Then arguing with people about whether the kernels popping is "justified".
Trying to focus on the slaughter of regular Israelis and whether it's good or evil to attack civilians is just such a ridiculous approach to me. The question has no meaning in this context. If you don't want kernels to pop take the pot off of the flame, if you refuse to do that then shut the fuck up about it.
Like obviously it sucks that everyday people were intentionally killed but the blame is just being put on the entirely wrong place, it's just individualist moralism that works to strip the event of any context. It feels like it's a rhetorical funnel whose function is to push those who engage in this moralizing to the next logical point in the talking-point journey: whether Israel has a right to defend itself.
I've found IRL that the people who are talking about how "evil" it is to attack civilians have literally no correct understanding of the situation. Event their superficial understanding is wrong. The extent of their conceptions is:
I don't even know how to even begin with these people. One person I said "if there was no occupation there would be no Hamas"; and they looked at me the way a dog looks at you when you try and talk to them. Had no idea what I even meant by "occupation".