> but presumably you can engage with the spirit of the analogy?

What you’re calling “the spirit of” the analogy, others are seeing as “the bias embedded in” the analogy and you seem annoyed that people aren’t accepting your proposed analogy as a valid analog to the topic under discussion.

You think they’re changing the subject; others, including me, experience you as the one doing that.

Why is an analogy needed? Just engage with what actually happened.

The donation example tracks.