[***Y'all will have to forgive us for yesterday. Apparently our host got attacked by terrorists or some such f*ckery and nobody using our host was able to log into their WP accounts until mad late. At which point Panama said, "f*ck it". Well, today, we're letting VSB legend, Cheekie, come thru and spread love the Brooklyn way. We'd let her do it the Chi-town way, but somebody might get shot then. Shots fired. Triple entendre, don't even ask me how. So without further ado, the floor belongs to the cheeks.***]
So, I be debating in these streets. And I enjoy it, thusly. Seriously, I love to debate for the sake of debating. Not because I want to change my opponent’s opinion (this mission is as futile as me trying to jump into freeze frame in real life as they did in 80s sitcoms, but still, I rise), but because I genuinely enjoy the discourse with someone who doesn’t share my opinion. It’s an adrenaline rush. A long one (heh), too. Apparently, the “gotta have the last word” is a Leo thing and it takes a lot for me to let sleeping dogs lie. #StayWokeDawg
Because of this, I’ve developed a few pet peeves when it comes to debating others. These are the things folks say in rebuttal, but in a “bringing a knife to a gun fight” manner WHILST puffing out their chest as if they brought an AK-47. So, without that ninja Adieu popping up to say anything further, I’m gonna to list ‘em for ya:
1. “I have a right to my opinion.”
Often said when I disagree with someone. Um, yes, booboo, we know you do. Know what I didn’t do, though, by disagreeing with your opinion? TAKE AWAY your right to yours. For the 50-leventh time folks (especially ya’ll in the back row), if I disagree with you, that is not taking away your right to your opinion, it’s using my own right. Capiche? Quiche. Also in this same vein: “I have freedom of speech.” You GO BOY/GIRL. But, I ain’t the gubment. Thus, I can sh*t on your speechy freedom as I dayum well please. Because I am doing, what again, class? Class: USING MY OWN RIGHT. *clap clap clap*
2. “Only SOME do this, NOT ALL.”
Chile. I think Panda-Panama wrote an entire post on this in the past, but in the spirit of being truthful, this IS in my top five of debate tactic pet peeves. So, I gotta speak my piece in order to maintain peace. Wait, what? Anyway. For some reason, generalizations ain’t what’s sizzling on these boulevards. And I get why, I really do. We are not a monolith, blah blah skippy. However, generalizations are necessary sometimes. Yes, necessary. Because what we can’t do is note every single instance in which our claim has occurred. I mean, do I gotta be like, “ONLY the 56,48484.54 men I have encountered have approached me on some street harassment steez” or can I assume readers have common sense and will read “Men engage in street harassment” and — by default — realize it only applies to the specific men who have engaged in such behavior? I be TRYING to achieve the latter, but alas…
3. “Agree to disagree.”
Now, this is my Lioness roaring again, because I do acknowledge that sometimes this is necessary. However, it’s oft-abused like a mug. So, while the term itself doesn’t particularly annoy me, it’s the manner in which it’s used: to have the last word, which, by default, MUST mean you have won. “Agree to disagree” is the end of the discussion and if you say this right after you have said all you need to say on a matter, you can smugly claim victory. Except not. But, folks do this sooooooo often and I be mad. Q: You mad? A: Yup.
4. “You just a hater./Why you hating?”
This is usually uttered when discussing a famous entity, even when you have a legit gripe about them. Lemme tell you something. Numero uno, someone has to be in the position to be hated on, in order for me to hate on them. Gotta get that outta the way as folks STAY claiming we’re hating when… girl wut… why???? Further, just because I have one not-so-glowing thing to say about someone doesn’t mean I hate them. It just means I know they ain’t perfect. The problem is… some folks don’t get this. It’s a low down dirty shame. Whew.
5. “You’re comparing apples to oranges.”
Another actually-necessary phrase that is oft-abused. And to use an example, I’mma bring up old sh*t (but not really, as it’s still an ongoing argument, in general). So, Panama (hey boy hey!) and I had this forever-and-a-day argument about how men are hypocrites for calling women hypocrites for liking “Scandal.” The menfolk (remember: NOT ALL! tee hee) came to a consensus that women are hypocrites for enjoying the drama within “Scandal” while hating cheaters in real life. And I used the example of how men love “The Wire” yet wouldn’t necessarily love the violence that came with it… in real life. I said that both occur for sheer entertainment, and it’s okay. It really is! He said I was comparing “apple to oranges.” NO SIR. Yes, the specific situations may be different in that women are more vocal about cheating, but the concept is exactly the same! Which is what I’m comparing. The concept that just because we are entertained by something in fiction, that doesn’t mean we condone such an act in real life. If we can’t separate the fact that even though it’s entertaining, Olivia Pope is a cheater (and we hate cheaters), then ya’ll can’t separate the fact that even though it’s entertaining, Stringer Bell, Avon Barksdale, an’nem facilitate in killing the community, including the kiddies (and ya’ll surely hate that if you have a heart, Five Heartbeats). Apples and oranges may be different in taste and color, but they still both fruit. (Manager’s Note: Did this motherlover really just come into my motherf*cking establishment and take as hot at me on a guest post I allowed to happen? Oh. Yes. Carry on. – Panama)
Woo, followed by… sahhhhhh.
Aiight, VSB fam, what other debates tactics annoy you? Do any of the above annoy you or do you think they’re valid? Speak (or debate) on it.
(Hey Panama, can I do this alias sign-off thing? It always seemed like fun.)
– Cheekie aka CHEEKS aka BELINDA J. CHEEKINGTON aka DAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAWG, SHE GOT CHEEKS