flicker

You just told them a “better example” than the one they made, because the example you told them was “better” was one you could disagree with, and that shit was transparent as hell.

You talk about wanting free debate but you used an actual strawman.

Holy crap. Thank you.

Sorry I’m OOTL; what quote?

Oh my God!

itshappening.gif

Fair enough! I was looking at that Wikipedia entry and that’s where I got that but I’m open to other non-cavewoman-gangbang answers.

Personally I’m loud every second I’m having fun and I can’t say I know of any scientific weapon for it. But it’d be nice for that to be more optional than it is!

I’m not reading your thesis on cave woman gang bangs. Hopefully someone else will engage you on this topic further.

Eta; And lemme just say, the idea that “more evidence should be gathered” demands that you need to specify exactly how you want to gather said evidence. Which requires treating human women as animals to be studied. It’s absolutely ridiculous at best and psycho at worst.

Bro your hypothesis is “I feel like it” and your evidence is “You can’t prove it’s not true” and that’s just not how science works.

What we have is evidence (see your damn link to wikipedia) in non-human primates and the “I’m making a sound now to indicate that you should ejaculated for maximum likelihood of impregnation” is pretty solid stuff. There’s talk of encouraging fights for better mate selection. What there isn’t is talk of “I am doing a sex, please join the train being run on me” no matter how much you feel like it’s a valid theory.

Dude you extrapolated some crazy stuff about cave woman orgies that are in no way supported by this link.

Thank you for posting this. I knew a woman’s orgasm had a purpose in insemination but vocalizations indicating the best time for male ejaculation makes sense.

And about a billion times more sense than some of the nonsense posted in this thread.

Right? What evidence?

“The evidence being that it makes my pants feel funny when I think about it.” - Some scientist, probably

I had steadfastly refused to make an account for years even though I browsed daily, until someone said something stupid in one of the Occupy Wallstreet threads and I couldn’t stop myself from needing to correct them.

Crapfully.

Sure it does. I’ve done it!

Code of Conduct and ethical behavior are for everyone, not just people who follow the rules in college. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.

Now, professionally, I’m under an exceptional amount of scrutiny for ethical behavior and I very much should be! I work with marginalized and underrepresented people! They are easy to exploit and are very protected by the law, as well as our ethics. I’ve reported others for their unethical behavior (as well as conducted conversations about appropriate interaction with the people we support).

What that means is, my (metaphorical) nuts are at the band saw every minute of every day. I am absolutely fine with that. It needs to be that way. And if I have a reportable offense, if I ever refer to my actual employer by their name online, I hope to God someone reports me. Because I need a reality check, and I need one badly.

Goose, gander. Rules for thee, rules for me. The poster isn’t somehow allowed to be abused because they did something in the past (which they paid for!) by someone with a superiority complex. That person isn’t somehow immune to the consequences of their actions just because of something OP did in the past.

I second the person who says you need to bring this public behavior to the attention of his employer.

He reported you for misconduct and the sword of damocles swings both ways.

I absolutely haven’t heard anyone infighting about this thing I’m hearing about for the first time, and also am referencing other times we added things and people engaged in infighting, since last behavior can often help predict future.

I take issue with putting a specific group first, intentionally, and can tell you (now that I’ve had a day) that the first indigenous person I asked about it said that it was “bullshit” because it feels “placating” to persons historically unrepresented and oppressed. Which does support my concern even if n=1.

For clarity, he is neither cisgender, nor heteronormative in any fashion.

I specifically referenced an incident but there were others. Did you finish reading that sentence?

Adding is absolutely not the issue here. I think I was pretty clear on that. There is room for everyone in our world.

It’s the intentional effort to put one group before all others, especially when that group has been vastly under-supported, historically.

I don’t like the idea of expanding the acronym to intentionally place someone “first.”

Everyone has an equal place at the table and this feels like a great way to start the kind of stupid infighting that I’ve found exhausting since I first heard a man claim that he didn’t have an interest in a community that spent any time and energy fighting for anything but his needs. At a Pride parade in the late nineties ffs.

Additionally, it feels hollow in the same way that corporate pride feels. “You haven’t been represented appropriately in this community up until now, but look! You’re first!”

I used to drink a lot of juice of Sappho when I was a younger woman and it never left a stain.

Thanks for pointing it out, too. I almost missed out on an awesome username.