I commented on a reply Nicky had made towards Miss Grace, a writer here at WordPress and a warrior in the fight against abuses. My comment received a lengthy reply from Nicky, also a writer here at WordPress. This is my response. He has another reply to me that I might respond to if and when time allows. That will depend on how this goes. I see no point in wasting my time if my words are only running into a block wall. Nicky’s words are in black. My responses are in blue. Good night.
False assumption number 1
Firstly, let me start off by saying that your feeble attempts to elicit some sort of angry, irrational response isn’t going to work.
I had no intentions on causing you to feel angry. I apologize if your perspective of my words were to get you to reply with anger and irrationality. I had hoped we could have a rational discussion. I also hoped you would address my questions to you in your response. My illusion, my mistake.
False assumption number 2
By calling me “Nicky”, I assume you mean to, in some way, anger me.
Nicky is not the name I woud’ve chosen if I were attempting to anger you. I told you already why I chose Nicky. “I like Nicky so I’ll go with that.” I add a ‘y’ to my children’s and their friends’ names. I like it. It sounds more personal, adoring if you will. Nicky also reminds me a song from my childhood that we all liked. I chose Nicky because I like Nicky. “Hey Nicky what a pity you don’t understand….” Perhaps you are unaccustomed to interacting with people who say what they mean and mean what they say. That is OK. We are a rare breed. We are used to people telling us what our intentions are, what we meant to say, what we think and what we will do next. “I know you said this, but I also know you meant that.” Are you me? No, you are not me and you will not tell me what I meant to say. I meant to say exactly what I said. This brings us to your next sentence.
That much is clear, although I am willing to bet you’ll obviously deny this; regardless, there is no other reason for you to do this.
I love what you did here. That is very clever. State a false assumption and follow it with the words, “you’ll obviously deny this”. So where exactly does that leave me now? I cannot lie and say you were correct yet, if I tell the truth, you have already pre-established what I would say and in doing so, you’ve laid the ground work to reply with, “See! I knew you were going to deny it!”. Tricky Nicky.
I don’t mind it though, as my sisters refer to me by that very name. So, please continue with you “pet names”. It’s flattering.
I am glad you approve and thank you for your permission to continue calling you Nicky. I would’ve done it anyway. I do it to my kids in front of their friends to pole at them once in a while. It’s something moms like to do. I suppose there are some sisters that like to do it to their brothers as well, especially in front of their dates.
Secondly, I think you’re really missing the point, much like Grace.
You really need to learn to stop assuming what is in the minds of others. You are not very good at it, no offense. I have not not missed the point you were trying to make. I was not commenting on the point you attempted to make, I was commenting on exactly what I said in my comment.
You see, characterizing me in a particular way, like a “hater” or “judgmental” or whatever, does not necessitate the falsity of any claims I have made. Neither you, Grace, or hardly anyone else has cared to engage any of the points I have made. Why not?
Who has characterized you as a “hater” or “judgmental”? If that was not addressed specifically to me, then I shall disregard it. You have asked a question that you already have the answer to. If you re-read the comment I made to you, I stated that I will be addressing all of you issues and points in due time. Patience, my dear Nicky. As to Grace, I cannot speak for her but I can say you failed to engage her on the points she made in the original article.
You used this quote “When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser.” First off, you may want to check your sources, because there is no evidence Socrates said this (and “brainy quote” is about as reliable of a source as Wikipedia).
The Great Book of Best Quotes of All Time. Published by Khushnood Ali. Page 149. The quote is well known and has always been attributed to Socrates. I like that you try to be so technical about the irrelevant portions of what people you believe oppose you write. It’s cute. It’s useless in a debate setting. I was not engaging you in debate, but from my perspective, you are attempting to debate an unclear topic. So far, all I have seen are false assumptions and plays on words. Plato wrote down much of what Socrates had said. Do we know for a fact if Socrates said it or if it was Plato who said it and attributed it to Socrates? I can say that I do not know that for a fact. I can also say that there is no evidence that Socrates did not say it, either. Lack of evidence does not invalidate the claim. For example, we do not know for a fact that your father is your biological father, unless you have had a DNA test performed. Does that make your mother’s claim that he is your father invalid? I didn’t think so. I’m not making an assumption or accusation, just demonstrating in a manner you can comprehend. Your remark, or should I say challenge, is still fallacious. That’s OK. I digress a lot as well, however it is normally only while I am writing my story.
That’s really not this issue though…it’s just embarrassing.
There is no reason for you to be embarrassed. We are all adults here. I won’t fault you for being young. You’ll increase your knowledge with age. Everyone does, well, that is speaking in general terms. Some people just get dumber, but I like to attribute that to the drugs they use killing their brain cells. See, now I’m digressing.
But what about the truth of the statement itself (regardless of who uttered it)? Well, it is true people resort to all sorts of nasty behavior.
I completely agree with you in that the statement is true. I do so love the way you pick out one thing and then talk for hours on it. It’s exactly what you did with your ‘article’ review of Miss Grace’s article. You focus so much time and energy on one word or phrase that you cannot see the message itself.
What argument has been lost though? Where have I slandered her? I’m concerned you may not understand what that means.
You attacked Miss Grace’s character. You labeled her and placed her into a group and then you attacked that entire group, making claims about an entire group, when you and I both know that you cannot assign claims to entire groups of people. That is called “stereotyping”.
Once again, neither you or Grace have addressed any of the points I made. Only one commenter, a friend of Grace, or the very least a follower like yourself, has commented with any sense. She didn’t choose the route you and Grace have so obviously chose.
Asked and answered x3.
I don’t care whether you think I’m a narcissist, a “hater”. a “bigot”, or whatever; what I care about is for you to prove that I am wrong by approaching the content of my writing, not my character.
I do not think you are a narcissist, a hater, or a bigot nor have I stated you were any of those things. Do I think you are misinformed and uneducated in some matters? Not only do I think that, I know it for a fact. We are all misinformed and uneducated in some matters. If we knew it all, we wouldn’t need to see professionals to do certain things that we do not know how to do. I also know that when you increase your education in an area of study, that your opinions change and become more solid. Life is an adventure full of lessons and learning experiences. We never stop learning and we never stop changing our opinions based on what we learned. I am having a ‘do as I say, not as I do’ moment. I replied to your statements in kind. Do you understand what that means?
By ignoring this and choosing this route of “psychological explanation”, when you have never met me, and do not know me, means that you are very likely proving the truth of the “Socratic” quote you used. I don’t understand what’s so hard for you or Grace to comprehend about this?
You don’t understand because you are not listening. You are not reading the words that are written. No one is giving you a “psychological explanation” for anything. I am not even sure if you read and responded to what I wrote. Almost nothing you have written has to do with anything I said. It’s all about assumptions of the meanings you have pulled out of thin air to attribute to my words. Is it so hard for people to read words written in black and white and understand they mean exactly what they say, nothing more and nothing less?
What if I grant to you and her that I am just full of hate, a terrible Christian man, who just wants to judge and bash people’s sprits? What if I said “Okay, you got me. That’s exactly who I am!” Now what? What about the words I have spoke? Do you not understand that even a hateful person can utter true things? Do I expect either or you to agree with them? No, not initially I don’t. I expect you to say “No, he’s wrong.” But then I expect you to tell me how. Neither of you have done that. I will no longer follow either of you down these evasive little trails away from my blog posts, because in truth, more so than slander, when an argument is lost people use a distraction when they have no retort. What else am I to believe you two are doing by communicating this drivel? Grace has literally linked my blog to her Facebook numerous times, sharing it on multiple blogs, seeking support from others because she has no response to it. A few people, yourself included, have come to her defense – whether she needed it or not I dare not say. The point though is that my thoughts have clearly affected her deeply and she has not responded to it in intellectual manner yet. Why? You are free to go on thinking that she is a “warrior” defending herself from the attack of a terrible enemy, but back in the real world all I did was question a concept – “Culture of Violence” – and worked out a post on that topic, not Grace and her life. Nobody was attacking her – she isn’t the one who coined the term anyways – but she made points I disagreed with and so I wrote about it, not to embarrass her or shame her, but because I enjoy discussing ideas (which she claims to but clearly I have my doubts now…). So, go ahead, characterize me whatever way you wish. I truly does not bother me one way or another. Plenty of people appreciate my writings and firmly believe I am wasting my time on people such as yourselves, who (whether you admit or not) enjoy playing the victim. There is a sort of a sordid joy in that.
Talk about drivel…smh This is beyond ridiculous. This is just plain silly. You categorized her and attacked everyone in that category. You then placed blame for the tragic things people do to others on that entire category. You are absolutely wrong in where you place the blame. You might as well have stated that all Liberals are criminals and all Conservatives are law-abiding citizens. If you’ll excuse me now, I’m going to go bash my head on a brick wall. It should give me the same effect as trying to have a reasonable and intelligent discussion with you. I know you will not agree with anything I have written, nor will you change your mind or opinion on anything. I do know when efforts are futile and it is time to walk away.
So you’re upset I pretentiously over-reacted above? “Help! “Verbal assault”! Help!” Yes, I caricatured her response. You’re right – it is immature. I’m glad we can agree on that, only you seem to notice this within the caricature rather than the real thing (her response) being caricatured.
Your clichés, er, quotes are not worth my time. You’re free to respond and I apologize we had to meet under these circumstances. I hope if you do re-read these posts of mine, which I have only been writing for a couple of weeks now, not years, you will find a way to challenge the thoughts and ideas (not me because there is a difference). I apologize these posts of mine have made you all feel so awful. I commended Grace for her well-intentioned fight against things that plague our nation. I simply disagreed with her ideas – that’s all. It is sad the discussion was reduced to this. The real question is why most of you have no chosen to challenge my ideas. The rest of this could have been avoided. Goodbye.
P.S. Plot twist: I’m not a Christian. Shocker, right? I am a Deist. I am working my way back to Christianity, but it would be unfair of me to call myself that as of right now. So, as you all continue the “Christian man hates and hurts us” diatribe just know there is no “Christian man” doing it….
I like quotes and cliches. I find some entertaining, some educational (because I research to see if they are true), and some just downright idiotic. You have not made me feel awful. You do not have that power. I see that same question yet again. Asked and answered x 4. I will challenge you words or you, depending upon what you write. I respond in kind. Then again, if you are writing things that you do not feel are true or correct, then why write them? If you do feel they are true and correct, are they not part of who you are? Are they not part of your character? Something to consider. I addressed your article on one of my pages. You are welcome to read it and respond if you feel the need. My apologies for not getting back to you sooner. I had a child in crisis to focus on. It comes and goes so if I don’t reply right away, it’s not because I am avoiding you. It is because I have serious issues to tend to. Priority number 1: My children.
Be well, Nicky.
Mel, Saved by God’s Grace.