Talk:Heterophobia/Archive1

This is an archive page, last updated 6 October 2021. Please do not make edits to this page.

Archives for this talk page:  , (new)(back)

CP article

CP's writing an article on this, intended as a neologism to classify all homosexuals as not gay, but "heterophobes," to suggest that being gay is just a personality quirk. I think we need a refutation.-αmεσ (spy) 21:14, 26 September 2007 (EDT)

Well, spreaching only for myself, I can tell you that I am afeared of no straight woman and care to sleep with the same amount of them. CЯacke® 21:25, 26 September 2007 (EDT)

Best of luck with your endeavors, Mr. Cracker. Anyone know why these sections in this article are numbered? Weird. Genghis Khant 04:09, 4 October 2007 (EDT)

Nothing like that is showing up to me? even weirder! Although I have a glitch in the Maryland page that apparently only appears on my computers, so I won't suggest anything like keeping off the sauce:--Remarcsd 08:16, 4 October 2007 (EDT)

Given that heterophobia means fear of difference, then does this term not discredit those that coined it (assuming that they are not latent homosexuals themselves- as the term "homophobia" implies) ? Dreadnought 05:27, 16 December 2007 (EST)

I don't know where you picked up your connotative dictionary, but "homophobia" for me does not imply that someone is latently homosexual. It means that the person has a very high disgust for the idea of homosexuality, no matter what the cause. "internalized homophobia" is the specific form of homophobia that you seem to be wishing to use. --Eira ^yay! 07:48, 16 December 2007 (EST)

The connotation is etymological. Since homophobia literally means a fear of that which is the same, or a fear of sameness, then it stands to literal reason that if a person is homophobic, and also hates or fears gays, then they must be gay themselves. Homophobia is an etymologically "bad" word, much like chocoholic. Anybody here addicted to chocohol? (-: Brianetta 20:15, 23 February 2008 (EST)

Here's something that is truly bizarre - Conservapedia have a page on 'Homosexuality and Scotland'. According to this page, the Church of Scotland is sympathetic to the 'homosexual agenda' (which my reading of Conservapedia's definition is some vast conspiracy of homosexuals doing evil things with an end goal of...well, I'm not even sure THEY know what), and this 'agenda' can be 'exemplified' by such things like 'the introduction of secular marriage', 'forcing religious schools to employ atheist teachers', 'protection for pedophiles' and a '22% increase in calls for emergency services caused by liquor'. Can anyone actually see a link between these things and homosexuality anywhere, far less specifically Scottish homosexuality? Zmidponk 21:05, 13 January 2008 (EST)

IF HETEROPHOBIA does not exist, why this? http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,21804872-2,00.html Not coming back to read answers, this page is really racist.^{— Unsigned, by: 85.18.66.19 / talk / contribs}

Page should be deleted.^{— Unsigned, by: 68.197.173.216 / talk / contribs}

Y? weaseLOId~ 15:34, 28 October 2008 (EDT)

I don't think it's right to say that separatist feminism "might" be called heterophobic, particularly in an article that attempts to discredit the idea that heterophobia exists in the first place. First of all, who's saying that it might be called that? Second, stating that the movement "might" be described as heterophobic is highly subjective, since it "might" just as easily be described as a culture, a community, or a protest movement.

If you feel it's important to include this section in this entry, you might point out that the term is used by Daphne Patai, in her book Heterophobia: Sexual Harassment and the Future of Feminism, to describe the separatist feminist movement. This is an objective statement of fact, rather than a subjective statement of opinion, and it also lets the reader know who's saying it.

--DoveArrow 15:09, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

CP Article Appears to have been blanked

Jimaginator 12:52, 4 September 2008 (EDT)

Strange comment removed

Justly, it is acceptable to oppose Islamic beliefs that is acceptable to persecute a people for choosing to live conversely to their religion. I thought it was just I who was displaying my thickety by not comprehending that at all. Not quite a double negative but somewhere along those lines. ^{I am eating} _& honey^chat 21:11, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

It takes a while to figure out, but I see what it's saying (that it's OK to criticise Islamic homophobia). However, there's no reason to say that specifically about Islam rather than any other religious or political creed which might happen to be homophobic. Wėąṣėḷőįď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 21:20, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

That's what I thought it might be saying, but it would have been more work to copyedit it for clarity than to start from scratch. If the idea even needs to be presented. Part of the problem is there appears to a word/some words missing, and guessing what they should be and where they should go made the other side of my brain start hurting as well. ħuman 22:04, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

I don't think there's words missing (except maybe "it"). It's just phrased really badly. It's about opposing "Islamic beliefs that [it] is acceptable to persecute a people [i.e. homosexuals] for choosing to live conversely to their [i.e. Muslims'] religion". Wėąṣėḷőįď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 22:18, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

I took it as [i.e. Christians] so goes to show. ^{I am eating} _& honey^chat 22:30, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, if it even needs to be said it needs to be two sentences probably. But I doubt it's needed. ħuman 23:11, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Entry point?

This page comes up as one of the eight suboptions when I google rationalwiki. Should it be an "entry point" page? Real first name and last initial (talk) 14:26, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Not sure. Usually they're classed by stats that Trent collects, rather than based on search results. ^postate 15:29, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Armond is correct. We can't tell from our end where people actually arrive at the site Trent (and probably Nx and Pi) can from the logs. ħuman 19:26, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Heterophobia could be a legitimate word if it were used to refer to a subset of LGBT people who despise, stereotype, and seek to demean straight people as a collective group. Since this (extremely small) subset of LGBT people does in fact exist, the term would have merit and in fact would be quite a useful word. Sadly, the conservatives have pulled their usual trick of flagrantly abusing a term and so discrediting it that it becomes unavailable to describe a real-world phenomenon. ^{— Unsigned, by: 198.107.160.107 / talk / contribs} on dec 15 2010 or so

I'd like to see links to clogs backing up that. I can imagine that it's true, a minorityof LGBT activists I know do seem hostile to anyone who is heterosexual and cisgendered, not hateful in the way homophobia implies, but very edgy towards anyone with a normative sexuality. However, I think this seems to be because they see homophobia everywhere, and if you're not one of "us" you're one of "them", so nothing really special. ^postate 12:12, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

The opening sentence.

"Heterophobia is a neologism constructed by certain conservative websites to delegitimize the gay rights movement's campaign for equal treatment and an end to anti-gay bigotry."

This sounds like the someone was just to giddy to offend people a la Encyclopedia Dramatica.

"The term implies that, rather than reacting to anti-gay rhetoric, homosexuals and gay rights advocates are in fact speaking out against heterosexuality and heterosexuals."

Are you implying that hatred, if you're gay, is good? Not only that, but this sentence makes a claim about how a casual definition of Heterophobia can be applied to all gay rights advocates. Really?

And this type of nonsense is the rest of the article. No basis in rationality whatsoever. If you're going to write an article about such an obscure topic, you should, at least, give it an actual definition.

Maybe you should've gotten someone who actually knew something about what he was talking about; rather than pointlessly insult groups of people. I actually had to look at wikipedia for the definition.

This would have 100% potential for a great front-page article if you actually told me what I was rallying against.

SoFlah (talk) 01:16, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Radical or conservative

I am thinking of making edit this article. Is it a radical position on an extension of a conservative one? --Myrtonos@ 13:38, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

"Heterophobia" is not just homophobes

I am not a homophobe, I am pro-gay. But I am also anti-straight. That is why I call myself a heterophobe. This article only shows one perspective. ProudHeterophobe (talk) 20:42, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Good for you. ^gnostic 21:32, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

• tosses out troll food*. Name one thing a stright line ever did to you! I mean, curves have their place, but to be anti straight is to be anti TV and Movie screens. and that's just unamerican.GodotVAGINA, Vagina, vagina vaginaVAGINA 21:32, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Conservative neologism?

From this, it seems like it was popularized rather than coined by the wingnut set. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 04:50, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

In pop culture

Apparently "heterophobia" isn't that well known, so got quite a laugh when brought up on Russel Howard's Good News. Apparently Nick Griffin used it in a tweet, causing Howard to ask "Heterophobia? Have you ever heard a gay man say 'right lads, let's get in the van and go straight-bashing... but let's make it quick because there's a double episode of Glee on later that I just have to watch!!'?" ^moral 08:03, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

I follow Nick Griffon on Twitter because I like to hear racism with a British accent. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 09:00, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

If you're looking for clarification on the "apparently", it was in response to the same-sex couple winning their court case against the Christians who refused them a double bed at their B&B, he posted "say no to heterophobia", put up their address, and "suggested" that a "British Justice Team" (or something along those lines) go to "cause a bit of drama outside their house". Seems like No-Nigs Nicky forgot gluttony is a sin, but I bet he knew full well that to the kind of thugs who listen to the BNP, "protest" means "bring knives". /rant, my apologies Polite Timesplitter ^{talk to me sugar, but best keep it on the}_down-low 11:07, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

What a prick. ^theist 12:49, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

This is absurd

I realise that homophobia is a very real problem in the world but heterophobia, that is to say, prejudice of gay people against heterosexuals is just as prevalent and grossly ignored, the same as black on white racism. Why does this article make out that "heterophobia" is a homophobic term? --Let Them Eat Cake (talk) 09:09, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

just as prevalent and grossly ignored - got any evidence for that or are your prejudices showing? Innocent Bystander (talk) 10:16, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

I don't think a few wedding crashers measures up to being more likely to be murdered (despite being, at best, 15% of a population [i.e. San Fran, surprise surprise]), being linked to everything evil, being cited as something that stands as a barrier to world peace, and many, many couples being penalised for correctly ticking the "Yes" box about their marriage on a yearly IRS form because of DOMA. Polite Timesplitter ^{come shout at me for being thick} 12:16, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Now, if you said "prejudice of gay people against heterosexuals exists" I would believe you. In fact, it would be trivially true. We could trawl the bottom half of the internet to find something. But you said "is just as prevalent and grossly ignored" which is A) something else entirely B) something that can be fact checked and C) something that is fundamentally incorrect. ^gnostic 12:20, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

As one of RationalWiki's resident homo sapiens sapiens homo, let me list the few examples of heterophobia I've seen in the gay community.

1. A straight friend of mine was once drinking in a gay bar with some other straight people, got into a cab with a very effeminate driver who presumed they were all gay and launched into a twenty minute tirade about how he hates straight people.
2. Nobody is too thrilled when drunk straight people invade gay bars and make tits of themselves.
3. A subset of (2): hen nights (US: bachelorette parties) in gay bars seem to lack any self-awareness that going in to a roomful of people who cannot legally get married and celebrating your forthcoming nuptials rubs people the wrong way.
4. Ridiculous hoo-haa and drama over people describing themselves as "straight-acting".
5. Some gay men get particularly exercised about pointing out how disgusting they find vaginas. (Honestly, that's not a hatred or fear of straight people, that's some combination of inappropriately expressing your turn-offs, sometimes tinged with misogyny.)
6. Occasionally, calling them "breeders" and suggest that they are sexually unadventurous and far too bothered about ridiculous gender norms.

That's... about it.

When we give it the full Fox News treatment–the murders, threats of rape, abuse, discrimination and denial of equal rights are definitely outweighed by gentle mockery and a bit of grumbling and banter in bars. —Tom Morris (talk) 14:05, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

LTEC, your post might be the single stupidest thing I've seen from a non-Rob regular contributor to this wiki. Congratulations. Theory of Practice "Now we stand outcast and starving 'mid the wonders we have made." 14:12, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, stop being so homophobic. --Henk (talk) 15:43, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Okay, maybe "just as prevalent" was a slight exaggeration but heterophobia is still grossly ignored. Got anything else up your sleeve other than ad hominem attacks Theory? And I'M NOT BEING BLOODY HOMOPHOBIC! I'm straight myself but I HATE homophobia. But I hate heterophobia just as much. --Let Them Eat Cake (talk) 18:06, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

OK, please find a link to an example where someone suffered directly at the hands of the homosexual community because they were straight. Can you find one example of a schoolchild bullied to suicide, or one "straight bashing" carried out by gays, or one right held by the gay community that is disallowed to straights.... Don't just assert, prove it. Innocent Bystander (talk) 18:14, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

EC Okay. Please show me documented cases of people being beaten/systematically denied jobs/housing/the right to full participation in social and family life because they are straight. Please provide documented evidence of people facing laws that specifically outlaw their sexual behavior as straights or that criminalize their very existence as a group of people. When "heterophobia" meets those standards, I'll take you seriously. And it's not ad hominem to call you an idiot when you are obviously saying clearly idiotic things. Theory of Practice "Now we stand outcast and starving 'mid the wonders we have made." 18:15, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Oh so it's not an ad hominem when it's true? Well then allow me to retort: you represent every loathsome characteristic of a human being, you are intellectually retarded, morally reprehensible, vulgar, insensitive, stupid, you have no sense and a pathetic sense of humour. You're not even interesting enough to make me sick. Not ad hominem if it's true! --Let Them Eat Cake (talk) 05:16, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

That's awful nice, but the above comments asked you for compelling examples of heterophobia being just as bad as homophobia. In fact, you haven't yet given any examples of the heterophobia you're complaining about at all. Since you're now steering the discussion in this childish direction instead, can we assume that you don't actually have anything to back up your argument with? Wēāŝēīōīď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 10:45, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

What Weaseloid said, plus some nitpicking that it can be ad hom even if it's true, it just has to be irrelevant to the argument it's dismissing. What you did there isn't ad hom because it's merely a crass insult and, as was also just pointed out, didn't really address an argument at all but merely threw in a red herring. But now we're de-railed to the finer points of informal logical fallacies and unlikely to get back on track. There's no ad homs in this page at all, and the fact you jumped on that rather than actually addressing any points raised pretty much proves you couldn't back up your point if we even gave you the time and the benefit of the doubt. So, kindly cough up the evidence to support the assertion of the "prevalence" of heterophobia (in a meaningful definition, not "allowing gays to marry is heterophobia" kind of way) or concede and abandon that point entirely. ^sshole 14:05, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

A subset of (2): hen nights (US: bachelorette parties) in gay bars seem to lack any self-awareness that going in to a roomful of people who cannot legally get married and celebrating your forthcoming nuptials rubs people the wrong way. This actually indirectly happened to me yesterday morning. There was one (if not two) hen party receptions in the hotel the night before, and the morning after I got in an elevator with two hungover women, and one blabbed to the other about how much fun the lot of them had "in the gay bar" the night before. I've never wanted to strangle somebody so much. I'm surprised I lasted a six floor descent listening to the vapid bitch. Polite Timesplitter ^{Let's move on to some other area of sodomy!} 11:32, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Tiina Rosenberg

She is a prime example of this. --Henk (talk) 17:34, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

How so? All I can find on her is that she's a gender studies proffessor who used to do theatre. ^bomination 18:03, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Even if she is, what's your point? Polite Timesplitter ^{come shout at me for being thick} 18:07, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Horrible

This page is a clear of heterophobia itself. It's been created by a very biased and intolerant person and as long as this page exist I will not advice rationalwiki to anyone and I will refer to "random irrational wiki" because it's really stupid.^{— Unsigned, by: 79.18.234.66 / talk / contribs}

Was that a threat? :D --ZooGuard (talk) 07:59, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

I agree with the first comment. This article is biased and intolerant. ^{— Unsigned, by: 181.49.12.182 / talk / contribs}

New Topic

Sorry, this is my first edit so I wasn't sure how to do this. :) Anyways. This article said something about homophobia being a deeply held "Christian" value. I thought it would be a better idea to say a deeply held value of many religions. (Maybe a list, but that would probably be somewhat too long. I don't know much about religion, though, so it might not be.) I didn't want to change the actual page because I wasn't really sure if I should, so I thought I should ask here. Another thing: Heterophobia is a real thing. I'm personally gay, and so I know many gay people. Many of my gay friends truly hate straight people in general after all the bullying they went through. This is of course extremely uncommon, but I just wanted to make it clear that this isn't a joke topic. Obviously, it isn't nearly as much of a problem as homophobia, but it does exist. In some Muslim (I think) cultures, people are so sexist that they are disgusted at the thought of having sex with females for anything but reproduction. Same but to a MUCH larger etent in ancient Greece. ^{— Unsigned, by: 198.20.4.95 / talk / contribs}

"Exists" as in "we can find a couple of examples that exhibit this trope" isn't quite the same as "exists" as in "this is an general rule we can depend on". You've spotted this, but it's important to reiterate the distinction. When heterophobia is brought up in the context that the article is discussing, it's the imagined snarl word, and makes no mention of individual cases where a gay person happens to hate straight people (perhaps this can be clarified, but personally I think it would muddy the waters too much to make a big deal of it - as, indeed, it is highly uncommon and individual hatred is not the same as systematic hatred).

It's also worth pointing out that the article specifies a fundamentalist Christian perspective with regards to homophobia. This is a lot more specific than anything where religion in itself is homophobic so expanding upon a list of generally homophobic religious would almost certainly dilute, rather than strengthen, the point. It's a bit US-centric or western-centric, true, but that's just how things happen to be when authors and readers happen to be US-centric and western-centric. We can look into it. ^gnostic 12:08, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

The Rational Wiki Definition of Heterophobia is Wrong

The following line taken from the Rational Wiki definition of heterophobia is wrong:

"It is a neologism and snarl word designed to delegitimize the gay rights movement..."

This sentence is wrong. The word heterophobia should be used to describe the aversion or mistrust of straight people by some gay people, the same way as homophobia describes the aversion or mistrust of gay people by some straight people. Anti-gay groups may misuse the word and use it to delegitimize the gay rights movement, but that should not change the meaning of the word. The article goes on to claim that heterophobia does not exist but admits that there are probably "a small number of gays and lesbians with an inflexible and pathological fear, hatred and mistrust of straight people". It goes on to say that these people should not be used to describe an entire group. Well, some people are psychopaths. We call these people psychopaths. That doesn't mean we are calling ALL people psychopaths. The same goes for heterophobes. Just because we can describe one person as a heterophobe does not mean we are describing an entire group.

I feel that the whole article is wrong and needs to be completely re-written. ^{— Unsigned, by: Chili Bean / talk / contribs} 11:44, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

Do you have an example of somebody you would describe as a heterophobe? Wëäŝëïöïď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 12:56, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

You could make a case for TERFs, many of whom still preach Political lesbianism and despise straight women. But TERFs are a fringe thing.

On a more jokey note, there's the Heterosexuality is a sin against logic dude(tte?), assuming his (her?) claims of not being kidding are true. |₹Λ¥$€₦₦ ^{Masturbation masturbation pies pies Brian Cox} 15:47, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

There is definitely an us versus them thing that goes on with the straights and the gays and there is definitely resentment coming from both sides. It's not like there a design on "straight rights" or any such silliness but you don't really need to look that far to find a group of gay people who bitch about the straights. I can also assure you that your lesbian friend is wary of whether you're trying to convert her. I don't like it when men hit on me, some men don't like it when women hit on them and some women don't like it when men hit on them because that's they way the world works. As long as nobody's really being mean about it then there's no problem but it's pretty easy to resent a cross section of humanity that gives you unwanted attention. It's even easier to resent people if they're given to hurting you because the fact that you exist somehow offends them. There's a good reason for those LGBT support groups to be around, but you're ignorant if you don't think someone has their fair share of human, small-minded bullcrap too on account of their sexual proclivities. The only solution is to somehow replace homo sapiens with a race of sexually achromatic human clones. They'll still hate each other and they'll probably still do ethnic cleansing and all that bullshit, but they'll never fight over sex. Problem solved, I win, hooray for me.

Thumpasaurus (talk) 01:52, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

My heterophobia

I am heterophobic. I'm also heterosexual. But just because I am heterosexual doesn't mean I have to like it. I loathe it, I detest it, I hate it and I abhor it. Heterosexuality disgusts me. I look at the dominance of representations of heterosexuality in the media, all these male-female couples everywhere, and part of me wants to hurl. And I am a member of a male-female couple - just because I practice heterosexuality doesn't mean I have to like it.

Thought experiment: suppose that reincarnation is real, and that when you die you get to choose what your next incarnation will be. Well, in this life, I am a straight male, but if that were the case, I wouldn't be male in my next life, and I wouldn't be anywhere near to being straight either. Does this make me transgender or transsexual? Well, I guess to a certain degree, yes, but at the same time for a number of reasons I don't really relate to those labels.

The Kinsey scale suggests that heterosexuality-bisexuality-homosexuality is a continuum, not a set of discrete categories. In the same way I say that cisgender-transgender is not a set of discrete categories, but a continuum. And I ask myself where I sit on this continuum? And I don't really feel the cisgender side describes me, yet I don't feel the transgender end describes me either - I am somewhere in the middle. Why do I say this? Well, I guess someone at the transgender end feels a great need to transition, whereas transitioning is not something that interests me. Once upon a time, it was a possibility for me; I do not see it that way any longer. I am left thinking, that maybe my lack of interest in transitioning is simply a sign that I am not as transgender as those people who feel compelled to go down that path. Yet still, the answer I give to my "reincarnation thought experiment" is scarcely a cisgender one.

I think if I tried to transition I would never be happy enough with the results. I can't through any worldly and natural means wholly eliminate my own maleness, as much as I wish that I could; and if I can't completely eradicate my own maleness, what's the point? If I can't have it all, just fuck it, I'll take nothing instead. Sublimation. I know religious views aren't very popular around these parts, but I am left thinking that after this life Goddess will give me another life like what I desire. You might think that hope is bullshit, but for me I feel like it is a better place to put my hopes and desires in than transitioning.

Misandry is buried deeply in my soul. The female is inherently superior to the male. That is why I wish to be female rather than male, that is why I desire the female rather than the male, that is why I desire to desire the female rather than the male, that is why I desire the female to desire the female rather than the male.

The female is inherently superior to the male. I don't know if this is actually true. Once I was convinced that it was, now I think it probably isn't, but part of me will always believe it. And paradoxically, this is the origin, not only of my heterophobia, but also my homophobia. Whatever elements of male-male desire exist in me - desire for the female vastly predominates over it, but I have enough self-insight to know that it is not zero - I feel I must repress out of loyalty to the female. When such glories exist, how dare I choose for myself anything lesser?

I rely on female heterosexuality for the comforts and consolations it gives me, yet I feel guilty. I love her on account of her beauty, yet I feel that she dishonours her very own beauty by loving me instead of loving her equals in beauty, indeed in doing so she is failing to love her own beauty as I myself love it - and I am her accomplice in this blasphemy, I encourage her out of my own selfishness.

I repress my own (rather weak and feeble) male homosexual impulses out of loyalty to the glory of the feminine, that for me to choose something less would be blasphemy. And yet, my rejection of them in my heterosexuality is itself a different blasphemy. Which blasphemy is greater? Maybe, if rather than repressing these impulses I tried to water them - in blaspheming less in one way, more in another, which blasphemy would be greater? I am damned, do or don't do, I blaspheme all the same.

So, yeah, for this life I'm a straight male. But that doesn't mean I have to like it. My cisheterosexuality is a kind of ironic, postmodern construction. I'm laughing at myself all the way to the grave. From the outside it probably looks like any one else's, but on the inside it is full of holes. I try really hard to play the role of the cisheterosexual male - I think I play it reasonably well - but a lot of it is a put-on, something studied, something self-consciously constructed, my whole life is a play and I am just an actor.

And, heterophobic, that word is mine. That's a label I'm proud (even if only ever pseudonymously) to own. So I can't relate to the content of this page as it stands. I feel it's perspective is so horribly incomplete. ^{— Unsigned, by: SpeedyLoris / talk / contribs}

Well, congratulations on purposefully being the strawman that crazy people insist exist, I guess. If you're sincere and not a troll(and I'm not saying you aren't), try not obsessing so much over labels. It's not healthy. ikanreed ^{You probably didn't deserve that} 15:16, 8 May 2015 (UTC)