|
|
|
|
|
by DropInIn
1079 days ago
|
|
> They aren't all degenerates, you are putting emphasis on something no one ever said, but they are obviously unwilling or they would not need special treatments. Holy hell active misrepresentation much? Or is your reading comprehension just that poor? You even quoted it yet didnt actually read it? > So long as they are viewed as degenerates unwilling to engage in basic care VIEWED AS That's not remotely the same as actually being such. Your whole diatribe is the same disingenuous, misrepresentative, seemingly deceptive, bs. I'm not engaging with someone so dishonest, regardless of their intentionality. Be better. |
|
Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith.
> VIEWED AS
Please don't use uppercase for emphasis. If you want to emphasize a word or phrase, put *asterisks* around it and it will get italicized.
I am a non native English speaker, but you are honestly trying to have a fight on something that it's not there.
Never said you called them degenerates, but that not all of them are (implying that some of them are), and that the emphasis on the "viewed as degenerates" is superfluous because no one pointed that out in this conversation.
Moreover, they are not viewed as unwilling, they are unwilling or we would not be talking about it.
I'll explain once again: they are not simply "viewed as degenerates unwilling to" they are obviously unwilling, some of them are clearly degenerates and all of them engage in some kind of anti social behaviour, mostly against their family members, which makes them outcasts.
Or the issue we are discussing would not exist!
> Be better.
Never been better, thanks.