No. As SenorBeef has explained to you more patiently than you have any right to, his complaint to Qin regards dogmatic certainty unjustified by the available evidence.
ETA: you know, this is the funniest thing about trolls. I actually came in here to advise SenorBeef to drop this, NOT because he’s being a self-righteous douchebag, but rather the opposite - he really ought to have picked up by now, that you’re just trolling, as is obvious from the way you continually pretend you don’t understand the distinction SenorBeef is making, or why it is important.
IOW, since you are not arguing in good faith, but just trying to get a rise out of SenorBeef, he should not continue to feed the troll.
That’s what I came in to post. And yet, look what I did instead! I’ll give you this, Monkey, you’re good at what you do.
Both the original thread Qin started (Eyebrows of Doom and kushiel both bringing it up) and by you: "If he was 35 and acting like that? Yeah. Creepy. 16ish and diagnosed with Aspergers? That actually makes me have sympathy for his situation. "
You did, when you said "If he was 35 and acting like that? Yeah. Creepy. 16ish and diagnosed with Aspergers? That actually makes me have sympathy for his situation. " Your having sympathy for him means that negative judgement has been deflected from him by the fact of his having Asperger’s - so him being Aspie has worked as an excuse.
I’m not “implying” anything - I’m saying outright that that’s what you said. You said it makes you have sympathy. That makes it an excuse.
Focusing you entire argument with me on the precise definition of one word from one post is the very epitome of anal.
Funny, you’re using all of the exact apologist arguments that religious people use.
Oh, my lack of comprehension?
I can expect you to come to all the threads where I debunk the moon landing conspiracy to tell me off, because I’m being a douchebag being so sure of myself, right? After all, you haven’t even tried to make a case that that’s different.
Do you know what “arguing in good faith” means? Do you think it means “you must respect their position and assume the truth is somewhere in the middle”, or something? Of course I can argue in good faith and I’ve done nothing but.
You’re essentially saying “you’re so passionate about being rational that there’s no way you can be rational”. Want a link to some of my work in religion threads?
No. See how you criticized my reading comprehension above, and yet at least twice now I’ve corrected this misconception of yours and you still keep on repeating it?
I hate when other people feel smug and smart and that others are dumb when they are the ones who are wrong. Or more specifically believe in something irrational or intellectually unjustifiable.
For instance:
A) Of course the US government blew up the WTC with demolition charges planted by seal team 6! Anyone who doesn’t believe that is just an idiot that believes any government propoganda.
B) There’s no evidence to support the idea that demolition charges took down the WTC towers and it’s a pretty ridiculous solution looking for a pretty ridiculous problem, so anyone who really believes that is nuts and/or stupid.
A would bother me. B would not. In your view, that makes me a hypocrite. Because you’re unable to comprehend that being correct factors into my judgement here - it is, in fact, the primary part of the judgement.
No. I’m not “twisting” anything, I’m explaining to you the full implications of what you said - are you claiming you didn’t say the fact of his being Aspie made you have some sympathy for him?
Bullshit. One more time, this is what I said in post #133:
Oh gee thanks for that. Oddly, I understand exactly what I meant by what I said and what it implied. You obviously don’t.
To make this crystal clear for you: I said I have sympathy for his situation, which as I understand it is being a 16ish y.o. kid, diagnosed with Aspergers. Having this type of disorder makes it more difficult for him to fit in with and relate to his peers at an age where being considered “normal” is incredibly important to most kids. The sympathy I have is separate from him getting called out for the inappropriate behavior. He acted obnoxiously and clearly made a female classmate feel extremely uncomfortable. Did the fact he has Aspergers possibly contribute to his failure to recognize the improper nature of his behavior? Maybe, maybe not. Frankly, I don’t know or care because it in no way would change the fact that it was harassment and therefore he needs to stop it.
Any sense that I have sympathy for him about getting in trouble for sexual harassment is purely something you are reading into what I wrote.
BTW, where do you get off repeatedly using the term “Aspie” to refer to people with this disorder? If he was diagnosed as having an intellectual disability or being mentally retarded would you feel it was appropriate to say he was a “retard” or a “tard”? Yet you have no problem using a term that can clearly only be intended to demean people with Aspergers. Huh.
Oh, his situation. That’s in no way having any sympathy for him, why didn’t you say so? His situation is of course completely separate from him.
:rolleyes:
Maybe I “read it in” because it was in direct reply to a post by me mentioning the fucking sexual harassment, and directly referenced the thread he started about it? I don’t know what I was thinking, I must have bent my intellect like a pretzel to make that connection. Silly me, thinking the “situation” you mentioned was the one in his school, where he was sexually harassing girls, and getting moved from his class because of the harassment.
You must have meant his other “situation”. The one nobody actually was talking about in that thread.
“Fail” is right.
It’s a term coined bya famous Aspie (note the URL, for fuck’s sake), and I’ve been given no indication that it carries any insult or is intended by its coiner for ingroup-only usage.
Yep, fail it is. Like I said in my previous post I’ve never heard the term and it sounded disrespectful to me. However, I was wrong and obviously you didn’t mean anything negative by using it. My sincere apologies.
Apparently.
That’s right, you are an amazing mind reader who knows more about what I’m thinking and what I mean than I do! Wow!
In an attempt to learn your meaning without twisting anything you’ve said, may I ask you to tell me what you mean (wrt sexual harassment) when you say
I mean, I take it you still find the sexual harassment component of his behavior to be inappropriate and inexcusable. Why do you judge that it is not also legitimately characterized as “creepy”?
I don’t think he’s a geeky little Asian kid reguritating what his parents tell him. I think he’s a hairy white dude living in his mother’s basement who posts on these boards between bouts of fapping to porn on the interweb.
