Chai-T-Rex
> But she gives the game away when she writes: “Maybe my relationship with dreaming wasn’t like everyone else’s.” Not like everyone else’s, no. But certainly like that of many people who suffer from recurring and terrifying nightmares.
Obviously, she's talking about the fact that she discovered that there were some people who didn't have her kind of nightmare issues. Realizations that your invisible traits aren't shared by everyone is a fairly common experience.
Yet, this is twisted so that the absurd criticism that, while writing her book after she found out that the condition is shared with enough people to be given a name, she just doesn't realize that there are some people who share her condition. Good thing the author pointed that out to her, I guess.
> Eloise writes that, according to the Mayo Clinic, nightmare disorder “only affects around 4-5% of adults, which shocked me: did adults really not have nightmares?” It’s as if she genuinely does not know the difference between 4% and zero.
She literally just got finished mentioning the 4%, which is why it should be obvious that she's talking about her realization that some adults exist that didn't suffer that condition rather than a statement about literally all other adults.
And the last sentence there gives the game away: she obviously realizes the difference and literally just mentioned it, and so she must have meant something else.
That's incorrect. It's like saying that one lottery ticket has a 50% chance of winning. If they're fooling people half the time, that's way better than chance, since there are so many ways of screwing things up.