Welcome to Gaia! ::


CH1YO
The Living Force
CH1YO
The Living Force
CH1YO
The Living Force
Why are they synonymous?


Because they describe the same thing.
Thank you for that. Now why are they synonymous?


I don't really see what problem is here.
The problem is that you are not explaining why they are synonymous but rather simply explaining to my what synonymy is. I've already got the latter down pat. How about you explain to me the former?


Can you explain why an Alsation and a German Shepard are synonymous? It's much the same reasoning.
I take this as a "No, I will not explain."
The Living Force
CH1YO
The Living Force
CH1YO
The Living Force
Thank you for that. Now why are they synonymous?


I don't really see what problem is here.
The problem is that you are not explaining why they are synonymous but rather simply explaining to my what synonymy is. I've already got the latter down pat. How about you explain to me the former?


Can you explain why an Alsation and a German Shepard are synonymous? It's much the same reasoning.
I take this as a "No, I will not explain."


The answer to the dog question is basically the same. I might be able to explain how the terms came to be synonymous or why they should be but there is no why; it is a truism.
CH1YO
The Living Force
CH1YO
The Living Force
CH1YO
The Living Force
Thank you for that. Now why are they synonymous?


I don't really see what problem is here.
The problem is that you are not explaining why they are synonymous but rather simply explaining to my what synonymy is. I've already got the latter down pat. How about you explain to me the former?


Can you explain why an Alsation and a German Shepard are synonymous? It's much the same reasoning.
I take this as a "No, I will not explain."


The answer to the dog question is basically the same. I might be able to explain how the terms came to be synonymous or why they should be but there is no why; it is a truism.
It's a truism that I have no interest chasing your tail in circles.
The Living Force
CH1YO
The Living Force
CH1YO
The Living Force
The problem is that you are not explaining why they are synonymous but rather simply explaining to my what synonymy is. I've already got the latter down pat. How about you explain to me the former?


Can you explain why an Alsation and a German Shepard are synonymous? It's much the same reasoning.
I take this as a "No, I will not explain."


The answer to the dog question is basically the same. I might be able to explain how the terms came to be synonymous or why they should be but there is no why; it is a truism.
It's a truism that I have no interest chasing your tail in circles.


I'm not being evasive here, you have asked an impossible question.
CH1YO
The Living Force
CH1YO
The Living Force
CH1YO
The Living Force
The problem is that you are not explaining why they are synonymous but rather simply explaining to my what synonymy is. I've already got the latter down pat. How about you explain to me the former?


Can you explain why an Alsation and a German Shepard are synonymous? It's much the same reasoning.
I take this as a "No, I will not explain."


The answer to the dog question is basically the same. I might be able to explain how the terms came to be synonymous or why they should be but there is no why; it is a truism.
It's a truism that I have no interest chasing your tail in circles.


I'm not being evasive here, you have asked an impossible question.
The question was how are you defining a phrase you used and I'm getting the runaround.

Destructive Detective

19,200 Points
  • Bunny Spotter 50
  • Elocutionist 200
  • Cat Fancier 100
faerystrangeme
Ratttking
Yes, they do. In my ideal world, reproduction would be regulated and prior consent of both parties to the pregnancy would be mandatory.


Interesting. I presume in your ideal world everyone would be required to go on BC? What do you believe about a person's right to control their own body?

(Er, because the internet is bad at communicating this, I honestly find your proposal interesting. I'm not just trying to tear you to shreds.)
Something like that, or reversible sterilization such as vasectomy or tubal ligation.

Currently, a woman has the right to produce as many children as she physically can, whether or not she has consent from the potential father(s) and regardless of her ability to support and raise them. I have issues with that. People have fewer rights regarding their bodies than you might think. In many places, part or all of the body must be covered at all times in public. I wouldn't get stoned to death here for going out topless, but I would be arrested and fined, while my BF would not if he did the same. Why? We do not have the right to profit by selling kidneys, lungs, corneas, etc., although we can sell blood, hair, eggs, and semen. We do not usually have the rights to sell, or rather, rent the use of our bodies to others for sexual purposes, unless you count surrogate pregnancies. As things stand, most laws favor reproduction, however indiscriminate. Any attempt to curb reproductive rights is seen as totalitarian, Hitler-esque, racist, bigoted, and any number of other negatives. It is a pity that wishing for a healthy, well-off, stable population in which all children are planned, wanted and (hopefully) loved is such a crime.

Er, sorry for wall-o-text.
The Living Force
CH1YO
The Living Force
CH1YO
The Living Force
I take this as a "No, I will not explain."


The answer to the dog question is basically the same. I might be able to explain how the terms came to be synonymous or why they should be but there is no why; it is a truism.
It's a truism that I have no interest chasing your tail in circles.


I'm not being evasive here, you have asked an impossible question.
The question was how are you defining a phrase you used and I'm getting the runaround.


Biological gender is sex. That is how it is defined. I have already said as much.

Beloved Friend

8,150 Points
  • Bunny Spotter 50
  • Friendly 100
  • V-Day 2011 Event 100
Kimihiro_Watanuki
Sexual Innuendo
Kimihiro_Watanuki
I'm saying it's a possibility. Forget about the why. The point of this hypothetical is that the abortion happened, and everyone is telling the man that his position simply doesn't matter. That's a bit dehumanizing. You'd think there would be at least some support for men caught up in that.
More like, it's a bit dehumanizing to think you have a say in what a woman does with her body.


FAILURE.

No where am I saying the woman doesn't have a choice in what she does with her body. I'm saying that it's wrong to tell a guy to just get the hell over it. For all the stress that a woman has to go through if she can't carry a baby to term and must get an abortion to save her life, you think some of those people could relate to men who wanted to have children, but couldn't because the woman carrying their child aborted it.

But I guess that's wishful thinking on my part. Men have feelings? Bollocks.


I'm not discounting a man's feelings, not at all. But women have feelings as well, not to mention that it's the woman's body that carries the baby.

Look, I feel like you're coming at this from the viewpoint that there's these heartless women prowling around out there waiting to get pregnant so they can have an abortion just to break your heart. Usually, there is a VERY GOOD reason for an abortion. Like I said, it's NOT something women do lightly. It hurts, there's all sorts of hormones making you miserable, not to mention the genuine sorrow most women feel to be in that position.

It sucks for EVERYONE. It sucks for the boyfriend (if he cares, which I guess you'd be the kind of guy who does). It sucks for the woman. But between the two, it sucks more for the woman. Which is why as a man, it's your job to suck it up and be strong. Unless it's a medical abortion, it takes two to create a REASON for a willful abortion.

Eloquent Trendsetter

I don't think the man has a say at all. At the end of the day, it's the woman's body that is affected by it, it is the woman that has to shoulder any complications, and the fetus is inside of the woman's body. That woman has more rights than that fetus, and it is not anyone else's place to try to give the fetus priority over the wants and needs that the fully functional, independent woman has. You have rights and control over your body, because it is yours. Whatever you do with it is up to you.
Nope, never.
Gatller
I've been thinking about this for a while and I can't work it out in my mind very well. But the point I've reached is that men will never know what it's like to have a child or an abortion so it makes less sense for men to be against it.

Obviously it makes sense if you are the father since it's your child too. I'm not saying men shouldn't have a say at all, I'm just saying means less coming from a man than a woman. Opinions?

Umm, its an ethical issue so of course men should have a say in whether or not its permissible. One could argue that women have more to gain or lose and are emotionally involved in the issue, so because they cannot objectively address the things at hand they shouldn't have a say in it.
Also, women have never experienced being aborted have they? Why should women be allowed to abort fetuses if they cannot experience the pain of being aborted?
If this sounds absurd to you its because I'm trying to convey how absurd your stance sounds to me.
The Living Force
Pseudo-Onkelos
The Living Force
Pseudo-Onkelos
The Living Force
There is no ignorance, there is knowledge.


Good. emotion_brofist
It is sensible to stay true to the code.


The Jedi Code?

Gosh, now I'm feeling tipsy again.
The one and only.


Peace is a lie, there is only passion.
Kahlan_M
The Living Force
Pseudo-Onkelos
The Living Force
Pseudo-Onkelos
The Living Force
There is no ignorance, there is knowledge.


Good. emotion_brofist
It is sensible to stay true to the code.


The Jedi Code?

Gosh, now I'm feeling tipsy again.
The one and only.


Peace is a lie, there is only passion.
Foolishness.
The Sky Does Not Bow
Melody Niwa
CH1YO
Melody Niwa
CH1YO
The Sky Does Not Bow
no you don't

also that would be a personality issue, not one of gender. you don't even know what generqueer is.


I do. Hence why I chose that as my example. I would have chosen something much more plausible if I were making it up otherwise.

Genderqueer is not even a thing. I know very well to what it tries to refer. So far you've been quite consistently wrong, try harder in future.


I hate to lurk this conversation, but you keep saying that "genderqueer is not even a thing", and yet you don't use any facts or even...anything to support your arguments. Saying something doesn't make it true.


It's a statement of fact, not of intent.


Do you have any proof? Sources? Anything?

Well, uhm, he doesn't have to. His position is negative; it's almost impossible to do any sort of factual analysis on whether or not something does not exist.

Which is why anyone who knows what they're doing sticks to proving things are real.



Unless the rules of the ED have changed dramatically, yes the troll does need to back its s**t up. When you make a claim you need to prove that claim, regardless of whether or not you are saying something a person says isn't true. If I say the moon isn't made of cheese and someone calls on me to provide proof of such a negative claim, then I need to do so or concede that I could be wrong. However, since you and CH1YO bot like to troll, I'm not surprised you're saying one of your ilk doesn't have to back its s**t up.

Quick Reply

Submit
Manage Your Items
Other Stuff
Get GCash
Offers
Get Items
More Items
Where Everyone Hangs Out
Other Community Areas
Virtual Spaces
Fun Stuff
Gaia's Games
Mini-Games
Play with GCash
Play with Platinum