General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Women only: Regarding the use of the term 'girls' to describe women. [View all]Major Nikon
(36,827 posts)The difference was I knew my statement was hyperbole and you apparently have a difficult time understanding why yours wasn't. In reality I was being pretty generous with your 'question' by calling it hyperbole. It was actually more closely associated with a particular byproduct produced by a certain male bovine.
You asked me, "yes... tell me, why do you want to interfer(sic) with women discussing their feelings on an issue that concerns them? it feels like you are suggesting maybe women should not be able to discuss this."
So if I chose to answer your obviously loaded question, regardless of my answer, I would be admitting my intention was to interfere with the discussion when nothing is farther from the truth. Sorry, I don't fall for cheap rhetorical parlor tricks as much as you wish I would. I did fully anticipate your response would be something along those lines as your false accusations of people trying to "shut you up" anytime someone disagrees with you is now fully predictable. This was the not-so-subtle point I was making with my hyperbole which you might have noticed if you were more in tune with your own modus operandi.
To use your own logic, my original response was fully intended and indeed did serve the purpose of contributing to the discussion. How you can derive that someone expressing an opinion and participating in discussion (which last I checked was still allowed on DU), is somehow interfering with discussion is anyone's guess. Again this points to your obviously flawed conclusion that anyone who disagrees with you is somehow telling you to "shut up".