null @ null @lemmy.nullspace.lol

`#0000FF`

---

Read more

Posts

2

Comments

243

Joined

3 wk. ago

Ok so starting with the comment you linked: https://lemmy.world/comment/18496795

That one and the next response we covered, and they are responses to questions, but don't include the answer we're looking for.

Moving on to the next time I ask any questions is here: https://lemmy.nullspace.lol/comment/55968

Your response was:

Jesus Christ, you're somehow losing the ability to follow a conversation.

Why are you quoting yourself?

It is sexist no matter the context, I'm not using it against anyone so I'm not a bigot I'm just exampling a bigoted word. You're being obtuse. Is there a way to remove the intended insult from the hard r? No. Can you remove the intended insult from mansplaining? No. So both of those are always bigoted at times you might argue there's some moral reason to do it but that's all ex post facto.

It's sexist. If you need to see me as a bigot to get that across the so be it but you know as well as I do your argument is void of logic.

Is that it? Because if so, that's also not an answer to my question, which, again is:

Can you give me a single example of a scenario where a woman could:

• assess an interaction she had with a man,
• deem his behaviour to be "misogynistic",
• not be a sexist herself?

Why is this guy saying a datacenter generates energy? It does literally the exact opposite.

Is that true, though?

Oh darn. Okay, is it this?

I have. Many times, you refuse to accept the obvious and ignore everything I’ve said that doesn’t support your point. Why should I prove anything to you at this point, you don’t care about the point you care about winning which is why you insult me when you can’t think of an argument.

You’re a bully, so why should anyone play with you let alone me?

If so, there's nothing in there that answers my question either.

Hmm, it can't be that. The first 7 words of what you linked are:

You doesn't respond to a single one

Which is definitely not an answer to the question:

Can you give me a single example of a scenario where a woman could:

• assess an interaction she had with a man,
• deem his behaviour to be "misogynistic",
• not be a sexist herself?

Hmm, okay, I'll guess again!

Is it this?

All the parts you're intentionally ignoring to make your dipshit gotcha point.

Because that also doesn't answer my question, if so.

Yeah we get it you have a reading comprehension issue, move on.

Look who's abandoning their argument in favor of an ad hominem. What a surprise.

Let's see if I can guess what you think you wrote that answers my question!

Is it this?

Nope not at all. I said it's a bigoted word and if you use it as it's intended you're a bigot. This isn't difficult.

Because that does not answer my question.

It's funny, every time you've accused me of not answering a question, I've provided screenshots and direct quotes. Pretty disingenuous of you not to do the same.

I provided two separate answers that happen to be the same, just read the comment chain again

I believe that you believe that's true. But having read that thread, I see nothing resembling an answer to that question. And since you refuse to just quote it, I have to assume it's just buried in your unreadable grammar and mess of typos.

So let's try this again:

Can you give me a single example of a scenario where a woman could:

• assess an interaction she had with a man,
• deem his behaviour to be "misogynistic",
• not be a sexist herself?

Max comment depth reached.

I'm just going to keep asking this question until you either quote your alleged answer, or give a new one:

Can you give me a single example of a scenario where a woman could:

• assess an interaction she had with a man,
• deem his behaviour to be "misogynistic",
• not be a sexist herself?

Nowhere in that thread did you answer that question. Feel free to quote your answer and prove me wrong.

Let's try again:

Can you give me a single example of a scenario where a woman could:

• assess an interaction she had with a man,
• deem his behaviour to be "misogynistic",
• not be a sexist herself?

Great!

So can you give me a single example of a scenario where a woman could:

• assess an interaction she had with a man,
• deem his behaviour to be "misogynistic",
• not be a sexist herself?

Let's try this again.

Yes or no:

Is it possible for you to use the word "mansplain" without being a sexist, depending on the context?

So it seems like what you're trying to say is that it's possible for you to use that word without being a sexist, depending on the context?

Yes or no?

That's what I was referring to, clearly.

So your response to "That's not what I said" is "That's exactly what you're arguing?"

Even though I explained it to you right after that line?

I said your logic concludes that you are bigoted for using it.

Weird.

No it concedes that I'm using a bigoted word in a discussion about said bigoted word.

Correct. And:

When it’s a sexist term you’re going to be assigned to be sexist

So, according to you:

• The word is bigoted/sexist no matter the context
• Using a bigoted/sexist term means you are going to be assigned to be sexist
• You used a bigoted/sexist term

Pretty simple stuff, guy. No one made you say these things. You can't be mad at me because you painted yourself into a corner.

Yeah except that's me and we know I don't mean it given the plethora of context

Contradicts with:

When it’s a sexist term you’re going to be assigned to be sexist

Which is it?

"My argument is perfectly clear: it’s that your logic is flawed."

That’s exactly what you’re arguing.

Yeah no shit, that's why I said it...

No it concedes that I’m using a bigoted word

Correct, which, by your logic, makes you a sexist:

When it’s a sexist term you’re going to be assigned to be sexist just like I’m not stopping to ask the person dropping hard r’s if they think they’re racist

Hatred of marriage?

I'm not saying it isn't bigoted.

That's not what I said. Read more carefully.

I said your logic concludes that you are bigoted for using it.

How can we discuss this subject without me necessarily use it.

You probably can't, which really puts you in a corner, logically.

Using a word as an example isn't the same as using it in it's intended context.

You previously stated that it is sexist in any context. So that's irrelevant.

You didn't make an argument you made an insult that didn't even particularly make sense but it's intent was clear.

My argument is perfectly clear: it's that your logic is flawed.

That's ad hominem

Again, no it's not. An ad hominem is when you use a character attack to discredit an argument. That's not what I'm doing.

No I lost

Lol

That's really up to you.

You can either demonstrate how your logic doesn't result in you calling yourself a bigot, or concede that you are one.

You keep saying it's an ad hominem, but I'm not saying your argument is invalid because you're a bigot.

I'm saying either your logic isn't sound, or if it is, then you must conclude that you are a bigot as a result of it.

You refuse to concede that your logic isn't sound, so therefore...

No you haven't.

So you can't show me how my conclusion isn't sound based on the logic you laid out?

What position have I abandoned? I've simply followed your logic that says anyone who uses the word "manspain" in any context is a bigot.

Show me the inconsistency.