Some weeks back during the Milo Yiannopoulus scandal involving his being a victim of and then making light of child abuse a friend posted this
These sort of things are why I’ve been so critical of the Left.. Lena Dunham openly admitted to molesting her sister, George Takei happily talked about being taken advantage of by an older man, and Roman Polanski was convicted of it and ran away.
.. And yet, only Milo gets criticized.
with this link : Bill Maher condoned Sex between an Adult and a Minor
The friend (Stephen from here on) had others chime in on his comment and I (Silas from here on) decided to engage one (Clarissa from here on).
What initially started as a sarcastic engagement turned into quite a long conversation that was instructive to me and may be to you. Shall post this in a several parts with only slight spelling corrections. Shall keep it free of commentary but may have a post at the end to mention some observations. The main one could be what may be some major gender based differences in how we communicate as I went over in the Babel of the Sexes.
We are now on the last part, when we left off in the previous part we were both implying that we both made implications. She had just attempted to correct that impression and where we go :
Clarissa : … I responded to his post with my opinion. This didn’t have to be a left/right debate, it could of been just about hypocrisy, but left was brought up. Also the “they did it to,” seems to be a very common way of minimizing the present and I am tired of hearing it.
Silas : So yeah you implied that he implied something? As he didn’t say something such as ‘unlike the right which i do like, this is why i don’t like the left’ you brought the right into this. I’d like to use this interaction in a post, Shall paraphrase what you said but with your permission would prefer to use what you said verbatim (shall keep it anonymous if you would prefer) I stand by what I said and think sharing this would be instructive and beneficial of others.
Clarissa : No I didn’t imply anything. He said he is critical of the left for their hypocrisy, but never mentioned the hypocrisy on the right. That is not implying that is what he wrote in black and white. Why be critical of ONLY the left. He could of left that out completely and just brought up hypocrisy, then this would be a completely different debate. Then I would of only mentioned how people minimize the present by bringing up the past.
Clarissa : His post was about HYPOCRISY. You cannot hit that point home when your being hypocritical, not sure how many times I have to say the same thing. He could of said “hypocrisy comes from both sides” then follow up with names from the right and left, that was not what he did so I addressed it
Clarissa : I am not sure what you are trying to defend to be honest
Clarissa : I posted my opinion on what he wrote, I am not posting facts or ideas of someone else. I responded to his post with how I felt about it
Silas : you implied that he was critical of only the left. Even though nowhere in his statement does he say he would appreciate this behavior from, or that none on the ‘right’ do it. In actuality you say his comment implied a ‘they did it too’ situation while proposing it would have been better if he pointed out that the right ‘does it too.’ Tis is what it appears like to me. May I please have your permission to use this?
Silas : I could be completely wrong, would like to have some relatively uninvolved people give their opinion on the exchange
Clarissa : I didn’t imply, he said “this is why I am critical of the left,” no implications needed. Why only be critical of the left when the right are doing the same. I didn’t imply “they did it to,” he wrote the people that “did it to,” no implications here either
Silas : is that a yes or no? If you do not respond I’m going to imply that its a yes by omission
Clarissa : Also if you actually think that I was implying and that is inappropriate, your part of this whole thread was implications because you didn’t write the post and cannot tell me for sure what he meant. I was not trying to imply what he meant, I was responding to what he actually wrote. Good debate
Silas: if i can use what you you wrote verbatim in a video or post. As said I think its fascinating how different things happen for the same reason. Want to show how we both have bee reading the same things but have different ways of ‘understanding’ them
Silas : shall borrow a quote “with self knowledge anything is permissible.” will add thought hat how others judge what you do is not entirely in ones control though.
Silas : I viewed it as you mainly discussing what he did not write, or should have written. But yes I was making several implications. we often do so. I do not consider it inherently good or bad.
Clarissa : You can never control how people judge you. I am a mom of 3 and I may do things that others don’t, so how they judge me is out of my control and I don’t really care about someone else’s judgments, but if I post it on social media, I am leaving my actions open to criticism, scrutiny, or concurrence
- Part 1 : Unsure She said What He Said
- Part 2: She Really Said That’s What He said
- Part 3 : Did We Read What We Said He Said
- About the Tower of babel and the European union Parliament buildings similar appearance. : Why Is The EU Parliament Building Modeled After The Cursed Tower Of Babel? So that was, ehh Dun Dun DUNNNNNNN
Thank you for reading. Subscribe to the Blog for more or: