Sgt_Smudge wrote:Tiberias wrote:Ffs that's not what sgt smudge argued. They specifically said that the feeling in that moment is what matters regardless of context.
When did I say "regardless of context"? I said that their feelings were valid - that wasn't, however, irrespective of context. *You* might choose to ignore context (such as the context in your prior example about the abuser being drunk, a goalpost you very hastily shifted, I might add), but *I* didn't ever say that.
Oh boy. Let's do this!
You yourself literally said that people should never have to feel insecure in a game store when they are being looked at, NO MATTER on whether the situation gets cleared up later, because their feelings are valid in that moment. That's ignoring context! Entirely!
And you accuse me of shifting goalposts? How intellectually dishonest can you be?
Sgt_Smudge wrote:Feelings are valid, but those feelings do have a context of their own. The feelings are real, the feelings are valid, but they *do* have context. Clearly, you don't know what I was actually arguing, do you?
So the wife beater being constantly angry or horrible to his wife is valid and justifiable in the same way someone in a game store feels uncomfortable even though it might just be a misunderstanding.
Thats messed up.
No, what's more messed up is that you thought that the two could be in any way related, and you chose to make that comparison. Why on earth did you think that was a smart thing to do?
That's not the messed up part, are you kidding? Or purposefully missing the point?
The two hypothetical scenarios are not equally as bad, but the logic YOU apply to them is the same, thats the truly messed up part here. It's actually mind boggling the intellectualy dishonesty at display here.
I suggest we do the sensible thing and part ways here, I certainly can't convince you and I'm prepared to die on that hill. And honestly, after that last few posts of yours, I couldn't care less.
