[rewmie]

> perhaps it's some kind of ESL issue, but here are some similar articles I'm talking about:

I'm not sure you noticed, but your so called sources are nothing more than baseless opinion pieces of people that you cherry-picked only because they convey the same prejudice and bias that you do.

Pointing out other people that share your opinion is hardly a substantial argument.

[mx_02]

So is pointing your own experience.

[rewmie]

> So is pointing your own experience.

No, not really. That's not how logic works. This puerile "no, you are" argument is meaningless.

If someone makes a broad baseless accusation that all X are true and you reject that baseless assertion by stating the fact that in the very least there exists some X that are verifiably false, you don't magically annul the rejection by mindlessly claiming it's a subjective interpretation. Either all X are true, or they are not. No discussion.

You can repeat all the puerile arguments you want, but if you want to defend a thesis on how all women are primed for something, in the very least you need to try to substantiate your wild claims, and your personal prejudices and bigoted views won't do.