>>47695
>so they take issue with any kind of generalization
Nor can they understand metaphors, or analogies. Which drives me insane. Women, and people who think like them, LOVE to focus on the subject of an analogie instead of the function which just easily conveys a message. Like when you use women and cars in an analogy, you aren't fucking calling them cars, but their emotions says otherwise, so you spend energy trying to defend something you weren't even insinuating.
>where it's often hard to confirm whether they're doing it to deflect, or because they're genuinely too stupid to understand.
That hit hard. I want to say a lot of them are just too stupid to understand. As these are the same women who can't understand what an analogy is trying to convey.