▲ 965 ▼ JD Vance suggests trans people pose a “domestic terrorist threat” & FBI plans to target trans people - LGBTQ Nation (www.lgbtqnation.com) submitted 11 months ago by andros_rex@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world 327 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] sparky@lemmy.federate.cc 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 child) I don’t really understand this comment. I was replying to the parent comment with a sarcastic/joke take on the “both sides same” people. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] M1ch431@slrpnk.net -2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 child) Say somebody writes a few paragraphs about the American political system in good faith. If they draw any parallels between the parties, even a little bit, people come out of the woodwork to mock them and reduce their arguments down to "both sides same". Your comment encapsulates such a situation. You led your comment by saying, "Something something both sides same". I just want to make it clear that I agree that there are significant, stark differences between the two parties, and I understood your sarcasm and probable frustration. If somebody simply says "both sides same" as their main argument or by itself: you are more than welcome in my book to call it out and push back. However, I'm trying to suggest that sometimes the "Something something" could be engaged with if it's in good faith, and it'd advance discourse. I'm also trying to suggest that mocking, while valid, can be unfairly applied. It likely isn't the best use of our energy as it can be divisive. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] sparky@lemmy.federate.cc 1 point 11 months ago (1 child) Ok, I think I see why your last comment made no sense to me. I think you’re trying to have a substantive discussion, but… you’re engaging with a joke. I can’t debate you because I don’t have a serious position, I have a joke. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] M1ch431@slrpnk.net 2 points 11 months ago* Fair enough, that's that then - I thought I was engaging with a person. As it must be clear now to you, it's the opposite of funny to me - it's frustrating, though not as frustrating as people who regularly spout both sides rhetoric in bad faith. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] M1ch431@slrpnk.net -2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 child) Say somebody writes a few paragraphs about the American political system in good faith. If they draw any parallels between the parties, even a little bit, people come out of the woodwork to mock them and reduce their arguments down to "both sides same". Your comment encapsulates such a situation. You led your comment by saying, "Something something both sides same". I just want to make it clear that I agree that there are significant, stark differences between the two parties, and I understood your sarcasm and probable frustration. If somebody simply says "both sides same" as their main argument or by itself: you are more than welcome in my book to call it out and push back. However, I'm trying to suggest that sometimes the "Something something" could be engaged with if it's in good faith, and it'd advance discourse. I'm also trying to suggest that mocking, while valid, can be unfairly applied. It likely isn't the best use of our energy as it can be divisive. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] sparky@lemmy.federate.cc 1 point 11 months ago (1 child) Ok, I think I see why your last comment made no sense to me. I think you’re trying to have a substantive discussion, but… you’re engaging with a joke. I can’t debate you because I don’t have a serious position, I have a joke. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] M1ch431@slrpnk.net 2 points 11 months ago* Fair enough, that's that then - I thought I was engaging with a person. As it must be clear now to you, it's the opposite of funny to me - it's frustrating, though not as frustrating as people who regularly spout both sides rhetoric in bad faith. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] sparky@lemmy.federate.cc 1 point 11 months ago (1 child) Ok, I think I see why your last comment made no sense to me. I think you’re trying to have a substantive discussion, but… you’re engaging with a joke. I can’t debate you because I don’t have a serious position, I have a joke. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] M1ch431@slrpnk.net 2 points 11 months ago* Fair enough, that's that then - I thought I was engaging with a person. As it must be clear now to you, it's the opposite of funny to me - it's frustrating, though not as frustrating as people who regularly spout both sides rhetoric in bad faith. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] M1ch431@slrpnk.net 2 points 11 months ago* Fair enough, that's that then - I thought I was engaging with a person. As it must be clear now to you, it's the opposite of funny to me - it's frustrating, though not as frustrating as people who regularly spout both sides rhetoric in bad faith. permalink fedilink source parent