|
|
|
|
|
by Supply5411
1003 days ago
|
|
It sounds like you're upset that I am pointing out the obviousness of thing you're requiring evidence for, and you're jumping to my use of sarcasm as a technical rule break to threaten reporting me. I'll make my point without sarcasm then: Asking for proof that "men need fathers" is so common sense and obvious that denying it suggests to me that there is no evidence that you would accept. If you're serious and actually want me to find you studies, please describe, in detail, what evidence would change your mind. I want to have a clear understanding of the requirements and goal posts before I make effort towards that. If you don't want to do that, then unfortunately I can only conclude the question was in bad faith. |
|
You think I'm denying your claim that "men need fathers". That's because you're spoiling for a fight instead of trying to have a reasonable conversation.
Before I can take you seriously, you need to start showing some awareness that there are potential alternative explanations for what you claim is too obvious to require evidence. The questions and criticisms your comments raise and the fallacies your comments perpetrate are obvious and plentiful enough that you should be able to anticipate at least some of them yourself, and preemptively respond to them as a way of strengthening your case and making your comments substantive. Instead, you're continuing to make low-effort comments and treating this forum like a playground for your trollish behavior.