232
this post was submitted on 02 Sep 2024
232 points (95.7% liked)
News
36647 readers
2750 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I was curious so I went looking in your post history for an innocent and clear comment communicating "that gay people can adopt babies". I found your comment, and immediately understood why you were downvoted for it. Here it is in context:
The OP was this:
and your comment was below one response to the OP:
I don't know if English is your second language, or if you're not used to drawing meaning from poetry rather than fact from prose. The person you replied to was giving a poetic answer. Keep in mind, I'm not saying I agree or disagree with any of the opinions listed above, simply that I can grasp the ideas and concepts the people were communicating in what they wrote:
When that poster said poetically "Every man is the son of a woman" they were communicating the idea that every man, that grows up to be an "undesirable adult" (as reflected by the OPs post) was once, at least for a fraction of a second, under the care of a woman (as in: thats how biology works). Further, the vast majority of those that would be men were under the care of women for many years, and if they grew to be "undesirable", then previous generations of women had a hand in raising them that way and are therefore at least partially responsible for them being "undesirable". Again, I'm not lending my voice in agreement or disagreement, I'm simply translating what they were saying poetically into an easier to understand block of text for you. It is up to you to form your own opinion.
What you responded with was appearing to contradict the poster as though they wrote prose. You focused exclusively on the idea that a tiny fraction of men are raised by a set of same sex parents ignoring the fact that the vast men aren't raised in that situation. Further your "yes and no" seemed to suggest it could be as high as 50/50 split, which is of course, far far from reality.
Your downvotes were earned by you with people essentially saying:
If you need another example to highly what you did. Imagine the original post was Shakespeare's like from Romeo and Juliet:
“What's in a name? That which we call a rose, by any other word would smell as sweet.”
And you responded with:
"Shakespeare was probably referring to Old Garden Roses (Rosaceae Gallicas) and it does have a unique fragrance"
You might be kind of factually correct, but Shakespeare was writing poetically, not referring to a specific plant, but that the properties of the thing apply to it irrespective of whatever name we attach to it. Nobody cares what the genus and species of rose Shakespeare was referring to because the meaning of the idea he was communicating was separate from that.