Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,918 Year: 4,175/9,624 Month: 1,046/974 Week: 5/368 Day: 5/11 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   rape culture/victim culture
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1497 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 201 of 209 (197541)
04-07-2005 6:40 PM
Reply to: Message 199 by arachnophilia
04-07-2005 5:28 PM


Re: consolidated response.
i believe i posted the definition, including the fact that it is explicitly linked to biological sex.
What I still wonder is how you missed the second definition, which you quoted, which explicitly referred to the qualities culturally associated with sex.
Given that we were talking about a creature whose biological genitals are never seen, if it even has them, and given that you were apparently aware of both definitions of the word "gender", why did you assume that I meant the first definition, which obviously doesn't apply, instead of the second, especially when I explained to you in subsequent posts which definition I meant?
Or do you deny that you posted these words?
quote:
Main Entry: 1gender
Pronunciation: 'jen-d&r
Function: noun
2 a : SEX b : the behavioral, cultural, or psychological traits typically associated with one sex
How stupid do you think I am, Arach? Did you really think that you could post a definition of a word that would confirm my usage of the word and that I wouldn't notice? Maybe the better question is, how stupid are you to have apparently done exactly that?
you're using it in a sense that is not correct in any area accept womens' studies classes.
...and, apparently, whatever dictionary you just used.
Look, I don't know what to say to you. Apparently you can't be bothered to read dictionary definitions as you copy and paste them into messages. Why should I be bothered to have a conversation with someone as lazy as you?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 199 by arachnophilia, posted 04-07-2005 5:28 PM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 205 by macaroniandcheese, posted 04-07-2005 10:53 PM crashfrog has not replied
 Message 206 by arachnophilia, posted 04-07-2005 11:00 PM crashfrog has not replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1497 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 202 of 209 (197542)
04-07-2005 6:41 PM
Reply to: Message 198 by arachnophilia
04-07-2005 5:23 PM


considering we were talking about something completely fictionally, i would consider the intentions of the producers, artist, and director to be substantial evidence.
Considering we were talking about how images would be recieved by an audience, those intentions, which would not have been avaliable to the audience, are not substantial evidence of any kind.
But, once again, you've demonstrated that you missed the entire point of what we were talking about.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 198 by arachnophilia, posted 04-07-2005 5:23 PM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 207 by arachnophilia, posted 04-07-2005 11:03 PM crashfrog has not replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1497 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 203 of 209 (197544)
04-07-2005 6:43 PM


Can we close this thread, already? We're terminally off-topic, and while I would just as soon disengage from Arach, he's given every indication that he's going to use my abstention to make me look like an idiot with his disingenuous, dishonest charactures of my position.

Replies to this message:
 Message 208 by arachnophilia, posted 04-07-2005 11:05 PM crashfrog has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024