![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
My new superpower: I HAZ UR ATTENTION SPAN
They say the third time's the charm, or in my case, the SUPERPOWER. Behold, mortals!
1. There was the men's rights activist who refused to read my rather thorough responses to his attacks on feminism, because why I gots to write so loooong waaaahhhhh.
2. There was this obnoxious pro-choicer who got in my grill, virtually speaking, because I dared to say I have personal misgivings about elective abortion. This, even though I specifically told her I have no intention of imposing my morality on anyone else--legally speaking I'm more pro-choice than Roe v. Wade calls for, in fact. But evidently in her world it's not enough to be legally and politically pro-choice, it's a sin to disagree with her even on matters of personal conviction.
As you can imagine she was a real charmer, ranting about how it was going to blow my little mind that, according to her brilliant philosophical deductions, human fetal life was worth less than animal life. I pointed out that my having different values from her was no reason for her incredible hostility and disrespect, that her assumptions weren't universal, and that she was using medical terms incorrectly (she confused being comatose with being brain-dead, lol). Somehow this reduced her to complaining about the length of my posts instead of the substance.
3. This just in: I debated a different MRA, who again gave up on any semblance of debate and asked if I was going to stop bothering him with 100-line replies (it was actually 62 lines) if he ceded to his straw-feminist formulation of my argument. Which directly contradicted what I actually said in my answer directly before his, showing that he had not read my actual words. And I tried to tone down the length for him, too, because after my experience with #1 I thought MRAs might have problems with concentration and reading.
The signs are clear, friends. I render my debating opponents incapable of reading long text. Some combination of my rhetorical prowess, unshakable calm, and the deadly omega rays that I shoot through the interwebz steals people's attention spans. I think I should get a superhero name to reflect this, like The ADDinator or The Human Cat Video.
The alternate explanation, which I proposed to Interlocutor #3, is that it just easier to blame me and my walls of text than their own inability to carry an argument. But where's the fun in that, I ask you? Now excuse me, I have to run to my cape-and-spandex fitting.
She'll fix me up with something.
1. There was the men's rights activist who refused to read my rather thorough responses to his attacks on feminism, because why I gots to write so loooong waaaahhhhh.
2. There was this obnoxious pro-choicer who got in my grill, virtually speaking, because I dared to say I have personal misgivings about elective abortion. This, even though I specifically told her I have no intention of imposing my morality on anyone else--legally speaking I'm more pro-choice than Roe v. Wade calls for, in fact. But evidently in her world it's not enough to be legally and politically pro-choice, it's a sin to disagree with her even on matters of personal conviction.
As you can imagine she was a real charmer, ranting about how it was going to blow my little mind that, according to her brilliant philosophical deductions, human fetal life was worth less than animal life. I pointed out that my having different values from her was no reason for her incredible hostility and disrespect, that her assumptions weren't universal, and that she was using medical terms incorrectly (she confused being comatose with being brain-dead, lol). Somehow this reduced her to complaining about the length of my posts instead of the substance.
3. This just in: I debated a different MRA, who again gave up on any semblance of debate and asked if I was going to stop bothering him with 100-line replies (it was actually 62 lines) if he ceded to his straw-feminist formulation of my argument. Which directly contradicted what I actually said in my answer directly before his, showing that he had not read my actual words. And I tried to tone down the length for him, too, because after my experience with #1 I thought MRAs might have problems with concentration and reading.
The signs are clear, friends. I render my debating opponents incapable of reading long text. Some combination of my rhetorical prowess, unshakable calm, and the deadly omega rays that I shoot through the interwebz steals people's attention spans. I think I should get a superhero name to reflect this, like The ADDinator or The Human Cat Video.
The alternate explanation, which I proposed to Interlocutor #3, is that it just easier to blame me and my walls of text than their own inability to carry an argument. But where's the fun in that, I ask you? Now excuse me, I have to run to my cape-and-spandex fitting.
She'll fix me up with something.