What about vaccinations? I’m talking about for mumps and stuff, things we should all agree are necessary. Those are more invasive yet we accept them today as a requirement for most of society.

I just don’t understand (cause I’m autistic I think) that if you think a mask might help, but it was mandatory anyways, why you would get angry then versus if they asked politely and you did it. Is that your ego or something? I totally don’t understand, but like I said, around here it was the exception for someone to not wear a mask, and those who didn’t had good reasons and were very careful to shop when less people were around and stuff like that. We care about each other where I live.

Happy to explain further, but first I need to know more about what you can relate to.

How do you feel about the ice cream analogy? Would you just be happy for the opportunity to eat ice cream and not be bothered by the gun to your head?

I guess maybe I just won’t get it, it seems like nothing, to me, to wear a mask if requested, so I don’t get the push back. Do you feel like it’s being too submissive or something? I prefer explanations of how you feel and what your internal dialogue is when a mask is mandatory at, say, the grocer. Vaccinations are a decent corollary but those are riskier than an N95 by far, so it’s not perfect. Wearing a mask basically costs nothing, IMO, unless you’re a very specific case where it’s harmful.

You refused to answer the question. I clearly stated it was a pre-requisite for an explanation.

I dont know how to explain it if you wont meet me half way.

The ice cream analogy was stupid, that’s what I think. Ice cream isn’t a virus, it’s not even the same stakes! Do 1/100 to 1/250 people die from new ice cream varieties?

Eating ice cream is an analogy for wearing a mask, not the virus.

It is something that isn't a big deal, and that I would normally enjoy doing. I guess you didnt get it

Fair enough, everyone can’t agree on everything or communicate with each other effectively. I am particular about masks because I know several close family members who could only go out during covid when people regularly masked, and when masking wasn’t mandatory again, they couldn’t go out for a while until they came out with some new drugs after a year or so. I am fine with no masking today, but it broke my brain that roughly a quarter of people in other places of the country from here were so livid and angry because they had to be somewhat uncomfortable so that immunocompromized people could have safely shopped for necessities. Not only that, but the aforementioned fact that in places where masking was prevalent there was a decreased death rate.

That's not what it was about for them at all. Wearing a mask is a minor, even trivial thing.

> {The ice cream analogy} was stupid, that’s what I think.

Replace the token above with mandatory masking, and you have your answer. Unfortunately, if you do not like the answer (perhaps you think it is stupid) your mind not be able to accept it.

Most of reality works this way as far as I can tell.

I would say this is false analogy fallacy.

You might be surprised at how many Americans feel the analogy is quite accurate.

Is this person a lawful agent of a legitimate government? Is the ice cream policy reasonably connected to some compelling government interest, like public health?

The degree to which people think these factors matter is likely a deciding characteristic in their response.

How do those people feel about wearing pants at the point of a gun?

It makes them see red.

If that's true, they're uncharacteristically quiet about it!

Do you expect anyone to follow any rules?

what do you mean.

Exactly what I asked.