• helenslunch
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    4 months ago

    you don’t know why Nex was a assaulted.

    And I suppose you do?

    you are admitting that you don’t have any standards to measure how true the authors claims are about Nex’s assault being related to bathroom bills.

    LOL this is not an “admission”. This is just basic logic. And what happened to pretending like that’s not what the author was saying? It was literally 1 comment ago.

    Quote from the article please

    Ope, and not we’re back to pretending that’s not what they were saying. Brilliant.

    Like I said, it’s in the title. If you are illiterate, that’s not something I can help you with without telling you what it says, which I’ve done.

    They included the info because a non-binary student was assaulted in the restroom

    Yes I also read the article, thank you.

    It’s important to context to the event.

    It’s only important if you want to imply that it was a cause of the event.

    • Bytemeister@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      Ελληνικά
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      Quote from the article please

      Ope, and not we’re back to pretending that’s not what they were saying. Brilliant.

      Hitchen’s Razor cuts deep. You can’t quote it because it wasn’t in the article. You’re standing up a strawman, and a bad strawman you can’t even defend at that.

      • helenslunch
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        LOOOOLOLOL just cover your eyes and “see no evil”, right? 🙈

        My God, the mental gymnastics people will do to defend someone on “your side” being dishonest.

        • Bytemeister@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          Ελληνικά
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          Sorry, I checked, but couldn’t find “see no evil” or “your side” in the article. Are you sure that you read and understood the piece before you decried it?