Calling out strawmanning is literally not a personal attack, it’s an attack on the dishonesty of the argument.
Comparing someone who is strawmanning to an actual person (read: not a generic pejorative like calling someone a “Karen”, for example) who literally became infamous for blatantly and shamelessly strawmanning during a public interview, is also not a personal attack, especially when the basis of the comparison is something they literally just did, not something I’ve accused them of without evidence or something.
Comparing someone who is strawmanning to an actual person (read: not a generic pejorative like calling someone a “Karen”, for example) who literally became infamous for blatantly and shamelessly strawmanning during a public interview
Who are you referring to? Because it definitely read like you were using a “generic perjorative term like calling someone a ‘Karen’”. Judging by the responses, I think this is how most people took it as well.
it definitely read like you were using a “generic perjorative term like calling someone a ‘Karen’”
Even though there is no such term/trope/meme associated with the name “Cathy” at all? Pretty frustrating to see that people are so eager to just assume the worst possible motivation instead of just asking, if they didn’t know what I was referencing. Or forbid, actually try to figure it out on their own.
Ironically, I would have been perfectly justified in straight-up calling them a jerk for strawmanning and obviously twisting my words, as it is in fact a shitty thing to do, especially so blatantly.
But since you actually asked me, even though I contend that it’s quite easy, especially now with the additional context, to figure it out independently with a Google search, fine, I’ll tell you: Cathy Newman.
News to me, I’ve never seen that a single time. Also makes no sense in context to think that’s what I was doing, as what I replied to with that was nothing ‘Karen-like’ at all.
You’re the one who is literally calling them names.
Calling out strawmanning is literally not a personal attack, it’s an attack on the dishonesty of the argument.
Comparing someone who is strawmanning to an actual person (read: not a generic pejorative like calling someone a “Karen”, for example) who literally became infamous for blatantly and shamelessly strawmanning during a public interview, is also not a personal attack, especially when the basis of the comparison is something they literally just did, not something I’ve accused them of without evidence or something.
Who are you referring to? Because it definitely read like you were using a “generic perjorative term like calling someone a ‘Karen’”. Judging by the responses, I think this is how most people took it as well.
Even though there is no such term/trope/meme associated with the name “Cathy” at all? Pretty frustrating to see that people are so eager to just assume the worst possible motivation instead of just asking, if they didn’t know what I was referencing. Or forbid, actually try to figure it out on their own.
Ironically, I would have been perfectly justified in straight-up calling them a jerk for strawmanning and obviously twisting my words, as it is in fact a shitty thing to do, especially so blatantly.
But since you actually asked me, even though I contend that it’s quite easy, especially now with the additional context, to figure it out independently with a Google search, fine, I’ll tell you: Cathy Newman.
Though Karen is the most popular example, people often use random names of white women in the same way. Examples include “Staci”, “Brenda”, etc.
News to me, I’ve never seen that a single time. Also makes no sense in context to think that’s what I was doing, as what I replied to with that was nothing ‘Karen-like’ at all.
Well, yeah, that’s why it pissed them off, probably.
Well, they made themselves mad over their own ignorant assumption, they have no one to blame but themselves for that, lol.
You still called them a name though.