4 ms·

> a person couldn't take your argument and do something useful, like convince a group that he should be allowe in Have you heard about civil war? That was one

> a person couldn't take your argument and do something useful, like convince a group that he should be allowe in Have you heard about civil war? That was one group trying to convince another that some people should be allowed in. And anyway; I wasn't making an abstraction but the very evil segregation such as rape victims meetups excluding men. Unsurprisingly these meetups don't exist in reality; there are some about violence or abusive relationships in general.

jessedhillon 14y ago
You obviously don't know what you're talking about if you think there are no female-only rape survivor groups.
- jQueryIsAwesome 14y ago
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem But is not the classic case of Ad-hominem, you did a deduction from point B to make a personal attack to deny the validness of point A. Interesting.
  - jessedhillon 14y ago
    It's not as hominem to say that you do not have facts. Moreover, I already said that being logically correct is not my aim. Your argument lacks relevance or informedness, so you can make as many valid points as you want, your words simply have no correlation to reality.
    - jQueryIsAwesome 14y ago
      Correlation with reality? If I wanted to speak the news I would become an anchorman. Most people here is discussing how things _should_ be and how that could become a reality. And say what you want, Im pretty sure white female rape-victims is not a valid meet up.
      - jessedhillon 14y ago
        When did "white" get added? Also, you could have easily searched for this: http://www.raap.org/support-groups.html http://www.raap.org/support-groups.html As you obviously know nothing of rape, and probably not much of women either, I really have to question why you're still typing. You seem to be woefully unqualified to be participating in any conversation about what _should_ be, even supposing, as you have, that such a conversation doesn't need to be informed with facts.
        jQueryIsAwesome 14y ago
        "White" excludes 40% of Americans, "female" excludes 50%. Its just semantics.

jessedhillon 14y ago

You obviously don't know what you're talking about if you think there are no female-only rape survivor groups.

jQueryIsAwesome 14y ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem But is not the classic case of Ad-hominem, you did a deduction from point B to make a personal attack to deny the validness of point A. Interesting.
- jessedhillon 14y ago
  It's not as hominem to say that you do not have facts. Moreover, I already said that being logically correct is not my aim. Your argument lacks relevance or informedness, so you can make as many valid points as you want, your words simply have no correlation to reality.
  - jQueryIsAwesome 14y ago
    Correlation with reality? If I wanted to speak the news I would become an anchorman. Most people here is discussing how things _should_ be and how that could become a reality. And say what you want, Im pretty sure white female rape-victims is not a valid meet up.
    - jessedhillon 14y ago
      When did "white" get added? Also, you could have easily searched for this: http://www.raap.org/support-groups.html http://www.raap.org/support-groups.html As you obviously know nothing of rape, and probably not much of women either, I really have to question why you're still typing. You seem to be woefully unqualified to be participating in any conversation about what _should_ be, even supposing, as you have, that such a conversation doesn't need to be informed with facts.
      - jQueryIsAwesome 14y ago
        "White" excludes 40% of Americans, "female" excludes 50%. Its just semantics.