This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Espeon can be male or female; it's not always a her, damn it!

#91SoulBlayZPosted 4/20/2013 2:29:12 AM
mewtwo you should head to bed. that one's just a waste of time at this point.

i agree with ya btw. but T.S. is arguing just to argue now. its a dumbass thing for ppl to whine about.
---
Trollin' the trolls. think all rpgs are the same? bet ya like Call of Duty or killzone. if i'm right stfu
PSN OverLord_BlayZen, 3DS message me
#92Twilight_SonataPosted 4/20/2013 2:32:05 AM
SoulBlayZ posted...
mewtwo you should head to bed. that one's just a waste of time at this point.
i agree with ya btw. but T.S. is arguing just to argue now. its a dumbass thing for ppl to whine about.

Honey, nobody that types like you do needs to be trying to insult anybody else's intelligence.
---
My NIDOKING brings all the boys to the yard:
http://goo.gl/ExAoe
#93Mewtwo_soulPosted 4/20/2013 2:32:20 AM
Twilight_Sonata posted...
Mewtwo_soul posted...
Care to explain.

No, I cannot explain your meandering rambling.

Also, are you going to apologize for saying that I said something that I didn't say and using that false attribution to call me a hypocrite?


You are a hypocrite. You said you wouldn't call a person you saw with a person lady because you have some gay friends/transexual friends. (which is a laughable stereotype because not every gay person has a purse >.> same for transexuals.) even then, considering it's the same example as this argument (which you are calling ramblings because you know you are wrong) which you said you wouldn't because of them.

They are a majority, if you see someone with a person without seeing any identifying marks (similar to this argument) what would you call someone with a purse? You'd say a lady, because by your logic that's the most common ratio.

So by not assuming them to be a lady in the first place, which is the bigger majority ( in this case ratio) would make more sense to assume they were. However, you used the exact opposite logic.

>,> It's not hard to understand really.
---
Only insecure and ignorant people try to debase someone online based on their username.
#94Mewtwo_soulPosted 4/20/2013 2:32:55 AM
Twilight_Sonata posted...
SoulBlayZ posted...
mewtwo you should head to bed. that one's just a waste of time at this point.
i agree with ya btw. but T.S. is arguing just to argue now. its a dumbass thing for ppl to whine about.

Honey, nobody that types like you do needs to be trying to insult anybody else's intelligence.


Now you have to resort to strawmen just to try and hype your ego?

Again, I say. How pathetic.
---
Only insecure and ignorant people try to debase someone online based on their username.
#95Twilight_SonataPosted 4/20/2013 2:43:09 AM
Mewtwo_soul posted...
You said you wouldn't call a person you saw with a person lady because you have some gay friends/transexual friends.

No, that is not what I said at all. I said I have some transvestite and gender-queer friends. I also have gay and transgender friends. Some of these overlap, and some do not, but they are not the same thing.

They are a majority, if you see someone with a person without seeing any identifying marks (similar to this argument) what would you call someone with a purse?

I would call them a person, and I would use gender-neutral pronouns such as "they".

You'd say a lady, because by your logic that's the most common ratio.

Please, find somewhere in this thread where I suggested that we should call anything by its "most common ratio". You won't be able to, because that is not an argument that I have made, because I think that argument is wrong. You are arguing against me by arguing against a position that I do not hold.

Mewtwo_soul posted...
Now you have to resort to strawmen just to try and hype your ego?

. . . What do you think a "strawman" is? Because what I was doing there could be much more accurately described as "ad hominem". A strawman is when you argue against an imaginary position that nobody is positing rather than the position that the opposition actually is arguing, like for example the imaginary position you apparently think I hold that things should be referred to in relation to their majority composition.
---
My NIDOKING brings all the boys to the yard:
http://goo.gl/ExAoe
#96Mewtwo_soulPosted 4/20/2013 2:47:34 AM
Either way final post for tonight, you want to know why this topic can not be proved on the whole newborn thing?


Why if it can supposively breed, how come it can not within in-game? How come all genderless Pokemon need Ditto to breed? (those that can)

If it were simple cell replication (see Ditto being a "hypothetical single cell organism" then dividing to create a baby version of said Pokemon) how come an egg is left behind?

So they must have some sort of genital to reproduce in such a fashion. In this case, I stand by my original statement, THE POKEMON THAT ARE GENDERLESS TAKE ON CHARACTERISTICS OF WHICHEVER GENDER BENEFITS THEM AT THE TIME!

Which makes them like slugs.


This includes Mew, this includes Mewtwo, this includes Ditto, Rotom, and every single other "genderless" Pokemon.

So in other words, Pokemon take on roles for a gender when they are genderless, which makes it fine to define them as any gender. Just like Zelda (role player) and Shiek (character)

Zelda pretends to be Male in LoZ by transforming into Sheik, she maintains a womans body, but gives off characteristics of Sheik.

Therefore there is still no solution to this argument, and it is stupid to think one side is right over the other with the comments and arguments I just pointed out.
---
Only insecure and ignorant people try to debase someone online based on their username.
#97Mewtwo_soulPosted 4/20/2013 2:51:34 AM
Twilight_Sonata posted...
Mewtwo_soul posted...
You said you wouldn't call a person you saw with a person lady because you have some gay friends/transexual friends.

No, that is not what I said at all. I said I have some transvestite and gender-queer friends. I also have gay and transgender friends. Some of these overlap, and some do not, but they are not the same thing.

They are a majority, if you see someone with a person without seeing any identifying marks (similar to this argument) what would you call someone with a purse?

I would call them a person, and I would use gender-neutral pronouns such as "they".

You'd say a lady, because by your logic that's the most common ratio.

Please, find somewhere in this thread where I suggested that we should call anything by its "most common ratio". You won't be able to, because that is not an argument that I have made, because I think that argument is wrong. You are arguing against me by arguing against a position that I do not hold.

Mewtwo_soul posted...
Now you have to resort to strawmen just to try and hype your ego?

. . . What do you think a "strawman" is? Because what I was doing there could be much more accurately described as "ad hominem". A strawman is when you argue against an imaginary position that nobody is positing rather than the position that the opposition actually is arguing, like for example the imaginary position you apparently think I hold that things should be referred to in relation to their majority composition.



So if some lady drops her purse and you can't tell for sure you're going to say:

"Hey person, you dropped your purse."

>.> You're lying. No one has EVER said that. I'm sorry, but considering it's obvious you use some psychology in your posts, you and I both know, humans use perception to make statements. Looks like a girl, walks like a girl, has a purse like a girl, I'm probably going to assume it's a girl first.

Strawman arguments are normally arguments that are just irrelevant, same as ad hominem. There is no reason to bring up typing or anything else for that matter or even respond to that poster, because they are not getting on the same discussion trail as we are. It's best to let it go, instead you have to condescend for obvious self gratification.

Anyway, my last post pointed out the flaws trying to use logic in Pokemon, breeding, genderless or not, and other such concepts.
---
Only insecure and ignorant people try to debase someone online based on their username.
#98Twilight_SonataPosted 4/20/2013 3:01:03 AM
Mewtwo_soul posted...
So if some lady drops her purse and you can't tell for sure you're going to say:
"Hey person, you dropped your purse."

"Hey, you dropped your purse!" is perfectly sufficient. On the slim chance that it is not, I can be far more direct and descriptive about the matter than using a gender marker that likely describes half the people around. "Yeah, you in the bright green tank top!"

Strawman arguments are normally arguments that are just irrelevant, same as ad hominem.

No, you need to look that up, because that is wrong. Those are completely different things.

Anyway, my last post pointed out the flaws trying to use logic in Pokemon, breeding, genderless or not, and other such concepts.

So you're going to end by (A) continuing to argue things at me that I'm not even arguing against and (B) refusing to apologize for repeatedly saying that I've said things that I've never actually said? If that's really how you want to go out, then that's fine by me. Sleep tight.
---
My NIDOKING brings all the boys to the yard:
http://goo.gl/ExAoe
#99Mewtwo_soulPosted 4/20/2013 3:10:23 AM(edited)
Twilight_Sonata posted...
Mewtwo_soul posted...
So if some lady drops her purse and you can't tell for sure you're going to say:
"Hey person, you dropped your purse."

"Hey, you dropped your purse!" is perfectly sufficient. On the slim chance that it is not, I can be far more direct and descriptive about the matter than using a gender marker that likely describes half the people around. "Yeah, you in the bright green tank top!"

Strawman arguments are normally arguments that are just irrelevant, same as ad hominem.

No, you need to look that up, because that is wrong. Those are completely different things.

Anyway, my last post pointed out the flaws trying to use logic in Pokemon, breeding, genderless or not, and other such concepts.

So you're going to end by (A) continuing to argue things at me that I'm not even arguing against and (B) refusing to apologize for repeatedly saying that I've said things that I've never actually said? If that's really how you want to go out, then that's fine by me. Sleep tight.



I'm talking about if you do by chance describe a gender which is also very common. Like I said before you may not think like that, but it's not beyond belief others do.

How are they not irrelevant? Strawmen are positions that can indirectly imply something or directly imply something not discussed which makes it meaningless. Correct? Ad hominem are just insults or implications as such (IE: If you don't agree you're just a big sissy/etc. Edit: Or hell the troll argument in this topic earlier, completely pointless) they should be just ignored and continued on to the main point of the argument.


Onto the last part, sorry for the mistake, however if your argument was about gender-less Pokemon not being described as a gender, I've already provided a solid argument that allows lee-way to do as such. (Like I made mention the most logical explanation is they take on male/female roles, during breeding especially which is evident by the eggs left behind as Ditto doesn't replicate like a Cell, even though it sure seems like one)

Which makes their point or statements valid in such a case. It's a meaningless thing. Because Pokemon never fully explains the logic induced it's just a stupid circular argument. My main statement is LET IT GO.

If the argument was on male female/etc. I already stated this but I'm just restating it:

It's just a perception reference. It's no different than an opinion in such a case, considering the key concept of perception.

There, that should do it. I'm not saying you said either, I am however, clarifying for both right now.
---
Only insecure and ignorant people try to debase someone online based on their username.
#100pokemon2poker(Topic Creator)Posted 4/20/2013 3:28:29 PM
Damn, I feel bad for a lot of the poor souls in this topic.
---
Dick Tracy