An OP in /r/relationships says she's not going to make excuses for her cheating...then proceeds to make excuses. She defends herself in the comments with more excuses. Drama everywhere. (np.reddit.com)
SubredditDrama
97 ups - 40 downs = 57 votes
73 comments submitted at 02:11:13 on Jan 28, 2014 by snallygaster
>They are not even remotely similar situations. How can you read her comment and decide that they are similar situations?
Previous relationship, kissed somebody else. Current relationship, kissed somebody else. Nope, can't see any similarities here.
Previous relationship: Abusive boyfriend, kissed somebody else.
Current relationship: Great boyfriend, fucked somebody else.
Both situations are wrong but what's the point of ignoring the fact that there are different degrees of how wrong/bad something is?
And that = no similarities? Right, got ya. Also, only kissing from what I read.
It's not that they share no similarities. It's more that they are much different scenarios than is fairly represented by the statement: "Previous relationship, kissed somebody else. Current relationship, kissed somebody else."
> only kissing from what I read.
Didn't she wake up naked in his bed?
Possible I missed that part. But I quoted the part I was taking issue with
>They are not even remotely similar situations.
which is clearly ridiculous. Different situations? Sure, and you can point out those differences. And if someone said identical situations? They'd be wrong. But to say they aren't similar? That's someone I'm going to laugh at.
Well you're right that that statement is wrong but you fought hyperbole with hyperbole when you reduced the scenarios to what you did in your first comment. That was the part I was taking issue with.
No I didn't. I pointed out the blatant similarities that the quoted post denies are there. Do you see anywhere where I've written that there aren't differences? No, because I haven't. Argue against what I've actually said, not what you think I've said.
Here's an analogy for what you've done:
Poster: I'm having trouble peeling this apple, even though I have peeled plenty of oranges in the past.
Commenter: Well, there's your problem. Oranges and apples are not even remotely similar. The peeling technique is different.
You: Orange: tart, round fruit that grows on trees. Apple: tart, round fruit that grows on trees. Nope, can't see any similarities here.
See the point of my analogy? Yes, you were technically right that there are similarities between the two situations. There are similarities between lots of situations. The question is, are the similarities relevant to the situation? Is it right to point out the similarities, given the context?
You may be technically correct, but you're kind of coming across as a jerk given the context.
Your analogy is wrong. He doesn't say there are no similarities in any particular way, he doesn't qualify the statement at all, he doesn't give any context. He straight up says there are no similarities. In fact he goes further, he is incredulous that anyone could find a similarity. I pointed out that there are very obvious similarities. And if we really have to deal with this citrus analogy, in your one I would be missing the point about peeling. Whereas in the linked post to what I posted here, I'm not missing anything. Unless you're seriously contending that somebody cheating in back to back relationships has no relevance to their post about them cheating.
You're also being incredibly generous to Diabolically from the linked post. That quote in full once again in case it's been forgotten.
>They are not even remotely similar situations. How can you read her comment and decide that they are similar situations?
Find all the differences you want, but someone saying there are no similarities is laughable, which is what I did because we're in SRD. I'm not technically correct, I'm just correct.
>And if we really have to deal with this citrus analogy, in your one I would be missing the point about peeling. Whereas in the linked post to what I posted here, I'm not missing anything. Unless you're seriously contending that somebody cheating in back to back relationships has no relevance to their post about them cheating.
Yes, I'm contending that. I'm saying that you are missing a very big mitigating factor, analogous to peeling: the abusiveness of the prior relationship changes everything. It means that any similarities you find are just pointless technicalities. She didn't care about the prior relationship when she kissed her now-boyfriend, and her ex did not care about her. The kiss in that context is not at all an indication of any kind of pathological pattern of cheating behavior. It's the desperate action of someone finding a way out of an abusive relationship.
Frankly, I think your repeated dismissal of that crucial mitigating factor reveals you to be callous and judgmental.
You pointed out one similarity between the two relationships without listing any of the differences. Was this not supposed to be an indication that you thought the scenarios were similar? If not then what was the point of the comment? To point out that her word choice was wrong? Yeah, you can find a similarity between two scenarios she described as "not being remotely similar" which makes her technically incorrect, but the way you simplified the two scenarios to:
> Previous relationship, kissed somebody else. Current relationship, kissed somebody else.
...is extremely misleading to the point of being a misrepresentation. No, you never explicitly mentioned there weren't differences but lets not pretend there isn't subtext to your comment.
>You pointed out one similarity between the two relationships without listing any of the differences.
While quoting someone stating that there were no similarities. How am I not getting this point across to you?
>but lets not pretend there isn't subtext to your comment.
This is actually hilarious. Go back and read my comment. I'm serious, put in the ?context= modifier and go back and read it. Then for one moment, just one, consider that what I did was laugh at a badly written comment in an SRD thread. Then read through your replies to me and consider that you're having an argument that I never subscribed to.
> While quoting someone stating that there were no similarities. How am I not getting this point across to you?
Did you not read the part of my comment where I stated you were technically correct about the person being semantically wrong?
> consider that what I did was laugh at a badly written comment in an SRD thread.
The problem is you responded to the badly written comment with a poorly formed argument. You misrepresented the two scenarios by leaving out extremely relevant, mitigating details. The first relationship she was unloyal to an abusive and unloyal boyfriend with one kiss. The second relationship she was unloyal to a good boyfriend with presumably sex. You'd have to be autistic to think those situations are more similar than they are different. You were pretty much laughing at a strawman of a comment.