LogFAQs > #902152757

red sox 777 posted...

My question was rhetorical.

I am aware. It's precisely why I answered it. You tried to sneak in what I found to be a false premise under the cover of a rhetorical question.

I do not agree that your answer is satisfactory, for the reasons I stated.

Weird, because you never actually stated that. In fact, I took it as you implicitly agreeing it was indeed a solution. What I saw was you saying was that you believed people would not successfully arrive at that answer. That's a wholly different issue and is why I accused you of shifting the goalposts of this argument.

And sure, privilege is not inherently an attack, but it has been used as an attack so much in the past few years that by now, people get defensive from even hearing the word.

Again. This is a separate issue - that of successfully, and effectively, convincing people of a position. Were this the only discussion in play, I'd be happy to have that conversation. But you're conflating this more general argument with the more specific argument that bringing up privilege is something that is unanswerable. And in doing so you're trying to force people to engage you in a setting where that specific premise has been accepted.

I don't feel like playing that game.
---

xp1337: Don't you wish there was a spell-checker that told you when you a word out?