A Boyish Girlfriend in High Humidity - Ch. 5 - You think a boyish girlfriend is too plain?

[AnacondaHL]

If you wanna see...

raises monocle indubitably, it seems there is an investigation afoot!

 

[Eighty-six]

Not how that's used. Imagine someone asking you why he has to go through an initiation for a group. You come at him with a "You want to join?" Which is a "Because you want to join" in declarative question form.

I don't think my example was wrong per se, but you're correct in demonstrating that a declarative question is only properly discerned in context. That is, "You want to join?" can be short for "Do you want to join?" if, say, the context is that someone just explained that he's going out for drinks and he's inviting someone along.

It can also be "Because you want to join?" if, say, it's in response to someone asking a "why" question.

 

[Ludd_]

I don't know how I went so long in life without encountering this "end declarative statements with a question mark" technique..

Because you're starting a debate/argument on something I did not say nor mean. That's why I said that

That aside, the point of me saying "women are women" isn't to refute a statement you didn't make, but rather challenge the idea of the tomboy as the "incidental woman", as if they bear none of the social complications of womanhood-- intrinsic or in relation to men-- and are, indeed, the "homie with tits".

Why are you making a debate based on a literal joke, I say "homie with tits" since they can act like a "homie" and fit in perfectly when a "homie" is usually only really used for men

You call it a joke, but even your explanation bears out what I wanted to respond to. At least, I'm not seeking to be aggressive about this (regardless of how I may come off), but I did want to comment on that idea since it was out there, and I've seen that kind of sentiment before.

I call it a joke because it is one, a widely used one at that, not sure why are you're even making a debate on that a "tomboy is a woman" or whatever since regardless of how a tomboy acts or appears they'll still be a woman just like how feminine guys are still men.

 

[Eighty-six]

Because you're starting a debate/argument on something I did not say nor mean. That's why I said that

...no, that remark was separate from the rest of what I was talking about, and related to an earlier inquiry about the practice of just appending question marks to declarative statements (as opposed to phrasing questions as declarative statements).

Why are you making a debate based on a literal joke, I say "homie with tits" since they can act like a "homie" and fit in perfectly when a "homie" is usually only really used for men

This is the second time you've said "it's just a joke" while affirming, in the very same sentence, in the very same comment, that you actually believe the meanings I chose to comment on. It's one thing if you don't actually believe in the contents of the joke, but it clarifies nothing to say "it's a joke" to wave away my comment and then affirm that you seriously believe the contents of said "joke", that prompted me to make said comments to begin with.

I know you don't mean to say that tomboyish women are literally men with breasts, or men with female anatomy, or men "trapped" in the bodies of women. My point's to be taken with the fact that I simultaneously addressed the "women without the complications" remark: I made the comment because you, in effect, presented the "tomboy" as a more convenient woman because she allegedly lacks the "complications" that non-tomboyish women do and is able to relate with a man as though she were herself a man.

Me saying "tomboys are still women" is to 1) point out that such characterization cannot be wholly true, and 2) address that there's no escape from those inconveniences, those "complications"-- the sources of which I've already described.

 

[Ludd_]

...no, that remark was separate from the rest of what I was talking about, and related to an earlier inquiry about the practice of just appending question marks to declarative statements (as opposed to phrasing questions as declarative statements).

"Women are women, tomboyish or not" which I answered with "I never said they weren't?"
and I added the question mark because I was confused where you got that from

This is the second time you've said "it's just a joke" while affirming, in the very same sentence, in the very same comment, that you actually believe the meanings I chose to comment on. It's one thing if you don't actually believe in the contents of the joke, but it clarifies nothing to say "it's a joke" to wave away my comment and then affirm that you seriously believe the contents of said "joke", that prompted me to make said comments to begin with.

I know you don't mean to say that tomboyish women are literally men with breasts, or men with female anatomy, or men "trapped" in the bodies of women. My point's to be taken with the fact that I simultaneously addressed the "women without the complications" remark: I made the comment because you, in effect, presented the "tomboy" as a more convenient woman because she allegedly lacks the "complications" that non-tomboyish women do and is able to relate with a man as though she were herself a man.

Me saying "tomboys are still women" is to 1) point out that such characterization cannot be wholly true, and 2) address that there's no escape from those inconveniences, those "complications"-- the sources of which I've already described.

Okay now I actually have something to address since you're being a bit more clear, first of, yes it's still a joke even if I believe the sayings, problem? I believe that tomboys get along better with men therefore they're easier to be around hence my jokes

Secondly, when I say "complications" I mean the many things women and men don't get along well on such as most women wanting to shop for really long, taking long to get ready to go out, some/most women not saying exactly what they want and so on, traits that tomboys usually don't have

And for your last line, what are you even trying to say, yes there is escape from it because not all women are like what I mentioned, and most tomboys aren't like that,

You need to understand why most men don't do those things I mentioned, it's the difference between masculinity and
femininity, and since most tomboys are masculine they just don't have a tendency to do those things, gender in a way has nothing to do with this, it's all about femininity and masculinity and because femininity is most commonly found in women they're more common to do those things

 

[Eighty-six]

Okay now I actually have something to address since you're being a bit more clear, first of, yes it's still a joke even if I believe the sayings, problem?

But it's not funny-- it's not even trying to be funny. You completely believe what you said.

In which case, what makes it a joke? If it's not that you're unwilling to stand by what you said (you are willing), the "joke" label is superfluous.

Secondly, when I say "complications" I mean the many things women and men don't get along well on such as most women wanting to shop for really long, taking long to get ready to go out, some/most women not saying exactly what they want and so on, traits that tomboys usually don't have

Right, and I'm saying that such things may be truncated in tomboyish women, but they aren't entirely absent. They can't be-- some of those things have deeper roots in the biology and psychology of women, putting aside that tomboys are still additionally socialized as women regardless of how much they don't adhere to the norms and responsibilities expected of women. Even by your framework, you have to agree:

You need to understand why most men don't do those things I mentioned, it's the difference between masculinity and
femininity, and since most tomboys are masculine they just don't have a tendency to do those things, gender in a way has nothing to do with this, it's all about femininity and masculinity and because femininity is most commonly found in women they're more common to do those things

To use your terms: femininity is heavily associated with being a woman, and tomboys are women. Ergo, they possess femininity still, as well as the "complications" associated with said femininity-- to whatever potentially lesser degree.

That's why there's no such escape in the "tomboy" (not when we're talking real people, anyhow), and that's why I felt it necessary to express that said "tomboys are still women" in the first place. To deny that there necessarily will still be "complications" of some sort is, roundaboutly, to deny the femininity they invariably do possess. To deny that, is to deny a part of their person.

 

[BuyVelomobiles]

 

[Ludd_]

But it's not funny-- it's not even trying to be funny. You completely believe what you said.

In which case, what makes it a joke? If it's not that you're unwilling to stand by what you said (you are willing), the "joke" label is superfluous.

Okay? That is highly subjective, this is a very common joke that has been used a lot of times and me and my friends find it funny, you said you weren't trying to be hostile but that is the opposite to what you're doing right now

Right, and I'm saying that such things may be truncated in tomboyish women, but they aren't entirely absent. They can't be-- some of those things have deeper roots in the biology and psychology of women, putting aside that tomboys are still additionally socialized as women regardless of how much they don't adhere to the norms and responsibilities expected of women. Even by your framework, you have to agree:

That's why I said most

To use your terms: femininity is heavily associated with being a woman, and tomboys are women. Ergo, they possess femininity still, as well as the "complications" associated with said femininity-- to whatever potentially lesser degree.

That's why there's no such escape in the "tomboy" (not when we're talking real people, anyhow), and that's why I felt it necessary to express that said "tomboys are still women" in the first place. To deny that there necessarily will still be "complications" of some sort is, roundaboutly, to deny the femininity they invariably do possess. To deny that, is to deny a part of their person.

Men possess some form of femininity too (Some more than others), does this mean they have the tendency to do the things I listed before? No because they are still masculine, and if you know what a tomboy is they are masculine, (Usually 50/50 masculine/feminine) therefore most tomboys don't have the tendency to do the things I listed

Not sure why you even are arguing this since for example, taking 1+ hour to get ready is a very feminine thing to do that most tomboys just don't do, are you gonna deny that too? And say that it's "part of their person" and that there is "no escape"

 

[Eighty-six]

Okay? That is highly subjective, this is a very common joke that has been used a lot of times and me and my friends find it funny

There's no operating joke in the statement-- you're just saying what you believe, as you've made clear. What you're doing is like saying "the sky is blue" and calling it a joke.

"It's highly subjective"? Absolutely-- that doesn't mean that there's any reason to seriously entertain the idea that stating a belief itself constitutes a "joke".

you said you weren't trying to be hostile but that is the opposite to what you're doing right now

This isn't hostile. "Being hostile" might have included me accusing you of hiding behind the "joke" label to cover your ass, but I'm granting that you're brave enough to stand by your beliefs-- which leaves me with confusion about where your "joke" is.

That's why I said most

It doesn't make a difference to my point, which is that the vague sense of "complications" you dread from women are still able to be found in some form, however truncated, in the experiences of tomboyish women.

Because many of those "complications" are rooted deep in the incontrovertible reality of their being women, and many also exist on account of the experience gap between men and women (so, also partly because of the incontrovertible reality of men being men) that prevents men from understanding or sympathizing on those matters.

(Usually 50/50 masculine/feminine)

It's impossible to meaningfully quantify these qualities, whether you consider them natural, metaphysical, or both.

Not sure why you even are arguing this since for example, taking 1+ hour to get ready is a very feminine thing to do that most tomboys just don't do

...why would taking >1 hour to get ready for an outing be a feminine thing in the first place?

Well, we can grant that it is, for argument's sake-- my point applied, then, is that maybe tomboyish women get ready in 30-45 minutes. Less than a non-tomboyish woman, but perhaps more than would be comfortable for those waiting for her. Again, it's the fact that she's still a woman, and still bears femininity to a significant degree on account of being a woman.

are you gonna deny that too? And say that it's "part of their person" and that there is "no escape"

The "no escape" part, specifically, is aimed at those men who would see in the tomboyish woman a promise of not having to deal with those aspects of the female experience that are inconvenient for men (understandably or otherwise).

That said, you're conflating matters-- each "complication" you can think of is downstream, in whichever way, from the femininity that women possess. "Taking >1 hour to get ready for an outing" isn't a quality-- it's downstream from multiple qualities, her femininity (defined biopsychosocially) being one of them.

Denying that there'll be complications (which you ascribe to femininity) at all is a denial of "a part of her person", because it's a denial of her inevitable femininity (from which these "complications" result, in part or in full).

 

[BuyVelomobiles]

saying "the sky is blue" and calling it a joke.

 

[Ludd_]

There's no operating joke in the statement-- you're just saying what you believe, as you've made clear. What you're doing is like saying "the sky is blue" and calling it a joke.

"It's highly subjective"? Absolutely-- that doesn't mean that there's any reason to seriously entertain the idea that stating a belief itself constitutes a "joke".

Still a joke mate, it's how you say it, I'm not stating a belief I'm just making a joke that I happen to mostly agree with
"a thing that someone says to cause amusement or laughter, especially a story with a funny punchline."
There's no way you thought I was 100% serious and wasn't joking when I literally said "homie with tits"

This isn't hostile. "Being hostile" might have included me accusing you of hiding behind the "joke" label to cover your ass, but I'm granting that you're brave enough to stand by your beliefs-- which leaves me with confusion about where your "joke" is.

How am I using the "joke" label to cover my ass?? You're making no sense, it's a literal joke, why are you so offended?


First of I am not denying part of her person, I know a tomboy is still feminine but they're still very less likely to do the things I listed because they are masculine, not every woman will do the things I listed because it's part of the personality and tomboys are WAY less likely to do them and overall are more chill to be with as a guy (Since they can fit in as a guy), honestly it seems like you're overly obsessed with gender roles

Secondly, taking very long to get ready is a feminine thing because they care a lot about their looks, which surprise surprise a decent amount of tomboys don't care so much about their looks (They still care about them but nowhere near as much, just like how guys don't take insanely long to get ready)

I just addressed the quick things but I won't bother to address anything else since you're just being hostile, it was a joke and you're making a big deal of it

 

[Eighty-six]

There's no way you thought I was 100% serious and wasn't joking when I literally said "homie with tits"

Just because I recognized you weren't being literal doesn't mean that the belief behind the statement wasn't serious. You've repeatedly stressed that what you said was a joke, but in explaining yourself you sincerely expressed the exact things I sought to comment on-- I understood the meaning of your words, as you meant them.

How am I using the "joke" label to cover my ass??

Read the quote you made. I didn't say that you were using the "joke" label to cover your ass-- I'm saying that if I wanted to be hostile, I'd suppose that you were using the "joke" label to cover your ass.

First of I am not denying part of her person,

You're denying that a tomboy has "complications" without recognizing that those "complications" are the result of being a woman (with every single thing that entails), and/or the result of the experience gaps between men and women on account of both being such.

There is no "woman with no complications". The "complications" (intersexual conflict) may be less depending on the given's woman personality, a tomboyish disposition may contribute towards that, and a given woman's "complications" are of course bound to be different from another's, but that's all. It's not as if the "complications" of women that aggrieve men are solely their fault to begin with.

The idea of a woman "without complications" is a convenient fantasy at best, and a denial of a part of her person at worst. It's certainly not a good paradigm with which to assess women as a category.

honestly it seems like you're overly obsessed with gender roles

...the term "tomboy" is wholly understood relative to society-defined gender roles, responsibilities, and mannerisms that said women markedly don't neatly fit. Putting aside that I'm manifestly not "obsessed with gender roles" beyond what's necessary for this term to mean anything (I'm not the one arguing that "taking >1 hour to get ready in the morning" is feminine), you yourself have not been able to have this conversation without resorting to stereotypes whose applicability is debatable.

Secondly, taking very long to get ready is a feminine thing because they care a lot about their looks, which surprise surprise a decent amount of tomboys don't care so much about their looks (They still care about them but nowhere near as much, just like how guys don't take insanely long to get ready)

You're conflating two different things here-- there's "taking very long to get ready", and then there's "caring about how you look". These aren't interchangeable, however related they may be.

Neither of those things are feminine, furthermore-- it's not as if the more time you take getting ready for an outing, the more feminine you are in that respect. Nor is it the case that the more you care about your looks, the more feminine you are in that respect. We can know that because we know both men and women living normal lives usually care about their looks.

 

[Ludd_]

Just because I recognized you weren't being literal doesn't mean that the belief behind the statement wasn't serious. You've repeatedly stressed that what you said was a joke, but in explaining yourself you sincerely expressed the exact things I sought to comment on-- I understood the meaning of your words, as you meant them.

Okay if you recognise it's a joke then leave it alone, you can go on your day and keep doing what you want, I recommend not picking debates with people that are unwilling, that act in itself is just being annoying.

You're denying that a tomboy has "complications" without recognizing that those "complications" are the result of being a woman (with every single thing that entails), and/or the result of the experience gaps between men and women on account of both being such.

There is no "woman with no complications". The "complications" (intersexual conflict) may be less depending on the given's woman personality, a tomboyish disposition may contribute towards that, and a given woman's "complications" are of course bound to be different from another's, but that's all. It's not as if the "complications" of women that aggrieve men are solely their fault to begin with.

The idea of a woman "without complications" is a convenient fantasy at best, and a denial of a part of her person at worst. It's certainly not a good paradigm with which to assess women as a category.

The things I mentioned that you refer to as "complications" (I only referred to them as complications in the first message when I was joking) is not the result of being a woman it's the result of the female femininity impacting the personality (Such as wanting to look really good = Taking really long to get ready) and as I've mentioned before the masculinity tomboys have is impacting their personality and as a result of that most tomboys don't do those such things

Not sure why you call it a "convenient fantasy" this is the same as saying that women wear makeup and if you say that there's a lot of women that don't wear makeup that's "denying part of the person" or that it's the "result of being a woman", it's a personality and anyone with common sense knows that everyones personality is different,

Taking really long to get ready, shopping for really long, not saying exactly what they want and stuff like that is not the "result" of "being a woman", that is part of the femininity which most tomboys (because they're masculine) just don't do,

...the term "tomboy" is wholly understood relative to society-defined gender roles, responsibilities, and mannerisms that said women markedly don't neatly fit. Putting aside that I'm manifestly not "obsessed with gender roles" beyond what's necessary for this term to mean anything (I'm not the one arguing that "taking >1 hour to get ready in the morning" is feminine), you yourself have not been able to have this conversation without resorting to stereotypes whose applicability is debatable.

Okay so you don't know what a tomboy is, a tomboy by definition is masculine, you should really look up the definition for tomboy and/or talk to a tomboy,
I'm not exactly using stereotypes I'm just halfassing the answers since I could not care less about this conversation, you are the one that started this pointless argument based on a literal joke I made, yes I think tomboys can be a "homie" and be more chill to be with so what? Does it affect you in literally any way?

You're conflating two different things here-- there's "taking very long to get ready", and then there's "caring about how you look". These aren't interchangeable, however related they may be.

Neither of those things are feminine, furthermore-- it's not as if the more time you take getting ready for an outing, the more feminine you are in that respect. Nor is it the case that the more you care about your looks, the more feminine you are in that respect. We can know that because we know both men and women living normal lives usually care about their looks.

When I say feminine women care about their looks I mean they overly care about their looks therefore they take very long to get ready, it is a feminine thing, ask literally any guy that goes to parties, sure he'll care about his looks but he won't take 1h+ to get ready

 

[Eighty-six]

Okay if you recognise it's a joke then leave it alone, you can go on your day and keep doing what you want, I recommend not picking debates with people that are unwilling, that act in itself is just being annoying.

You've obviously been extremely willing to have this conversation from the start.

The things I mentioned that you refer to as "complications" (I only referred to them as complications in the first message when I was joking)

How is it that it's only now, after me quoting that word repeatedly in order to address it, that you want to downplay that part as a "joke"?

[...] is not the result of being a woman it's the result of the female femininity impacting the personality

"Female femininity" is redundant-- "femininity" itself relies on the definition and implications of "female". Secondly, femininity isn't separate from womanhood (as women are female humans), regardless of what one may say about the presence of femininity in men.

Okay so you don't know what a tomboy is, a tomboy by definition is masculine, you should really look up the definition for tomboy and/or talk to a tomboy,

I've done both, I'm currently reading a book on the matter as part of larger research, and my current definition of "tomboy" is inherited from one (former or otherwise). It's precisely because of those experiences, that I've come to groan at the narrow characterization of the "tomboy" that entails "woman, but without the inconvenient parts" and even the conventional definition of "boy-girl".

I take issue with the idea of the "tomboy" as necessarily being a "masculine girl", because-- while mostly consistent-- what constitutes "masculinity" and "femininity" differs and shifts between cultures and time periods. To define a "tomboy" as "masculine girl" prompts the question of "what is masculinity?" or "what are the interests of men?". The definition then loses consistency between cultures and time periods-- for example, why are tomboys often characterized as athletic, with athleticism being itself characterized as "masculine", when women's sports exist? Women's sports may not be a thing in other cultures, which would make such a characterization sensible, but it becomes less so wherever female participation in sports is more normalized (the book I alluded to earlier, Tomboys: A Literary and Cultural History, goes into detail about the various-- though seemingly not mutually unintelligible-- shifts of the notion of the "tomboy" throughout American history).

Furthermore, there are interests adopted by one sex over the other, but without any (clear) attributes that would prevent both sexes from equally taking interest (for example, what makes computer science more attractive to men, when it's not gated by something like physical strength? Or, what makes something like Star Wars more attractive to men than women?)

I find it much more proper to define a "tomboy" as a girl who adopts interests and mannerisms without regard for (or in spite of) sex-specific social norms or responsibilities. There's no particular statement on what this makes her, masculine or feminine, but it states a condition that's understood regardless of culture or time period: she does not conform to even the gamut of what is expected of her as a woman... whatever that means in practice.

Any sense of masculinity is thus potentially incidental to her tomboyishness. To exemplify: a so-called tomboy can be expected to find herself in male-dominant spaces on account of her hobbies (which at least don't clearly conform to what's expected of, or liked by, girls), and through that exposure she may gain more social experience with men compared to other girls, being able sympathize with men better than a so-called "non-tomboy". Such experiences may foster in her an "independent streak", where she's at least less concerned about group conformity-- which certainly reminds of masculine attitudes.

Apart from what I've already stated, I find mine the superior definition because, when you actually observe and talk to so-called tomboys, you realize that many of them are just doing what they want, without regard to sex-based social norms (or, perhaps, while chafing under them). There are some who, in the worst case, have internalized misogyny and adopt in their attitude some idea of masculinity because they find in it a good they can't identify in "femininity", but it doesn't appear that the masculinity/femininity paradigm is all that intrinsic to their contemplations of their attitudes and interests. You can especially see it in young girls who are just starting puberty and have to grapple with the burgeoning differentiation between boys and girls as their social circles, what's expected of them, and their very bodies are quickly and drastically changing (their bodies, especially, change more drastically than those of men).

I'm not exactly using stereotypes I'm just halfassing the answers since I could not care less about this conversation--

That you've actively chosen to have for nearly one page.

This doesn't make any sense-- how are you going to half-ass answers, and then get mad when I take issue with your half-assed answers? Part of the issue is going to be that your answers are half-assed and may communicate information you don't even believe but are still presenting just as sincerely.

And again, why is this coming up now, after multiple back-and-forths with the stereotypes/whatever-you-want-to-call-them at hand?

yes I think tomboys can be a "homie" and be more chill to be with so what? Does it affect you in literally any way?

Did I argue that they can't be? No, in fact I gave that idea due credence. Rather, I've made it exceedingly clear that I took issue with the sentiment behind the joke(?) of tomboys being "women without the complications".

When I say feminine women care about their looks I mean they overly care about their looks therefore they take very long to get ready, it is a feminine thing, ask literally any guy that goes to parties, sure he'll care about his looks but he won't take 1h+ to get ready

I don't know what to tell you-- in my (limited) experience, I haven't had that issue with women. I haven't been around men who made that complaint. I think my mother was like that, kind of, but not consistently.

There surely are women like that, but depending on what a man's trying to, I'm sure he'd take just as long.

 

[Ludd_]

You've obviously been extremely willing to have this conversation from the start.

Not really, I've literally been halfassing all these responses saying whatever comes to mind, so now that you know that I'm not willing, can you take your beliefs and go somewhere else?

How is it that it's only now, after me quoting that word repeatedly in order to address it, that you want to downplay that part as a "joke"?

Because it literally is? The first message I sent was completely a joke, and I literally addressed it before what I meant when I said that joke

Secondly, when I say "complications" I mean the many things women and men don't get along well on such as most women wanting to shop for really long, taking long to get ready to go out, some/most women not saying exactly what they want and so on, traits that tomboys usually don't have

This is me addressing what I meant when I was joking and saying "complications"

This doesn't make any sense-- how are you going to half-ass answers, and then get mad when I take issue with your half-assed answers? Part of the issue is going to be that your answers are half-assed and may communicate information you don't even believe but are still presenting just as sincerely.

You're getting things jumbled up here, you're the one arguing with me here, not the other way around, why are you even taking issue with my joke in the first place? Even if I believed in what I said (which I mostly do), does it affect you in any way?

Anyways I didn't read the rest of your message since it's just going to be same old and I honestly could not care less, I don't care about your beliefs nor do I want to debate it so I recommend just going to some kind of debate discord instead of being annoying.

 

[Eighty-six]

Not really, I've literally been halfassing all these responses saying whatever comes to mind, so now that you know that I'm not willing, can you take your beliefs and go somewhere else?

This is a pretty ridiculous cope for someone who could have stopped responding at any time. I'm not holding a gun to your head so you can make half-assed responses and then get angry when I take issue with them (naively believing them to have been made in earnest, like you would expect of someone persisting to have a conversation they can arbitrarily opt out of).

Because it literally is?

Every single time you've tried to wave it off as a joke, you affirmed that you believed what I wanted to address in the first place.

This is me addressing what I meant when I was joking and saying "complications"

It was a non-exhaustive list whose contents-- and the picture I interpreted them as painting-- I still took issue with.

You're getting things jumbled up here, you're the one arguing with me here

It doesn't make a difference if you're participating in the conversation, and continue to do so.

why are you even taking issue with my joke in the first place?

I... already explained why. You've already responded to some of the reasons I've given.

Even if I believed in what I said (which I mostly do), does it affect you in any way?

...clearly, since we're had nearly an entire page's worth of argument about the "joke" and its underlying ideas.

 

[Ludd_]

This is a pretty ridiculous cope for someone who could have stopped responding at any time. I'm not holding a gun to your head so you can make half-assed responses and then get angry when I take issue with them (naively believing them to have been made in earnest, like you would expect of someone persisting to have a conversation they can arbitrarily opt out of).


Every single time you've tried to wave it off as a joke, you affirmed that you believed what I wanted to address in the first place.


It was a non-exhaustive list whose contents-- and the picture I interpreted them as painting-- I still took issue with.


It doesn't make a difference if you're participating in the conversation, and continue to do so.


I... already explained why. You've already responded to some of the reasons I've given.


...clearly, since we're had nearly an entire page's worth of argument about the "joke" and its underlying ideas.

You got upset over a joke I made and started an argument, the end. Now we can stop this

And if you're wondering why I kept responding it's like a adult trying to calm down a kid throwing a tantrum, I thought you had good intentions but at the end you were just trying to argue because you got offended over a joke

 

[Eighty-six]

And if you're wondering why I kept responding it's like a adult trying to calm down a kid throwing a tantrum--

Please stop making stuff up to save face. I reiterate:

I'm not holding a gun to your head so you can make half-assed responses and then get angry when I take issue with them (naively believing them to have been made in earnest, like you would expect of someone persisting to have a conversation they can arbitrarily opt out of).

 

[Ludd_]

Please stop making stuff up to save face. I reiterate:

Not making stuff up, you came arguing at me when I made a joke and I answered with some half ass answers (Or in other words just said whatever came to mind since I thought you were sincere), respect when people don't want to debate with you, please don't be immature.

 

[Eighty-six]

Not making stuff up, you came arguing at me when I made a joke and I answered with some half ass answers (Or in other words just said whatever came to mind since I thought you were sincere)

You "half-assed" your answers by duly answering sincere responses?

You don't care for this conversation, but have never stopped responding on top of--at multiple points-- prompting me with questions?

You thought your role as akin to calming down a kid having a temper tantrum while lobbing insults and not ceasing a conversation you supposedly never wanted to have?

Are these more of your jokes?

respect when people don't want to debate with you

You could have stopped responding at any time. You supposedly never wanted to argue this, so stop now.