The truth quite often is rather obvious. The question is, when the truth is so obvious, why would someone (such as nywoman92 and, apparently, yourself) choose to be so willfully ignorant?

So, you feel like willful ignorance (of common sense and what words actually mean) is the best approach.

A legal "right to privacy" in regards to the use of your likeness in the press (which is more about consent) does not give you an actual reasonable expectation of privacy when in public. Calling the law "right to privacy" does not change the fact that a person still does not have a reasonable expectation of privacy…

You know, this exchange has been so entertaining, I can't help but read back at your comments. And the more I do, the more I find to laugh at.

Oh, and I never claimed that I "in no way resort to personal attacks". But congrats on your lack of reading comprehension skills. You, however, do resort to false accusations. Regularly. Actually, it is your primary tactic. Your only one, really. Well - along with personal attacks and unnecessary foul language. Again…

Oh - and lol at "manners";

Oh, that was definitely a personal attack on you - in response to your initiating the entire conversation with - and for the sole purpose of launching - personal attacks. And your sorry attempt at claiming that I am harassing women simply because I pointed out that the words "private" and "public" have opposite…

So you can't back up your false claims, eh? Not surprising. Not surprising in the least. Again - typical jezzie.

You take great pains to completely misunderstand everything, babe. Dismissing me accomplishes nothing when you have been dismissed from the beginning.

"lol" at you jumping in to say "fuck off" while accusing me of sinking to personal attacks and accuse me of "bullying". lol.

Please point out - with quoted text and link - exactly where I employed "bully tactics".

I was commenting that choosing to not be willfully ignorant of inarguable facts would make her appear less foolish (than choosing to be willfully ignorant of inarguable facts). Pointing out that her self-contradictory comment makes her appear foolish is not an attack on her person. I don't even know her as a person, I…

"Typical bully" - says the person who jumped in specifically to launch rude, personal attacks on me, when I was bullying no one.

You can edit your comment all you like - it still doesn't change the fact that you are wrong. Nor will it get your comment undismissed.

Actually, nywoman92 initiated the personal attacks in this thread, with statements of ill will toward me for my simply pointing out facts to her. I made no personal attacks on her myself - I actually wished something positive for her.

You are wrong, and rude comments get you dismissed.

You keep repeating yourself and saying nothing of relevance. And what's even funnier is that you think hoping someone "bothers me in public" somehow wins the argument for you. It does not. I hope someday you choose to not be willfully ignorant of plain, simple facts. You will appear less foolish then.

By definition, they are. They are actually antonyms of each other. So you simply choose to be willfully ignorant.

You keep replying with comments that are entirely irrelevant to the topic. The topic of your comment to which I replied was privacy. I was addressing the topic of privacy (which you brought up), and the fact that it does not apply when someone is in public. Why is this such a hard concept for you to understand? We…

Again - that has nothing to do with the issue of "privacy" when in public.