You overuse the “your whole argument” misrepresentation debating technique. If only there were a phrase for that kind of fallacy.
Because you repeatedly refuse to state what you are arguing. Switching from argument to argument.
Making the whole thing an unnecessary ordeal that’s just there to discourage girls from reporting it even to the school.
How is it unnecessary? Do you believe no false accusations are made? Do you believe the previous system was able to deal with false accusations? Or do you believe that falsely expelling innocent people does not matter?
You repeatedly refuse to answer the above, because you clearly know each one of the options can be easily disproven. So you just try to mix all the options together and throw in extra irrelevant statements hoping to create enough confusion that it can’t be argued against.
That’s why my previous comment had to have bullet points addressing different interpretation of your vague bullshit and it still does not seem enough.
You repeatedly ignore the fact that Trump is a rapist who has a track record of using expensive lawyers to harass women who speak out about it, and that you should have seventy times the skepticism about a rapist changing the rules in favour of rapists, but somehow you can’t hear that without shreiking about bias or ignoring it completely.
Don’t put the lunatics in charge of the asylum, don’t listen to sex offenders proposing changes to how sex offenders are dealt with, and don’t defend rapists who want to change how schools deal with rapists. It really stretches people’s ability to see you as having any sort of rationality or objectivity on the issue when you can’t accept this point.
And you keep throwing in ad hominem arguments and false claims about what I believe. Bringing in Trump who is irrelevant to the argument. Why is he irrelevant? Because I don’t listen to Trump. I held the belief that this change should be done for years, ever since I read about 5 girls falsely accusing a boy of rape and being caught bragging about the false accusation. I read how he was kicked out of school. I read how he was under house arrest for months. I read how despite clear recorded admission that the girls made it up, prosecutor refused to charge them with false reports “Because it could discourage girls from speaking up”. Yeah, no shit. It is supposed to discourage false claims. I read how the school administration despite clear evidence the claim was false refused to apologise or even just readmit him to the school. I tried to look up that case right now and google finds so many false rape accusation I can’t even find the one that I read those years ago.
How many false claims are never included in any statistic, because the accusers are not dumb enough to send each other texts and voicemails admitting to it? So yes, I believe there should be more protections for the innocent people that are falsely accused.
So when I saw Trump actually made the change I believed should have been done for years, I find it ridiculous people will repeatedly shit on it just because of who enacted it. That people could not go a few messages without mentioning Trump is a fascist and rapist in a discussion that should have nothing to do with him. That people would repeatedly call me Trump supporter for happening to agree with single one of his policies.
I shouldn’t be forced to write this. In any genuine good faith discussion about policy, individual politicians or parties should not be playing a role. Just the merits and demerits of the policy. But you refuse that. Instead of arguing why you think the policy is unnecessary, you again and again resort to personal insults and “Trump bad” statements that have nothing to do with it.
You would rather 99 out of 100 guilty rapists get to further traumatise their victim at school.
It’s because you don’t care two cents about rape victims,
you only care about male impunity
just like your leader Trump
After writing this shit repeatedly, you have the gall to say I am the one using “misrepresentation debating technique”? Just because I am forced to divine what your argument is from the word spaghetti you keep throwing at the wall hoping for something to stick? So go and make a proper logical argument, without 20 non sequesters weaved in just to confuse everything. I am not able to read minds, so when you write vague statements instead of a full coherent argument, I have to guess what your argument could be.
Because you repeatedly refuse to state what you are arguing. Switching from argument to argument.
How is it unnecessary? Do you believe no false accusations are made? Do you believe the previous system was able to deal with false accusations? Or do you believe that falsely expelling innocent people does not matter?
You repeatedly refuse to answer the above, because you clearly know each one of the options can be easily disproven. So you just try to mix all the options together and throw in extra irrelevant statements hoping to create enough confusion that it can’t be argued against.
That’s why my previous comment had to have bullet points addressing different interpretation of your vague bullshit and it still does not seem enough.
And you keep throwing in ad hominem arguments and false claims about what I believe. Bringing in Trump who is irrelevant to the argument. Why is he irrelevant? Because I don’t listen to Trump. I held the belief that this change should be done for years, ever since I read about 5 girls falsely accusing a boy of rape and being caught bragging about the false accusation. I read how he was kicked out of school. I read how he was under house arrest for months. I read how despite clear recorded admission that the girls made it up, prosecutor refused to charge them with false reports “Because it could discourage girls from speaking up”. Yeah, no shit. It is supposed to discourage false claims. I read how the school administration despite clear evidence the claim was false refused to apologise or even just readmit him to the school. I tried to look up that case right now and google finds so many false rape accusation I can’t even find the one that I read those years ago.
How many false claims are never included in any statistic, because the accusers are not dumb enough to send each other texts and voicemails admitting to it? So yes, I believe there should be more protections for the innocent people that are falsely accused.
So when I saw Trump actually made the change I believed should have been done for years, I find it ridiculous people will repeatedly shit on it just because of who enacted it. That people could not go a few messages without mentioning Trump is a fascist and rapist in a discussion that should have nothing to do with him. That people would repeatedly call me Trump supporter for happening to agree with single one of his policies.
I shouldn’t be forced to write this. In any genuine good faith discussion about policy, individual politicians or parties should not be playing a role. Just the merits and demerits of the policy. But you refuse that. Instead of arguing why you think the policy is unnecessary, you again and again resort to personal insults and “Trump bad” statements that have nothing to do with it.
After writing this shit repeatedly, you have the gall to say I am the one using “misrepresentation debating technique”? Just because I am forced to divine what your argument is from the word spaghetti you keep throwing at the wall hoping for something to stick? So go and make a proper logical argument, without 20 non sequesters weaved in just to confuse everything. I am not able to read minds, so when you write vague statements instead of a full coherent argument, I have to guess what your argument could be.
So much protection.