This question has been around for a while but I’m curious as to your answer

  • Hadriscus@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    7 months ago

    lol that doesn’t make any sense. Why would you replace something with something completely different and expect it to work the same ?

    • Nibodhika@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      7 months ago

      Because at its core your argument is “group of people X feels threatened by group of people Y, but group Y should listen and not feel attacked if someone from group X tells them group Y is dangerous”. Replacing group X and Y by any group of people should give you an idea of why this is a bad argument. In other words I’m just applying analogical reasoning to your argument to showcase that in an analogous situation the same argument would be considered aggressive.

      Granted, it’s not always possible to substitute groups, but if your counterargument is that the substitutions are not analogous you need to present evidence of why that is the case. In other words, why do you think this argument applies to women who are afraid of men but not to whites that are afraid of blacks.

      • Hadriscus@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        6 months ago

        Look, I’m not the person you replied to, let’s start with that. Second, no, I don’t have to justify countering that absurd sophism that you did. It’s on you to make sense in the first place

        • Nibodhika@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          6 months ago

          Ok,sorry, didn’t see it was someone different, in any case at its core his argument was that.

          You’re making a claim that those two are different, it’s impossible to prove a negative so I can’t prove that they’re not different because even if I pointed to 99 metrics that made it the same that doesn’t mean that there doesn’t exist a metric by which they’re different.

          I’ve explained my reasoning, they’re analogous groups, so if you can point to a relevant metric by which they’re different then my argument would be invalid. Let me explain, one could argue that it’s different because women are mostly attacked by men, but statistically speaking whites are also attacked more by blacks, and again one can easily see that that’s a bad argument to claim blacks are criminals, therefore the other form of it is a bad argument to claim men are rapist. Any meaningful metric I can think of has the same problem, i.e it also applies to the white/black version.

          And no, you’re not forced to reply, but that does sound like confirmation that you couldn’t think of any meaningful metric by which my analogy fails.

        • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          How is it any different? It’s discrimination. Not cool, no matter which group is doing it to which other group.