32
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] FishFace@piefed.social 2 points 3 weeks ago

I don’t think there are any exceptions

Obviously you don't think there are exceptions, or at least, you don't think they're the same ones I do, otherwise we would agree. But you're not saying, for example, whether you think that the things other people think are exceptions go any way towards mitigating the wrong you believe is being done, or whether they make no difference at all. So you have again not moved the discussion forward. The point of a discussion isn't to just state your position and when someone says why they disagree, to state it again; it's to explain why you don't don't agree, in light of their reason.

If I say "killing people is wrong" and you say "I'd make an exception for self-defence", and I reply, "no, killing people is wrong," that's not a conversation. If you say, "but killing is wrong because of the harm it causes, and acting only in self defence doesn't cause harm but rather reduces it" and I say, "no, killing people is wrong without exception," no possible function of a conversation is fulfilled. Here are all the functions I can think of, apart from social (because we're not doing this to make friends, let's be real):

  1. To convince the other person that you're right (whether for personal satisfaction, or the hope that this will improve the world). I'd be failing at this, as you are, because without raising any objection to someone's reasoning, they're never going to change their mind. That reason remains valid for them and noone tried to change that.
  2. To get the other person to understand where you're coming from. Again, this is a failure: by not engaging with your reasoning about self defence, you never get the chance to understand why I think the way I do.
  3. To understand where the other person is coming from. Clearly this function is also a failure with this way of conversing.

The only thing I can imagine you succeeding at is that you just have a compulsion to state and restate your opinion when someone contradicts you. So I'd ask you to seriously think about what it is you are achieving for yourself. If it's just that compulsion, then you need to know that it's really annoying for everyone else, so please find some way to reduce that compulsion or divert it somewhere else to not piss us off. If instead you're trying to achieve one of the more reasonable goals, I'd ask you to seriously evaluate how well you're doing and whether you can bring yourself round to a different conversational style which will work better for you.

Either way it's quite clear you won't be able to do this right now. I offered you a lot of opportunities to engage, and you were immune to all of them, so I'm out - bye.

[-] velma@sh.itjust.works -2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

I explained more in detail and this is how you reply to me? By ignoring everything I said, comparing non-consensual recording to murder, and then criticizing the way I write because you believe I’m either crazy or are trying to win people over?

It’s not my job to hand hold the type of person who believes it’s ever justified to sexually harass someone as revenge.

I don’t give a single fuck if my comments piss you off. Be mad.

this post was submitted on 31 Aug 2026
32 points (100.0% liked)

Brand New Sentence

1080 readers
14 users here now

A community to post any brand new sentences you find!

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS