You really do come up with some real cobblers (and transparent distraction techniques) to try to wriggle out of admitting how poor your arguments are.
Let’s simplify things for you:
- You basically seem to be trying to argue that it’s OK for the store staff to discriminate against males, in contravention of their own company’s clear policies, because some males are violent towards women.
- I’ve never been violent towards women. But you seem to think it’s OK for staff to discriminate against me simply because I’m the same biological sex as most of the people who are violent towards women. But that’s what sexism is all about; being prejudiced against someone based merely on what sex they are.
- I then say this:
“Is a male more likely to commit such as offence than a female? Possibly. But what if I told you that black people were slightly more likely than white people to commit such an offence? Would that justify excluding black people from the fitting rooms? Of course not! That would be racist. Just as what you are condoning, is sexist. And sexism is no better than racism.”
That’s a perfectly fair analogy. The point should be obvious: If it isn’t right to discriminate against all black people simply because of what a small minority of black people do, then it isn’t right to discriminate against men simply because of what a small minority of men do.
- You attempted to dismiss my racism analogy by claiming it is ‘spurious,’ ‘contrived’ and ‘lacking in validity.’ But these are empty accusations, for which you have failed to provide any justification. I pointed this out, but you have again failed to provide any justification for your claims — instead indulging in more distraction techniques.
- Instead, you gave this crap about you trying to clarify my analogy. But what you originally wrote was:
“As far as your spurious racism analogy is concerned, it’s just that — a contrived argument, totally lacking in validity. How do you know black ‘people’ are slightly more likely to assault a woman or girl in a female fitting room? By ‘people’ do you mean males or females, or both?”
So what actually happened was that you first declared that my racism analogy and argument was ‘spurious’ and ‘contrived’ and ‘lacking in validity’ and only then did you ask a question about it, having already made your judgement. And your questions are not relevant to the point at issue. They’re just another part of your distraction tactics. But I’m not fooled.
So, please, how about you cut the crap, stop indulging in silly distraction techniques and either justify your claims or be grown up enough to admit you can’t justify them?
And I’m not virtue-signalling. I’m taking action to expose and challenge people’s prejudices, as a matter of principle. You, on the other hand, seem to be more interested in excusing the sort of prejudice, bigotry and discrimination that I have highlighted in my article. Perhaps a rethink would be in order?