So if I find one woman who disagrees with your claim (“women hate indicating consent”), you’ll concede your argument is faulty? Because I’ve known several.
If you modify your argument to “Some women…” then that’s slightly more defensible , but not really meaningful because there’s all sorts of people. You could probably find someone who believes anything.
If you want to say “most women” then you’re going to need to show your work.
No I don’t because only the Sith deal in absolutes. You obviously have nothing of value to say other than pedantic bitching about your own inability to grasp generalizations. Goodbye.
So if I find one woman who disagrees with your claim (“women hate indicating consent”), you’ll concede your argument is faulty? Because I’ve known several.
If you modify your argument to “Some women…” then that’s slightly more defensible , but not really meaningful because there’s all sorts of people. You could probably find someone who believes anything.
If you want to say “most women” then you’re going to need to show your work.
No I don’t because only the Sith deal in absolutes. You obviously have nothing of value to say other than pedantic bitching about your own inability to grasp generalizations. Goodbye.
Well you certainly lived up to your name.
And storming off is certainly one way to deal with people questioning if your generalizations have any validity, but I don’t think it’s the best way.
You’re insufferable.
You are the one incapable of grasping generalizations and their meaning apparently. Maybe don’t use them if you don’t understand them?