balance8873

joined 1 week ago
[–] balance8873@lemmy.myserv.one 1 points 27 minutes ago* (last edited 25 minutes ago)

What about that was derogatorily?

And also how is that sucking a dick?

This is sucking a dick, silly: πŸ†πŸ˜―, or πŸ†πŸ«¦

I don't even know how that can be considered derogatory, it's something pretty much every adult on the planet has either seen or done or received, seems ridiculous to say it's homophobic.

[–] balance8873@lemmy.myserv.one 1 points 31 minutes ago* (last edited 29 minutes ago)

But I didnt call anyone a removed

So: what the actual fuck are you guys talking about?

[–] balance8873@lemmy.myserv.one 1 points 36 minutes ago (1 children)

I'm not repeating this conversation with someone who is as openly aggressive as you out of the gate. Read the rest of this comment chain.

[–] balance8873@lemmy.myserv.one -1 points 13 hours ago (4 children)

Ok let's ignore that for a second and focus in on your homophobia. What precisely about that message is homophobic?

[–] balance8873@lemmy.myserv.one -2 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) (6 children)

I like that you didn't even settle on one, you're just like "I don't like this😭😭😭, let me grab a few misc words and chain them together".

I mean, I get it. There's no meaning behind the message so you have to put together several fake meanings and hope they stick.

[–] balance8873@lemmy.myserv.one -2 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

More fun if you go via the neck

[–] balance8873@lemmy.myserv.one -4 points 16 hours ago (3 children)

So who do you stand with?

That having been said I don't actually know why you're responding to me. It sounds like you have some kind of actual evidence backing up your beliefs (whatever those beliefs may be) which means you don't fall into the category of stupid we were discussing.

[–] balance8873@lemmy.myserv.one -3 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

Another solid argument that gets right to the real point of all this.

[–] balance8873@lemmy.myserv.one -3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

No, he said everything else is some type of castle. I looked this castle up and it aligns well with the idea that he's trying to shut down the other claims without considering them.

From the wiki:

where an arguer conflates two positions that share similarities: one modest and easy to defend (the "motte") and one much more controversial and harder to defend (the "bailey")

So he's technically saying that the rest of the post is modest claims which are easy to defend, ie he agrees with Y. (I'm assuming the bailey is genocide and the motte is the claims of ethnic cleansing w/out genocide)

[–] balance8873@lemmy.myserv.one -4 points 1 day ago (8 children)

πŸ†πŸ’¦πŸ˜œ

view more: next β€Ί