>>712571497
>>712571616
>>712571815
>make generalized statement using a pop culture example
>droves of mental midgets focus on the example and not what is being said
>>712571895
You absolutely can, but based on your statements you are, again, using simple ideas to illustrate a vague enemy (trannies) that is easy to attack and is ultimate uncontroversial for your mind.
That's fine, but you're not some bastion of discussion nor do you want any. You're not Plato or Diogenes, you're a soccer mom sprawled out on the couch watching the news all day because Osama Bin Laden might bomb her suburb.
>>712572347
Eh, you don't have to be interested in discussion. It's pretty overrated and most proponents of it here moreso want circlejerks where they gush about a game and don't actually say anything (and then get mad when they're called faggots).
Similarly- you're not talking to people who want discussion either. Like I said, this happens on most of the internet. People paint a vague idea of an enemy and then they can pack everything and everyone they dislike into a box labelled 'tranny', 'nazi', 'commie', 'pinko', etc etc.
Really, seeking out discussion on a board like /v/ is completely asinine. Most people here are transparently some form of third worlder who has never read a book in their life outside of school and they just come here to get mad or mock an easy target- because that's easy and makes them feel good. It's pretty easy to understand base desires and I do it all the time too. But don't mistake any of that as intelligent discourse, it's more like playing a multiplayer shooter with text instead of guns.
