Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 7461710" data-attributes="member: 4937">No, you are quoting me out of context.No, the antecedent of the pronoun is logically and properly in the prior sentence, so that I said was, "I also don't think [whether the difference between the two genders in real life is purely cosmetic] is nearly as relevant as some people think it is, as I don't think whether or not the only differences between the genders are cosmetic [in real life] matters much."  You can't just attach a pronoun willy-nilly to whatever you think it applies to.   Further, if you quote the remainder of the paragraph you'll see that I'm supporting the above thesis with my points, and not the crap you are trying to attribute to me.Further, you are now back peddling, since your first statement regarding what I said is not the same as your second statement regarding what I said.  Both assertions are inaccurate, but they are also not equal to each other.I actually didn't say very much at all about presentation of gender, or what I thought of mechanics around gender, although the fact that I wrapped up my statements about real life by saying, "Unlike an RPG, in the real world the value of a person is not based on the number of points on their character sheet.", does in fact suggest that I think that there is at least one basis for stating that RPG's logically don't and maybe even shouldn't try to emulate the real gender differences - whether or not you think those gender  differences are real.  In any event, I could continue Fisking all your unreason, sentence by sentence, but given that I've just overthrown the entire basis of your argument, I don't see why I have to and I'm disinclined to give you more time anyway.   There are a few points I want to address as low hanging fruit though.Some might, but they are apparently the same sort of people that call coming in hurling around a bunch innuendo, well-poisoning, slander, passive aggression, racialism, negative stereotypes, and general dickery "respectful", so I don't think there opinion on what is respectful matters that much.   You'd have been actually more polite being insulting and actually saying what you mean, than your condescending pretense - and even then you couldn't help throwing around terms like "barely-washed straight white dudes".   You are the one the is reeking in here.I'm not in the habit of thinking that there is two sides, and that we are in some sort of war, or of throwing down you are either for me or against me gauntlets.  I generally find that the opinions I hold aren't equitable to any 'side', but likewise I'm not in the habit of claiming that everyone that disagrees with me is "bad people".I don't think logic is your strength any more than reading comprehension is.  When a person is misquoted and slandered by a journalist, the person so misused doesn't reply because they care particularly what the journalist thinks of them, because the journalist has already revealed themselves to a reprehensible person.   Rather, a person that has been slandered takes the time to correct the record, because they care what other people who aren't acquainted to them might think, and because not responding might be seen as conceding the truth of the slander.  So what you think is simply wrong.</blockquote>

Verification