Most of this is autobiography, status display, and a fictional profile of me rather than a response to what I said.
That's your opinion. Mine remains.
Saying your claims are “factual with substance” does not make them so. Calling me unintelligent while insisting you are not insulting me is also transparently contradictory. My briefly narrowing an earlier interpretation does not validate the rest of your claims.
What makes my claims factual is what I wrote before you responded. That hasn't changed. As a matter fact you are a doom poster. No one here would argue that. You're also miserable which is most likely the key driving force of your consistent poo flinging.
Yes, everything I've said is factual. Stamped and approved and on display before I even mentioned it here.
“Younger people have less experience” is obvious. “Therefore Gen Z is uniformly the least wise” does not follow. Age can provide opportunities to gain wisdom, but people can also accumulate prejudice, rigidity, and repeated error. Experience is not automatically converted into wisdom.
Wisdom is gained by experience and observation. Both come in due time and there is a lot to learn.
On that note, I can tell you have some overdue hard lessons. Reality hits. Older people on average, by a landslide, also have more regrets, and regret makes one wiser. It really does.
Your long description of enjoying pizza, technology, attention, money, sex, friends, and entertainment does not conflict with nihilism. You are describing subjective enjoyment. I have never claimed that people cannot enjoy temporary experiences. I have said that enjoyment does not establish objective or permanent purpose.
Don't care about nihilism. It's been your theme for weeks. Nihilism is a void. Belief in nothing. It by definition means nothing. No values, no traditions. No sense of right or wrong. Nothing good comes out of it. It's boring, ignores functionality.
If you're a nihilistic person, you shouldn't bitch when I'm not in the mood to entertain what I perceive as foolishness, though I can agree it shouldn't matter.
Don't care if you know your purpose or not either, which is a good thing cause I cannot change your mind, nor would I consider trying, though I can assure you closed minds will most likely never realize their purpose, especially a nihilistic persona.
You also keep replacing my actual position with “the world is going to end and it will be great,” “life is hard, therefore everyone should die,” and similar caricatures. Recognizing that extinction and impermanence are inevitable is not the same as feeling constant doom, nor does preferring eventual nonexistence require being unable to enjoy anything now.
I brought it up, not replacing anything.
Still, you'd like us all to just die. That's your "Holy Grail". Your sense of a creator is the very nothing that created you and so you'll return to the very nothing from where you came, and how it'll be great cause life is nothing but suffering. To you it's a sin to procreate.
Likewise, I do not label myself a feminist. Supporting abortion as necessary healthcare and supporting a woman’s ability to opt out of reproduction does not automatically entail every political and psychological belief you assigned to me. You invented an ideological character and then attacked it.
Every label I've, as you say, assigned to you, come from the various attributes and ideologies you've displayed here over time.
I do think there are cases where abortion is in order, but if a whore keeps getting knocked up she should have her tubes tied.
The comments about my body, masculinity, sexuality, family, location, physical survival, and supposed fear of women have no bearing on whether your claims are true. They are humiliation tactics intended to replace analysis with a hierarchy in which you appoint yourself healthy, strong, desirable, and enlightened while assigning me the opposite traits.
Ha ha ha.
Regardless if I bring it up or not, it's true.
That may be emotionally satisfying, but it does not constitute truth or intelligence. It only demonstrates how heavily your argument depends on asserting personal superiority whenever the actual claims are challenged.
Fine then.
I'm either able to assert personal superiority or not. If I did, I'll take it. Did I really do that Dragoon ?
Only someone with personal superiority would be able to assert it in the first place.
- I told some stories. I claim them to be true. Take it or leave it.
- In my story I got ran over, cockblocked, toyed with and a list of other things I've tolerated and forgiven.
- I cut someone I love loose. Best for us both. She lost the protector, the cheerleader, the comedian and the truth teller all at the same time. I will no longer be a resource to be used. No more chances. We need to release what doesn't serves, especially if it does nothing but causes distress. This took a very long time.
- There comes a point where we really should give up.
When it's time to understand, you'll overstand, that's why you're deluded. You don't understand.
No argument when I wrote it the first time. But you somehow still see it as some argument.
Here's what I know.
When you see people make better choices, wise choices, you have something to argue. I don't see any value arguing about my personal experiences, my incredible capacity to forgive and tolerate, and my decision to give up for a change. Perhaps to you, I'm in the wrong. Not important to anyone. Kinda makes me question your nihilism. Looks like you're displaying some sense of right or wrong. Here I'll be a nihilist for a moment. Fuck that shit. I'm putting me first for a change. Thank you.
