But it's cool if we disagree on what that means.


>(in other words), dude said "women cant love being black and
>hate black men for inflicting pain and trauma"


That's an interpretation, not a direct quote. Mainly because loving being Black and being pro-Black don't mean the same thing. Loving being Black is a part of being pro-Black but doesn't mean you're pro-Black.



>my reply (in other words) was "you're asking them to choose
>race over their womanhood, why should they have to instead of
>the world making things less harmful for them"
>
>your reply was "what would you say to men who say they've
>experienced the same thing"
>
>I replied to that in reply 96 with "I understand" and I went
>on to question whether that fits this particular discussion.
>now we're going in circles



This is dishonest, because the subsequent "questioning" was part of your answer. That's why I had to break it in half to respond to it in reply 136. So again, you're doing exactly what you accuse men of by invalidating the male experience by refusing to even acknowledge on its own, "deeming their level of hurt unacceptable" by comparison.



>you seem to want to argue until people give up so you can feel
>right, I have no investment in winning an okp discussion"


Neither do I, and according the conversation you and I are having, this is a weird, ridiculous, and intellectually lazy accusation. Surely adults can close a discussion better than that.
At the core of this is our disagreement that men also experience sexism (termed gendered racism) and misandry as well. The rest is that you refuse to just engage with the plain question I asked. I'm gonna drop this though (unless you want to actually answer what I'm asking you) since you think trying to get a plain answer = trying to "win." Then again, maybe you just don't like my response to your answer and have to start with personal attacks. Again, surely adults can to better. Perhaps you can't. You're in here calling someone names for a legit analysis, so I'll believe the face you're showing. I'm also going to just going to assume your answer includes the interjection of women, since that's what you did. Therefore, my response in reply 136 stands. We can simply agree to disagree.