Below is a thread (i.e. series) of posts that originated from a message someone wrote at my message board regarding my "Disapproval IS Offensive" rant. Therefore, you should go read that rant before reading this one; otherwise you won't know what we're talking about in the beginning of the thread below. Anyway, this rant sort of speaks for itself and I have nothing to add to it, so here it is; as always, all names except for mine have been changed, and if you see anything in italics in a certain post, those are just words from previous posts that the person has quoted in his/her reply. ;> Anyway, here's the first post, written by Khaki:

- - - - - - - -

I just casually overlooked the "disapproval IS offensive" rant and noticed again, what I did not particularly like about it: Try reading the green lines, which the girl wrote, without reading your lines and you will realize that the poor girl was probably at a loss of how to phrase her thoughts correctly. Personally I think you misinterpreted her words and I believe her intention was something along the line that she cannot image to be gay / lesbian herself. That's what she meant with the whole "I do not approve of homosexuality, but I do not have anything against it." IMHO. This is especially clear to myself when she said "I don't mind if someone else is gay, though I'm sure I'm definitely not."

Naturally I read your lines as well, when I read it the first time, however it is more clear when you are only reading the green lines.

Anyway, I got the impression that sometimes, especially on topics which you deeply care about, you are just interpreting things the wrong way.

With regards,

Khaki

- - - - - - - -

And here's the reply I wrote...

- - - - - - - -

>I just casually overlooked the "disapproval IS offensive" rant and noticed again, what I did not particularly like about it: Try reading the green lines, which the girl wrote, without reading your lines and you will realize that the poor girl was probably at a loss of how to phrase her thoughts correctly.

Well, when a person can't phrase themselves correctly when they're trying to defend themselves, that tells me that they don't have a good defense. If you can't phrase yourself correctly, maybe you should examine if what you're saying is on the ball or not, or not bother to say anything at all. (As one of my teachers used to say, lengthen the journey from one's brain to one's mouth.)

>Personally I think you misinterpreted her words and I believe her intention was something along the line that she cannot image to be gay / lesbian herself. *snip* This is especially clear to myself when she said "I don't mind if someone else is gay, though I'm sure I'm definitely not."

No, the main point of the posts Ame made was that just because she disapproves of gay people it doesn't mean that they should hate her because she still can like them as friends. The only reason I responded to that comment of hers was because I wanted to explain why I personally found it inconsistent as well as being prejudiced to disapprove of something someone can't change about themselves.

>I got the impression that sometimes, especially on topics which you deeply care about, you are just interpreting things the wrong way.

I'm sorry I come off to you that way, but I'm afraid you're the one who misinterpreted things, at least this time. Maybe it's because I didn't quote Ame's entire posts and only quoted the lines I replied to, but I don't know how you thought the main point of her posts was that she "cannot image to be [sic] gay / lesbian herself." In her very first post, she was talking to someone (it wasn't me, as I wasn't involved at all in the thread at first iirc) and she commented that she doesn't see why she can't be friends with gay people just because she thought that being gay was wrong. That's when I jumped into the thread, and the entire thread was about she and I talking about why I felt her way of thinking was inconsistent. Her comment about not being able to imagine being gay herself was something she said in passing, a digression she made while she was trying to prove that she liked gay people even if she thought homosexuality was wrong (she made the digression because she was trying to clarify that even though she was trying to prove that she liked gay people she certainly wasn't one herself).

Since I don't have the entire posts saved, I'm afraid you have to take my word for it when I tell you that you are the one who misinterpreted the point made by the girl I was talking to. If you can't take my word for it, that's fine too, but in that case I really don't see what point there is for you to read my rants - cause if it looks to you that I misinterpret things depending on how close the subject is to my heart, then - in your eyes - I really have no credibility and I let my bias cloud my logic more than other, more objective ranters, and my subjective crap really wouldn't be worth reading. *L*

- Ganymede

- - - - - - - -

Khaki's reply...

- - - - - - - -

>Well, when a person can't phrase themselves correctly when they're trying to defend themselves, that tells me that they don't have a good defense.

Not necessarily, when I am in an argument, I sometimes get too exited and go into a fit, no kidding, and then I cannot dig up any arguments anymore ;-)

>I'm sorry I come off to you that way, but I'm afraid you're the one who misinterpreted things, at least this time.

Perhaps. I do not rule this out. After all, we all make mistakes.

>cause if it looks to you that I misinterpret things depending on how close the subject is to my heart, then - in your eyes - I really have no credibility and I let my bias cloud my logic more than other, more objective ranters, and my subjective crap really wouldn't be worth reading.

That's not what I meant, it's just that I like to listen to my instinct, which is usually dead on. In this case it told me that while you are right on most things - and that is more than I can say of most people - you still have a tendancy to interpret things too much at times, which in turn leads to wrong conclusions. That's my impression, take it or leave it =)

With regards,

Khaki

- - - - - - - -

My friend Woodstock decided to reply...

- - - - - - - -

That's not what I meant, it's just that I like to listen to my instinct, which is usually dead on.

^^;;; Aside from the argument that instinct even exists... Instinct is usually one of the most incorrect things you could listen to. Instinct is a very biased and uneducated thing. (and if you ask my sociology teacher, instinct is usually dead wrong) You'd be better to listen to reason and take an objective stand on things then to listen to your instinct ^^;

Gomen, I just had to say that ^^; Also, I read Ganymede's rant too and I agree with the fact that disapproval is offensive. It's kind of rude to say that you don't like who a person is but you'll be friends with them anyway. If it was on a viewpoint it'd be different, but being gay is actually who you are.

It'd be like me saying I didn't like Asian people but I'd be friends with them anyway. Do you think anyone who was Asian would want to be friends with me after a comment like that? *I* wouldn't want to be friends with me after a comment like that, in fact I'd want to slap myself :p

Maybe the poor girl didn't really know how to phrase herself correctly, but that's no excuse for saying something offensive ^^;

Woodstock

- - - - - - - -

Khaki replied to Woodstock...

- - - - - - - -

>^^;;; Aside from the argument within that instinct even exists.. Instinct is usually one of the most incorrect things you could listen to. Instinct is a very biased and uneducated thing. (and if you ask my sociology teacher, instinct is usually dead wrong)

Apparently we have a differing point of view on that. In fact, if I had listened to my instinct more often, I would have avoided many disappointments in life. If I wouldn't give anyone the benefit of doubt, I would have seen through the many lies an ex-friend kept feeding me.

>You'd be better to listen to reason and take an objective stand on things

Who says I don't?

With regards,

Khaki

- - - - - - - -

...and I replied to Khaki:

- - - - - - - -

>In fact, if I had listened to my instinct more often, I would have avoided many disappointments in life.

In many cases, that's less instinct than it is just good ol' hindsight kicking in. And even if it wasn't, the point is that instinct is still a subjective thing. If you want to take actions in your own life based on instinct, then that's fine, go right ahead, cause no one is really gonna care about that; however, if you're having a discussion with someone and you're trying to prove a point, you don't do that from instinct. That's where reason and consistent thinking should come in.

>>You'd be better to listen to reason and take an objective stand on things
>
>Who says I don't?

"I like to listen to my instinct, which is usually dead on. In this case it told me-"

You do. ^^;

Since Woodstock said it quite perfectly (sasuga da na! xp), I don't have much to add except that if you get into fits in arguments, you really should learn how to calm down, cause otherwise you'll never be able to get your point across intelligently. And if I really am misinterpreting things, feel free to give me a few examples of it, cause I'd like to know where and when this happened so I can change that (and I'm not being facetious, by the way ^_-).

As for the instinct thing, I pretty much agree with Woodstock (my Poli. Sci. teacher said the same thing! *_*). I listen to my gut instinct sometimes, but before I do I usually try examine my instinct rationally and see if it's a good one, or a product of my diseased thinking, or just lame. xp

- Ganymede

- - - - - - - -

Khaki's next reply:

- - - - - - - -

>into fits in arguments, you really should learn how to calm down

It's not that I go into some sort of bloodrage or rabid frenzy, it is more of a paralyzation which keeps me from pointing out any flaws or loopholes in the other person's reasoning. And I did not mention this in order to get pity or compassion, I mentioned this, because I wanted to point out that the girl maybe had something similar, which kept her from discussing things calmly.

>(my Poli. Sci. teacher said the same thing! *_*)

My chemistry teacher told me that there are 105 elements, no more and no less, that does not make it the absolute truth however. In order to give some good advice for your future live as well: Don't take anyone's word for something, because most of the time it is just a matter of opinions anyway. Try to get some proof from other sources.

>I listen to my gut instinct sometimes, but before I do I usually try to examine my instinct rationally and see if it's a good one, or a product of my diseased thinking, or just lame. xp

Well, Mr. Vulcan, congratulations if you are able to do that. Personally I have yet to meet a human who is able to let his reason dictate each and every move.

With regards,

Khaki

- - - - - - - -

My next reply:

- - - - - - - -

>It's not that I go into some sort of bloodrage or rabid frenzy, it is more of a paralyzation which keeps me from pointing out any flaws or loopholes in the other person's reasoning. And I did not mention this in order to get pity or compassion, I mentioned this, because I wanted to point out that the girl maybe had something similar, which kept her from discussing things calmly.

Don't get me wrong, I saw what you're getting at the first time, but as Woodstock said that doesn't excuse the fact that she couldn't back up why she felt it was okay to make an offensive comment.

>>(my Poli. Sci. teacher said the same thing! *_*)
>
>My chemistry teacher told me that there are 105 elements, no more and no less, that does not make it the absolute truth however.

Your analogy is fallacious because my teacher was talking about the tenets of good reasoning: consistency, logical premises, relevant data, et cetera as opposed to instinct and gut reactions. Your teacher in question is talking about the periodic table. Also, perhaps you're not quoting your science teacher properly, because no competent science teacher would EVER say that there are a certain set number of elements. Every competent science teacher always adds that "there could be more out there that we don't know of yet, and humans are creating new elements in the lab as well" (I think they found a 119th element recently, iirc). Same with biology: every science teacher also says, "There are such and such number of species in the world, but we are always discovering more and there are many we do not know about." NO science teacher would ever cite a fixed number of chemical elements, much less a set number of species.

>In order to give some good advice for your future live as well: Don't take anyone's word for something, because most of the time it is just a matter of opinions anyway. Try to get some proof from other sources.

It's a matter of opinion that good reasoning should be based on a system that's as objective as possible instead on instinct? You want people like my Poli. Sci. teacher to take the time to prove this?

>>I listen to my gut instinct sometimes, but before I do I usually try to examine my instinct rationally and see if it's a good one, or a product of my diseased thinking, or just lame. xp
>
>Well, Mr. Vulcan, congratulations if you are able to do that. Personally I have yet to meet a human who is able to let his reason dictate each and every move.

Your point would be well-taken, except I never claimed that. Let me restate it for you and highlight the key words:

"I listen to my gut instinct *SOMETIMES*, but before I do I *USUALLY* *TRY* to examine my instinct rationally"

Key words: "sometimes," "usually," and "try."

Perhaps I read too much into things (like that Ame girl's comment), but it seems to me that you aren't reading closely enough.

- Ganymede

- - - - - - - -

After that, Khaki made a final post in which he said he wasn't going to reply to the posts anymore, and he added that: "I feel that I have twisted Ganymede's words, but he did the same to me as well and did not want to understand my point - you are right though, it does not matter."

Disregarding the inconsistency in calling something inconsequential yet taking the time to point it out, I replied back, saying: "Since you said you were leaving, I doubt you'll see or reply to this, but I should point out that it's rude to accuse someone of twisting your words and of *refusing* to understand your point and then leave without backing up what you say."