h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

You do not give any reasons for moving them, please do so if it is to be considered.

Reply to CS:
After your man-hating lesbian remarks? The gloves are off. Feeling lucky?

Ah, well that answers my question to some extent.

Hero worship? I don't like the idea of one human being worshipping another. I don't like the idea of hero status either. Only those with big egos would like to be a hero. truly great people wouldn't want to be heroes. Deep respect? Yes. Hero Worship? No.

Gain prestige via association. I really don't like this one. An example: I don't want the respect of my peers because my PhD supervisors are famous in our field! That's, like, stealing. And I would be fooling myself too. I can't think of any positive slant to put on this idea.

Is it safe yet? Can I come back in now? *Fastens strap of steel helmet under chin, poking head out of the Andersen Shelter*

hey, let me in that shelter!

I don't suppose I expected anything different, despite the fact that you made this statement well after my alleged "man-hating lesbian" comments: "I have provoked responses but I have insulted no one except in self-defence. If you perceive my responses as insults then I apologise and will attempt to avoid doing so in future."

And as usual, you took my statements out of context. I said that you struck me as someone who is angry at men, and lonely. You implied that you were lesbian in your next post (paraphrased): "You say that I am single, lonely, heterosexual, looking for someone, and that men are intimidated by my intelligence. Well, you can't be wrong on *everything.*

I then said that I had considered that as a *possibility*, but refused to mention it until you indicated it. And there was nothing judgemental in that statement. If you prefer women, that's fine. It makes no difference to me. I would have gone on believing you implication that you were a lesbian, until you said otherwise.

So not only have you backtracked on your pledge to maintain civility, but you have also done so on your stated desire to maintain this as a reasonable discussion. Rather than address my points, you attack me personally for not introducing anything new (which I am guilty of... I was interested in answering your counter-post to my latest one, and hadn't read beyond to the post I unknowingly reiterated), and allege that my grasp of logic is rudimentary at best. But if my arguments were so bad, you could have more easily deflated them than insulted them.

Come in my dear, make yourself at home, here, have a

Time for your dried frog pills, CS?

I'm glad to see that you've changed from the veiled insult to the direct. Honestly, I was tired of responding to your indirect insults and baiting just to be slandered by everyone else in the forum

Now the real Amy steps forward...

The real Amy has always been here, stepping forward, treading on your toes and making you feel really, really uncomfortable. Everyone here knows me, they see facets of me all over the place. I cannot be diminished in any way by your words, you only diminish yourself. You come out of this very badly and nothing you say now will change that.

The tactics you use on other women will not work on me. I'm not a victim, not a doormat, not a silly airhead. I'm not playing up, I'm not having a silly moment or getting ideas above my station. I'm secure, happy, self-confident and solid as a rock.

S'cuse me...*opens wallet* Anyone mind if I buy the movie rights to this?

Tom Hanks and Meg Ryan perhaps?

Tom will have to wear a long wig. Will Meg make a good Colonel Sellers, do you think?

Your gender-bending taunts fall on deaf ears, Amy the Revolting. But I see also that my attempts to restore this to a reasonable conversation are doing likewise.

Now you presume too much. I do not resort to any *tactics* other than reason. I never implied that you were "above your station", "having a moment", or anything resembling them. You suddenly seem to feel the need to prove you are not. Is your conscience calling you?

And if you were so self-confident, you wouldn't have to resort to name-calling.

I felt *I'd* expended a deal of effort to avoid slandering anyone, but to be honest, I really can't be bothered to wade back through the conversation and check. If I'm wrong, could someone let me know?

He's determined to have the last word, isn't he?

Don't worry about it. He thinks someone's slandered him. He thinks I've called him names. I haven't and I suspect the slander is in his imagination too.

A curious accusation from someone who slandered me yet again when I attempted to depart. I don't think I'll make that same mistake again.

Hey! That's two words for you to look up now, CS: logic and slander.

"He thinks I've called him names. I haven't and I suspect the slander is in his imagination too." - As you're so fond of saying, your comments speak for themselves.