Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

trotsky

(49,533 posts)
35. You're doing it again.
Tue Apr 2, 2019, 09:47 AM
Apr 2019

marylandblue didn't ask you for an opinion on "types of sexual abuse" - which is the question you decided to answer.

You were asked if "the RCC scandal is, or is .. not worse than other similar scandal(s)".

The *scandal*, not the abuse.

Recall that the the scandal includes the abuse AND its cover-up and subsequent behavior.

Answer the question, g.

I bet you won't, though. Because you are not interested in actual discussion - you just want to control what is discussed.

Consistent with a pattern. trotsky Mar 2019 #1
Misframing. guillaumeb Mar 2019 #4
... Major Nikon Mar 2019 #7
Thanks for that wonderful explanation. trotsky Mar 2019 #10
And when called on the whataboutism the next tactic is gaslighting Major Nikon Mar 2019 #9
Someone is working overtime to gaslight everyone into believing their fallacy isn't a fallacy Major Nikon Mar 2019 #2
Misframing. guillaumeb Mar 2019 #5
... Major Nikon Mar 2019 #6
I've solved that problem for my part... NeoGreen Mar 2019 #16
I don't really see it as a problem Major Nikon Mar 2019 #17
It's more like an ear-worm to me... NeoGreen Mar 2019 #18
This should do it Major Nikon Mar 2019 #20
Ouch... NeoGreen Mar 2019 #21
It is very basic. guillaumeb Mar 2019 #3
... Major Nikon Mar 2019 #8
lol tymorial Apr 2019 #76
Again? And Again? And Again? MineralMan Mar 2019 #11
Please explain why simplicable.com is a better source on this than Merriam Webster. trotsky Mar 2019 #12
I know! I know! MineralMan Mar 2019 #14
Gladly: guillaumeb Mar 2019 #26
Huh? trotsky Apr 2019 #27
Amazing? Definitely. eom guillaumeb Apr 2019 #29
And nobody said you denied guilt. marylandblue Apr 2019 #30
Your claim about my supposed position lacks something. guillaumeb Apr 2019 #31
I can't show you what isn't there. marylandblue Apr 2019 #32
Sexual abuse is criminal behavior. guillaumeb Apr 2019 #33
Evidence for which assertion? The one you didn't answer before? marylandblue Apr 2019 #34
Again, that depends on a number of factors. guillaumeb Apr 2019 #40
Again, you're not answering the question. trotsky Apr 2019 #41
You have an agenda. guillaumeb Apr 2019 #46
Tu Quoque? MineralMan Apr 2019 #47
Observation. guillaumeb Apr 2019 #49
I see. Again and again, I see... MineralMan Apr 2019 #53
Actually studying the issue is so much harder than making an assertion. Correct? guillaumeb Apr 2019 #55
Still no answer. MineralMan Apr 2019 #57
No, not the answer you prefer. guillaumeb Apr 2019 #58
ONCE AGAIN trotsky Apr 2019 #70
"No puppet. No puppet. You're the puppet." trotsky Apr 2019 #48
Yes, it is. guillaumeb Apr 2019 #50
I'm glad you can admit your response was pathetic. trotsky Apr 2019 #51
Question? guillaumeb Apr 2019 #52
No it wasn't. trotsky Apr 2019 #54
Certainly. guillaumeb Apr 2019 #56
Still no answer. trotsky Apr 2019 #59
I have not seen enough actual information to answer. guillaumeb Apr 2019 #60
Then that would be a "no" answer. trotsky Apr 2019 #61
Did you read my response? guillaumeb Apr 2019 #62
You mean your evasion? Yes, I read it. trotsky Apr 2019 #63
Provide a comparison to justify the assertion. guillaumeb Apr 2019 #64
Just did. trotsky Apr 2019 #65
Make an appointment with an optometrist. guillaumeb Apr 2019 #66
You're the one who said you couldn't see something. trotsky Apr 2019 #67
The optometrist might be able to help you find those assertions that you made about my posts. guillaumeb Apr 2019 #68
Now you're mixing up your threads. trotsky Apr 2019 #69
Actually, it was a question, because your answer is unknown marylandblue Apr 2019 #72
At least you mentioned some specifics marylandblue Apr 2019 #71
As I have pointed out in previous posts, guillaumeb Apr 2019 #73
So your answer is "no?" marylandblue Apr 2019 #74
My answer is still that, lacking specific statistical information, guillaumeb Apr 2019 #75
You said there were many factors. marylandblue Apr 2019 #77
But, the scale and scope of the RCC's scandal is hugely larger. MineralMan Apr 2019 #78
Yes, it seems larger. guillaumeb Apr 2019 #81
Irrelevant MineralMan Apr 2019 #82
The point. guillaumeb Apr 2019 #83
Still irrelevant. MineralMan Apr 2019 #84
A large scandal in a large organization is much worse than in a small organization marylandblue Apr 2019 #85
Yes, it is worse in that way. guillaumeb Apr 2019 #86
No. The human "family" is not a family and is not an organization marylandblue Apr 2019 #87
All human organizations are comprised of? guillaumeb Apr 2019 #88
Can we get off this logical contradiction already. marylandblue Apr 2019 #89
What about when an organization has its own power structure and "legal system"... trotsky Apr 2019 #93
It makes those who shielded the abusers complicit. guillaumeb Apr 2019 #95
But it suggests, perhaps, that an organization should not be allowed to have such a structure. marylandblue Apr 2019 #96
Many have taken steps. guillaumeb Apr 2019 #97
In time? Many places have had these measures for decades. marylandblue Apr 2019 #98
According to some we can't even take the steps that are already working with other organizations Major Nikon Apr 2019 #99
Which makes the scandal worse. trotsky Apr 2019 #100
Yeah, just be sure not to hit your kids in the face while beating them Major Nikon Apr 2019 #94
Global coverups Lordquinton Apr 2019 #91
You are attempting to re-frame and distract. trotsky Apr 2019 #92
You're doing it again. trotsky Apr 2019 #35
But whutabout Chinese atheists? Major Nikon Apr 2019 #36
How long does he get to play this damn game while trying to pretend he's the real victim? trotsky Apr 2019 #37
Until everyone here puts him on ignore Major Nikon Apr 2019 #38
On the other hand, I think he's here less and less often. MineralMan Apr 2019 #39
His XX/XY sexist/transphobic thread was pretty bad. trotsky Apr 2019 #42
Well it certainly demonstrated that he doesn't understand genetics. MineralMan Apr 2019 #43
That's just it, there has been no growth, no learning, nothing. trotsky Apr 2019 #44
Well, there it is, I guess. MineralMan Apr 2019 #45
Kinda shocking you'd get even one Major Nikon Apr 2019 #90
He's good at it, that's for sure. Mariana Apr 2019 #80
Without having seen all the posts in question, I've got a working assumption: Pope George Ringo II Mar 2019 #13
Congratulations, you do not need to read the posts in question. trotsky Mar 2019 #15
My hat's off to those of you who suffer through trying to correct the irredeemable. Pope George Ringo II Mar 2019 #25
Ha, there is no correction possible. He's made that quite clear. trotsky Apr 2019 #28
It's so bad, WEC is... NeoGreen Mar 2019 #19
Some people build castles in the sky. Pope George Ringo II Mar 2019 #23
Eventually, it must come to this: MineralMan Mar 2019 #22
Let's look at the good news, though Pope George Ringo II Mar 2019 #24
I always thought Whataboutism was a pivot in a conversation so you don't answer the question mitch96 Apr 2019 #79
A beam, a mote, an eye and the confused I sanatanadharma Apr 2019 #101
I get it, but this mostly does not compute in Western philosophy. marylandblue Apr 2019 #102
Kick... NeoGreen Jun 2019 #103
:shrug: As Expected. MineralMan Jun 2019 #104
Well, when a current thread is the subject of numerous examples, guillaumeb Jun 2019 #105
Whatabout the whataboutist poster? Major Nikon Jun 2019 #106
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Religion»Jumping on the Whatabouti...»Reply #35