Post reply

Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.
Name:
Email:
Subject:
Message icon:
Verification:

shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview


Topic Summary

Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: August 17, 2025, 11:17:06 pm »

"People can see this debate for themselves and see what a dishonest and insane person you are."

If anyone here requires clarification on any of my positions in this topic, I would be happy to comply.

"I've said enough."

I suspect you initially misunderstood my original post, then once you realized what I actually meant, you didn't want to admit that you had previously misunderstood.
Posted by: Aucontraire
« on: August 17, 2025, 07:58:26 pm »

Keep playing dumb and reaching. People can see this debate for themselves and see what a dishonest and insane person you are. I've said enough.
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: August 17, 2025, 04:28:32 am »

"That wasn't the question and you know it."

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/questions-debates/hinduism/msg30799/#msg30799

Quote
I don't consent to playing 90s retro games (I care about justice.)

I have no problem with this.

"I never made even the slightest allusion to caring about you "choosing not to have sex with a woman for your own reasons.""

Then what is this about?

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/questions-debates/hinduism/msg30774/#msg30774

Quote
What a stupid, chauvinistic, and sexphobic way of thinking you show us. I would feel most respected were my consent and autonomy respected, not some objectifying "her physical attributes must be protected" nonsense.

"What we were discussing was the mechanism for genetic microchimerism."

Among other issues:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/questions-debates/hinduism/msg30769/#msg30769

Quote
"Never heard of a condom!?"

It could malfunction. To even take such a gamble would be disrespectful. Also, if there is a hymen, I would not want to damage it.

Thus:

Quote
Whatever the mechanism, she has been changed as a consequence of sex. That is not what we should prefer if we view women as proposed earlier.

which occurs below the stuff in the first quote, includes the issues mentioned in the first quote.
Posted by: Aucontraire
« on: August 17, 2025, 02:53:33 am »

Quote from: 90sRetroFan
I am not bothered by you choosing to not play 90s retro games for your own reasons.

That wasn't the question and you know it.

Quote
You, in contrast, felt so bothered by me choosing not to have sex with a woman for my own reasons that you reacted in the following way:

You're really clinging to that strawman for dear life. You know I never made even the slightest allusion to caring about you "choosing not to have sex with a woman for your own reasons." You can choose not to have sex with her for whatever reason you like. It's your body your choice. You can choose not to have sex with her because you think she's a serial killer. Does that mean I'm not allowed to dispute your accusation that she's a serial killer? Utterly insane.

Quote
Whatever the mechanism

What we were discussing was the mechanism for genetic microchimerism. At this point I'd recommend you get tested for dementia/Alzheimers, but I really think you're just dishonest.
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: August 16, 2025, 03:57:57 pm »

"You don't disagree with the idea that wanting to play 90s retro games means you don't care about justice?"

I am not bothered by you choosing to not play 90s retro games for your own reasons.

You, in contrast, felt so bothered by me choosing not to have sex with a woman for my own reasons that you reacted in the following way:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/questions-debates/hinduism/msg30774/#msg30774

Quote
What a stupid, chauvinistic, and sexphobic way of thinking you show us.

Is this still your view?

"This was so obviously in reference to the specific type of change we were discussing."

Quote
Whatever the mechanism, she has been changed as a consequence of sex. That is not what we should prefer if we view women as proposed earlier.
Posted by: Aucontraire
« on: August 16, 2025, 02:12:31 pm »

Quote from: 90sRetroFan
I am not complaining. Are you?

You don't disagree with the idea that wanting to play 90s retro games means you don't care about justice?

Quote
Quote
Whatever the mechanism, she has been changed as a consequence of sex. That is not what we should prefer if we view women as proposed earlier.

As a consequence of fertilization, not sex, which may or may not result in fertilization

This was so obviously in reference to the specific type of change we were discussing.
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: August 15, 2025, 09:01:23 pm »

"what are you complaining about?"

I am not complaining. Are you?

"Excuse me? When did I say this?"

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/questions-debates/hinduism/msg30774/#msg30774

Quote
Quote
Whatever the mechanism, she has been changed as a consequence of sex. That is not what we should prefer if we view women as proposed earlier.

As a consequence of fertilization, not sex, which may or may not result in fertilization
Posted by: Aucontraire
« on: August 15, 2025, 07:39:33 pm »

Quote from: 90sRetroFan
If you view a woman as a goddess, you would not consent to sex with her.
If I view a woman as a goddess, I would not consent to sex with her.
I don't consent to sex with her (this woman whom I am viewing as a goddess).


I can play this game too:

If you care about justice, you would not consent to playing 90s retro games.
If I care about justice, I would not consent to playing 90s retro games.
I don't consent to playing 90s retro games (I care about justice.)

If you disagree with my premise (that caring about justice means you wouldn't consent to playing 90s retro games,) then you're saying I should play 90s retro games against my will! Otherwise what are you complaining about? 🤪

Quote from: 90sRetroFan
your assertion that only sex that leads to fertilization changes women.

Excuse me? When did I say this?
Will you ever stop using dishonest debate tactics?
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: August 15, 2025, 04:15:08 pm »

"I don't think saying "I don't consent to sex with her" is the same as saying "if you view a woman as a goddess, you would not consent to sex with her"?"

If you view a woman as a goddess, you would not consent to sex with her.
If I view a woman as a goddess, I would not consent to sex with her.
I don't consent to sex with her (this woman whom I am viewing as a goddess).

Is your grammatical struggle resolved?

"Similarly insane is thinking some women possibly having their hymen broken by vaginal sex specifically, proves that all sex always changes women."

This was just a trivial counterexample to point out the falsehood of your assertion that only sex that leads to fertilization changes women.

"Obviously not."

So what are you complaining about?
Posted by: Aucontraire
« on: August 15, 2025, 02:28:30 pm »

Quote from: 90sRetroFan
You are illiterate.

Because I don't think saying "I don't consent to sex with her" is the same as saying "if you view a woman as a goddess, you would not consent to sex with her"?

This goes far beyond literacy. You are insane.

Similarly insane is thinking some women possibly having their hymen broken by vaginal sex specifically, proves that all sex always changes women.

It's not even an interesting point. You would've looked less ridiculous if you just let the hymen comment bury itself.

Quote
A woman can demand sex from me. I can refuse. Does my refusal remove her autonomy?

Obviously not. That is some kind of rapey incel thinking. Autonomy literally means self-choice. It doesn't mean you get to decide what others do.
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: August 15, 2025, 06:05:37 am »

"Which is an entirely different argument to your cute little red herring."

You are illiterate.

"We have established that a woman is not necessarily changed by having sex."

We have established that you at best have a short memory and at worst are a liar:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/questions-debates/hinduism/msg30778/#msg30778

Quote
Quote
I see you have ignored my hymen point

It was boring.

"We have also established that autonomy is important to women"

A woman can demand sex from me. I can refuse. Does my refusal remove her autonomy?
Posted by: Aucontraire
« on: August 14, 2025, 07:37:58 pm »

Quote from: 90sRetroFan
So if you view a woman as a goddess, you would not consent to sex with her, because you would prefer to keep her unchanged.

Which is an entirely different argument to your cute little red herring.

We have established that a woman is not necessarily changed by having sex. We have also established that autonomy is important to women, not material permanence per se (which would be especially true for a goddess, who is by definition above the material world.) Next.
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: August 14, 2025, 07:07:28 pm »

"Not everyone wants to stay as babies."

They can mature without my help.

"your argument wasn't "I don't consent to sex.""

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/questions-debates/hinduism/msg30762/#msg30762

Quote
if you view a woman as a goddess, you would just as obviously not want to have sex with her, because you would prefer to keep her unchanged.

So if you view a woman as a goddess, you would not consent to sex with her, because you would prefer to keep her unchanged.
Posted by: Aucontraire
« on: August 14, 2025, 06:14:39 pm »

Quote from: 90sRetroFan
Certainly not for minimizing change. If it were, healthy children would never grow, let alone mature.

Is your concern about minimizing harmful, non-consensual change, or change in general?? Not everyone wants to stay as babies.

Quote
The burden is on you to explain how.

The debate is there for you and everyone else to see your argument wasn't "I don't consent to sex." Nice red herring though.
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: August 14, 2025, 03:19:44 pm »

"What on earth do you think health is for?"

Certainly not for minimizing change. If it were, healthy children would never grow, let alone mature.

"Hahahha Now that's just dishonest."

The burden is on you to explain how.