• Ech@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    Demanding evidence that you have or haven’t broken your own standards doesn’t refute my point that those standards are insufficient, which I have been quite consistent on.

    I will simply reiterate that which was deflected, “Words only have power if you let them."

    It wasn’t “deflected”. It was outright rejected and called out for the victim blaming that it is.

    • lennybird@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      Then I suppose we’re at an impasse because I “outright reject” the unsubstantiated accusation claim that this is victim-blaming — both by definition of the verb, “to blame,” and given my unchallenged aforementioned argument that the target is what matters, and now finally by the admission that one is choosing to blindly reject without merit the notion that, “Words only have power if you let them.”

      I offered you the opportunity to change my view; you failed to make a compelling case.

      Have a great day.

      • Ech@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 days ago

        Funny how it’s on everyone else to convince you not to be hurtful. That it’s “my” failure that you couldn’t be swayed to be considerate of others, which was absolutely not my intent. Your stance was clear from the very beginning. I’m just hear to point it out.

        • lennybird@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          3 days ago

          In a thread whose comment section is full of opinions, I stated my own. I offered an open invitation to change my view. You clearly disagreed and intended to change my view. However, I am not obligated to change it if I remain unconvinced. That’s not “funny,” that was just what you signed up for when you responded and accepted my invitation.

          You then reassert a Circular Reasoning / Begging The Question fallacy because you are asserting a premise that has yet to be established in our argument — that is your belief that I apparently am being hurtful, but has not been established in the domain of discourse. Of course you are free to believe that. But how dare one presumes on my intentions to harm the vulnerable. Are you putting words in my mouth, too?

          I will cede on one aspect: It’s not necessarily your “failure,” insofar as the invitation to change my view. It could be one side or both side’s failure to have a productive discussion in the mutual pursuit of truth. However, I am open to accepting that it is my failure to have fully understood your argument. It wouldn’t be the first time I was wrong; nor last.

          • Ech@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 days ago

            But how dare one presumes on my intentions to harm the vulnerable. Are you putting words in my mouth, too?

            Lol. Your outright hypocrisy and double standards are astounding. Too self-centered to consider anyone’s hardship but your own.