No, sometimes the comment and your stand alone make you a douchebag, no matter HOW they express it, or even there is no argument at all. You can say “awww… i love puppies! I love how they look when i beat the crap out of them, so cute!” - ya, that makes you a douchebag too!
Aren’t you reinforcing my point? I didn’t say that defending bad stuff politely means no duchebaggery. I said that agreement or disagreement do not affect the douchebagness. If you agree with the puppy-beater, does that mean he is not a douchebag? Of course not.
Just expressing stuff politely does not imply a lack of douchiness. Or inverting this statement, a douchebag can definitely be polite.
When there is an argument - which is a precondition for my douchebag lemma and the related agreement irrelevance corollary - the guy who agrees with you is not necessarily a non-douche, and a guy who disagrees is not necessarily a douche, which disproves your original point.
I hope that is clear. I should write “the Big Bang Theory” episodes.
INCORRECT!
If i agree with the person beating puppies up, OF COURSE i WOULDN’T think he’s a douchebag!
It’s like i’m not going to think Tom Cruise is crazy if i believe in Scientology myself!
Like i said, there is no universal definition of douchebag - it is up to one’s judgement.
It’s simple as that.
It’s hard to argue when someone keeps changing their perspective. Your example about puppy-beating started out like this:
That implies that the puppy-beater is an absolute douchebag. No relativity. Doesn’t matter who agrees or disagrees. And now you say
So now he is a douchebag only if you disagree with him?
Make up your mind. I can’t argue two opposing sides, maybe you can argue with yourself whether a puppy-beater is a douchebag depends on whether you agree with him.
My original example still stands: I say “this one Asian girl sucks”. TRH says, hypothetically, not really,“all Asian girls suck”. He is supporting me but he is still a hypothetical douchebag.
No silly, my quote about the dog beating is to illustrate the fact that it’s not about HOW you sound that makes you a douchebag, it’s what you say, so i intentionally make the quote sound like the best possible tone, just to prove your point wrong.
AND the fact that i actually disagree with dog beating, of course, that makes me think that person is a douchebag.
Whether i think that person is a douchebag is purely based on the fact i agree or disagree with his actions (or opinions), if we breathe through the same hole, i wouldn’t disagree and therefore would not find anything wrong with that person thus not make the conclusion that the person is a douchebag.
So you have never agreed with a person knowing he is a douchebag (or vice versa)? I find that very hard to believe.
Douchebags can cometimes have valid points. Example: Ayn Rand was a mega-douche, but she had a point about not encouraging moochers at the expense of prime movers. I agree with her while knowing she was a DB. Another example - many atheists in US are DBs, suing public schools already strapped for cash when the school promotes something religious, but I agree with them that church and state should be separate.
Alternately, I disagree with you but I don’t think you are a douchebag (how is that for a smooth compliment?)
Did you guys hear about that one “hypothetical” time when 1recho was lynching black people in a Ku Klux Klan uniform. He also beats women and rapes children. Hypothetically of course. He also fcked his own mother in the ass. Hypothetically.
^ That’s a little over the top. Oh well, now we know TRH’s caliber.
I already said a few posts ago that a douchebag can be an angel in other situations, and I did say i judge someone on case by case basis… why do you keep bending my words??
How did I bend your words? You clearly said that if you agree with someone then you don’t think they are a douchebag. You even gave the puppy-beater example. I agree with you that a douchebag can be an angel in other situations. But my disagreement is whether you can agree with someone knowing that they are a douchebag. Previously, you stated that you cannot. That is, if you agree with them then you don’t think they are a douchebag. My counter-examples to that are Ayn Rand and some atheists (see above.) Are you saying these examples are invalid? If so, why?
Simply put, i cannot possibly disgree with someone 100% of the time, even if that person is a serial killer i may agree with his taste in music! So if i call someone a douchebag, i must be in disagreement with that person on some level, on that particular topic. That’s not to say, i can’t turn around and be friends with the same person at another occasion when he/she does not behave douchebaggy to me.
hahaa cant believe you guys are soon going to be CFA charterholders !!
hahaa cant believe you guys are soon going to be CFA charterholders !!
In your example, you are not in disagreement with the serial killer in the particular topic of your shared taste in music. Is he a douchebag or not?
It depends on what we are talking about, i mean, if he’s not constantly reminding me that he is a serial killer and he happens to like the same music i’d probably think to myself, “hey he’s a serial killer but he’s got good taste in music, i give him that!” And serial killer is probably the MOST EXTREME scenario, in most cases, people around me are not criminals and their doucheyness is just a matter of opinion. 
So… is that serial killer whom you agree with about music, a douchebag or not? It’s your example, you should be able to say Yes or No firmly. No wiggling.
He would not be a douchebag if i see him in the concert and we are dancing on the amp! But he would be if i happened to know he killed my baby sister and i see him at the concert partying it up!
Why would you call him a serial killer unless you knew that he was one? So, the answer is, if you knew he was a serial killer, and you and he looooooove the same music, and you agree with him about the music, he would still be a douchebag. So, you don’t really base your douchebag evaluation on a single criterion of whether that person agrees with you on a particular topic. That’s what I have been saying all along.
Well… if he’s a serial killer but did not kill my friends or relative… like i said this is an extreme case and it’s unlikely i would see a serial killer at a concert! if he’s a known serial killer why isn’t he in trial or jail already? This example wasn’t meant to be elaborated.
^ sometimes, it’s OK to admit you were wrong! Or do you still think you were right? If yes, you need to come up with a better example.