I gave enough context for it to be apparent we are not using the same idea of what "dominance" meant here. That one word choice is also the least interesting or important part of what I said, and it provoked you into arguing against a position, supposedly mine, that I didn't actually articulate. You also chose to focus on the word and run with it, abandoning all the sense and meaning of what was said.

This is malignant lawyer behavior. Which, combined with a look-over of what else you've said in this forum, is hardly surprising.

I don't trust anything you say a jot. Your bread is very clearly buttered. I think you misrepresent who you are, and why you're "arguing." You're agenda-driven. It was clear from how you came out of the gate, with a very long screed that had very little to do with my post.

Maybe you're Doing It For Free, but smart money says your palm is greased one way or another.