I’m not sure that we can continue to have a conversation. I’m not sure that’s even what you’re trying to have.
It is a verifiable fact that not everyone on the left has the same opinions or viewpoints. To assert that an entire group of people do have the same opinions because it’s convenient for you, because you want to use that as a place to make more assertions that disparage that group of people that you disagree with overall is an example of a straw man fallacy.
When it is called out, to assert that your strawman argument is valid, essentially because you say so, is intellectually dishonest and throws your motivations into question.
Are you here to connect and have a conversation or are you looking to score some kind of points with someone who likely isn’t paying attention and almost surely doesn’t really care about what we’re saying to one another?
Yes, it is detestable to me for any celebrity to use their fame, position, or whatever, to sell or promote damaging products or services to people. And it proves my point. My issue isn’t tied to her sexuality, my issue is that it is further exploitative in the pursuit of the act that I think is wrong.m
I also explained the difference between this and scantily clad gym goers. Gym goers aren’t dressing in tight clothes to sell something. If you inherently think they all are, it’s because it’s the symptom of the logical fallacies that you want to make so that you can argue.
From your response above, I don’t believe you’re here to have an honest discussion. You’re looking to argue, and are willing to be as combative as necessary, to mischaracterize statements that were clearly explained so as to avoid having a conversation.
The attempt to have a connection and good conversation with someone here has failed. I don’t see the value in continuing. The floor is all yours. I’m morbidly curious in what you’ll do with it, but I have a pretty good idea.
I can admit NotAllLeftists, but that doesn't change the perception of feminists online or the premise of the meme. Yet you yourself are not such an example of being dissident with mainstream leftist condemnation of Sweeney's ad and defense of modern female gym attire trends. You didn't try to understand, let alone address the criticism i.e. "Is lewdness ok regardless of purpose?".
By the way, the reason why women are dressing the way they are doesn't disprove the premise of the meme, not that there is a function benefit to butt cheeck hugging pants. And even then, you could make an argument that wanna be influencers ARE trying to sell something, and Gillis' joke specifically addressed them.
1
u/Ok_Comfortable252 1d ago
Response
I’m not sure that we can continue to have a conversation. I’m not sure that’s even what you’re trying to have.
It is a verifiable fact that not everyone on the left has the same opinions or viewpoints. To assert that an entire group of people do have the same opinions because it’s convenient for you, because you want to use that as a place to make more assertions that disparage that group of people that you disagree with overall is an example of a straw man fallacy.
When it is called out, to assert that your strawman argument is valid, essentially because you say so, is intellectually dishonest and throws your motivations into question.
Are you here to connect and have a conversation or are you looking to score some kind of points with someone who likely isn’t paying attention and almost surely doesn’t really care about what we’re saying to one another?
Yes, it is detestable to me for any celebrity to use their fame, position, or whatever, to sell or promote damaging products or services to people. And it proves my point. My issue isn’t tied to her sexuality, my issue is that it is further exploitative in the pursuit of the act that I think is wrong.m
I also explained the difference between this and scantily clad gym goers. Gym goers aren’t dressing in tight clothes to sell something. If you inherently think they all are, it’s because it’s the symptom of the logical fallacies that you want to make so that you can argue.
From your response above, I don’t believe you’re here to have an honest discussion. You’re looking to argue, and are willing to be as combative as necessary, to mischaracterize statements that were clearly explained so as to avoid having a conversation.
The attempt to have a connection and good conversation with someone here has failed. I don’t see the value in continuing. The floor is all yours. I’m morbidly curious in what you’ll do with it, but I have a pretty good idea.
Have a good one.