Sucks, man. Over here, we typically live past our 70's.

So I guess you live in some third-world nation then?

I dunno, man. I think people are just psyched to be able to play a brand new Mega Man game...

Tom Clancy was awesome. Ghost Recon ruled. RIP.

When I was in college I lived like that for six years, worse actually because I shared that size a room with others.

If a group of people on motorcycles surrounded me and my family while I was driving and kept attacking my car, you can bet your fucking ass I'd run them over.

If a group of people on motorcycles surrounded me and my family while I was driving and kept attacking my car, you can bet your fucking ass I'd run them over.

Because I want her to show off her super hot body while she's kicking people's asses.

I really don't want Wonder Woman to start wearing pants. Fuck that shit.

S&M is about the guy getting humiliated by the dominatrix, not about getting your head punched into orbit by a flying superhuman juggernaut.

I laughed way harder than I should have at that.

GaymerX?

Back in my time, we thought paying money to cheat was awesome. We proudly jacked in our Game Genies, gleefully plugged in our turbo controllers, and happily subscribed to Nintendo Power to get all the day zero cheats.

If you're going to bother mapping labels to values, then you need to make sure you're doing so properly and consistently. Why is that so hard to understand? Gay and straight are two different things — therefore if you're going to bother showing them on a chart and labeling them they shouldn't be in the same…

The point of using the 8 plot lines is to break apart gender and orientation into gender identity, sexual orientation, gender expression, and biological sex. And to show how each aspect is a sliding scale, that has two parts to it.

Why bother to show something as a graph at all if the coordinates have no bearing on the labels? If the point it's trying to get across is that gender and orientation is complicated and non-binary, ok that's easily stated in a sentence. Putting in charts and diagrams implies that there is some specific meaning that…

That's a non-answer.

Sorry for being confusing. I'm thinking of this problem in terms of the math of the graph itself. I'll explain:

If that's the case, then charting this is impossible without more dimensions. I'd go so far as to say that the issue of equal-gender or gender-less individuals completely destroys the "Attracted To" graph entirely. Without being male or female yourself, liking one gender or another cannot be labeled at all in terms…

If that's the case, then why make it ambiguous at all? As we just agreed, the chart only makes sense for specific combinations of gender and attraction, but for others it doesn't. The chart doesn't specify gender ID anywhere in the graph, plot, or labels, yet it's critical to make sense of it.