u/06yuzuha

I was having a discussion with someone the other day about something I actually know a fair amount about, making some pretty solid points with actual evidence and examples, but right when I was getting to the part where my argument was really coming together, they just said "well I guess we'll have to agree to disagree" and completely shut down the conversation.

And I've noticed this happens a lot, where someone will say "let's agree to disagree" but what they really mean is that they don't have a good response to what you just said but don't want to admit it, so they're going to act like we both have equally valid positions and should just move on, even though we don't have equally valid positions because I have evidence and they have opinions, and those aren't the same thing.

It's this weird move where someone can lose an argument but pretend it's a draw by just refusing to continue the conversation, and then somehow I'm supposed to be okay with that because apparently being polite is more important than being right, but no, we're not agreeing to disagree, you're just disagreeing and refusing to explain why or engage with anything I'm saying.

I had a coworker do this during a meeting when I was trying to explain why her approach to a project wouldn't work, and instead of addressing any of my concerns she just said "I think we see this differently, let's agree to disagree and move forward," but we're not moving forward, we're moving forward with her plan that I just explained won't work, which means that when it doesn't work I'm going to be blamed for not stopping it even though I tried.

The whole phrase has become this get out of jail free card for people who don't want to defend their positions or admit they might be wrong, and it works because if you push back after someone says it, you look like you're being difficult or can't let things go or you're not being respectful of different viewpoints, even though having different viewpoints is fine when we're talking about subjective preferences but it's not fine when we're talking about facts and one person is just making stuff up.

And I get that sometimes conversations reach a point where continuing them isn't productive and it's better to just move on, but there's a difference between "this conversation isn't going anywhere" and "I'm losing this argument so I'm going to pretend it's a stalemate," because one is actually about the conversation dynamic while the other is just intellectual cowardice dressed up as politeness.

The worst is when people use it to shut down conversations about things that actually matter, like when you're trying to explain why something is harmful or wrong and they just go "agree to disagree" as if your position that something is harmful and their position that it's fine are both equally reasonable takes that we can respectfully walk away from, but some things aren't matters of opinion, and pretending they are doesn't make you diplomatic, it just makes you wrong.

I'm fine with disagreeing with people and I do it all the time, but can we at least finish the actual discussion before we declare it a tie, and can we stop acting like "let's agree to disagree" is this mature way to handle conflict when really it's just a way to avoid admitting you don't have a good argument?

Got an email a few days ago. "We've updated our privacy policy." Fourteen pages, single-spaced. I tried to read it. Made it through a couple of paragraphs before my eyes glazed over. Something about third-party partners, data sharing, anonymized profiles.

I don’t actually know what I agreed to. I clicked "accept" because I needed to use the app. Because the alternative was... not using the app. And that’s not really an alternative anymore. It’s my bank. My doctor. My work schedule.

They all say the same thing. "We take your privacy seriously." It feels like a ritual chant. Say it a few times and the liability disappears. If they really took it seriously, the policy would be three sentences: "We collect almost nothing. We sell nothing. You can delete everything forever with one click."

Instead it’s pages and pages of "we may share with select partners for purposes including but not limited to..." Basically, they’re doing a bunch of stuff you wouldn’t like, in words you can’t understand, and calling it transparency.

They don’t want you to understand. They want you to feel like you had a choice, so they can’t be blamed. "We gave them the option. They clicked accept."

I don’t want "options." I want privacy. But apparently those are two different things, and only one of them actually makes them money.