Esprix, tilting at strawmen again

For some time now, Esprix has been following me around, sniping at me and pathetically begging for attention. I guess he’s getting what he wants.

In this thread, lissener asked how the SDMB has affected people’s thinking on gay issues. I replied that this board is intolerant of views not in line with anything other than a rather left-wing point of view, and that people have responded to my views by such dishonest tactics as misrepresenting my position. And Esprix responds by (what else?) misrepresenting my position, claiming that I believe that bisexuals are pedophiles.

This just reinforces my point about this board: Esprix simply makes up positions for me, and no one else calls him on it. Apparently believing the “right” thing is more important than being honest.

If anyone, anywhere, could make out what the hell you think about anything, you’d have a believable point.

As it stands, everything you say is lost in a pea-soup fog of semantical gymnastics and hallucinatory obfuscation. You’re the least comprehensible being on the planet, and that includes dolphins and primitive AI routines.

Well, that thread was interesting. :rolleyes:

If you’re arguing some position, The Ryan, I can’t tell what it is.

Your schtick has been done before, BTW:

But Lewis Carroll was a bit funnier than you are.

Esprix seems to have captured your logic perfectly on the second page to me. You pretend to be holding some tenable position by never actually stating your position, merely referring to some mystical important concept you understand which we don’t.

If you have something important to say about homosexuality/paedophilia, say it here and now. Tell us your position clearly so we can’t misunderstand you. It seems to me that you are the one “pathetically begging for attention”.

Okay, let’s try a little experiment. If I punch someone in the arm do they:

A: Tell me to stop because it hurts.

or

B: Say that it hurts because they want me to stop.

Show your work.

Second question…

If I call someone a bad name, do they…

A: Ask me to stop because they find it offensive.

or

B: Say that it’s offensive because they want me to stop.

Again, show your work.

(We really should make The Ryan take this test before every post he makes, and only allow his post to go through if he can answer both questions correctly)

That wouldn’t be fair… he’d never be able to post again.

Hmmmm… maybe you have a point…

Are you talking about The Ryan or “The Ryan”?
There IS a distinction.:smiley:

So, Esprix is cooking meat on Friday?:confused:

Are you sure that’s what you said?

I’m quite sure there’s a bit of a difference between the “gay rights” and “left-wing” points of view. There may be some overlapping, but that’s to be expected.

And by the way, you’re the one who brought up pedophilia in the other thread, not Esprix.

Kind of hard to get on your side when you make such an ass of yourself.

I assume you are commenting about this statement by Esprix

The final statement of that quote does not logically follow. The statement “pedophiles are bisexual” does not suggest “bisexuals are pedophiles” in the slightest. Most serial killers are white males, but that doesn’t make most white males serial killers.

I do not know if you have personally made that connection in the past, and Esprix is just restating your previous posts, or if he has just misunderstood you and assumed that last statement. Your posts are often difficult to read so it wouldn’t surprise me if you were just misunderstood despite an honest effort to get your drift.

It also wouldn’t surprise me if Esprix was just a bit sensitive to any sort of connection to pedophilia. Too often in the past homosexuality was equated with pedophilia, so one can appreciate his feelings on this.

The Ryan,

In using a term like pedophilia, which has a concrete, clinical definition, it might be helpful to look at that definition. Here is one from the DSM-IV, which outlines the clinical definition of pedophilia. There are indeed subsets of pedophilia, which allow the clinician to add whether the pedophile is sexually attracted to males, females, or both. Now, those should not be confused with homosexuality. The fact that a male pedophile has a sexual attraction to males does not make him homosexual, it makes him a pedophile with an attraction to males.

Now, I hate to argue semantics with you, but I’m hoping you can understand better now what Esprix may have been trying to say. That a pedophile is a pedophile, a homosexual is a homosexual.

With that in mind, can you understand why there seems to be a problem with your communication in this area?

What a perfect description of The Ryan.

The Ryan,

I can sympathize with you about Esprix. However, it is also true that your posting style tends to be very terse and precise, and this frequently makes it hard for people to figure out what you mean.

In general, I have found that most Pit threads of this sort are nothing more than popularity contests, in which people’s opinions about the posters involved counts more than a judgment of the particular situation at hand. (You may notice this in some of the posts to this thread).

Only in a The Ryan thread could the words ‘terse’ and ‘precise’ be used as synonyms for ‘babblative’ and ‘insanely vague’.

You may also find that posters here become more popular as they post rational, coherent arguments, instead of bizarre screeds on how we need to interpret their previous unintelligible posts.

Pitted by The Ryan. Will wonders never cease?

To all who comprehend English and have posted in here as such, thank you. A special thank you to Hamlet for a rather tidy summation. (And IzzyR, I don’t know what your gripe is, but whatever.)

But I cannot let this gross misrepresentation of my position and personage go unchallenged:

The Ryan, if you do not retract this bold-faced lie immediately I will call out the National Guard, stamp my foot - repeatedly - and notify Cecil himself. Your dishonesty and strawman tactics are reprehensible. A duel, sir! A duel is called for!

Esprix

Somehow, I get the impression that Esprix doesn’t take The Ryan seriously.

Hey, look, The Ryan is blaming somebody else for his own incomprehensible bullshit.

“Six bells and all’s well.”

–flips over hourglass–

Somebody ping me if I don’t notice the next time it happens.

Pistols on the commons at dawn! I’ll be 'Sprix’s cheerleader!

Cervaise, I believe you can set up e-alerts with the new software upgrade. (Then again, do you really need all that mail in your inbox?)

Esprix

Esprix does not “tilt” at straw “men”.
(he’s a top;)