Cautionary message about Amazon Eve

Rachel Bronwyn · 01-31-2010

Honestly, I'm entirely in favour of the Warlock's approach at this point.

You're still relying on a definition of homophobia that suits your fancy as opposed to it's actual, factual definition. The definition of phobia is conditioned by the prefix which, in this case is homosexual. Neither your definition of homophobia nor the clinical definition of phobia is pertinent to the discussion at hand.

You've also entirely ignored the very unique scenario from which homophobic tendancies are arising that is being discussed. What is being discussed is being attracted to a woman, physically and psychologially, until their status of biologically male, despite having an entirely female body and psyche, comes to light. You've not been willing to expand on the reasoning for this, which is what is being deemed homophobic tendancy.

You seem profoundly uneducated about the transgendered community and physical transition as well. It is not visibly apparent that many transgendered people are transgendered. Supportive parents enable their children to experience something very close to puberty of the gender associated with the sex they identify with, negating the development of any tell-tale adult features associated with one sex or another. Given the leaps and bounds made in genital construction, it's entirely possible you could go down on someone with a Y chromosome and not know.

And now you're strawmanning like a champ. There is no disussion to be had with you at this point. You have misrepresented the arguments made by the Warlock and I and not responded to any of their actual sentiments. I can only redirect you to the actual argument so many times before your intentional or unintentional twisting of words becomes tiresome.

Qzar is still taking the logic-free route of claiming "I never said that, so you're a big liar-liar-pants-on-fire" which, frankly, is just inflated semantics. If you honestly think not saying exact words equates to having not said or suggested as much, you're delusional. But that's old news. If someone honestly believes "I didn't name-call or use swear words, therefore, I wasn't insulting and I win", frankly, I applaud them. That level of irrational thinking might do my mental health some good (and make me a total dick.) Sadly, I'm a prisoner of logic and reason.

01-31-2010	#10
Rachel Bronwyn Banned Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 4,002	Re: Cautionary message about Amazon Eve Honestly, I'm entirely in favour of the Warlock's approach at this point. You're still relying on a definition of homophobia that suits your fancy as opposed to it's actual, factual definition. The definition of phobia is conditioned by the prefix which, in this case is homosexual. Neither your definition of homophobia nor the clinical definition of phobia is pertinent to the discussion at hand. You've also entirely ignored the very unique scenario from which homophobic tendancies are arising that is being discussed. What is being discussed is being attracted to a woman, physically and psychologially, until their status of biologically male, despite having an entirely female body and psyche, comes to light. You've not been willing to expand on the reasoning for this, which is what is being deemed homophobic tendancy. You seem profoundly uneducated about the transgendered community and physical transition as well. It is not visibly apparent that many transgendered people are transgendered. Supportive parents enable their children to experience something very close to puberty of the gender associated with the sex they identify with, negating the development of any tell-tale adult features associated with one sex or another. Given the leaps and bounds made in genital construction, it's entirely possible you could go down on someone with a Y chromosome and not know. And now you're strawmanning like a champ. There is no disussion to be had with you at this point. You have misrepresented the arguments made by the Warlock and I and not responded to any of their actual sentiments. I can only redirect you to the actual argument so many times before your intentional or unintentional twisting of words becomes tiresome. Qzar is still taking the logic-free route of claiming "I never said that, so you're a big liar-liar-pants-on-fire" which, frankly, is just inflated semantics. If you honestly think not saying exact words equates to having not said or suggested as much, you're delusional. But that's old news. If someone honestly believes "I didn't name-call or use swear words, therefore, I wasn't insulting and I win", frankly, I applaud them. That level of irrational thinking might do my mental health some good (and make me a total dick.) Sadly, I'm a prisoner of logic and reason.