We have made the same mistake over and over again when dealing with conservatives, which is the assumption that they give a micron of a shit about definitions and facts.
They are not living in a fact-based world, and we resent them for that because they are benefitting from the science, facts and reason that has build the world they cherish.
But we can make far more effective arguments if we meet them on an emotional level in these debates. I’ve seen more progress made in debates by progressives asking them what they would do if their own son or daughter was gay or trans than all the graphs and statistics in the world.
Or at the very least, call them heartless, weird, child-hating, freedom-hating, etc.
We have made the same mistake over and over again when dealing with conservatives, which is the assumption that they give a micron of a shit about definitions and facts.
They are not living in a fact-based world, and we resent them for that because they are benefitting from the science, facts and reason that has build the world they cherish.
But we can make far more effective arguments if we meet them on an emotional level in these debates. I’ve seen more progress made in debates by progressives asking them what they would do if their own son or daughter was gay or trans than all the graphs and statistics in the world.
Or at the very least, call them heartless, weird, child-hating, freedom-hating, etc.
I don’t disagree, just pointing out - engaging them on an emotional level (in a different way) is exactly what happened in OP.