>>311203Your post makes zero sense. I suggest you re-read the one you quoted.
>>311204>You're trying reframe it as that, which you can do by showing that "him being an MRA" is a premise of an argument that's not fallacious.Here you go:
In
>>311133, I called someone an MRA while complaining about MRAs usually spouting buzzwords and boogeywoman words. In
>>311136, someone claimed this was ironic because supposedly me calling someone an MRA was just as baseless as someone calling me an SJW. However, I have since explained (
>>311137,
>>311144,
>>311153, etc.) that the people who started an argument in this thread were, in fact, real MRAs as per the original application of the word upon a few concrete Internet communities, thus proving that my action was not in fact ironic.
Q. E. D.
>If you can't (and you haven't yet)I actually have, several times over. You just literally failed to understand it. Let's see if it will work this time.
I'm guessing your head's smoking way too much right now to be able to go on normally though, so you're kind of just losing track and starting to complain about non-issues. Like look at how autistic your whole post is. You've pressed yourself into some corner and are pitifully trying to fight back after everything else was futile.
There is only one thing that is extremely ironic about my behavior in this thread: on one hand I claim to oppose the male culture of "dominating" other people, on the other hand I keep blowing the fuck out of pathetic little MRAs like you and deeply enjoy it.
Maybe you're just subliminally brainwashing me into becoming a vicious masculinist! Holy shit!
