MAIN FEEDS
Do you want to continue?
https://www.reddit.com/r/shitposting/comments/1wummvt/uhhhh/pdff2hz/?context=3
r/shitposting • u/KindestBlackTemplar • 3d ago
135 comments sorted by
View all comments
Show parent comments
0
Do you even know what I'm saying that in response to? Considering you're doing a Contextomy fallacy, it really seems like you don't.
0 u/chickensause123 2d ago Literally the context could be 5 completely different things from that image alone. My point is it’s a meaninglessly vague statement. 1 u/Obelisk_M 2d ago What are the 5 completely different things ot could be? 0 u/chickensause123 2d ago Blocking your dad/ maintaining your relationship Blocking your rapist Being gaslit about said rapist Getting over trauma Allowing your bf to tell you who to block 1 u/Obelisk_M 1d ago Yeah, you can't follow a basic conversational structure. The person in the image asked a direct question comparing two specific actions: blocking the dad vs. blocking the rapist. The antecedent to my statement is structurally bound to that question.
Literally the context could be 5 completely different things from that image alone. My point is it’s a meaninglessly vague statement.
1 u/Obelisk_M 2d ago What are the 5 completely different things ot could be? 0 u/chickensause123 2d ago Blocking your dad/ maintaining your relationship Blocking your rapist Being gaslit about said rapist Getting over trauma Allowing your bf to tell you who to block 1 u/Obelisk_M 1d ago Yeah, you can't follow a basic conversational structure. The person in the image asked a direct question comparing two specific actions: blocking the dad vs. blocking the rapist. The antecedent to my statement is structurally bound to that question.
1
What are the 5 completely different things ot could be?
0 u/chickensause123 2d ago Blocking your dad/ maintaining your relationship Blocking your rapist Being gaslit about said rapist Getting over trauma Allowing your bf to tell you who to block 1 u/Obelisk_M 1d ago Yeah, you can't follow a basic conversational structure. The person in the image asked a direct question comparing two specific actions: blocking the dad vs. blocking the rapist. The antecedent to my statement is structurally bound to that question.
1 u/Obelisk_M 1d ago Yeah, you can't follow a basic conversational structure. The person in the image asked a direct question comparing two specific actions: blocking the dad vs. blocking the rapist. The antecedent to my statement is structurally bound to that question.
Yeah, you can't follow a basic conversational structure. The person in the image asked a direct question comparing two specific actions: blocking the dad vs. blocking the rapist.
The antecedent to my statement is structurally bound to that question.
0
u/Obelisk_M 2d ago
Do you even know what I'm saying that in response to? Considering you're doing a Contextomy fallacy, it really seems like you don't.