WraithGear

didn’t do that. that was what you invented to argue against. honestly you already admitted to dishonesty and no one other then us cares very much at this point. you have made it very hard for those who would have otherwise agreed with you to follow along. this is getting so bad i might start being accused of fighting a sock puppet to make my argument look good by comparison. you gave up the ghost hours ago

did… did you just make a eric cartman quote? did you think that sounded like a mature, and good idea when you wrote it?

constructive criticism? from you? which if i remember, said you didn’t even have to interact with my post at all? you assert victim blaming, not demonstrated it. it is not unreasonable to not like the fact that she made bad choices that will prevent the rapist from faceing justice. however justifiable a reasoning. and it’s also not unreasonable to not like the using of rape as a political weapon. but you were never interested in arguing about that. you invented what you needed to get what you wanted, a chance to virtue signal. and were in no way interested in clarification.

noted ;)

“ok”

-velma

oh i thought you were done, but you[‘re] back with the exact same dishonesty on repeat. hoping a slight change in venue would get a different result?

about what?

that is an open admission to everything i accused you of, and you fall back on to an appeal to mob rule, it’s lazy and dishonest. and quite frankly i can live with negative votes. it does not invalidate my core argument of, i don’t like this whole thing.

“You’re under the mistaken impression that I respect you enough to have a fruitful discussion on this topic with you. 

I don’t. “ -velma

why should i take you seriously? you still lie about the meaning of my post and you never had any intention to say anything meaningful, and have resorted to thought ending cliches and straw mans”

so then you never had any substance, and were only looking to stir hate. you invented a person and post to hate and to virtue signal for internet points. you have not said anything respectable in any of your posts

you have brought nothing but unjustified ad hominem attacks, and now thought terminating cliches. you have a problem with my understanding of victim responses to harm, but you are going to have to actually deal with what i said, instead of making up your own, because i don’t get to put words in your mouth to find out

it was intended as a question for confirmation. it directly asked them if they agree with the framing, because i am having to do most of the leg work here amid ad hominem attacks.

you in particular have been straw manning my posts because you have not actually said anything of substance.

then make your arguments about what i am acting saying so i don’t have to guess.