You're viewing part of a thread.
Yeah, and what I am saying is that you should.
Seems pretty useless to do that here, now, when we all agree.
So you agree that you should have an opinion on this, when you just explicitly avoided that, despite that having been my point all along?
Ei tarvinnu kyllä nickiä kattoa että tunnisti suomalaisen.
I have always had an opinion about it, I just don't see a reason to bring it up when it is not the point of what I'm saying. That could be a little obnoxious.
Oh yes, it would just be totally obnoxious to voice an opinion against child genital mutilation, on a FORUM.
“If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor. If an elephant has its foot on the tail of a mouse, and you say that you are neutral, the mouse will not appreciate your neutrality.”
― Desmond Tutu (Foreword)
If it's on a place where everyone already agrees and it's not even the point of what I was saying then yes, it can be pretty obnoxious.
If you are neutral
I'm not neutral though.
I’m not neutral though.
I haven’t taken any moral position on that.
Okay. Ever heard of the term "avoidance"?
You've misunderstood. I have a moral position, I haven't made a moral stance in this thread. Do you get the difference?
For about a dozen comments, I've been banging on about how my point is that my opinion is that there is absolutely no reason not to oppose child genital mutilation — during which you first actively avoided even taking a stance, and now say you always had a stance, but just refrained from telling it out of politeness.
I've seen this a thousand times. Like I said, I knew your nationality before I happened to gaze at the nick. That attitude is exactly what I've been protesting the whole time. Protesting, and reiterating that I'm protesting it. Which you've not gotten. Despite me pointing this out several times.
You're here protesting someone (who already agrees with you) because I didn't care to soapbox about my view since the discussion didn't call for it and we all already agree. This is slacktivism at its finest.
You very explicitly stated "I haven’t taken any moral position on that", but after I point out how weird it would be to not have a position on that, you suddenly always had one, just conveniently adding "in this thread" to the end.
You chose to say that you're actively deciding not to voice an opinion, ie you're proclaiming a neutral position in the context of this conversation. That is a position.
It's not soapboxing to not be pathologically avoidant of ever having an opinion publicly.
The sad part is you honestly don't even what I'm talking about. I'm yet to figure out what it is about the Finnish language / culture / mentality which breeds this sort of thing. It's infuriatingly common in Finland.