Again, not to me. My comment was regarding BrainInaBox’s treatment of another user. Had they not repeatedly and angrily vilified the other user, maybe their point would’ve been heard.
You should teach them diplomacy and respect if you really want to support the message. They didn’t want to hear it from me.
Which is exactly why I asked your opinion five comments ago. Lol
All I’m saying is you’ve got a person saying “what you said is homophobic and you’re a fucking idiot bigot if you don’t listen” in the same breath as “Fedel held votes but I don’t have proof and anything you say is stupid imperialist propaganda,” while fully aware of how Castro treated homosexuals, isn’t really the most compelling stance and may be deserving of the same condescension they’re dishing out.
Again, I wasn’t defending the victim, I was criticizing the attacker. When presented with one person unintentionally offending someone, and another repeatedly verbally attacking them in retaliation, one must choose which evil to criticize.
If the person committing the repeated verbal attacks were the homophobe, then they’d be the one I’d criticize first. A strong moral compass and delusions of superiority are in no way justification for verbal attacks.
In my opinion, attacking someone for getting upset at homopbobia and defense of fascism serves to minimize the damage. This is why “tone policing” doesn’t work too well, BrainInABox is justified in attacking homophobia and running interference for fascists and slavers.
Agree to disagree. There’s nothing compelling about condescension, belittlement, and name calling, and it’s frankly discrediting to any message it’s attached.
BrainInABox agreed with me regarding homophobia, and likely didn’t think it necessary to repeat what I had already said.
Again, not to me. My comment was regarding BrainInaBox’s treatment of another user. Had they not repeatedly and angrily vilified the other user, maybe their point would’ve been heard.
You should teach them diplomacy and respect if you really want to support the message. They didn’t want to hear it from me.
Put opposite, you defended a user’s homophobia and defense of fascists over someone upset at both.
Which is exactly why I asked your opinion five comments ago. Lol
All I’m saying is you’ve got a person saying “what you said is homophobic and you’re a fucking idiot bigot if you don’t listen” in the same breath as “Fedel held votes but I don’t have proof and anything you say is stupid imperialist propaganda,” while fully aware of how Castro treated homosexuals, isn’t really the most compelling stance and may be deserving of the same condescension they’re dishing out.
You came out defending a homophobe and fascist defender despite agreeing that they were being homophobic, though. Why?
Again, I wasn’t defending the victim, I was criticizing the attacker. When presented with one person unintentionally offending someone, and another repeatedly verbally attacking them in retaliation, one must choose which evil to criticize.
If the person committing the repeated verbal attacks were the homophobe, then they’d be the one I’d criticize first. A strong moral compass and delusions of superiority are in no way justification for verbal attacks.
In my opinion, attacking someone for getting upset at homopbobia and defense of fascism serves to minimize the damage. This is why “tone policing” doesn’t work too well, BrainInABox is justified in attacking homophobia and running interference for fascists and slavers.
Agree to disagree. There’s nothing compelling about condescension, belittlement, and name calling, and it’s frankly discrediting to any message it’s attached.
But hey, you do you.