Neonivek, you just dismissed my argument
No, I am saying that... You are making all the same points I am making but coming to a different conclusion... and that... that is fine.
It isn't being dismissive, it is recognizing that frankly at this point there isn't anywhere for the debate to go when both sides agree on the points but disagree on the conclusion.
when the whole point of my argument is that I disagree with your points.
Hence why the conclusion differs.
A therefor B
A therefor not B
You didn't disagree that humans have fight or flight mechanisms, you didn't disagree that there is extensive uses of violence in media (Reasons does not equal dismissal), and your disagreement with my example was semantics at best (especially since even if taken your way, it doesn't dismiss itself as "using violence against violence" means that people believe in perpetuating violence so long as they feel threatened with annoyance and aggravation as being justified). As well all the information you added didn't dismiss my points, since the ability to be obsessed with violence and not act in a violent fashion exists.
The only difference between our arguments is qualitative statements, but distilled it doesn't mean anything. What conclusion should I reach other than the one I am displaying here? Well other than the fact that we are clearly using two definitions of obsessed (though that was already known).