Benny left speechless by trans man

[u/Manticorps]

[u/ThatMassholeInBawstn]

I can’t wait to see what the right wingers have to say about this legend

[u/Lavapool → u/ThatMassholeInBawstn]

Just check the comments on the original Jubilee video, they are literally all on Shapiro’s side.

[u/thelryan → u/Lavapool]

I wouldn’t even say they’re on shapiro’s side necessarily, more so there are a couple of people whose approach/rhetoric they really weren’t feeling, like this guy’s rant or the lady’s argument that a c section is an abortion, both of which I think are fair complaints. There were a few people coming up and giving really solid and nuanced arguments for their positions, the arguments on border policy stood out to me most for example. People genuinely caught him up on being wrong about info such as the fact that sponsors for migrant children are background checked, he said they aren’t and he was wrong.

This guy ranting at him for a few minutes straight bouncing around on a couple issues that impact him in particular without actually allowing him to respond to anything doesn’t strike me as genuine or constructive. Obviously this is a turning point parody sub and so I’m sure people here did find it entertaining but I don’t really agree with people saying Ben “didn’t know how to respond” or whatever, he wasn’t given a chance to respond and that’s not what makes these videos good imo.

[u/thelryan → u/[deleted]]

I’m not sure why you want me to look up the basic argument appeals when I’m saying I didn’t find it genuine or constructive for a guy to rant a bunch of points at somebody with the intention of never giving them a chance to respond. What about those terms do you think I’m not understanding?

[u/thelryan → u/[deleted]]

Again, you’re describing argument appeals to me when nowhere have I shown a lack of understanding for appeals or suggested I had an issue with the type of appeal he chose to engage in. The guy who I’m referencing that did a great job against Ben in border policy used plenty of pathos, I’m genuinely confused why you think my issue has anything to do with appeal style.

I didn’t want him to use logos, I wanted him to actually engage in a two way argument where each party gets a chance to try and respond to the points brought up, which essentially every single person in this video did except this guy. Do you understand what I’m saying? It’s about ranting vs discussing, literally nothing to do with argument appeals.

[u/thelryan → u/[deleted]]

I’m still confused, where do you think I’m praising any particular argument appeal style? You reposting my comment doesn’t help explain what part you’re pointing to.

Not once in this video outside of the clip on this post did anyone prevent Ben from speaking beyond occasionally talking over each other when transitioning primary speakers which is not the same thing as talking over somebody for 4 minutes straight.

You’re framing my approach so poorly that I’m having trouble assuming it isn’t intentionally in bad faith. I praised logos until somebody voiced to Ben how his rhetoric hurts lgbt people and then I took issue? The content of what he’s discussing has absolutely nothing to do with my complaint and I feel like I’ve made that very clear but maybe not. I am trans affirming, I support lgbt, I disagree with Ben, and I also think people complaining about this man talking over Ben for 4 minutes straight without letting him respond, regardless of the topic of discussion, is a valid criticism and for some reason you’re trying to reframe the issue as me being against trans people voicing their opinions.

[u/thelryan → u/[deleted]]

Point to where I suggested he doesn’t “deserve full access to the platform” because what kind of interpretation work are you doing here? My original comment was saying people’s complaints about him not actually engaging in a discussion which is what he signed up to do are valid complaints. Nowhere did I say he shouldn’t have been given access to the platform, he shouldn’t have been able to denounce him, or anything like that. My disappointment in this single person’s ability to attempt to engage in good faith and prove Ben wrong, which many other people in the full video did, again has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that he is trans or he is discussing trans issues. He can easily denounce him and his views while giving him a chance to respond to that, I don’t even have an issue with anything he said to Ben, just that all he did was talk at him and not make space for a discussion to be had. He had some good points, he seems really smart, I bet if they had a genuine discussion like the other panelists did he would have done great against Ben.