4 ms·

Perhaps you should think why you felt the need to be passive aggressive instead of giving a direct response. You are passive aggressive because you know my cen

Perhaps you should think why you felt the need to be passive aggressive instead of giving a direct response. You are passive aggressive because you know my central point is correct, and are seeking to downplay it.

wpietri 4y ago
I thought my answer was direct enough, but if you need it spelled out further, I'm glad to give it a go. It is possible that there are some people seeking "retribution". It is also possible that somebody might seek to whitewash retribution under the label of asymmetric behavior. However, I am not doing that. I specifically chose that phrase because it's extremely broad, because in encompasses all sorts of things. If you are choosing to see anything asymmetric as retribution, that's not about me. That's about you.
- norwalkbear 4y ago
  You choose to be passive aggressive and use extremely broad terminology because you know full well retribution is a core part of that and you are fine with it. You admit being part of the oppressor class and likely have guilt. You simply don't care about that retribution falls under your broad scope and ideas because you are old and will not have to pay for it. "Asymmetric retribution" is your way to whitewash the damage you wish to inflict on a different generation of men for your guilty conscience. It's clear you know full well what all this implies but choose to play ignorant as seen in your replies with other commentators. I'm glad the young men and I guess some women and mothers too here on hackernews see through your tactics and are rejecting them.
  - wpietri 4y ago
    > know full well retribution is a core part It is not. > "Asymmetric retribution" is your way I never said those words that you quote. You keep hearing what I said that way for reasons of your own. Just in case I have't been explicit enough for reasonable participants: I am not interested in "retribution". I am interested in ending oppression. Even if I didn't find retribution repugnant on its own, I find it counterproductive in relation to my goal. I chose a broad term because I did not want to get bogged down in endless nitpicking over particular approaches to ending oppression. The people who agree that oppression exists and that we must work to ending it will not have much problem seeing that something asymmetrical must take place. (If you have examples of oppression ended without asymmetric behavior, I look forward to it.) But it's not surprising that even the broadest term has itself generated endless nitpicking, because there are a lot of people who are invested in the oppressive systems themselves.

wpietri 4y ago

I thought my answer was direct enough, but if you need it spelled out further, I'm glad to give it a go. It is possible that there are some people seeking "retribution". It is also possible that somebody might seek to whitewash retribution under the label of asymmetric behavior. However, I am not doing that. I specifically chose that phrase because it's extremely broad, because in encompasses all sorts of things. If you are choosing to see anything asymmetric as retribution, that's not about me. That's about you.

norwalkbear 4y ago
You choose to be passive aggressive and use extremely broad terminology because you know full well retribution is a core part of that and you are fine with it. You admit being part of the oppressor class and likely have guilt. You simply don't care about that retribution falls under your broad scope and ideas because you are old and will not have to pay for it. "Asymmetric retribution" is your way to whitewash the damage you wish to inflict on a different generation of men for your guilty conscience. It's clear you know full well what all this implies but choose to play ignorant as seen in your replies with other commentators. I'm glad the young men and I guess some women and mothers too here on hackernews see through your tactics and are rejecting them.
- wpietri 4y ago
  > know full well retribution is a core part It is not. > "Asymmetric retribution" is your way I never said those words that you quote. You keep hearing what I said that way for reasons of your own. Just in case I have't been explicit enough for reasonable participants: I am not interested in "retribution". I am interested in ending oppression. Even if I didn't find retribution repugnant on its own, I find it counterproductive in relation to my goal. I chose a broad term because I did not want to get bogged down in endless nitpicking over particular approaches to ending oppression. The people who agree that oppression exists and that we must work to ending it will not have much problem seeing that something asymmetrical must take place. (If you have examples of oppression ended without asymmetric behavior, I look forward to it.) But it's not surprising that even the broadest term has itself generated endless nitpicking, because there are a lot of people who are invested in the oppressive systems themselves.