News

I just read your two comments. I mean this as constructive and helpful. Sorry if it comes off as rude.

On the bridge you start interrogating about the incorrect answer to your first question. It's quite presumptuous. I wouldn't have downvoted. But it also doesn't seem like a big deal.

On your gay adoption comment, I get what you were saying. It came off really pedantic. But also, the implication is hilarious that the way to make men "manly" is to have them raised by gay men.

In the past 3 days I’ve been downvoted for commenting that gay people can adopt babies (in 196 for that matter)

I was curious so I went looking in your post history for an innocent and clear comment communicating "that gay people can adopt babies". I found your comment, and immediately understood why you were downvoted for it. Here it is in context:

The OP was this:

and your comment was below one response to the OP:

I don't know if English is your second language, or if you're not used to drawing meaning from poetry rather than fact from prose. The person you replied to was giving a poetic answer. Keep in mind, I'm not saying I agree or disagree with any of the opinions listed above, simply that I can grasp the ideas and concepts the people were communicating in what they wrote:

When that poster said poetically "Every man is the son of a woman" they were communicating the idea that every man, that grows up to be an "undesirable adult" (as reflected by the OPs post) was once, at least for a fraction of a second, under the care of a woman (as in: thats how biology works). Further, the vast majority of those that would be men were under the care of women for many years, and if they grew to be "undesirable", then previous generations of women had a hand in raising them that way and are therefore at least partially responsible for them being "undesirable". Again, I'm not lending my voice in agreement or disagreement, I'm simply translating what they were saying poetically into an easier to understand block of text for you. It is up to you to form your own opinion.

What you responded with was appearing to contradict the poster as though they wrote prose. You focused exclusively on the idea that a tiny fraction of men are raised by a set of same sex parents ignoring the fact that the vast men aren't raised in that situation. Further your "yes and no" seemed to suggest it could be as high as 50/50 split, which is of course, far far from reality.

Your downvotes were earned by you with people essentially saying:

If you need another example to highly what you did. Imagine the original post was Shakespeare's like from Romeo and Juliet:

“What's in a name? That which we call a rose, by any other word would smell as sweet.”

And you responded with:

"Shakespeare was probably referring to Old Garden Roses (Rosaceae Gallicas) and it does have a unique fragrance"

You might be kind of factually correct, but Shakespeare was writing poetically, not referring to a specific plant, but that the properties of the thing apply to it irrespective of whatever name we attach to it. Nobody cares what the genus and species of rose Shakespeare was referring to because the meaning of the idea he was communicating was separate from that.

Malicious downvoting is rampant here. People are a bit more silo'd on reddit which leads to less noise and more positivity when a user sticks to their chosen subs. I get the feeling that people here stick to the All or Local feeds which leads to a lot of negativity.

The majority of lemmy is grade school/high school aged kids. Don’t expect reasonable responses to anything here and you’ll do just fine.