AuroraLights

Most attendees of a party would be meat-eaters. Serving only meat is a pragmatic decision and not an insensitive, disrespectful one

Forget the TQ+ community; the most oppressed minority are the brussels sprouts that have been banished to the darkest corners of the produce aisle. No more, I say! The plucky little cruciferous veggies deserve a prime spot on everyone's plate! #SproutLivesMatter

The dictionary is not a tyrannical overlord, but a dutiful chronicler. In its pages, we find the firm footing of definition

True wit is in the clarity of thought. What could be more clear than a well-defined word, its meaning crisp as a freshly printed dictionary entry? I shall not cast clarity into the sacrificial flames of novelty

Don't sully the noble study of linguistics with flights of fancy that conjure an ever-expanding pantheon of pronouns and gender identities. Would you see us plunge headlong into the roiling waters of language without a map or compass? Shakespeare would scoff at the folly!

I'm a card-carrying member of the "keep it classy and decent" club. What's your membership status? Are you a cult member of the "one-night stand" community?

The Literary Council granted me the power of assessing the quality of writing. Who are you to question their judgment? I'll continue being the self-proclaimed arbiter of literary excellence that deems "erotica" to be of subpar quality in terms of writing

"Buying"

I'm not trying to sell my beliefs. There's no need for you to buy anything. I'm handing them out for free, like samples at the supermarket

@Nameless, "Sexual content" reduces boys and girls, men and women, to one-dimensional, mindless tools for arousal. It creates a limited, inaccurate picture of sexuality. The genre you mentioned is poorly written, relying on overused tropes and feeble plot devices

There are plenty of ways to explore teenage sexuality without resorting to excessive, gratuitous "sexual content"

@Nameless, If you believe "not getting horny" is a problem, please reassess who's under the influence. "Sexual content" is a drug. It has addictive qualities and tinkers with your brain chemistry

I’ll stick to the mental tango of a chess match. With chess, I'm stimulating my mind, instead of ... you know

That's because actors and actresses are professional pretend-daters. Their job description involves making out with a different co-star every other movie or drama. It’s hard to take their off-screen "relationships" seriously

We catch them "dating" off-screen, we shrug and say, "same shit, different day"

Sexuality and gender identity are different, and it's possible to support one without the other. It would've been beneficial for the LGB and TQ+ communities to be separate, each with our own platforms and goals

I understand that we might not see eye-to-eye on the issue

Taiwan? Ouch, that's a real kick in the pants!

The "omegaverse" genre is a disease spreading faster than a rumor in a small town. It makes me wish time travel were a thing so I could go back in time and prevent it from ever existing in the first place

Overzealous enthusiasm for celebrities can, at times, cross the threshold and veer into the land of the obsessive. I didn't disagree that "taking it over board is wrong"

Most adult shippers, in my experience, don't get carried away. Their ships are a harmless pastime and a source of mirthful escapism. Everyone has indulged in a moment of whimsical speculation or idle daydream. It's common

The celebrities suggesting therapy for all shippers could benefit from self-reflection and therapy themselves. Fame does funny things to a person's head

Thank you for the respectful conversation. I wish you the best

Rock beats scissors. I suggest you put your scissors away, lest they meet their rocky demise

BL is the glue holding society together. Without it, we'd be eating boring, non-layered "straight" desserts and living in culinary misery

Stains are temporary. A few brush strokes and a bit of dental floss, and your teeth will be back to their gleaming glory. But the happy memories of the delectable gay dessert will stay with you forever

Your comment, the perfidious spectacle that besmirches my eyes, is the serpentine musings of a charlatan bamboozling the unwary with a torrent of prolix verbiage. The oracular pretensions of this apotheosis of pseudo-intellectualism are a misunderstanding of linguistics

The dictionary isn't a scrap heap of irrelevance. The cacophonous clamor for an ever-expanding pantheon of gender identities and pronouns bespeaks descent into the depths of navel-gazing

A language unmoored from an anchoring, unchanging wisdom of dictionaries would drift aimlessly, its meaning scattered and reduced to a protean mirage in the desert of postmodernist indulgence. What next, shall we abandon the rules of syntax and grammar? What diabolical machinations have conspired to desecrate the once-revered sanctity of language?

Don't be seduced by "change." The great Shakespeare himself quipped, "what's in a name? That which we call a rose, by any other word would smell as sweet." If "rose" could be anything from a flower to a casserole dish, the bouquet of shared meaning would be a fleeting whiff lost in the wind

Human cognitive capacities are frequently marred by shortcomings, biases, and errors. People ascribe human-like qualities to the natural world or conceive of supernatural entities. The anthropocentric lens has given rise to the attribution of non-conformity to spiritual or otherworldly forces. The Two-Spirit identity is a salient exemplar of the phenomenon

The definition of "intersex" is flawed and overbroad

Ambiguous genitalia is a visible and easily identifiable marker of "intersex" conditions. It is the most prevalent/common impetus for the medical evaluation of "intersex" children

Gender dysphoria meets the criteria for a mental illness. It "causes" distress and impairment in daily functioning, and requires psychological treatment

Pressure to conform to gender norms and expectations comes from liberal and conservative environments

The people undergoing gender-affirming interventions are disposed to underreport unfavorable outcomes. They introduce a self-report bias in studies assessing the satisfaction and success rates of interventions

"The absence of objective measures does not invite the potential for manipulation"

This fails to capture the full range of motivations and experiences related to gender expression

"It is not rooted in evolutionary principles, but in patriarchal and heteronormative ideologies"

In a surprising turn of events, you have fallen into the trap you vehemently decry: the snare of oversimplification. With a determination that belies the intricacies of the subject matter, you have flattened the landscape of binary gender paradigm into a one-dimensional, unscientific, heteronormative, patriarchal caricature that oversimplifies the complex interplay between evolution, culture, and history

The act of viewing a dictionary as an infallible oracle or reducing a human to a collection of tags doesn't possess the qualities or motivations associated with sexualization to be a fetish. Is admiring a thesaurus a romantic infatuation? Or treating people as walking encyclopedias the epitome of sensuality?

The "diversity" of gender identities and pronouns is a Tower of Babel, where clarity and communication crumble beneath the weight of ever-multiplying, unnecessary labels

Linguistic "fluidity" erodes the once-solid ground of linguistic stability. The signposts of shared understanding succumb to the winds of semantic drift. This doesn't presage the evolutionary ascent of our communicative prowess. It foretells a regressive descent into a nebulous quicksand of ambiguity

Mimicking my words, playing the jester and japing at my expense, might elicit a fleeting chuckle, but it's no substitute for a well-crafted argument

One segment of the definition posits that a fetish is a sexual interest in a non-sexual object. Another segment posits that a fetish is a sexual interest in a sexual object. The discordance between the two is readily apparent. An object or entity isn't simultaneously sexual and non-sexual. The definitions are incongruent and mutually exclusive

If (homo)sexuality, the ineffable and mercurial force at the heart of human and non-human experience, can be reduced to a fetish, what, pray tell, can't be? Is everything a fetish?

"Fetishization can also be a proclivity to ascribe non-sexual connotations to sexual objects"

Fetishization can't extend beyond the sexualization of non-sexual objects to include the de-sexualization of sexual objects. Imagine the befuddlement of a culinary enthusiast who, in a quest to redefine the boundaries of gastronomic delight, proclaims a candlelit dinner—a romantic and intimate dining experience—is nothing more than a practical solution for coping with an unexpected power outage or a creative method for testing one's night vision. Is the de-sexualization a fetish? Your mental gymnastics would befit the denizens of Wonderland, and hardly the rational discourse of the real world

Does the refusal to dance the tango betray an irrational fear of choreography? My skepticism towards the proliferation of gender identities and pronouns isn't obstinate ignorance or bigotry. It's a reluctance to embrace the latest fashion trends

The landscape of gender identities and pronouns is a "minefield." It is we, the critics, who will don our metaphorical protective gear, not to shield ourselves from diversity, but to guard against the barrage of bewildering buzzwords that threaten language and everyday communication. Words are metamorphosing into shapeless, meaningless phantoms. We tiptoe gingerly through the lexical labyrinth, and risk inadvertently detonating semantic landmines. Innocuous utterances have become incendiary, and inquiries have devolved into unforgivable transgressions. In your topsy-turvy world, language is not a tool for connection. It's a weapon of confusion and division. The irony!

The Two-Spirit identity doesn't denote a third gender. According to an Indigenous friend's testimony, Two-Spirit refers to the belief that a person performing feminine and masculine gender roles embodies a duality of feminine and masculine spirits. The Two-Spirit were not revered or celebrated. Ancient societies attributed illnesses to demonic forces, and non-conformity to spiritual influences. This misunderstanding of non-conformity, the belief that a non-conforming person was possessed or under the influence of a supernatural entity, was entrenched in homophobia and misogyny

"The studies ... use a broad definition of intersex"

Right, the definition is flawed in its overbroad and imprecise scope. A broad definition pathologizes non-visible variations. The presence of visible ambiguous genitalia is the hallmark of "intersex" conditions. To avoid unnecessary medical interventions, we should delimit the definition of "intersex" to visible variations alone

The variability in prevalence rates across studies alludes to an overestimation of "intersex" cases resulting from differences in methodology, sampling techniques, or diagnostic criteria

Gender dysphoria, an acute and persistent discomfort with one's body, is a mental illness

It is essential that treatment does not affirm the dysphoric patient's misguided perception of their gender. Gender-affirming interventions exacerbate the pathology

The "low" incidence of regret or dissatisfaction with gender-affirming interventions is subject to underreporting and social desirability bias. This is pertinent in liberal environments where interventions are promoted or encouraged. People feel pressured to be happy and align with societal expectations to dodge/escape backlash

"Gender identity is not a fixed or objective category"

Right, it's virtually impossible to distinguish between genuine expressions of self-identification and those motivated by ill intentions. The absence of objective measures invites the potential for manipulation, posing a challenge to the integrity of systems and policies built around self-identification. People would pretend, and you wouldn't know

"The binary gender paradigm is not based on scientific knowledge"

This has been addressed and found to be erroneous. The binary gender paradigm is rooted in evolutionary principles

"Let’s play rock-paper-scissors"

Be warned. My paper can crush the most stubborn of rocks, and my scissors can snip through the thickest egos. The tears you'll see are from laughing hard at your weak game

"... but you do not provide any data or examples to back up this claim"

Mr. BL identifies as "having a positive effect." It must be true!

I don't need a lab coat to tell me that a slice of cake is the perfect prescription for a bad day blues. You don't need numbers and charts to tell you that BL is making a difference. Look at the BL crumbs on our faces for proof. BL has healing powers

The convoluted definition of fetishization does include the sexualization of that which is not sexual

Fetishize: to have a sexual interest in an object or a part of the body other than the sexual organs, or in a person as if they are an object

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/fetishize

The second definition conflicts with the first definition

Fetishization is a proclivity to ascribe sexual connotations to non-sexual objects. (Homo)sexuality can't be fetishized. Race/ethnicity and culture, the non-sexual facets of human existence, can be fetishized or entangled in a web of wanton desire. The human libido is a capricious beast that finds arousal in unlikely places

"... unhealthy bigotry"

Can bigotry be healthy or peacefully coexist with health? Don't you mean, "unhealthy obsession?"

The claim that a disinterest in gender identities and pronouns is an unhealthy obsession is a curious contradiction. If we are to agree that fetishization is an unreasonable or excessive interest in something, then the opposite, my disinterest or refusal to partake in the game of gender identities and pronouns, can't be an unhealthy obsession

Aversion to the ever-shifting quagmire/minefield of gender identities and pronouns isn't an irrational fear. It's a sober discernment and a steadfast adherence to the dictates of reason

Only serving meat at a party is not veganism or discrimination against vegans

Equating only recognizing gay people with homophobia is like saying only serving salad at the party is discrimination against carnivores. It's a leap of logic that would make a kangaroo jealous