This dude is just mad because his dick is smaller than the average clit
Wow such a well thought out response that means anything. Omg you’re so smart
Conservatives in 2000: idiots Conservatives in 2026: retarded fascists
Whatever you imagine is uncontestable reality!
That was a lot of words for you to rant about me correcting you on the definition of the word you said I misused. It’s also admitting to a logical fallacy…which is funnier still. This is all just a big fat ad hominem attack, and no I don’t gave to the any stance in an informal setting while evaluating and making a structural critique of a truth claim. Your attempt to mimic/mirror me is psychologically telling and you literally said something derivative and anti-intellectual. You’re not a skilled rhetorician or tactician. Shocker.
Why would I try to argue with you about what is a logical fallacy and what isn’t one, when you clearly don’t actually understand what they are and can’t actually identify one? Also your entire argument is just another regurgitated fallacy accusation that you barely understand (like I predicted) and then to make grammatical errors so egregious that your response absolutely is unintelligible. Then say I’m not a skilled rhetorician lmao. You people have no self awareness. If you’re not smart enough to actually understand what the point is and what is being said, just put the phone down. It’s embarrassing at this point.
I’m not making an argument. I’m under no burden to disprove what you have failed to prove. Also, if I was in error? You’d be eagerly correcting me. You’re deflecting and fumbling for an escape hatch. This is like that girl you were dating who went to a different school …isn’t it? It’s called a meta analysis of you and your rhetorical strategy and its inherent flaws and goals. Basic epistemic hygiene puts the burden on the claimant (you)…your claim relies on a flawed bridge, and if your conclusion cannot cross said bridge, it is not logically valid. You can’t win, and you’re just showing your utter ignorance of the rules of logical discourse and both formal and informal debate. Not a very sagacious fellow and very tacky.
Nice strawman… You gay dawg
I’d recommend googling the definition of words before you use them little guy
A gross mischaracterization… That’s a strawman. You engaged in a gross mischaracterization in a grievance post. Looks like you don’t know the meaning of the word. Now say something derivative and anti-intellectual. You gay dawg.
People like you are always so silly. I guess it makes arguing easier to spout out a logical fallacy that you have a high school level understanding of rather than say anything of value. If you don’t take that stance, then you don’t have to worry about it. But people do take that stance. Cry more about it little buddy. Now vomit out another regurgitated echo chamber response that makes you feel good
As a progressive of 2026: No.
You actually admit that? I'm embarrassed for you. Probably tip: Men don't have periods freak.
Yes, I will always openly admit to fight for people‘s rights, and I seriously don‘t care how you feel about it.
People's rights to insist they are something they are not. Invade spaces not meant for them, because irrational FEELINGS. FOAD.
