Have you ever considered when you keep on appealing to reason.

1) That I know the reason, logic, and statistics of their arguments
2) Hashing it out with words though takes a long time and is exhausting, exhausting in a way that lowers the quality of my life
3) Thus I skip ahead (which in turn is a mental shortcut)
4) Simultaneously you keep on trying to make me eat green eggs and ham, with paternalistic energy telling me you are going to love it in the end.
5) But I know how this ends up (see 1 and 2), and I find those values of theirs incompatible with my values.
6) Thus I say fuck no, and I do not want, and they are nuts.
7) Yet you are the one offended for in your mind it is impossible that anyone can dislike green eggs and ham and this challenges your entire world view if this fact may be true.

So who here has the problem?

—————

The way I see it, it is a question of agency and subjectivity. Everyone has the right to reject and say no.

Sidenote you keep on saying ad hominem is a problem but there is a lot of philosophy that disagrees with that “Claim” including Aristotle himself that talks about the different forms of authority in rhetoric. Ethos is not just ethics but questioning the authority of another and ad hominem is very much involved with this and can not be separated in a real world or an ideal world.