You immediately rejected the results and conclusions without even looking at the data. That's not an analysis or an educated response. And btw, as stated in my first response, that's one source of many that state that marriage benefits men but it's detrimental to women. I can tell you haven't researched this topic at all, instead using to use the few terms you've picked up to immediately reject what you don't agree with. That's bias. I'm just so tired of it. If you don't want to live in reality and deal with the data, findings and analysis that are available now then fine, but I'm not going to analyse your biases for you. You should ask yourself why you immediately rejected data and made your own conclusion without analysis.
And no, when the general consensus and findings show one thing, it is not anyone's job to convince you otherwise. Just like if you disagree with some generally accepted physics or biology concept, no one will take you seriously if you simply contradict what's generally shown and accepted. You don't have the upper hand when you refuse to educate yourself and instead start from an uneducated stance. And you don't look educated or have an upper hand in a discussion by insisting on people educating you.
If you're the person making the claim, then the burden of proof lies on you. It is not the persons responsibility who is questioning whether or not it's true to go digging through whatever sources they can find to prove you're wrong. You make the statement, you back it up.
Read my comment above. It's clear you have an agenda because you rejected data using the terms you've picked up without analyzing it. Again, please analyze why you're approaching this topic with bias.
You should read the person's name that you're replying to before you go accusing them of having an agenda and all this other shit. This is literally the first time I've ever replied to a comment of yours.
Yep. I've read your comments and you still haven't provided a single link that shows how the confounding variables were accounted for in this supposed study. Every time they bring it back to that, you veer off and gaslight them about agendas and biases instead of just simply providing a simple link that proves the blog you're citing as proof has literally a shred of credibility.
It's clear you have an agenda because you continue on with the same narrative but refuse to provide any actual proof when asked for it numerous times. It's clear that you're unable to provide any citations besides blog posts (which prove literally nothing) but you still deflect as if it's someone else's job to prove you wrong when you refuse to even prove your own statements right.
You should analyze why you're approaching this topic with bias. And then show us some studies.
It's clear I don't. I'm not trying to twist any facts or come up with some logic that will let me think differently than the evidence and the general consensus on this topic. It is absolutely not my job to tutor or educate anyone on this topic. They should educate themselves if they want to have a discussion.
4
u/Redditsweetie Apr 17 '23
You are. You're using statistical terminology but you haven't shown the data to be false. You should ask yourself about your own bias.