You know how to spot someone who doesn't know what a troll is? They'll show you.
Quoting specific points in a post to address those points is "trolling"? You really should read more.
[no true scotsman]
In other words, "Ignore nuance, all the matters is the 'big picture'"? Sorry, but there's more to it than that.
[the fallacy fallacy] Your unwillingness to see beyond that fact is your problem, not mine.
I've already addressed that topic to you, and further back in the thread. What #metoo is "about" is irrelevant. Cases of "made me feel uncomfortable" being under the same umbrella as actual assault/rape does a huge disservice to the latter cases. A word or phrase (or in this case, hashtag) carries only as much power as its weakest connotation.
Yes, they do. That you're unable to grasp the context of the very document you're quoting just shows how nonsensical your argument is.
[personal incredulity]
No, but you apparently have a problem with making a rational argument without resorting to ad hominem drivel. Do you know
for certain that, in the anecdote
you provided, that the person was
physically locked (as in, behind lock and key) in their room and were
explicitly denied food, water and facilities or are you just assuming it based on a third- or fourth-hand story?
[tu quoque][bandwagon]
People may use them interchangeably, but they are not the same thing. Leaving a child in a car falls under abuse, but specifically, it's neglect. Beating a child is not "neglect", it's straight up
abuse. Again, if you can't understand context, stop talking.
[ambiguity]
Is it peer-reviewed research/study?
[burden of proof] If not, it's no more relevant or valid than some random helicopter parent on a gaming forum. I'm starting to think you're one of those people who call child services when a parent lets their kid play in the back yard alone.
[ad hominem][strawman]