Sexual orientation of forum members

[Quagmire]

Why do you disagree with the statement?

I wasn't talking to you.

You think people want to be offended?

Some people? Absolutely.

You know exactly what was meant, they aren't referring to the poll they are referring to the people who are being dismissed by ignorant people like yourself.

I am dismissing you, but not based on your sexual orientation.

Really? Why is heterosexuality the only orientation represented then?

Why is pizza the only food being discussed in the "what kind of pizza do you like" thread?

Obviously that thread was designed to offend people who like Mexican or Chinese food.

No one has accused the OP of saying that,

we are simply referring to the meaning behind making a poll that recognizes ONLY heterosexuality as a sexual orientation.

So you'r not criticizing what he said, you're complaining about what he "really" meant.

Can't people bring up concerns or disagree with a post without people being defensive? Why not discuss the concerns, instead of making them out to be ignorant.

Because THAT IS NOT WHAT THIS THREAD WAS SUPPOSED TO BE ABOUT.

Seriously, if I were Jay I'd report you both for trolling and posting off-topic.

 

[Lady B]

I think someone needs to look up what pansexuality is and what asexuality is before they start trying to compare the two...

I agree and will go further and ask it be defined for us who are scratching our heads.....

 

[Drolefille]

I disagree.

You're entitled to your opinion, but your opinion about my internal thoughts is clearly significantly less informed than my own.
As I said, I feel there's a set of circular logic here where anyone who disagrees with you is just looking to be offended and being dismissive, and there's nothing we could say to change your mind unless we agreed with you. Can you propose a way I might convince you that I'm simply expressing my opinions.

I thought your objection was that you're not being talked about.

We're talking about us.

The poll doesn't say "normal vs abnormal". You're the one reading that into it.

No, the OP stated that he was contrasting the norm with.... well everything else. By default that is the abnormal.

If we accept that heterosexual-male / heterosexual female are the norms, the poll asks whether or not you self identify with the norm. There are only three answers: yes; no; I don't want to play. I really am OK with any of them.

The OP doesn't say any of that either.

That was a general discussion on the concept of privilege, no where did I say the OP said any of that. Being able to erase the minority does typically come from a place of privilege however. As noted, I believe it would also be offensive if it had been a discussion of ethnicity with the categories as "white" and "non-white."

Then again, like I said: create your own poll. You want to foster awareness? Or would you rather just complain that other people aren't doing that for you?

By speaking, we raise awareness. By engaging in critical dialogue about things that are problematic we raise awareness. As noted, criticism isn't invalidated because the critic didn't do the same thing. Movie critics aren't directors, food critics aren't world class chefs. That's an invalid argument.

Now, when I did make a demographics survey for my thesis I followed these guidelines, but I don't have to follow around everyone on the internet and repeat what they do but "better" to have valid concerns.

 

[Aiden]

Seriously, if I were Jay I'd report you both for trolling and posting off-topic.

Off topic? My posts have nothing to do with sexual orientation? There is nothing wrong with challenging the views of certain people. Your arrogance is just funny.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Seriously, if I were Jay I'd report you both for trolling and posting off-topic.

It really is rather remarkable - as if one walked into a subdued yet crowded library and yelled: "I'm a misunderstood victim; stop picking on me!"

 

[Drolefille]

You can "assure" me you're a pelican. Unless I see a big bill and some feathers I'll still have my doubts.



I doubt you truly feel that way. I think that's just an all-purpose line you use whenever you don't have a legitimate rebuttal to something.

Dismissing everything I say as dishonest is not conducive to discussion. Since you criticized others for "showing their true colors" I encourage you do engage in the discussion at face value.

Except that that isn't what the OP wanted to know about.

What gives you the right to tell another member what they should and shouldn't be interested in?

When did rights get involved? I didn't know that there were some sort of legal or constitutional issues at stake here.

OP could have gathered his information in a more accurate and less insulting manner by putting more effort into it as well as not being dismissive when it was pointed out.

I agree and will go further and ask it be defined for us who are scratching our heads.....

Asexual - Someone with no sexual attraction to any other person - typically capable of engaging in sex if necessary or if a partner desires it, but has no personal desire for any sexual activity.
Demisexual - Someone with a very low level of sexual interest or attraction in other people - but does not see this as an impairment, simply how they function.
Bisexual -Someone attracted to both the same and the opposite sexes/genders
Pansexual - Someone who does not consider gender a factor in attraction. Some consider this more inclusive than bisexual, but in essence they're the same.

Heteroromantic/Homoromantic - just as with heterosexual and homosexual except instead of sexual attraction they're about who one finds romantic partners with. For many or most this aligns with the sexuality - that is most people who are heterosexual are heteroromantic as well - but not always.

Any others you're not sure about?

 

[Drolefille]

Because THAT IS NOT WHAT THIS THREAD WAS SUPPOSED TO BE ABOUT.

Seriously, if I were Jay I'd report you both for trolling and posting off-topic.

As you are staff, and essentially immune to reporting yourself IIRC, you can feel free to do so if you find us off topic. I think this is possibly the only off topic post I've made in this entire thread.

But as you have spent your time in this thread accusing me of lying and being disingenuous, I don't know that you have much ground here.

 

[Quagmire]

You're entitled to your opinion, but your opinion about my internal thoughts is clearly significantly less informed than my own.

(And then she goes on to comment on my "internal thoughts". )

As I said, I feel there's a set of circular logic here where anyone who disagrees with you is just looking to be offended and being dismissive, and there's nothing we could say to change your mind unless we agreed with you. Can you propose a way I might convince you that I'm simply expressing my opinions.

In a debate or discussion, you should also set aside a moment or two here and there to consider other people's opinions. Otherwise you're just lecturing.

We're talking about us.

I give up.

No, the OP stated that he was contrasting the norm with.... well everything else. By default that is the abnormal.

Ah I see. With that logic, since it's the norm for people to eat meat, vegetarians must be abnormal.

That was a general discussion on the concept of privilege, no where did I say the OP said any of that.

It was an off-topic bid for sympathy.

Being able to erase the minority does typically come from a place of privilege however.

"Erase". Un-friggin-believable.

As noted, I believe it would also be offensive if it had been a discussion of ethnicity with the categories as "white" and "non-white."

And we would be having the same argument. :yes:

By speaking, we raise awareness. By engaging in critical dialogue about things that are problematic we raise awareness. As noted, criticism isn't invalidated because the critic didn't do the same thing. Movie critics aren't directors, food critics aren't world class chefs. That's an invalid argument.

Now, when I did make a demographics survey for my thesis I followed these guidelines, but I don't have to follow around everyone on the internet and repeat what they do but "better" to have valid concerns.

Oh god, another speech.

 

[Quagmire]

Off topic? My posts have nothing to do with sexual orientation? There is nothing wrong with challenging the views of certain people. Your arrogance is just funny.

Keep those ad hominums rolling in.

you have no idea how good they make you look.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Given that the respondents are self-selecting, wouldn't a representative number need to include just about everyone on the Forum? Or am I missing something?

I honestly don't know. But, clearly, the thread has taken on a somewhat neurotic life of its own.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

64 votes

 

[Quagmire]

It really is rather remarkable - as if one walked into a subdued yet crowded library and yelled: "I'm a misunderstood victim; stop picking on me!"

I'm wondering if some of the people in this discussion are looking at that and saying to themselves, "What's wrong with that? I do it all the time".

 

[Quagmire]

As you are staff, and essentially immune to reporting yourself IIRC,

This is a lie, as you well know.

you can feel free to do so if you find us off topic. I think this is possibly the only off topic post I've made in this entire thread.

But as you have spent your time in this thread accusing me of lying and being disingenuous, I don't know that you have much ground here.

That is also a lie.

 

[Aiden]

This is a lie, as you well know.



That is also a lie.

Why do you keep making baseless points? I have re-read all of your arguments and I've came to one conclusion; You have none.

 

[Lady B]

dang.....just danggggg. how did it come to this?

 

[Drolefille]

In a debate or discussion, you should also set aside a moment or two here and there to consider other people's opinions. Otherwise you're just lecturing.

This is where I say that I did, and you say you don't believe me again, right? How could i convince you otherwise?

Ah I see. With that logic, since it's the norm for people to eat meat, vegetarians must be abnormal.

Depends on what part of the world. But when vegetarian is a protected class, we can talk. Similarly it would be bad data collection

It was an off-topic bid for sympathy.

No, I never seek sympathy. I do hope to provoke empathy. But that was a response to the other discussion of privilege and your response to that that inspired me to address it. If privilege is related to the poor construction of the poll it's quite on topic.

If necessary, if this is off topic and inappropriate, please feel free to report it, otherwise repeated accusations aren't necessary.

"Erase". Un-friggin-believable.

Yep, erasure of minorities sucks quite a lot.

And we would be having the same argument. :yes:

And that's the problem I see here. It is a matter of privilege I suspect as well as different worldviews, but when it is literally a mattero f a few minutes of work to be polite - to be inclusive - I don't see it as some sort of unreasonable or victimhood-filled request. Even simply an "other" button would work here as there are people who do not ID as either male or female and thus may not feel comfortable answering the question at all.

Oh god, another speech.

Another one brought to religion!
But seriously, I don't think you can legitimately call a couple of sentences a speech. And I'd appreciate you not insulting me by calling me a liar anymore.

 

[Drolefille]

dang.....just danggggg. how did it come to this?

Did you have any other questions about any of the terms used LadyB?

 

[dgirl1986]

dang.....just danggggg. how did it come to this?

Certainly facepalm worthy

 

[Revoltingest]

----- I hereby appoint myself temporary moderator -----
No more accusations of lying.
Be nice to each other, folks.

 

[Quagmire]

This is where I say that I did, and you say you don't believe me again, right? How could i convince you otherwise?

I don't know. Maybe you should "assure me" some more.

Depends on what part of the world. But when vegetarian is a protected class, we can talk. Similarly it would be bad data collection

Missed that point too. :yes:

No, I never seek sympathy. I do hope to provoke empathy. But that was a response to the other discussion of privilege and your response to that that inspired me to address it. If privilege is related to the poor construction of the poll it's quite on topic.

Because Drolefille says so. :yes:

If necessary, if this is off topic and inappropriate, please feel free to report it, otherwise repeated accusations aren't necessary.

If I were going to do that I wouldn't need your permission.

Yep, erasure of minorities sucks quite a lot.

So does hyperbole.

And that's the problem I see here. It is a matter of privilege I suspect as well as different worldviews, but when it is literally a mattero f a few minutes of work to be polite - to be inclusive - I don't see it as some sort of unreasonable or victimhood-filled request. Even simply an "other" button would work here as there are people who do not ID as either male or female and thus may not feel comfortable answering the question at all.

Again (and for the umpteenth time) if that's what you want the poll to say, what's stopping you from creating a poll that says that?

Another one brought to religion!

Funny, I did see you up behind a pulpit.

But seriously, I don't think you can legitimately call a couple of sentences a speech. And I'd appreciate you not insulting me by calling me a liar anymore.

Then quit lying.

Why do you keep making baseless points? I have re-read all of your arguments and I've came to one conclusion; You have none.

The same conclusion you started out with, ironically. :yes: