Sources?! You need fucking Data? You need a scientific study to discern the precise level of sexism of Pizzacake? Did you ask for sources when Kanye West was in the news for chanting “Heil Hitler”? If not does that mean you need a news article about it from the New York Times or some shit? Did you ask for sources on altright comic artist StoneToss?
I have, multiple times now, demonstrated that a very large number of people recognize this artist as sexist with specific examples going back many years.
Nope, you’ve repeatedly asserted a large number of people recognize her as sexist.
The only thing that approaches having “demonstrated” her “well-documented” misandry is the single incredibly begrudging example you provided - one that multiple other people have also referenced, and which is at very worst a quite bad take from an otherwise pretty progressive artist.
You’ve refused to show anyone this well documented pattern of misandry, but you’re quick to claim you have. And that kind of openly deceptive behavior is exactly why it’s so important to ask for sources.
First:
What an absolutely spectacular example of Argumentum ad populum! Unfortunately no, just because you got upvotes does not establish your claim that it’s well documented. “Many people believing” something does not make that something true (#EdgyAthiestHumor). But well done on finally finding a real logical fallacy!
Second:
“You claim this is well-documented but refuse to show us that documentation”
*“Well you’re sealioning!”
No. Sealioning is a bit like DARVO: while they are useful concepts in sociology, you cannot simply throw the terms out like Pokemon and expect them to do all the work for you.
Yes, I know you begrudgingly provided a single link, I talked about that. Your single link didn’t at all establish your claims, as multiple people have explained. Asking for actual proof of your claims is not bombarding you with requests, it’s a single request that you have utterly failed to address.
You gotta realize this is just not a great look for you.
No, buddy, the argument was “Well documented misandrist”. That you’re trying to present it like it’s always been “Lots of people think that she is [xxxxx]” is a textbook example of shifting the goalposts, another informal logical fallacy. You’re on a role finding these!
“I have, multiple times now, demonstrated that a very large number of people recognize this artist as sexist with specific examples going back many years.”
You said
Nope, you’ve repeatedly asserted a large number of people recognize her as sexist.
Oh my god lmfao. You’re actually claiming that 18 people is “a very large number of people”? In that case I apologize, I had no idea you were trying to prove something so… lame.
I mean sure, you have demonstrated that 18 accounts agree with you. No argument there. That’s not generally what a “very large number of people” is used to mean, but sure fair play.
Of course if we’re going by that, I’ve already demonstrated a mindbogglingly stupendously large number of people think you’re an incel - x2 the number that think pizzacake is a misandrist. By the rules of one-number-bigger-than-other-number I think I win…
Sources?! You need fucking Data? You need a scientific study to discern the precise level of sexism of Pizzacake? Did you ask for sources when Kanye West was in the news for chanting “Heil Hitler”? If not does that mean you need a news article about it from the New York Times or some shit? Did you ask for sources on altright comic artist StoneToss?
I have, multiple times now, demonstrated that a very large number of people recognize this artist as sexist with specific examples going back many years.
Nope, you’ve repeatedly asserted a large number of people recognize her as sexist.
The only thing that approaches having “demonstrated” her “well-documented” misandry is the single incredibly begrudging example you provided - one that multiple other people have also referenced, and which is at very worst a quite bad take from an otherwise pretty progressive artist.
You’ve refused to show anyone this well documented pattern of misandry, but you’re quick to claim you have. And that kind of openly deceptive behavior is exactly why it’s so important to ask for sources.
My top level comment alone has 18 upvotes. And I have linked for you sealioning assholes.
First:
What an absolutely spectacular example of Argumentum ad populum! Unfortunately no, just because you got upvotes does not establish your claim that it’s well documented. “Many people believing” something does not make that something true (#EdgyAthiestHumor). But well done on finally finding a real logical fallacy!
Second:
“You claim this is well-documented but refuse to show us that documentation”
*“Well you’re sealioning!”
No. Sealioning is a bit like DARVO: while they are useful concepts in sociology, you cannot simply throw the terms out like Pokemon and expect them to do all the work for you.
Yes, I know you begrudgingly provided a single link, I talked about that. Your single link didn’t at all establish your claims, as multiple people have explained. Asking for actual proof of your claims is not bombarding you with requests, it’s a single request that you have utterly failed to address.
You gotta realize this is just not a great look for you.
The argument was “sizeable number of people think this way.”
No, buddy, the argument was “Well documented misandrist”. That you’re trying to present it like it’s always been “Lots of people think that she is [xxxxx]” is a textbook example of shifting the goalposts, another informal logical fallacy. You’re on a role finding these!
I said
You said
Skill issue on your part.
Oh my god lmfao. You’re actually claiming that 18 people is “a very large number of people”? In that case I apologize, I had no idea you were trying to prove something so… lame.
I mean sure, you have demonstrated that 18 accounts agree with you. No argument there. That’s not generally what a “very large number of people” is used to mean, but sure fair play.
Of course if we’re going by that, I’ve already demonstrated a mindbogglingly stupendously large number of people think you’re an incel - x2 the number that think pizzacake is a misandrist. By the rules of one-number-bigger-than-other-number I think I win…
Polls work by gathering opinions from a relatively small subset to draw conclusions on larger numbers of people.