Ophiomancy_Xaxax OP t1_j22af80 wrote
Reply to comment by wildadragon in There are no ambidextrous people, only people living in denial of their disability. by Ophiomancy_Xaxax
Lol, it's "shower thoughts". I was supposed to read a study on hand dominance first? This is quite literally the exact right place to post half-baked garbage online. I'm actually surprised that this seems to have eluded you.
"The only time it was an aversion", he says about people who lived in the past and made no record whatsoever of whether it was an aversion or not. Maybe they also had an aversion to know it alls showing up at the pub and correcting everybody's language.
wildadragon t1_j22ao47 wrote
It also has to make some amount of sense also probably shouldn't call people disabled. Next when you literally contradict yourself the first reply you made should have told you that you're literally wrong.
Ophiomancy_Xaxax OP t1_j26tgkg wrote
You're such a tool. It wasn't a literal statement, as I've already explained to you. Also, the rules for the posts on this sub literally state that is for things thought of while staring blankly at a wall, and you're in here critiquing me for not having sound formal logical argument, and for having not read a study on hand dominance. Get the fuck outta here. It makes perfect sense. All the people who can't use one hand are disabled, but they instead call the people who have two functional hands "ambidextrous". Then you wanted to nitpick about preference vs aversion and all sorts of other nonsense.
The fact that this post is even up and wasn't removed is testament to the fact that it was sufficiently stupid in the correct way for the sub, which you keep confusing for the American Medical Association sub.
Megafister420 t1_j24c1b9 wrote
A shower thought is usually thought out pretty well as you are stuck in the shower to think about it. This was not even remotely thought out
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments