Contributing to a conversation doesn’t make someone a snowflake. I can talk about rape and never have been raped. By your logic, you’re also a snowflake. Besides, labeling someone with a word with negative connotation isn’t a productive way to have a conversation. Its just insulting them. You can still have a conversation with ad homonyms. I personally haven’t seen it going anywhere, though.

Wow, cryophilia that might be the most dishonest argument I’ve seen. It certainly is the worst one i can think of. Read a whole post before responding, Oh intelligent and rational one.

Emotions are inherently irrational. Deal with it. Trauma is inherently irrational. You’re cherry-picking the part of the paragraph that you think makes the other argument seem absurd. If anyone here’s the irrational one, it’s you.

Maybe you’re just dense? It seems pretty damn obvious if you can read between the lines. It seems to me that you don’t like that you dont understand, so you’re blaming it on everyone else. Dont blame others that you aren’t picking up what others are putting down I’m a dude, and it’s pretty straightforward if you can put yourself in the shoes of someone who has had a terrible thing done to them. They don’t want to be even near a situation like that again. The point isnt the bear. You could replace that with anything. It could be a humpback whale, a lion, or a capybara. The animal isn’t the point its the inherent unfairness of women that have to live their life in fear of men. Due to a past experience or even just caution.

Let’s say i choose being in the woods with a bear over a woman. Does that make me sexist? I personally dont see it. Im not setting a different standard for men or women. Maybe I’m just gay, or afraid of women. I dont see how it’s sexist if i say, im more afraid of x than y. Therefore, i choose y. Maybe, I have more bad experiences with x, leaving y. Sexism would be to set different standards for the sexes where this question isn’t setting different standards for men and women. It’s pointing out that the already existent standards for men and women and how different they are.

If you create someone, a living thinking person,do you have authority to destroy them? I’d say you do not. Do your parents have the right to destroy you? No, they do not. So why does god have this privilege?

I have a question, suppose that a different god or being did all the things said in the bible attributed to god. Are these deaths and atrocities still moral? Are they good because god did them? Or are they inherent good things to do? What if you were the one who started the flood or unleashed the plagues or anything else like that? Is the act still moral? Is the death of thousands if not moral at that point?

I disagree with the notion that religion is a mental disorder. I myself don’t subscribe to religion or the notion of a god, but you need to be careful with how you say things like this as this will feed into christian feelings of persecution. This kind of rhetoric is exactly what the christian god has done. Cleanse the unbelievers because they’re evil. Do not commit the same failure that this other guy is. We can’t commit the same crimes as the proposed yaweh and think ourselves morally superior.

And, those are awesome solutions, my thought is, that a random peasant could get disabled and not afford magical solutions. Or maybe they’re superstitious of magic. Maybe they’re part of a blood cult that worships some demon that values the sacrifice of limbs. There are legitimate reasons to have some npcs with disabilities.

I have way too much fun reminding the dm of things that screw us, the party, over. It makes it kinda fun!

Get revanced, it works now.