Introducing GenAI as a ‘tutor’ inserts a fundamentally irresponsible agent – an agent who cannot even potentially assume responsibility – into the co-constructive teaching and learning space, corroding the mutual responsibility that makes teaching and feedback effective. Yet the perverse response to tacit acknowledgement of the irresponsibility of GenAI tutoring systems is to expect students to assume responsibility for their ‘tutor.’ This at the very least reverses the common assumption that pedagogical responsibilities flow, at least initially, from teacher to student: it is the responsibility of the teacher to make possible a co-constructive site of mutual responsibility between teacher and students, by modelling ‘care respect’ (Zhou et al. 2021) and foregrounding their own vulnerability to feedback (Carless and Boud 2018; Carless and Winstone 2023). The assignation of responsibility to students for their GenAI ‘tutors’ should indicate that GenAI systems are not really tutors at all; they can only be called as much by disregarding the reality of GenAI and of genuine teaching. It is, again, bullshit.