at least that’s what anonymous** says. not once, but twice. once i woulda taken as an interpretation, albeit an incorrect one. twice — well, then you’re just trying to cast aspersions. and my response to that?

f*ck off.

you wanna come ’round here and say — “hbdchick, your ideas are supremely stupid|wrong because of this, that and the other” — fine. you wanna come ’round here and say — “hbdchick, you are the dumbest creature to ever walk the planet because of this, that and the other” — i’m cool with that.

you gonna come ’round here with your giiiiirlie-man shaming techniques and try to bully me into shutting up by calling me nasty, nasty, baddy names — well, that sh*t ain’t gonna fly ’round here, pal, so don’t even bother.

anonymous’ problem with what i had to say (apart from the fact, i think, that he thinks that i was trying to insult east asians) is: “I do not see how you can examine history to look at biology.”

well, what is history? it’s the totality of human behaviors, plus freaky acts of nature like earthquakes and tsunamis and sh*t, isn’t it? and where do human behaviors come from? well, we behave the way we do because of our innate natures and the effects of the environment on those natures. so, human history is, at least partially, rooted in biology. that’s why i think you can examine history to look at biology. it’s complicated, sure, but so what? dontcha wanna KNOW?

**some people don’t like online anonymity. i think it’s the greatest f*cking thing since the invention of stone tools — or maybe even sliced bread! that people can voice their opinions without the fear of being watsoned? awesomesauce! i will fight to the death (or until i break a nail) for anonymous’ right to be anonymous, even tho he comes off sounding like a ‘tard.

(note: comments do not require an email.)

Advertisements