I'm not certain that that is what BCT doesn't understand. I'm not even certain he disagrees with that, as far as it goes. For example, if we rewind to the post that began this thread, I suspect he would agree that "Alien as angry black woman" is preposterous. If I read him right, his argument with you would be more along the lines of "yes, but..."
However, I can't really speak for him, that's just my read, and maybe I'm wrong.
Possibly. But that's what I'm trying to interrogate...
the "yes, but". On it's face - it's fine. I don't have any problem with people offering up counterfacts. That's good for healthy discussion. But the reflexive use of "Yes, but" without any contextual discernment of what gets offered up *after* the "Yes, but" is what is needed.
If the premise of the "Yes, but" ignores any of the aforementioned claims such as "Pretending to know what the intent of of what's in someone's mind at the time of an an action is very difficult to ascertain"... You know... this is the difference between Manslaughter and Murder 1. Intent is *extremely* hard to prove for a reason.
Saying "Yes, but" - then flying off the handle with telepathic claims of intent, should be taken with extreme skepticism. the degree to which people engage in this kind of rhetoric as a norm means the problem is likely with the person making the rhetorical argument.
I have been down this road before and “Yes, but... (ignores any refutations and just reiterates his/her/their? point with ever increasing histrionic hyperbole mixed with oddly misanthropic quips and lamentations about the human species)” is all that arguing with crayon eater ever gives you. He/she/it(?) never addresses your point. He(etc.) almost never provides any example of WTF exactly he’s talking about, and in the odd event that they(?) do, it’s always wrong and a misrepresentation of the actual work it(?) is using as an example. Everything is “obviously” racist, sexist, whatever and you just have to accept it as self-evident fact.
Arguments with crayon always end in frustration—both, your own and their’s, which he/she/it(?) will express profusely in a whiny manner. I’ve argued this exact same topic with him(?) extensively months ago, and it just went on in circles (as arguments with them always do), and it never went anywhere, with crayon never counter arguing my refutations and just circling back to his original point eventually, just slightly reworded or from a different angle—like he/she/it(?) is desperately trying to convince me of his foregone conclusion rather than actually addressing my point.
Like bringing it up again, but comparing orcs to vikings instead of non-white ethnic groups this time around is going to convince me that describing a group as “bloodthirsty raiding savages” is always racist propaganda to justify “blah, blah, blah” rather than accurate descriptions of both, vikings and orcs. Cuz obviously I’m a white supremacist or something, and I would relate more to a white group of bloodthirsty raiding savages, so using them as an example is just what I would find relatable enough to realize just how racist it is to refer to a group of bloodthirsty raiding savages as bloodthirsty raiding savages. Except that vikings ARE bloodthirsty raiding savages, and the fact that some groups have historically used words like “bloodthirsty raiding savages” as part of their racist propaganda to justify blah, blah, blah does not change the fact that the words “bloodthirsty raiding savages” can ALSO be accurate descriptors for some groups. And if you want to describe something you HAVE to use accurate terminology and the fact that racist groups may have also used similar words in their propaganda DOES NOT mean that those words are compromised and racist forever and you cannot use them again.
But crayon’s histrionic, myopic ass can’t tell the difference so he/she/it just chooses to interpret EVERYTHING as “similar to racist propaganda, therefore ‘obviously’ equal to racist propaganda”. So the argument circles back, ENDLESSLY, cuz he ain’t arguing points or listening to reason. He just has his forgone points stuck in his head, which he wrongheadedly takes as “obvious” despite just being figments in his head. So won’t discuss anything else. And it goes on and on, FOREVER.