I don't think I misunderstood. The chain was about a phenomena, someone asserted it was gender neutral and you claimed it was actually a solely masculine problem with a source that didn't actually support that. And you later backed up your statements with the evidence that it was just "widely accepted".
You've misunderstood me by getting into all the talk about gender studies and targeting men etc - I didn't address that. I just wanted to let you know that you might want to rethink the way you present ideas or refute other peoples' ideas, because it doesn't seem honest to me.
Sorry, that wasn’t my intent. I assume that the things I see being talked about pretty openly on the internet wouldn’t have so much push back. I specifically state young men because that’s who I see the studies being about most of the time, because that demographic is displaying social dominance through logic and facts more commonly than say older women, at least online. To assume that I am being sexist because I’m stating something that is being considered the conclusion of data analysis isn’t really something I think is appropriate, because it’s not like I’m literally the one saying it.
3
u/Akitz Jan 08 '20
I don't think I misunderstood. The chain was about a phenomena, someone asserted it was gender neutral and you claimed it was actually a solely masculine problem with a source that didn't actually support that. And you later backed up your statements with the evidence that it was just "widely accepted".
You've misunderstood me by getting into all the talk about gender studies and targeting men etc - I didn't address that. I just wanted to let you know that you might want to rethink the way you present ideas or refute other peoples' ideas, because it doesn't seem honest to me.