• PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    God, just today someone was telling me that definitions were “facts”, and that staying “LGBTQ” was “changing the meaning of the alphabet” somehow.

    They were celebrating a bunch of women not being able to attend a job fair, but then started telling me that they were “protecting women”

  • uphillbothways@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Seems like debate and people changing their minds when presented with new information is something that died around 9/11, if it ever even existed. Even the most mild vocal disagreement just further entrenches people in their feelings.
    There’s just no point.

      • trailing9@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Both sides are right. Every argument comes from a true emotional desire. Every exchange of arguments can be ‘won’ by recognizing the need of the other person and finding common ground.

        • Delphia@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          Ok so “Gay people deserve the right to live and be happy” and “Gay people are abominations who deserve death”

          Tell me exactly where the middleground is please.

          • trailing9@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Default male identity surpresses pain and desire to be reliable. (roughly, please don’t get lost in the details.)

            Gay culture is about accepting and expressing deep desires. It’s just coincidentally sexuality because that desire is so strong that it drives the change to accept desires. It’s in the name, gays are gay.

            If you are on a diet and you are hungry and you have to sit next to somebody who eats cake, it brings the will for self-control to its limit.

            The middle ground is protection of the self. The haters hate to not be vulnerable, to be able to fight and endure pain and suffering.

            Show them how they can protect without suffering. Remove the need for them to hide their emotions. Make the world safe. Remove the need to hate.

            Or accept that we need to fight and surpressing sexuality is a price to pay to win against the enemy.

            Or have both sides look at it together and discover social norms for coexistence together.

          • trailing9@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            You have to look at the underlying desires.

            If people are rational you can convince them with arguments. But if they are not then they don’t care about what they say and walk back on their words. What good is winning those arguments?

    • GCostanzaStepOnMe@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      It happens, it just never comes to a satisfying synthesis. I changed my opinion a few times after one of those big 25 reply arguments, though I never admitted to it in the moment.

    • Ookami38@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s always been a thing to not really want to admit you’re wrong. Half of debate is just realizing you’re not ever going to change your opponent’s mind real-time. Ego gets in the way way too hard, particularly on a public platform. Debating on a public platform is more to try to convince people in the audience that are more moderate.

      Sometimes, your good argument can also actually change the other person’s mind, even slightly, but you’ll probably never SEE it. That doesn’t mean it’s pointless, just that if you’re expecting to get something out of the act of debating, it has to be something other than changing your oppo mind.

  • Pons_Aelius@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    Anyone who does not understand what I am saying = Idiot.

    Anyone who disagrees with what I am saying = Troll

    • RealFknNito@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Anyone who does not understand or agree with what I’m saying = idiot

      Anyone who understands or agrees with my opinion but pretends not to in order to get a rise = troll

        • Delphia@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I once told a coworker doing dumb shit to “Take a minute, go outside and count your chromosomes.”

          I also told another one “You are wasting my time AND the time of the tree that makes your oxygen”

          I never used the words idiot or retard, but I meant every word. Because if being bitched out for unsafe behavior hurts your feelings, you’re really going to hate being thrown offsite and having to beg HR to keep your job. Because those are my choices, bitch you out or write you up.

        • Pons_Aelius@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          I don’t see a point of constantly shifting the words.

          There is no point, that is just what humans do with language. It is never static. Always evolving.

          Every generation crates new slang to differentiate themselves from their parents. Give it enough time and Latin turns into French, Spanish, Portuguese, Italian and Romanian because each local population changed Latin in different directions.

          It is even happening to English. There are now several sub-languages of English according to linguists.

          UK English.

          US English

          Aus English

          Singapore English

          International English

          To name just a few.

  • JiggityWeenis@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Sometimes you can hit the stage where either person admits they’re wrong.

    It only requires an analytic philosophy PHD- Level essay.

  • SirStumps@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Any political idea that differs from someone else’s seems to get you these labels. They really don’t like it when you straight up tell them you are not going to continue the dialogue and call you one of these two things to get the last word.