Cat_Hoarder0 t1_isagjwi wrote
Reply to comment by Dawens in Finished a fantastic new book - Of Boys and Men: Why the Modern Male is Struggling, Why it Matters, and What to Do about It. by Dawens
> The article aligns with the book.
So something else I shouldn't bother to read then. Especially from a guy who works with a foundation whose founder and president pushed the repressed memories and satanic panic nonsense.
wonderfulstoryteller t1_isajo85 wrote
You seem like someone who’s very open minded and welcoming to ideas that possibly oppose your current beliefs or what you think you know. Healthy sign of a growing and thinking person and just what we need in a divided country! Cheers!
Cat_Hoarder0 t1_isako7u wrote
I'm quite open minded, up until the point where I see someone making claims that aren't based in reality.
wonderfulstoryteller t1_isam4m4 wrote
How can you claim something to not be based on reality without even reading it? You refuse to read a book based on one line from another Redditor’s review of the book or a news article based on the actions of the president? Every writer and journalist of The Atlantic is invalid and wrong, and seemingly complicit and guilty by association? That’s pretty ridiculous, no? Doesn’t seem open minded at all. Cheers.
Cat_Hoarder0 t1_isamnue wrote
> How can you claim something to not be based on reality without even reading it?
I read the review; that was enough to determine the author wasn't arguing in good faith.
>news article based on the actions of the president?
I actually read the editorial piece that was suggested. The author is arguing based on a definition of toxic masculinity that dates back to the 80s, and not how it is used today.
> Every writer and journalist of The Atlantic is invalid and wrong, and seemingly complicit and guilty by association?
Nice strawman argument you have that. Why don't you actually argue against what I said?
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments