@TishaCM She has a valid point. The best way to counter the point is with a related valid point. What happened here is circumstantial Ad Hominem, na sa halip mapansin ang punto niya, binanggit na celebrity siya.
@mjfelipe Pokwang is in a darn-if-you-do-darn-if-you-don't situation. What she did is the "lesser evil" one (o anumang term which fits). What is sure though is hindi yung may mali ang nag-sorry. Sana all may taga-sorry on behalf.
@_djchacha Ang tataas ng standard sa bagay na personal (na sinisikap naman ayusin), pero sa public officials na corrupt mga tahimik at malamang, todo nood pa o accommodate kapag dumating.
The difference between envy and calling out double standards is how you deal with the beneficiaries and benefactors.
If you bash the beneficiaries (regardless of their attitude), it's envy.
If you call out the benefactors, it's not envy.
Rarely talking about the past, or people from your past, is a sign of moving on too. Disrespecting that because you want to appear as the lighter one or funnier one or the better person is a sign you did not move on or worse than that, you dictate your own values to others.
@itscamilleco Hahahahahaha true. It's also free to change one's own mind once presented with facts. It's also free to apologize once they saw you and those folks are not related.
2. The way someone or a group treats a person often reveals more unresolved issues than that person’s use of satire or humor.
3. Silence isn’t always a sign of maturity or peace; sometimes, it means gaslighting—or someone was simply silenced.
Propagandas I’m (probably) falling for:
1. Restoring a verbally repentant brother or sister in Christ—even without visible proof—is often a more genuine sign of a forgiving spirit than demanding evidence or using shame to push for reconciliation...