No.... you're doing the exact opposite of that. You're taking a ser of numbers where only one matters, the one that's fraudulent, and then claiming the catagory says something.
And do you therefore agree with my generalization that men, particularly ones that women are more familiar with, must be kept away from women in order to protect them?
It's as if I'm explicitly using a highly generalized and reductive approach to make a decision.
No.... you're doing the exact opposite of that. You're taking a ser of numbers where only one matters, the one that's fraudulent, and then claiming the catagory says something.
That's quite litterly the opposite of reductive.
No, I'm not doing that at all. Again, I'm doing the opposite of that, which is reductivity.
I'm analyzing the numbers off of one axis: sex.
You would prefer I analyze them solely off of one other axis: race
My point is to show you that one-axis analysis is stupid.
Your sex axis is CORRECT AS WELL YOU IMBECILE
And do you therefore agree with my generalization that men, particularly ones that women are more familiar with, must be kept away from women in order to protect them?