It’s a bit of a square/rectangle thing. All of the women who get fridged are/were damsels, but not all damsels get fridged.

The Brits only like homegrown Nazis

Okay, so we’re different colors and we’re different creeds and different people have different needs.

It’s obvious you hate me though I’ve done nothing wrong. I’ve never even met you, so what could I have done?

They were pointing out why she lost (being an out of touch defender of the status quo) and stating that being better than the alternative doesn’t automatically make her good.

Least bad ≠ good

You want to be a psychic zombie strapped to a life support machine powered by thousands of dead psykers?

Okay now that I put it like that it seems metal as fuck.

As a three-legged person, I appreciate the support.

Or how about a different YA series, not written by an avowed transphobe? People should be supporting the Animorphs show is what I’m saying.

I accept your surrender. Try again next time.

You are stupid and not worth my time.

If you really thought that you’d have stopped replying.

My point is that your argument is bad. I even agree that engaging with Rowling’s work only feeds her agenda and people shouldn’t even pirate it. It’s just that you were arguing for it so poorly I had to say something.

There is a difference between “consuming” something and studying something.

Like there is a difference between a rectangle and a square. Study is a more intensive form of consumption, but it is still consumption.

I don’t want to put words in your mouth, but I think what you’re trying to say is that there is a difference between consuming something for pleasure and consuming something for study, but the difference is literally academic.

Use words correctly and people won’t argue with you over definitions and context.

You should really learn to defend your points if you want to speak on the internet

No.

How can you accurately critique something without consuming it? You can generalize about it or say you won’t consume it for whatever reason, but to actually critique something you have to know what it is saying.

Where do I say anyone doesn’t have agency? Check your assumptions, they’re causing you to make wrong inferences.

How do you accurately critique something without consuming it? You can’t analyze something critically without knowing what it is.

Edit: typo

Religious beliefs are agreed upon systems of opinions about philosophy. Definitions are agreed upon opinions of what words mean.

Both were constructed by humans to better understand and communicate about our world and our place in it.

So you trust this definition because experts have told you it is so?

We’re talking about worldviews which is just another name for your beliefs about the world. Whatever you base your worldview on is what you believe. That is a basic fact about how words work.

deleted by creator

And you believe this definition to be true?

I would expect « worldviews » to be rooted in reality and science rather than in mysticism.

This is you bringing science into this.