Ok, I changed my mind. I have some free time and I don't want your thesis to go to waste.
1) Your post I originally called "gross" in the BN thread was disgusting. A woman accuses an artist you like of being an abusive pedophile, and your instinct is to "play devil's advocate" by sharing with us that she has problems with depression and anxiety. Stop trying to frame it like it's some service you did in the interest of conversation. You kept saying her character was in question. It was not. Not until you brought it up. Jesse Lacey's character was in question. You brought that shit up because you wanted a reason to doubt her.
2) You made your little quip and quoted what I originally said to you. I made a little quip back. But somehow my sentence was super serious business whereas yours was just a joke? See the hypocrisy there?
3) Rooks' little gotcha moment was cute, and, at first, valid. I explained why the situations are different to me, and laughed at how dumb it was that he jumped at a chance to "get me" because of the BN stuff. Then he got all mad we argued. At this point I'm guessing you knew you'd have the support of all your fellow SJW haters with their sandwich jokes and decided to join in. Rooks brought the argument over, I did not. I stated my excitement for this LP. In both cases in this thread, you and Rooks initiated the personal attacks.
4) Yeah, I said I "absolutely destroyed" him. But, we can both tell jokes from serious business, right? It was a ridiculous phrase. Tongue in cheek.
5) Your love letter to me. God, where to begin. You went from "lighten up" to a novel on your personal life that I don't care one bit about. Some of my favorites:
"I explicitly gave you the option of being overly sheltered or an internet white knight. You've always had the courtesy of choice. So knock it off". Is it supposed to be funny because of how obviously hypocritical it is? I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say "good joke".
Pretending you don't know what The Red Pill is. Ok, dude. I mean, just, lmao. It's cool you're not an MRA. But I don't believe anyone with as much internet experience as you hasn't heard of that trash.
Linking to the definition of tongue in cheek. That made me lol. Can I refer you back to "absolutely destroyed you" btw?
"Does that not seem a little excessive over a one-line callback/joke?". So you can make one-sentence jokes and I can't. Gotcha. Also, you wrote me a damn essay. That's pretty excessive.
I'm glad to see you think of yourself as an ally of positive change, and you're just annoyed by the condescending and pretentious "SJWs" as you call them. Yes people who monopolize conversations about social justice to boost their egos exist, and yes they are annoying. Imagine if you were as mad about bigotry and injustice as you are about those keyboard warriors. That's why I didn't give you the benefit of the doubt.
"The official statement that Lacey made dodged the age difference entirely, and that was enough for me to fold and put my cards down. I used rationality as an adult. You should try it out sometime". I mean, I guess I'm glad we both recognize that his apology was meaningless? Cool rationality burn, though?
"We are in fact thrust into the treacherous waters of SRS BSNS with captain Daniel at the helm". Again. I said I was excited for the LP. Rooks brought the shit over here and you capitalized on it to have your little moment. I'm a passenger on this argument, dude.
I know you said you weren't after some "gotcha" moment, but your wall of text is littered with them, so I don't believe you. I'm sorry that conversations about bigotry and racism/misogyny/homophobia are annoying to you because a small percentage of the people who talk about those things can be annoying. But don't act all high and mighty as if you're some totally chill dude who doesn't care about what someone says on these boards when you clearly do. I wasn't going to waste my time responding to this, but, you know, we hit the same brick wall that people who disagree about this shit always do. And, because even though I disagree with you, and I think you're kind of a dork, I acknowledge that you're probably a smart dude. And I assume nobody on my side of the disagreement has ever taken the time to explain why we disagree with your perspective, so here it goes. You entered a conversation about a person facing multiple accusations of predatory behavior and your first instinct was to suggest that one of the accusers could be lying. You saw a conflict that on one side had a possible pedophile abuser, and on the other side had a possible SJW lying for attention or recognition. And the thought of some SJW making up shit about an artist you admire got you more riled up than the thought of Jesse Lacey being an abuser. At least, that's what your post suggested. Now I ADMIT that my initial responses weren't constructive, because it pisses me off when people approach conversations about abuse that way. It makes other survivors feel unsafe and afraid to share their experiences. And everything since then has just been a pissing match between us because we're annoyed with one another.
So, I hope one day soon we can have constructive conversations about bigotry and abuse without the discussions being clouded by outright misogynists and abusers (which I do not believe you are) and self-important keyboard warriors looking for a sense of superiority rather than making a positive difference (which I am not). I explained to you why I called your post gross, and explained why your perspective on this pissed me off. Remember, I have been a Brand New fan for almost 15 years as well. We were all on edge. I reacted non constructively, but I stand by my sentiment, and I hope you understand it now that I've given you an actual explanation.