How can you accurately critique something without consuming it? You can generalize about it or say you won’t consume it for whatever reason, but to actually critique something you have to know what it is saying.
Tell that to the House N house ELF, slave… Or the Nazi Jewish caricatures running the banks… Or the dozens of other dog whistles in there.
I get it, you’re ignorant and tolerate racism, sexism, misogyny, slavery…
Oh wait no I mean, Raceuffleism, Sexofflepuffletuffism, slavertifflepifflery, and misogynotiffery.
Yes trans and gay people don’t exist in the Harry Potter universe because they were all killed.
Besides are you a pedophile or something? Why are you obsessed with some children’s story?
Reductio ad absurdum (Latin for “reduction to absurdity”) is a form of argumentation that disproves a statement by showing that its logical conclusion is absurd, contradictory, or untenable. It works by assuming a premise is true, following its logic to a ridiculous result, and thus proving the original premise false.
Yeah they’re two different things, that’s why I’m comparing them. That’s how comparing things works.
The similarity is: they are both biggoted pieces of fiction, and there is no ethical consumption of biggotry. Even if you pirated it.
Cool.
Now tell me about how pirating Mein Kampf and the Protocols of the Elders of Zion is ethical consumption.
I would read mein kampf but there is a bunch of other historical literature I should likely get around to first.
I read it.
I’m not an expert, but that guy was fucking bonkers
I’m okay with YOU thinking that’s unethical.
I think stuff about you too, all good
yeah I actually blocked him. Im leaning toward blocking if folks treat questionable things as the greatest trajedies in all of history.
Oh fuck, better tell every historian that’s ever read Mein Kampf that some guy online thinks they’re all nazis
Critique is different than consumption, but nice try bud
How do you accurately critique something without consuming it? You can’t analyze something critically without knowing what it is.
Edit: typo
Splitting hairs.
Disengage.
No.
How can you accurately critique something without consuming it? You can generalize about it or say you won’t consume it for whatever reason, but to actually critique something you have to know what it is saying.
Disengage
You should really learn to defend your points if you want to speak on the internet
You should learn to fuck off when people don’t feel like arguing over definitions and context.
False comparison. One is a children’s story (which does not mention the issue at hand) and the other is mein Kampf.
Children’s books are different because their intended audience is children! Apples and Oranges!
https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Poisoning-young-minds-in-Nazi-Germany%3A-children-and-Corelli/198bafb16c54b40f9fd8e4c043df4327fb57c325
Harry Potter does not mention trans or trans issues once dude. I read them cover to cover.
Tell that to the
House Nhouse ELF, slave… Or the Nazi Jewish caricatures running the banks… Or the dozens of other dog whistles in there.I get it, you’re ignorant and tolerate racism, sexism, misogyny, slavery…
Oh wait no I mean, Raceuffleism, Sexofflepuffletuffism, slavertifflepifflery, and misogynotiffery.
Yes trans and gay people don’t exist in the Harry Potter universe because they were all killed.
Besides are you a pedophile or something? Why are you obsessed with some children’s story?
Disengage
Wow. The absolute insanities in jumps of logic. There’s no sense arguing with you.
Disengage
Yeah they’re two different things, that’s why I’m comparing them. That’s how comparing things works.
The similarity is: they are both biggoted pieces of fiction, and there is no ethical consumption of biggotry. Even if you pirated it.
Great, I have another concept then. Apples and oranges.
Both round sweet fruits. There are a lot of things you could say similarly about the two of them.
They’re as classic as unoriginal thought, cliches, and a stubborn refusal to be responsible for supporting racism, classism, and transphobia.