ARE your attempts to have a debate frequently undermined by the other person’s inability to argue without being a complete twat? Here are their annoying techniques.
Assuming that talking the loudest makes them right
Or just shouting. Somehow they believe that being a bolshy bastard or just plain aggressive wins an argument. Unfortunately ranting at a higher sound level is not irrefutable evidence of them being right.
Failing to understand that people have different views
We all have opinions on things and sometimes they differ. Is that difficult to understand? Apparently so, as the merest sign of a disagreement sends these people into a state of defensive fury as if you’re physically threatening them, not just discussing whether Line of Duty is a bit overrated.
Launching an ad hominem attack
Rather than arguing about the issue at stake, these charming individuals resort to personal insults in an attempt to undermine your case. Not nice, and a bit over-the-top when the disagreement is only about how to pronounce the word ‘lido’.
Pressuring neutral bystanders into taking their side
Idiots will rope in a bystander who has been silently observing, saying something like ‘Steve, you agree with me, don’t you?’ When Steve looks uncertain, they say ‘Thank you’ and nod in agreement with themselves, as if they’ve had the final word.
After realising the opposing argument may have some merit, rather than accepting this they storm off like a moody teenager, shouting something along the lines of ‘This is ridiculous, like talking to a brick wall’, then slam a door somewhere, as if this signifies victory.