If Heterosexualism Existed, We Wouldn’t Have To Make It Up

ecdanc said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

ecdanc said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

ecdanc said:

brianlux said:

ecdanc said:

brianlux said:

ecdanc said:

brianlux said:

^^^ I'll make sure to read all of that when I've run out of books to read.

You posted your inane tangent in response to something you didn't even read? 

I read enough to call bullshit, yes.

No, no you didn't. You read enough to totally misunderstand something. I guess selling books isn't the same as reading them. 

I call further bullshit.  Knock it off with the personal attacks, buddy.

Sorry. had to edit.  My arthritis sometimes makes my fingers hit the wrong fucking keys.

Dude, you felt the need to come respond to a post that is "hey, here's an interesting article, what do you think?" with "I didn't read it, but it's bullshit." What do you expect?

Except you didn’t do this. You made an eye catching title, some might say, provocative, and posted a link. No comments from you, not even a “what do you think?” I read the article and it reads like a philosophy grad student’s essay, maybe with a little too much time on their hands to concern themselves with runny makeup and hygiene routines on a tv show I never watched nor heard of. Is this the most pressing issue to write about? Or philosophize about? Plus, it was difficult to read as it jumped  around a lot and made my eyes close and head snap.

It’s the title of the article FFS. 

And other than that, you didn’t offer up any commentary. Just a title of a thread with the thread title in the posted link. FFS. 

Jesus. It’s a funny, thought-provoking little post for Valentine’s Day. I thought I was supposed to be the over-sensitive one around here. 

ecdanc said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

ecdanc said:

brianlux said:

ecdanc said:

brianlux said:

ecdanc said:

brianlux said:

^^^ I'll make sure to read all of that when I've run out of books to read.

You posted your inane tangent in response to something you didn't even read? 

I read enough to call bullshit, yes.

No, no you didn't. You read enough to totally misunderstand something. I guess selling books isn't the same as reading them. 

I call further bullshit.  Knock it off with the personal attacks, buddy.

Sorry. had to edit.  My arthritis sometimes makes my fingers hit the wrong fucking keys.

Dude, you felt the need to come respond to a post that is "hey, here's an interesting article, what do you think?" with "I didn't read it, but it's bullshit." What do you expect?

Except you didn’t do this. You made an eye catching title, some might say, provocative, and posted a link. No comments from you, not even a “what do you think?” I read the article and it reads like a philosophy grad student’s essay, maybe with a little too much time on their hands to concern themselves with runny makeup and hygiene routines on a tv show I never watched nor heard of. Is this the most pressing issue to write about? Or philosophize about? Plus, it was difficult to read as it jumped  around a lot and made my eyes close and head snap.

Where do you publish?

ecdanc said:

rgambs said:

ecdanc said:

rgambs said:

There were 2 links in there that I really liked, they were quite good, so I will definitely go back and read through some of the others that didn't interest me on the first pass.

The piece itself was not at all to my taste, it gave me the feeling of the academic equivalent of an amateur bodybuilder flexing his/her muscles in front of a mirror so his/her friends could watch and clap.

It did have some interesting points though, if you could make it through the Ayn gRANDstanding.  

What? What does Rand have to do with anything?

Pretty much nothing, it just reminded me of her writing style.  The almost self-congratulatory tone, like I said, it comes off very much like posing for applause.
It's sort of a polar opposite to Rand though, the other side of the coin.  Where Rand would beat you over the head relentlessly with a thousand ways of stating the same simple idea, this writer prefers to beat around the bush a thousand ways to convey a simple idea without stating it.

But through all that, she? made some interesting and valid points, my favorite of which was that women tend to grow tired of sexual monogamy quicker and possibly to a greater degree than men.

Honest question: do you read a lot of scholarly writing?

ecdanc said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

ecdanc said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

ecdanc said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

ecdanc said:

brianlux said:

ecdanc said:

brianlux said:

ecdanc said:

brianlux said:

^^^ I'll make sure to read all of that when I've run out of books to read.

You posted your inane tangent in response to something you didn't even read? 

I read enough to call bullshit, yes.

No, no you didn't. You read enough to totally misunderstand something. I guess selling books isn't the same as reading them. 

I call further bullshit.  Knock it off with the personal attacks, buddy.

Sorry. had to edit.  My arthritis sometimes makes my fingers hit the wrong fucking keys.

Dude, you felt the need to come respond to a post that is "hey, here's an interesting article, what do you think?" with "I didn't read it, but it's bullshit." What do you expect?

Except you didn’t do this. You made an eye catching title, some might say, provocative, and posted a link. No comments from you, not even a “what do you think?” I read the article and it reads like a philosophy grad student’s essay, maybe with a little too much time on their hands to concern themselves with runny makeup and hygiene routines on a tv show I never watched nor heard of. Is this the most pressing issue to write about? Or philosophize about? Plus, it was difficult to read as it jumped  around a lot and made my eyes close and head snap.

It’s the title of the article FFS. 

And other than that, you didn’t offer up any commentary. Just a title of a thread with the thread title in the posted link. FFS. 

Jesus. It’s a funny, thought-provoking little post for Valentine’s Day. I thought I was supposed to be the over-sensitive one around here. 

I didn’t say it bothered me but that it bored me. “Funny” and “thought provoking” to you maybe. 

I’m guessing you’re not the intended audience. 

ecdanc said:

rgambs said:

ecdanc said:

rgambs said:

ecdanc said:

rgambs said:

There were 2 links in there that I really liked, they were quite good, so I will definitely go back and read through some of the others that didn't interest me on the first pass.

The piece itself was not at all to my taste, it gave me the feeling of the academic equivalent of an amateur bodybuilder flexing his/her muscles in front of a mirror so his/her friends could watch and clap.

It did have some interesting points though, if you could make it through the Ayn gRANDstanding.  

What? What does Rand have to do with anything?

Pretty much nothing, it just reminded me of her writing style.  The almost self-congratulatory tone, like I said, it comes off very much like posing for applause.
It's sort of a polar opposite to Rand though, the other side of the coin.  Where Rand would beat you over the head relentlessly with a thousand ways of stating the same simple idea, this writer prefers to beat around the bush a thousand ways to convey a simple idea without stating it.

But through all that, she? made some interesting and valid points, my favorite of which was that women tend to grow tired of sexual monogamy quicker and possibly to a greater degree than men.

Honest question: do you read a lot of scholarly writing?

No, because it always gives me that bad taste lol
Fully willing to admit that this makes little sense when my favorite writers are all found in the Norton Anthology.

I can drive through Shelley's A Defense of Poetry without getting that flavor I don't like, T.H. Huxley is my jam, but stuff like this...not so much. 🤷‍♂️

I hear you. I read a lot of scholarly writing and, it pains me to say, this is actually a pleasurable instance of it!

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

there was nothing satirical about it as far I as read it the first time, which was at least haflway. so I went back and attempted to read it all the way to through to see if I found it funny. 

no. 

it didn't help that half of the words seemed like things the person googled to find out the more complicated synonym of. you going to use words like "solipsistic" in satire, you aren't going to garner too many chuckles. 

I think maybe you're misunderstanding the humor. That's ok. I never found Dan Akroyd funny.