True for you, but not for me.

This statement in itself is contradictory. Suppose one person says that murder is a crime that should be judged harshly, but you say that it is a natural act that can't be prevented. Who would be right? Well according to relativism you both would be correct. Now think about the same argument but consider if that person you talked to went and killed your best friend. Would you still hold the same belief? If so, how can you be angry at that person for doing what they believed was "true for them"? This is the would downfall for relativism. If this theory were true no one could be angry about anything. If a girl was raped she could take no retaliation because it was in the man's nature to do it. Relativist contradict themselves not only by their words, but also by their actions.