to me?

Tony: Friday, alert the team that I can't fly because my suit broke.

Friday: Activating, I've fallen and I can't get up protocol.

Tony: what multiplication table is this. Why are we jumping around?

Peter: wouldn't you like to know, weather boy.

(Obviously the judgement was an avalanche of 'NTA and also he's abusing you', which she agreed with, and decided to kick him out, so happy ending.)

Anyway I told my husband about this and he was outraged. "I would never do that!" he told me, furious. "I would find it adorable if you had bath snacks!"

Since then, every time I try to have a bath (which I only do as a rare treat) after about ten minutes there has been an anxious scrabbling at the bathroom door.

"Elanor!" he says. "Do you have bath snacks? Do you need anything?"

op's husband:

I'm truly sorry if this comes across as cold or brusque, because I don't mean it to, but mate. Come on. You are only reading, here, an incredibly abridged version of that story, which I recounted at speed in a post designed to get it out of the way quickly so I could focus on the bit that was actually relevant to me. It is Extremely Silly for you to think that you can spot whether it's real OR fake based on this little information, recounted third hand, with an obvious slant away from any actual details beyond whatever could be exaggerated for comedic effect for a second anecdote to have the right impact. There are ZERO details. Your tags and tone both make it clear that you think of yourself as being an incisive critic able to peel back the falsehoods of the world so that the less talented masses may be shown the truth, but Automatically Disbelieve is actually no better than Automatically Believe; neither position is actually evaluating anything. You simply CANNOT TELL based on this post, one way or the other. You just can't.

For the record, from what I remember of that story (this was years ago now), the copious details on offer were all extremely believable, because one person's "cliche" is another person's "extremely common abusive narrative that happens all the time, just with different colour hats." This post has also attracted a few people over the years who want to decry it as fake, and when pressed, it's interesting how the justification is always "No one would ever ACTUALLY *insert incredibly common abuse tactic*!" with a side order of "Who would ever ACTUALLY fall for *common abuse*?", thus making the disdain for the intelligence and integrity of abuse survivors abundantly clear. And I really wish people could stop and actually think about that when reading these tales of abuse, rather than jumping straight to "Sounds cliche, must be fake." And, perhaps, think about the problematic elements of accusing abuse survivors of faking...? Particularly on a sub-Reddit that literally began, back in the beginning, as a tool for abuse survivors to get reassurance that their abuser was wrong, and the scenario was not, in fact, their fault.

As for this:

#<- guy who feels a compulsory need to call out fake AITA stories when they show up on tumblr; #especially when they have this many cliche markers of fake AITA stories

Maybe consider the language and tone you use when you do it? Even if you'd been right, this is a very arrogant and sanctimonious approach that you've chosen when "I'm not convinced that's a true story, detail X seems a bit... fishy" would have done the trick perfectly without trying to imply the person you're talking to is an idiot who needs your enlightened vision. Which; I am actually giving benefit of the doubt here, I am genuinely assuming was NOT your intention. But that's how it comes across.