# Diogenes, what the hell!? **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [December 4, 2009, 3:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/diogenes-what-the-hell/519991 "2009-12-04T15:58:07Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 13
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2009, 5:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/diogenes-what-the-hell/519991/241 "2009-12-07T05:19:59Z")
Lots of straight couples can’t have children either. So what? What does having children have to do with anything? ---
**Author:** ![CrazyCatLady](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/dfb087/32.png) [@CrazyCatLady](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CrazyCatLady)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2009, 5:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/diogenes-what-the-hell/519991/242 "2009-12-07T05:27:07Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Polygamy refers to nothing but the marriage of a male to multiple wives. That is incorrect. Polygyny is the marriage of a male to multiple wives. Polyandry is the marriage of a female to multiple husbands. Polygamy is the marriage of more than 2 people. When most people say polygamy, they mean polygyny because it’s far and away the form you see the most of when looking at the norms of various societies. But there are societies where polygamous relationships are polyandrous, and I think even a very small handful where there both polyandry and polygyny, though I don’t swear to that last because it’s been many years since I lived with an anthropology major. As for the rest of this mess…meh. I personally wouldn’t take an extra partner seriously till they’d been around a while, same as I wouldn’t a mono partner. When someone is still in the flavor of the month stage, even Emily Post wouldn’t expect you to give them and the relationship the same consideration and respect you would a more serious and established relationship. That means you don’t have to invite them as a group, among other things. They are, of course, entitled to get offended and decline the invitation…but the general concensus is typically that people who get tore up about you not inviting their brand-new squeeze over are wankers. I don’t see why that should be any different just because the new squeeze is the third or more partner. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2009, 5:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/diogenes-what-the-hell/519991/243 "2009-12-07T05:59:16Z")
And now **Diogenes** has single handedly obliterated the concept of step parenting. Predicted Response: “No I didn’t!” ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2009, 6:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/diogenes-what-the-hell/519991/244 "2009-12-07T06:09:50Z")
Please, do elaborate. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2009, 6:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/diogenes-what-the-hell/519991/245 "2009-12-07T06:13:06Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Lots of straight couples can’t have children either. So what? What does having children have to do with anything? I am not going to pretend that this is even a serious question. It’s one of the stupidest copouts ever brought up. So a stupid question gets a stupid answer: > **[Reproduction](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reproduction)** > > Reproduction (or procreation or breeding) is the biological process by which new individual organisms – "offspring" – are produced from their "parent" or parents. There are two forms of reproduction: asexual and sexual. > In asexual reproduction, an organism can reproduce without the involvement of another organism. Asexual reproduction is not limited to single-celled organisms. The cloning of an organism is a form of asexual reproduction. By asexual reproduction, an organism creates a genetical... Basic biology. Human coupling is for the purpose of sexual reproduction. Outside of that it serves no purpose, and as such is an arbitrary standard. There is no reason to insist on mongamy if there is no procreative reason. Otherwise you are simply holding one sentimentality up above another. You are saying that a homosexual coupling is kosher but a trio is somehow sick and wrong. Completely arbitrary without the need to reproduce and raise children. You adhere to the perversion of multiculturalism, which is really monoculturalism. It cannot stand the idea of multiple cultures. Really multiculturalism refers to the monoculture of atomized cosmopolitanism, where different cultures are relegated to street fairs, whether it be Folsom, or the Puerto Rican day parade. Saying homosexual relationships are just like heterosexual relationships requires homosexual relationships to adhere to a facsimile of hetero-normative culture so that intolerant people can feel better about themselves by pretending that they are the champions of the downtrodden. But really, what the multiculturalist wants is a cheerful conformity. They want everyone to be the same, in order to be equal. So you claim there are no such thing as gender differences, that homosexual relationships are not fundamentally different from hetero relationships because you cannot imagine love in a non-conventional setting, so homosexuals get put into the box, so that their love may be accepted as part of the overall normative culture. Now of course you are being confronted with the idea of a loving relationship that includes more people than the standard coupling, and you’re repulsed by the deviance from the program. You point to religious zealotry, and all dysfunctional relationships as your examples of why it’s not kosher. And yet, is it not kosher in essence or is it because of the strain placed upon it by outside pressure to conform to the will of the multicultural cosmopolis? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2009, 6:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/diogenes-what-the-hell/519991/246 "2009-12-07T06:26:44Z")
There is no such thing as a biological “purpose.” The fact that fucking can lead to reproduction is incidental, not purposeful, and many, many millions of people couple without any purpose to reproduce at all. I don’t “insist” on anything, by the way. I don’t care what people do. Just don’t expect me to automatically take all sexual arrangements seriously as earnest relationships. ETA when the fuck did I say there was no such thing as gender difference or that I was a “multi-culturalist.” I don’t even know what the fuck that is. Whatever it is, I don’t give two shits about it. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2009, 6:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/diogenes-what-the-hell/519991/247 "2009-12-07T06:35:29Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > There is no such thing as a biological “purpose.” The fact that fucking can lead to reproduction is incidental, not purposeful, and many, many millions of people couple without any purpose to reproduce at all. Reproduction is the biological PURPOSE of coupling. > [@](#): > > I don’t “insist” on anything, by the way. I don’t care what people do. Just don’t expect me to automatically take all sexual arrangements seriously as earnest relationships. Ok, then I guess we don’t need to take your relationships seriously either, right? I mean, why bother taking anyone seriously at all? > [@](#): > > ETA when the fuck did I say there was no such thing as gender difference or that I was a “multi-culturalist.” I don’t even know what the fuck that is. Whatever it is, I don’t give two shits about it. When you said that homosexual and heterosexual couplings are the same you said there is no difference between genders. And it’s a multiculturalist idea that to validate something you call it the same as whatever the normative situation is. Homosexuality is valid, it’s just like heterosexuality! Black people are valid they are just like white people! Jews are valid, they are just like Christians! It’s a certain habituated parsimonious equanimity that belies the underlying assumptions. It’s also completely and totally dismissive of any sort of cultural value that deviates from the normative value. People are welcome to celebrate their cultures in the kitchen, as long as they wear a tie to their cubicle. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2009, 6:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/diogenes-what-the-hell/519991/248 "2009-12-07T06:44:08Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > Reproduction is the biological PURPOSE of coupling. Cite? There is no such thing as a “biologocal purpose” for ANYTHING. Biology is not goal directed. It has no design or intended end. It’s just a rock rolling down a hill. > [@](#): > > Ok, then I guess we don’t need to take your relationships seriously either, right? I mean, why bother taking anyone seriously at all? I don’t care if you take my marriage seriously or not. What the fuck is it to me? > [@](#): > > When you said that homosexual and heterosexual couplings are the same you said there is no difference between genders. Sexual orientation is not a gender identification. > [@](#): > > And it’s a multiculturalist idea that to validate something you call it the same as whatever the normative situation is. Homosexuality is valid, it’s just like heterosexuality! Black people are valid they are just like white people! Jews are valid, they are just like Christians! It’s a certain habituated parsimonious equanimity that belies the underlying assumptions. It’s also completely and totally dismissive of any sort of cultural value that deviates from the normative value. I have no idea what any of this means, or what it has to do with me. I don’t even know what you mean by “valid.” Valid in what sense? What would it mean to say that black people are not valid, and why do you object to saying they are. In short, what the fuck are you babbling about? > [@](#): > > People are welcome to celebrate their cultures in the kitchen, as long as they wear a tie to their cubicle. I don’t give a flying fuck where people celebrate their cultures. Fucking lots of people isn’t a culture, though. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2009, 6:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/diogenes-what-the-hell/519991/249 "2009-12-07T06:54:59Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Cite? > > There is no such thing as a “biologocal purpose” for ANYTHING. Biology is not goal directed. It has no design or intended end. It’s just a rock rolling down a hill. So human beings can reproduce without coupling? > [@](#): > > I don’t care if you take my marriage seriously or not. What the fuck is it to me? I guess it doesn’t matter. > [@](#): > > Sexual orientation is not a gender identification. Umm…yes it is. My wife is a woman (gender identity), I am a man (gender identity). > [@](#): > > I have no idea what any of this means, or what it has to do with me. I don’t even know what you mean by “valid.” Valid in what sense? What would it mean to say that black people are not valid, and why do you object to saying they are. In short, what the fuck are you babbling about? I don’t object to saying black people are valid. My point is that your entire sense of validity is based around conformity. Homosexuals are valid because you can see them conforming to a certain standard, that of coupling, which is completely arbitrary. > [@](#): > > I don’t give a flying fuck where people celebrate their cultures. Fucking lots of people isn’t a culture, though. Well as it was pointed out to you monogamy is the exception not the rule in human cultures. Monogamy isn’t a culture either. It’s one aspect of culture, just as polyamory is another aspect of culture. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2009, 7:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/diogenes-what-the-hell/519991/250 "2009-12-07T07:08:17Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > So human beings can reproduce without coupling? Who cares if human beings reproduce at all? It is not necessary for humans to reproduce. Biology doesn’t care and has no purpose for sex. People couple for whatever reason they each individually ascribe to it. > [@](#): > > Umm…yes it is. My wife is a woman (gender identity), I am a man (gender identity). Which is a separate thing fro sexual orientation. > [@](#): > > I don’t object to saying black people are valid. My point is that your entire sense of validity is based around conformity. Homosexuals are valid because you can see them conforming to a certain standard, that of coupling, which is completely arbitrary. Again, I have no idea what you mean by “validity,” nor do I give a rat’s ass about conformity. I don’t judge polyamory because it’s non-conformist, but because it’s lame. Just because something is non-conformist doesn’t mean it isn’t stupid. > [@](#): > > Well as it was pointed out to you monogamy is the exception not the rule in human cultures. As I said upthread, the option to have more than one sex partners has historically only applied to men. Polygamous paradigms are not mutually reciprocal, organic relatiosnhips where everybody is in love with everybody else. It’s just a guy with a bunch of subservient wives. > [@](#): > > Monogamy isn’t a culture either. It’s one aspect of culture, just as polyamory is another aspect of culture. I never said monagamy was a culture. So we agree. How many people you fuck is not a culture. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2009, 7:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/diogenes-what-the-hell/519991/251 "2009-12-07T07:26:16Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > I thought BDSM was about tying people up and whipping them and shit. You thought wrong. ---
**Author:** ![Dissonance](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/85f322/32.png) [@Dissonance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dissonance)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2009, 9:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/diogenes-what-the-hell/519991/252 "2009-12-07T09:24:27Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > The fact that fucking can lead to reproduction is incidental, not purposeful Ummm… how else do species that reproduce sexually reproduce? Mommy and Daddy loving each other very much and the stork arriving isn’t actually how reproduction occurs. That whole menses cycle, egg and sperm thing is how sexual reproduction occurs. It’s not actually an incidental side-effect. ---
**Author:** ![kimera](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/f0a364/32.png) [@kimera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kimera)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2009, 1:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/diogenes-what-the-hell/519991/253 "2009-12-07T13:11:03Z")
> [@Turek](#): > > See, you come in here spouting all sorts of stuff that sounds legit, and then you go off the rails with your subjective value judgement at the last minute. It’s “better for society?” How the fuck can you possibly know that? Quite simple. There are societies where polygamy is highly practised (almost always polygyny) and societies which are more monogamous. One can compare rates of violence and treatment of women in both societies and see if they are equal. Rates of high polygyny (which is what most of them are) arise out of economic conditions which allow certain males to control the wealth. The more polygyny there is, the more certain males have power. When you have a set, small group that has power and large number of males who don’t have access to women, violence arises. Why do you think so many people are worried about the large number of Chinese men who can’t find mates. When females become scarce, instead of the rights of women rising, the reserve occurs and women are treated more and more like chattle. Even today there are problems in rural parts of China where women are being kidnapped and sold into marriages and kept as slaves by men in monogamous marriages. Again, in the vast majority of cultures that practiced polygyny, most individuals were married monogamously. Our species has traits which suggest a trend towards monogamy - females going through puberty before menarche, the male preference towards younger females (which increases the more polygynous the society is), the reduced sexual dimorphism, the levels of oxytocin that are released during sex and the evidence which suggests we are influenced by vasopressin. It’s also worth noting that no one here talking about polygamous relationships is talking about fidelity. Monogamy doesn’t mean fidelity (unless we mean sexual monogamy which is a whole 'nother ball-game)! > [@mswas](#): > > Basic biology. Human coupling is for the purpose of sexual reproduction. Outside of that it serves no purpose, and as such is an arbitrary standard. Simply false. We are primates with complex social structures. Sex is about more than reproduction. ---
**Author:** ![kimera](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/f0a364/32.png) [@kimera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kimera)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2009, 1:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/diogenes-what-the-hell/519991/254 "2009-12-07T13:26:26Z")
**John Mace** ’s cite was from [wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polygamy), but he left off the very next line: According to the Ethnographic Atlas Codebook, of the 1231 societies noted, 186 were monogamous. 453 had occasional polygyny, 588 had more frequent polygyny, and 4 had polyandry.[2] At the same time, even within societies which allow polygyny, the actual practice of polygyny occurs relatively rarely. The pure number approach doesn’t also explain WHY said marriages occur. If you look at the societies and economics, then the patterns become clearer. The number of societies doesn’t reflect the number of individuals themselves. More information can be found [here](http://www.wikigender.org/index.php/Polygamy) which shows where polygamy has occurred and also notes > [@](#): > > By a comparison between countries with high rates of polygamy and monogamous countries located in the same zone (close to the Equator) Tertilt (2005) shows that polygamy entails a large increase of fertility and an even larger decrease of savings and output per capita. Much of this behaviour therefore corresponds to unproductive saving, in the sense that it contributes less to future income growth than schooling or acquiring durable or capital goods. > Based on an analysis of Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana, de Laiglesia and Morrisson (2008) find that polygamy increases fertility and, by enlarging households, leads to lower incomes per capita. Moreover, the costs incurred in successive marriages explain a lower propensity to save and invest because dowries crowd out investment in physical assets. I’m not saying that people that practice polyamorous marriages are linked to these types of marriages. I only wish to counter the notion that monogamy hasn’t been the ‘norm’. This doesn’t mean that what is outside the majority is a-normal or non-healthy. Homosexuality is rare compared to heterosexuality, yet it’s perfectly normal. ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2009, 1:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/diogenes-what-the-hell/519991/255 "2009-12-07T13:30:32Z")
Judging by marriage isn’t necessarily a meaningful statistic, **kimera**. Many many societies have had implicit acceptance of adultery (mostly on the part of the men) and the Romans had orgy as a hobby and part of festivities. That people are naturally non-monogamous is almost certainly true. But, it’s generally to a small enough extent that most are happy to only have a romantic interest in a single partner. I don’t see it as implausible that if there’s a sliding scale of all other various forms of sexuality that there wouldn’t be a sliding scale on this as well. It would also be hard to prove that the 50% divorce rate isn’t somewhat linked to the desire to move on to someone new. ---
**Author:** ![Fenris](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fenris/32/498_2.png) [@Fenris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fenris)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2009, 1:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/diogenes-what-the-hell/519991/256 "2009-12-07T13:52:52Z")
Ladies and Gentlemen, Part two of Dio The Troll’s famous impersonation of Fred Phelps. Mr The Cynic: how do you think Fred Phelps would respond to a question about gay adoption not being legal in many states? > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > I don’t give fuck one about them. > > Nope. I never defined what the gender of the parents had to be. It’s whoever the legal parents/guardians are. \< snip \> People do not become family members and co-parents just because you fuck them. YES! He’s played the “Gay people are immoral because they fuck people outside of marriage. It’s _illegal_ for them to marry?! :eek: Then they better not fuck! Ditto adoption. Only married couples should adopt. Why…gay people can’t legally marry? Then they can’t adopt!” gambit. A true classic Phelpsism, ladies and gentlemen. Let’s give him a big round of applause. > [@](#): > > If you think I’m trolling, fucking REPORT it, asshole, How do you know I didn’t? > [@](#): > > For the record, I have nothing to retract, I overstated nothing. I’m absolutely right on the money, and I don’t give a shit if it hurts your little feelings. Saying that fucking lots of people is the same as being gay is fucking moronic. I agree. So stop saying it by implication. (Prediction: Troll-boy will now shout “cite!” despite the implication being right there on the screen. ) > [@](#): > > ETA, what’s with the scare quotes over “wife?” Because I don’t believe that in that one thread where your “wife” came in to tell you were being an asshole (because you realized you were about to be piled on) that any such thing happened. I doubt that your “wife” in that thread was anything more than an excuse to bail given that you realized that your trolling had gone too far. By the way…do you still believe that black people are better at music and sports because [their brains are different than white people’s brains?](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=9743260&postcount=234) Or that [black people didn’t have a written language until white people taught them?](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=9743844&postcount=25) ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2009, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/diogenes-what-the-hell/519991/257 "2009-12-07T15:05:59Z")
> [@Dissonance](#): > > Ummm… how else do species that reproduce sexually reproduce? Mommy and Daddy loving each other very much and the stork arriving isn’t actually how reproduction occurs. That whole menses cycle, egg and sperm thing is how sexual reproduction occurs. It’s not actually an incidental side-effect. Yes it is an incidental side effect. Everything in biology is incidental. Reproduction is a by-product of sex, but not because biology cares or has an intended “purpose.” Animals do not share genetic material and reproduce because they have to, but because it feels good. The more likely it is to feel good, the more likely they are to reproduce, and the more they reproduce, the more likely it is for reproduction to feel good to those offspring. It feeds back and forth and becomes more efficient, but it’s still just incidental cause and effect, not purpose. There is no such thing as a biological purpose. That’s religious thinking, not scientific. ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2009, 3:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/diogenes-what-the-hell/519991/258 "2009-12-07T15:06:57Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > It’s interesting how disturbing the notion of personal choice and personal freedom is found by some people. This. I lost a lot of respect for quite a few people that I really liked before this thread. You know most of you sound like a bunch of old maids tut-tutting in your rocking chairs, right? Geez…it’s not enough to simply dislike the practice of polyamory or even open relationships, you have to insist that a triad choose to cut out one of their members to come to your party. **Diogenes** won’t have them in his house. What did they ever freaking do to you people? You act like deciding not to conform to the societally normal dyad system is some kind of great moral failing. Bullshit. Monogamy is great if it’s the relationship form _you’ve chosen_, but I’m not going to refuse to invite a couple to my party, despite their slavish conformity to the stultifying norm… ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2009, 3:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/diogenes-what-the-hell/519991/259 "2009-12-07T15:17:13Z")
> [@Fenris](#): > > YES! He’s played the “Gay people are immoral because they fuck people outside of marriage. It’s _illegal_ for them to marry?! :eek: Then they better not fuck! Ditto adoption. Only married couples should adopt. Why…gay people can’t legally marry? Then they can’t adopt!” gambit. A true classic Phelpsism, ladies and gentlemen. I didn’t say anything about marriage, moron. I said outside the family. > [@](#): > > How do you know I didn’t? Did you also report everybody in this thread who agrees with me? > [@](#): > > I agree. So stop saying it by implication. (Prediction: Troll-boy will now shout “cite!” despite the implication being right there on the screen. ) You’re the one saying it, not me. I’ve consistently called the comparison bullshit, which it is. So cite me, scumbag. > [@](#): > > Because I don’t believe that in that one thread where your “wife” came in to tell you were being an asshole (because you realized you were about to be piled on) that any such thing happened. I doubt that your “wife” in that thread was anything more than an excuse to bail given that you realized that your trolling had gone too far. I have no memory of what you’re referring to, but who gives a shit what you believe? It’s pretty easy to call somebody a liar about something they have no way of proving. I’ve also never trolled, but if you think I am, report me. > [@](#): > > By the way…do you still believe that black people are better at music and sports because [their brains are different than white people’s brains?](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=9743260&postcount=234) > > Or that [black people didn’t have a written language until white people taught them?](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=9743844&postcount=25) These are incredibly dishonest characterizations of both of those posts (which you know because you isolated the posts from their contexts in the thread). You are lying about what I said. You are the troll here. ---
**Author:** ![Jimmy\_Joe\_Meager](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/bb73d2/32.png) [@Jimmy\_Joe\_Meager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jimmy_Joe_Meager)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2009, 3:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/diogenes-what-the-hell/519991/260 "2009-12-07T15:32:13Z")
Stop feeding the troll, folks. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/diogenes-what-the-hell/519991.md?page=12) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/diogenes-what-the-hell/519991.md?page=14)