Below is typical of Graham’s behavior and logic and a reason why arguing with him is pointless.
Graham Quote
I haven't had gyno surgery myself, so I cannot honestly talk about the pros of it. However, I am familiar with some cons of surgery that, like you have also pointed out, often go unmentioned. Don't expect me to have bad surgery just to be able to comment on its cons. That would be ridiculous. Why is there double standards between pros and cons?
Unquote
Let’s look at your logical constructions and your clever and malevolent attempt to blur fact and opinion and misrepresent the truth.
Fact: if you have not had surgery you cannot speak subjectively about the pros or the cons of surgery.
Fact: In terms of speaking objectively, if you can speak using common knowledge of the cons of surgery, you most certainly must also be able to speak using common knowledge of the pros of surgery.
Yet you have said you cannot talk about the pros because you haven’t had surgery- but still having not had surgery can speak of the cons- the logic is deeply flawed and in my view deliberately so. You have tried to bend the reality, to bastardize logic to suit your own ends.
Your next line is a classic, again deeply flawed and in my view shows your malevolent intent to try and bend reality.
Quote
Don’t expect me to have bad surgery just to be able to comment on the cons.
Ok, first of all no one on this site expects you to do anything Graham. No one is forcing you to get surgery are they Graham
Your opening gambit in that line is highly emotive and deeply flawed.
I note the way you say quote ‘don’t expect me to get bad surgery’, not surgery but ‘bad surgery’. Well given there is a minimum 64% chance of successful surgery (given re-growths form part of the statistics, if you have been checked by an endocrinologist and treated if required this will be an even higher success rate) why would the surgery automatically be bad as opposed to a success
So landing two completely illogical points, you back that up the latter with a logical point based on the foundations of the illogical, saying quote ‘just to be able to comment on the cons’.
You see, If you base a logical point on an illogical foundation, the logical point actually becomes an illogical one based upon the context that it is set in.
Just to be able to comment on the cons, would be logical if you were to have surgery and it was to turn out bad.
But you are not having surgery are you Graham you are exercising your prerogative and I might add warped opinion on the only person that you can affect- yourself
For the purposes of the point, I will continue nevertheless.
If you were to have surgery which you are not, there is absolutely no given whatsoever that it would turn out bad, so you would then not just have to comment on the cons as your polarized view would wish, but you would either have to comment on the pros and the cons or even just the pros if the surgery was in that 64% category.
I must congratulate you on this artifice of basing a logical point on a flawed position; it is as clever as it is wrong.
Last of all you use the term ‘bad surgery’, again highly emotive, but how many people have ‘bad surgery’ Statistics aside for one moment, we know that some people are not entirely satisfied with their surgery, some are even plain unhappy about it, but ‘bad surgery’? The connotations of ‘bad surgery’ are to be butchered a word that has tripped off your tongue on a number of occasions.
Now turning to the statistical, can you go and get the statistics of surgery that goes drastically wrong or results in law suits?
Do it now please Graham, I’ll be here waiting, don't you worry.
In the meantime I must congratulate you on your use of language;
you are talented in the use of sophistry, unfortunately it would seem you are not quite talented enough.
Topic: A question for the post-op people on this board (Read 7472 times)
Similar Topics
