At what point is this child abuse? Trans kids.

[o_O.Q]

Hiku said:

o_O.Q said:

"i suppose you aren't going to address you contradicting yourself?"

"my point is that you are identifying them as asexual then claiming that their sexuality has nothing to do with their identity"

"I said "Identity is not the same as sexuality". I did not say it "has nothing to do with it"."

"It can be part of someone's identity. And it may not be for others.
And in the case of some asexual people, sexuality is not a factor."

No answer again?

o_O.Q said:
"You know there have been times when one person perceives a contradiction where there is none due to a misunderstanding or miscommunication"

well i suppose, but it doesn't change the fact that before clarification the contradiction has still occurred right?

No, there was never a contradiction. Only a person who didn't understand it before the clarification. The meaning of what I originally said never changed. If a person for no apparent reason presumed that it can only mean one thing, then that is on their reading comprehension.

And the way you've responded here, refusing to clarify how there's been a contradiction, over and over, no matter how many times I ask, makes it seem like you don't want bring this to light.

o_O.Q said:

if you can't see how this

"It can be part of someone's identity. And it may not be for others.
And in the case of some asexual people, sexuality is not a factor."

contradicts this

"I said "Identity is not the same as sexuality". I did not say it "has nothing to do with it"

then the only reasonable conclusion is that you don't know what a contradiction is

No, there's actually another reason for why a person refuses to answer a simple question, over and over, after they've painted themselves into a corner.

The problem with this is that you are deliberately wasting the other person's time. Just to avoid explaining something that you brought up, that may make you come off in a bad light.
I gave you many chances to explain. I even specifically said not to just highlight two terms that are opposite, like ice and fire. But you still did exactly that, again. And you still refused to explain.

I'm not going to ask again. But I want you to know that I find this behavior in particular very toxic because it wastes the other posters time on purpose to protect your own ego, and I will keep an eye on your posts in the future for similar behavior.


Other problems with your post also comes down to apparent lack of sincerity.

Like this:

"no i expect people who discuss these issues to be mature enough to discuss the ideas at hand reasonably, i mean i think everyone here has that expectation otherwise you wouldn't be a moderator would you?"

As if you've never encountered immature angry responses online. And as if you think there's no process involved to determine who is suitable to be a moderator. Or maybe that was intended as a backhanded shot at me?

And this:

"i have never been banned for a discussion on this topic before if i remember correctly, because as far as i know my posts have always been helpful and informative with regards to my opinions and pertinent and concise with regards to my questions"

You were moderated for a comment on the very off-topic subject you're trying to debate with me here. Women's equal rights.
And you know your posts have not always been helpful.

I also don't know if you're intentionally switching between "moderated" / "banned" / "Banned for this specific thing" in order to make it look like you've been more well behaved than I suggested, but given everything else, I wouldn't rule it out.

I'm not going to debate the other issues with you, because I think it's just a waste of time. But I am putting this reply here for moderator related reasons.

uh... you've waited a month later to reply? after i've long forgotten the context of this discussion? why? anyway...

"No answer again?"

no answer to what?

"No, there was never a contradiction. Only a person who didn't understand it before the clarification."

because your wording as i clearly quoted showed a contradiction, if you don't actually type what your intent is concisely how am i suppose to interpret you correctly? do you think i'm medium?

to reiterate you state here that for asexual people, sexuality is not a factor

"in the case of some asexual people, sexuality is not a factor."

but then here you state the opposite

"Identity is not the same as sexuality". I did not say it "has nothing to do with it"."

how can something be a factor and not be a factor simultaneously? i just posted quotes because i didn't seriously believe i'd have to spell this out like this

"I'm not going to ask again. But I want you to know that I find this behavior in particular very toxic"

what about bringing someone's post and moderation history into a completely unrelated discussion to poison the well? do you think that's toxic as well?

"no i expect people who discuss these issues to be mature enough to discuss the ideas at hand reasonably, i mean i think everyone here has that expectation otherwise you wouldn't be a moderator would you?"

"And as if you think there's no process involved to determine who is suitable to be a moderator. Or maybe that was intended as a backhanded shot at me?"

the point i was making is that we have moderators for these discussions because we expect people to discuss things reasonably, why would i be making backhanded shots at you? i don't even know you

"and I will keep an eye on your posts in the future for similar behavior."

you mean you're going to put more effort into scrutinising my posts specifically over the posts of others to see if you can moderate me?

"Other problems with your post also comes down to apparent lack of sincerity."

on what basis are you claiming that i'm insincere?

"I also don't know if you're intentionally switching between "moderated" / "banned" / "Banned for this specific thing" in order to make it look like you've been more well behaved than I suggested"

i'm not a moderator i honestly don't have in depth knowledge of how the terminology works and i don't see why i should be expected to

"You were moderated for a comment on the very off-topic subject you're trying to debate with me here. Women's equal rights."

can you actually give me a link to the post or post it here for clarification?

"I'm not going to debate the other issues with you"

so let me get this straight, you bring up my moderation history spontaneously into a completely unrelated discussion, and now that i've asked you to provide a more detailed breakdown of what its actually like so that i can defend myself, you just refuse? you think that's fair?

if you want to say that i'm a bad person you should at least be able to post for me how many bannings i've had over the years i've been a user

"And you know your posts have not always been helpful."

based on what? examples of unhelpful posts?

Last edited by o_O.Q - on 19 May 2019