Philips:

“You’ll notice that I discredited phanto’s nonsense before noting that he was being an idiot”

Why would you bother to discredit nonsense? If it really is nonsense then why not just ignore it? It shouldn’t need to be discredited or is it that you don’t have enough confidence in the capacity of other forum members to decide for themselves whether or not it is nonsense? Either it is not nonsense or you arrogantly assume that other readers cannot see nonsense when it is displayed and need you to help them out. Which is it?

If it is was not nonsense but has been discredited then why note that I was being an idiot? It sounds like you do not have enough confidence in your ability to discredit arguments. If you arguments are good enough then everyone will see that and that is all that they need to see. It seems though that you do not have enough confidence in your arguments and that is why you have to tack an insult on to your comments just in case.

Fundamentally you resort to the same ‘name-calling’ that you accuse others of because you do not have confidence in your arguments. It is ad hominem that you accuse others of. You are no better than anyone else.

“The meaning of words evolve over time, and others come in to fill any gaps. Get used to it.”

You don’t sound very convinced of your assertion or you would not have to command that Yuyutsu ‘get used to it’. Why not just make you point and have enough confidence to let your point stand on its own merits. Why do you need to tell people what they should do? Either you are not confident in your assertion or you think that Yuyutsu is too stupid to know what to do in response to your assertion. Which is it?

How can people have confidence in any of your arguments when you demonstrate such a lack of confidence yourself?

Toni Lavis:

“You just have to be attracted to the same sex: that is all, end of story.”

But how do you know that you are attracted to the same sex? Perhaps you are just attracted to certain personal characteristics which you project onto other people. Maybe you are not attracted to them because of their sex or gender but because of their characteristics which have nothing to do with sex or gender. You are attracted to human characteristics and if they are truly human then they can be possessed by either sex.

How do you know that it is sex that attracts you and not some other aspect of the individual person?

Maybe sex is just the rationalisation of the attraction since all of us are capable of having those human characteristics which we project onto others. Rather than appropriate those characteristics to ourselves which can be emotionally painful we excuse our attraction by presenting it as some kind of instinct for sex.

//You are attracted to human characteristics and if they are truly human then they can be possessed by either sex.//

Roll up, roll up and see The Amazing Phanto, world's greatest mind-reader! Marvel at his incredible power to see inside the mind of men! Thrill to his torturous contortions of logic! Gasp in awe at his breath-taking conclusion that we're all secretly bi and just haven't figured it out yet!

//How do you know that it is sex that attracts you and not some other aspect of the individual person?//

'Coz I like pussy. Not rocket science, dude.

Toni Lavis:

"'Coz I like pussy."

Yeah that's what pedophiles say but it hardly makes their behaviour reasonable does it?

"Not rocket science, dude."

No its not really but still you completely missed the point. What has 'bi' got to do with anything? I was talking about being attracted to things other than sex or gender.

Dear Toni,

«Nope, usage defines meaning.»

25 million North Koreans use "DPRK", hence "democracy" means _____?

Yes, language evolves: new words are being formed and old ones forgotten, but we should be very concerned and rejectful when established words are hijacked to facilitate propaganda - how more so when the new meaning is contradictory.

Why contradictory? Can a gay person, i.e. proud and joyful, also be depressed? We know that homosexual people can be depressed (with some indications, even at above-average rates): Alan Turing himself was depressed (no wonder, given the horrible way he was treated) to the point of committing suicide. Surely he was not proud and joyful at the same time!

Would you be similarly happy had the word 'gay' instead been hijacked for propaganda by a different group? say they invested millions in ads: "Gay people drink Coca Cola, so join us and be gay - drink Coca Cola!"?

Because I enjoy it, phanto.

<<Why would you bother to discredit nonsense?>>

Why does there have to be another reason?

<<It shouldn’t need to be discredited or is it that you don’t have enough confidence in the capacity of other forum members to decide for themselves whether or not it is nonsense?>>

This is a false dilemma.

http://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/94/False-Dilemma

<<Either it is not nonsense or you arrogantly assume that other readers cannot see nonsense when it is displayed and need you to help them out. Which is it?>>

This is another False dilemma. There’s at least one other option. Let's see if you can get it.

<<It sounds like you do not have enough confidence in your ability to discredit arguments.>>

More pseudo-psychoanalyses. Can you tell on which psychological perspective you are basing this assessment and what the research is behind it?

<<It seems though that you do not have enough confidence in your arguments and that is why you have to tack an insult on to your comments just in case.>>

Yes, because that happens so-o-o-o-o frequently, don’t it phanto?

<<Fundamentally you resort to the same ‘name-calling’ that you accuse others of because you do not have confidence in your arguments.>>

"Resort". That's adorable.

Can you tell on which psychological perspective you are basing this assessment and what the research is behind it?

<<It is ad hominem that you accuse others of. You are no better than anyone else.>>

Ad hominems are fine so long as they can be justified and they are not used in place of an argument - like your last one was. I pick on the ones that are unjustified or used in place of an argument. Sounds like you need to learn the difference.

<<You don’t sound very convinced of your assertion or you would not have to command that Yuyutsu ‘get used to it’.>>

Or it could just be a result of the fact that I have already explained what I had said to Yuyutsu many times before. True to form, however, you take most unflattering possibilities, and present them as the only ones.