@Lenka, like Paulina, you refuse to admit the possibility of what I'm saying as the truth
You keep repeating this, but didn't you notice that you yourself refuse to admit even the possibility that what we're saying is the truth and that you may be actually wrong in drawing such far-reaching conclusions from anecdotal evidence and taking at face value what a bunch of drunk women told you?
Lyzko, why are you so convinced that it is you who is right? Where is this unwavering certainty coming from?
The moment when you wrote that people had to bribe officials and women had to prostitute themselves in order to "survive" during communist times in Poland, I knew you have
no knowledge about the reality and what life looked like during communist times in Poland. It's not just about Polish women or exchanging sex for something, but it looks like you have some
serious misconceptions about life in communist countries in general. Life in PRL wasn't
that bad. It was sh1tty if you compare it to life in the West, obviously, but it really wasn't
that bad. It's not my subjective opinion, it's a historical fact. You'd know that if you bothered to do some research and talk to Poles who were living during those times. It looks like you didn't, because if you did, you simply wouldn't make such claims.
Also, it's not only me and Lenka that disagree with you. Men don't agree with you either.
Anecdotal claims, should not require "sources".
First of all, I don't know what "anecdotal claims" are. I only know what "anecdotal evidence" is. That's all Lyzko has - anecdotal evidence. And he's drawing conclusions about Polish women and the reality of communist times in Poland just based on this anecdotal evidence. In a pretty arrogant way at that. I wouldn't mind if all he did was sharing that anecdotal evidence ("Those drunk women told me this and that. What do you think about this? Is it true?"). But he's drawing some wild conclusions based on that anecdotal evidence and he's making claims based on that anecdotal evidence. And since I know that what he claims is not true, I'm challenging him to back up his claims with something more than that anecdotal evidence.
I don't think Paulina is saying that you are lying, but merely that you are forming general opinions based on an infinitesimally small sample set of talking to "Polish dissidents".
Yes, of course. I'd go further with that though, because I don't even believe that anecdotal evidence from Lyzko. Why? Because I "know" Lyzko long enough and I know how he's capable of drawing some wild, crazy, messed up conclusions from the conservations and people's behaviour in real life. So I simply don't trust his "reporting". Because those women could say one thing and it could grow into something else in his head.
This is why I asked him those "simple questions".
Earlier you might think that Lyzko had some serious, deep conversations with numerous, various "anti-Communist defectors" about life in communist Poland. Now it turns out that he "elicited" some answers from a bunch of drunk women and took them at face value lol Who knows what more we will find out if I keep digging? :)