Reply #114: If you think

[omega minimo]

"Sure, I'm generalizing, and generalizations are inherently false (gotcha), so of course this doesn't apply to everyone with ...."

...if you think that "generalizations are inherently false" you may be predisposed to not understand my comments or the ambiguity that allows for exploring these ideas.

If it was safe, which it isn't, I would be more specific about the differences. As it is, ambiguous comments, even with disclaimers attached and careful wording, are too much for those who want to make them something they're not.

You have told me what I meant by with my words, reiterating them to me and asking for defense against your interpretation. I can simply tell you that's not correct.

You "don't agree with your assessment" of my own ideas :silly:

Thank you for trying. :hi:


on edit:

"There's a difference between saying that men and women generally communicate differently and saying that women in charge of politics would listen and be considerate. The first is true and the second, false and sexist."



I said the first and did not say the second. So we agree.



"Any drastic change to a system is likely to cause other changes, but not necessarily, and it's a bad idea to assume otherwise."

I imagine if the OP supposition happened, it would be the result of gradual change.



"It's bad science to think it's one OR the other."

I never said it was. I think there are other aspects as well.

"...and thinking women would act differently in the same situation is an interesting hypothesis, but certainly not a given."

Never said it was, dear P-- wish we could get away from the Either/Or thinking.