DON'T FUCK THIS UP BEN AFFLECK.

Ok, so what you're saying is that the first plot makes sense if the person we're talking about considers themselves a woman, and the second plot makes sense if the person we're talking about considers themselves a man?

Whoops, I forgot to reverse the straight and gay top and bottom bars in the image. If you reversed those, THEN the image would make sense.

No, my confusion has to do with their 5 examples. I understand that there are infinite combinations. I get that, really I do. What I don't understand is how the first two examples make any sense. I adjusted the chart so that it makes sense it its context:

Ok, I still don't get it.

Well, I think you're on the right track...

Well, I think you're on the right track...

I'd love to tackle her character too, if you know what I mean...

Why is she problematic and broken?

Wonder Woman is awesome, but gimme a break. That's the lowest showing I've ever seen for Wonder Woman. I mean, for the love of God, she's gone toe to toe with the likes of Superman. She can fly, she's virtually indestructible, she can punch down buildings, she can move hundreds of times faster than sound...

But it has to be as something. If a man is more attracted to men than he is to women, then he isn't straight, but if a woman is more attracted to men than she is to women, then she IS straight. Without speaking specifically as either a man or a woman, the "straight" and "gay" charts make no sense.

I'll try to explain my confusion with an image. Tell me where I'm going wrong.

Dude, a transgender person got some hurt feelings. Meanwhile, a million kids across the US got some hurt feelings on the playground this morning. How dehumanizing! Q fucking Q.

If I am confused by a person's gender, I would call them "it" as well. They should make it more obvious which they are, or they should stfu and deal with my descriptors.

I guess I don't understand that chart. The "gay" and "straight diagrams are identical. Is that suggesting that there's no difference?

This is just an article about pc QQ with a huge pc lovefest happening in the comments. Most normal people probably saw this article, rolled their eyes, and moved on.

It's a comedian. They say offensive shit and people laugh at it. It's been that way for a good long while now. This is another non-story that somebody is pushing to further their own political beliefs.

Nope, not a straw man. You are arguing the slippery slope fallacy. You do not have to literally say the words "slippery slope" to be arguing the slippery slope fallacy. In fact, most slippery slope fallacies do not literally state "slippery slope."

Slow day I guess.

thatsracist.gif