View Single Post
  #51  
Old 09-09-2010
smc's Avatar
smc smc is offline
Senior Ladyboy Lover
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Boston area, U.S.A.
Posts: 18,085
smc has a reputation beyond reputesmc has a reputation beyond reputesmc has a reputation beyond reputesmc has a reputation beyond reputesmc has a reputation beyond reputesmc has a reputation beyond reputesmc has a reputation beyond reputesmc has a reputation beyond reputesmc has a reputation beyond reputesmc has a reputation beyond reputesmc has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via Yahoo to smc
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wxhluyp View Post
Ofcourse. There are times when theorizing is more appropriate than others. Theres a false common-sense idealization of identity which must be overturned in society. Gender is positively multiple.

The accusation of sophism and lack of clarity in my mere "opinion" was pretty hostile. I don't know whether it was intentional, but it did seem so.
Let me clear up a couple of things.

First, my comment about "clarity" referred to my posts, not yours -- that is, they were to explain that I was posting my message about ungendering and how we view it on this site for the purpose of clarity.

Second, regarding "sophism": I apologize for not having written more carefully. I did say "as it may be," but that was insufficient for expressing that I was hypothesizing the possibility that your opinions was sophistic (not definitively characterizing it as such). By "sophism" in this regard, I do mean an argument of considerable ingenuity in reasoning that is put forth with the objective of deception. I hypothesized that your argument was designed to deceive the self-identifier (the person who identifies her/his gender in her/his own self-determined way) to accept the rationale of your argument and thus abandon her/his own self-determination. That is, technically, a sort of sophism, but the word sophism does come laden with other baggage in its meaning that was genuinely not intended.
Reply With Quote