What “hard questions” have I avoided? I responded to everything you asked me.
It’s a clear, objective fact that men are, statistically, more prone to violence than women. That means that you are, objectively, wrong. There’s no reason for me to “admit that I’m wrong” when the facts and evidence are clearly on my side, lol.
How about answering the following question first to prove you actually intend to answer what you’ve avoided:
Do you think vaccines cause Autism?
I’ll bet you do.
It’s the same identically flawed reasoning you’re using for men and testosterone.
Specifically:
People who are vaccinated are more PrOnE to Autism!
Men with testosterone are more PrOnE to violence!
Do you also have thought terminating memes about vaccines in that vein too? Maybe something equally sarcastic and dismissive like the Kool Aid man bursting through a wall saying “NoT aLL VaXxED haVe Autism!”
Do you think everyone who got the COVID vaccine is also prone to death too?
What you are completely failing to grasp is what “prone to” means in an analytical and scientific context. And through that failure of comprehension you are driving through a dump truck of bullshit trying to convince me it’s fertilizer.
With that context, here’s the “hard question” you keep avoiding (this is the third time I’ve asked):
What is the difference between men who are violent and men who are not?
This is the same as if I were to ask:
What is the difference between those who are vaccinated, and those who are vaccinated and have autism?
These are the questions that actually get us meaningful answers in science. You shouldn’t be avoiding them.
I’ve provided my hypothetical answer to this question, specifically, that men can adapt to managing their increased emotions from testosterone over time - and I supported it with a study you dismissed due to poor reading comprehension or malice.
You have provided no answer, and have only avoided this question as if it doesn’t need asked. This is despite this question literally being the whole point of this conversation.
Instead, you’ve spent this time making it very obvious you have no interest in what I have to say. Especially when I clearly proved you are only arguing on assumptions, having interpreted the source you provided wildly out of context.
You dismissed all that as “rambling and illogical” because you can’t admit to being wrong - that you clearly came to the wrong conclusion from your source.
So now you are pretending to need help seeing these questions and details despite how you’ve been ignoring them due to your own insecurities in the first place.
I fully expect you’ll ignore these two questions further, and asked them simply to prove that assumption right.
The question you asked me before, multiple times, was “Do you believe all men are violent?” Which I answered. I will now promptly answer every single question you asked.
Do you think vaccines cause Autism?
No, obviously. Irrelevant nonsense.
Do you also have thought terminating memes about vaccines in that vein too?
No, and that logic is complete nonsense. Vaccines do not make people more prone to autism. Do you think they do?
Do you think everyone who got the COVID vaccine is also prone to death too?
No, of course not. This is all coming out of nowhere.
What is the difference between men who are violent and men who are not?
There isn’t a singular difference. Some men are more violent than others because of the conditions they’re born into, or the way they were raised, or different reactions and ways of handling testosterone (as you suggested). This question is largely unconnected from the point I’ve disputed, which is your claim that men are generally less prone to violence than women.
What is the difference between those who are vaccinated, and those who are vaccinated and have autism?
The ones who are vaccinated and have autism happen to have autism. What even is this question?
There you go. I’m not interested in responding to the rest of your rambling. I asked what question I haven’t answered and then answered every question you asked, if you have another question you forgot, I’ll answer that too. What did I have for breakfast this morning? Do I condemn Hamas? Go for it. You can say whatever you like about me, but I’m not afraid from answering questions or engaging with hard concepts, that’s just false.
I’m not afraid from answering questions or engaging with hard concepts…
You absolutley are.
You just redefine any hard concepts you encounter as rambling, then refuse to engage with it.
You even admit to this readily:
I’m not interested in responding to the rest of your rambling…
Conveniently, what you’ve labeled as rambling is all the comparative analysis and supporting studies I’ve provided that immediately prove what I’m saying as valid.
We very much could be having that conversation if you were willing to listen.
Instead, you’re trying to convince yourself this conversation isn’t reasonable unless we ignore everything I’ve said that you don’t like.
Here’s another question to prove my point:
Can you explain what parts of what I’m saying is rambling to you? (Specifically, direct examples of what I’ve said that comes across as “confused or incoherent.”)
I would very much like this list, as it’s the same list of hard concepts you keep running away from.
What “hard questions” have I avoided? I responded to everything you asked me.
It’s a clear, objective fact that men are, statistically, more prone to violence than women. That means that you are, objectively, wrong. There’s no reason for me to “admit that I’m wrong” when the facts and evidence are clearly on my side, lol.
How about answering the following question first to prove you actually intend to answer what you’ve avoided:
I’ll bet you do.
It’s the same identically flawed reasoning you’re using for men and testosterone.
Specifically:
Do you also have thought terminating memes about vaccines in that vein too? Maybe something equally sarcastic and dismissive like the Kool Aid man bursting through a wall saying “NoT aLL VaXxED haVe Autism!”
Do you think everyone who got the COVID vaccine is also prone to death too?
What you are completely failing to grasp is what “prone to” means in an analytical and scientific context. And through that failure of comprehension you are driving through a dump truck of bullshit trying to convince me it’s fertilizer.
With that context, here’s the “hard question” you keep avoiding (this is the third time I’ve asked):
This is the same as if I were to ask:
These are the questions that actually get us meaningful answers in science. You shouldn’t be avoiding them.
I’ve provided my hypothetical answer to this question, specifically, that men can adapt to managing their increased emotions from testosterone over time - and I supported it with a study you dismissed due to poor reading comprehension or malice.
You have provided no answer, and have only avoided this question as if it doesn’t need asked. This is despite this question literally being the whole point of this conversation.
Instead, you’ve spent this time making it very obvious you have no interest in what I have to say. Especially when I clearly proved you are only arguing on assumptions, having interpreted the source you provided wildly out of context.
You dismissed all that as “rambling and illogical” because you can’t admit to being wrong - that you clearly came to the wrong conclusion from your source.
So now you are pretending to need help seeing these questions and details despite how you’ve been ignoring them due to your own insecurities in the first place.
I fully expect you’ll ignore these two questions further, and asked them simply to prove that assumption right.
The question you asked me before, multiple times, was “Do you believe all men are violent?” Which I answered. I will now promptly answer every single question you asked.
No, obviously. Irrelevant nonsense.
No, and that logic is complete nonsense. Vaccines do not make people more prone to autism. Do you think they do?
No, of course not. This is all coming out of nowhere.
There isn’t a singular difference. Some men are more violent than others because of the conditions they’re born into, or the way they were raised, or different reactions and ways of handling testosterone (as you suggested). This question is largely unconnected from the point I’ve disputed, which is your claim that men are generally less prone to violence than women.
The ones who are vaccinated and have autism happen to have autism. What even is this question?
There you go. I’m not interested in responding to the rest of your rambling. I asked what question I haven’t answered and then answered every question you asked, if you have another question you forgot, I’ll answer that too. What did I have for breakfast this morning? Do I condemn Hamas? Go for it. You can say whatever you like about me, but I’m not afraid from answering questions or engaging with hard concepts, that’s just false.
You absolutley are.
You just redefine any hard concepts you encounter as rambling, then refuse to engage with it.
You even admit to this readily:
Conveniently, what you’ve labeled as rambling is all the comparative analysis and supporting studies I’ve provided that immediately prove what I’m saying as valid.
We very much could be having that conversation if you were willing to listen.
Instead, you’re trying to convince yourself this conversation isn’t reasonable unless we ignore everything I’ve said that you don’t like.
Here’s another question to prove my point:
I would very much like this list, as it’s the same list of hard concepts you keep running away from.