/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>5104504
>>5104510
>no im saying any idiot online can manufacture a sad background to make their argument more believable
"Nothing ever happened, nobody ever experienced anything ever"
The post I replied to claimed that part of or all of my post is wrong because they felt I haven't experienced hardship, all the while misunderstanding the entirety of my post. This is in itself a fallacy but I played into it and said what I went through. If you don't give a damn about what I have or haven't been through then why not focus on what I actually said rather than focus on that one specific angle? If you're so focused on intellectual rigor then why validate the person putting forth a fallacious gate by further enforcing it? I'm not saying "I had it rough so I know everything, believe me or die" but "You can't exclude me from talking about the issue because I don't fail your silly shit-test"


I made an argument, was told my argument was automatically invalid because I didn't have the right experience, and then when I clarify I do have that experience my argument is again automatically invalid because I could be bullshitting. At that point just focus on the fucking logical points I made instead of being a blockhead. You're intentionally getting in your own way of seeing the actual point of the posts by getting caught up in what my qualifications are.
>>5104510
You specifically are illiterate as well.

>>4986233
>>4987033
tl;dr everyone is ugly and should shut the fuck up about petty bullshit