Messages

271

General Chat / Re: You're Not Such a Nerd

« on: November 02, 2012, 03:51:58 PM »

I'm not quite sure what that means, but apparently not.

272

General Chat / Re: You're Not Such a Nerd

« on: November 02, 2012, 11:40:03 AM »

You say that as if the mere name holds meaning to all of us.

273

Forum Games / Re: You Groan, You Lose

« on: October 31, 2012, 04:59:34 PM »

Heh, I imagine iTunes could be used in the development of a psychological weapon and little else.

274

Not at the Dinner Table / Re: Homosexuality and Same-Sex Marriage

« on: October 29, 2012, 01:21:33 AM »

Nice quote! Who said that? EDIT: Thomas Jefferson, eh? I wonder if I had read that in the past, and then forgot it. Anyways, I'm glad to see my own thoughts put so eloquently.

And appeal to authority, ha! You're free to argue with or back whoever you please, regardless of whatever underused privileges he or she may have. Frankly, I was hoping to see somebody strike back at my boat-shaking.

275

Forum Games / Re: Ask a stupid Qusestion get a stupid answer

« on: October 27, 2012, 03:39:26 AM »

Rhetorical questions can make for pretty stupid qusestions, though! But the answer is "already."

Name the 36th usage of scarves, aka mufflers.

276

Not at the Dinner Table / Re: Sexual Orientation

« on: October 26, 2012, 04:02:23 PM »

Ah, so you're saying this contrast we use has sociological influences, then. That makes more sense than calling this contrast an illusion. I would not be surprised, however, if it had biological roots, further exaggerated by social influences. I understand that whether we perceive a face to be male or female can be an illusion, but I see no evidence that can indicate men and women's faces are not visually different. In other words, I see no reason to believe gender role is the only thing at work, here.

277

Not at the Dinner Table / Re: Sexual Orientation

« on: October 26, 2012, 02:20:20 PM »

Isn't that defining sex, rather than debunking it? Even if the natural lighting environments rather than the contrast were changed, we would be seeing a very quantifiable difference. They both look male to me, anyway.

278

General Chat / Re: The HOPEFUL thread: Be happy here!

« on: October 26, 2012, 12:50:00 AM »

When the Japanese Consul General of Seattle asks you to translate one of the 100 Poems by 100 Poets for him, you don't decline. (Done and done, by the way.)

279

General Chat / Re: New/Returning Members Post Here!

« on: October 25, 2012, 02:31:45 PM »

I had to read the entire mockery before realizing "gecko's" true intent... Also, hello Richard. I've never heard of "brogres," so I'm afraid I must assume you made that up to describe yourself.

280

Forum Games / Re: You Win, A Random Stranger Loses?

« on: October 25, 2012, 11:35:34 AM »

I'm not saying it isn't ethically flawed. Rather, I'm saying that I am ethically flawed. I stand by my psychological evaluation of the hypothetical button, however, and also the inflation problem.

Essentially, if people were continuously killing off winners, continuing the process would become necessary for survival, as I imagine that with every other person being an instant billionaire, the dollar would be worth virtually nothing.

281

Not at the Dinner Table / Re: Sexual Orientation

« on: October 24, 2012, 09:24:33 PM »

Thar's what the sex neutral restrooms are for. They're not exactly numerous, and we usually refer to them as handicapped restrooms, but if the decision is that tough, then that's the place to go, pun intended.

282

Forum Games / Re: You Win, A Random Stranger Loses?

« on: October 24, 2012, 08:05:41 PM »

I'll be honest with you, I'd be more comfortable killing a "winner," but by that point, inflation would give you little choice anyway. There are a lot of variables to consider, here, but in general, I see this hypothetical button as a one way ticket to madness and/or depression.

283

Forum Games / Re: The Add-One-Word Story Returns

« on: October 24, 2012, 12:08:31 AM »

, Ph.D.

284

Not at the Dinner Table / Re: Homosexuality and Same-Sex Marriage

« on: October 24, 2012, 12:04:29 AM »

Good grief. Nobody is chained to their opinions when they put them into words, even politicians. If opinions change from experience, new evidence, or some sort of enlightenment, then the change should be accepted as rational. When opinions change for no identifiable reason, fallacious reason, or reasons too petty to put into words, that's when you can smirk and be suspicious.

I'm not saying that we should clear the slate of all past bigotry, I'm saying that the reasons that propped up that bigotry should be explored, at least by the person who once made that stake.

285

Not at the Dinner Table / Re: Homosexuality and Same-Sex Marriage

« on: October 23, 2012, 11:21:06 PM »

Well, I'm pretty sure I managed to keep quiet here about this matter until quite recently, but even I have changed my opinion over the years to some extent. My 14-year-old self was once spontaneously interrogated by one of my larger, more sports-inclined peers concerning my opinions on homosexuality in general. This is what I said: "I think it's abnormal and I will have nothing to do with it." Harsh words, although there were a lot of things pressuring me into a very unsympathetic position. I still flinch when I think of the response to my intentionally unemotional answer, "All right! Ian's cool."