What's with all the lesbianism?

You did make a mistake, plenty of them:
First, you misread what the OP was talking about. Nothing was stated about "sexually objectifying" lesbians. Yes, the word "sexually" was used, but to explain the confusion of what many experience. Furthermore, the OP was talking about the OVERT nature of entertainment displaying "lesbianism" instead of, why can't girls just be friends?

Are you in agreement with the OP that there should be less "lesbianism" in media?


Then you take your misunderstandings of the OP, and apply it to an argument or idea that I have not expressed, and to then judge me based on not wanting to answer your politically motivated and loaded questions.


It's funny that you now harp on "pretty" and drop "sexually objectifying". Or are you claiming that using the word PRETTY is sexual and objectifying and that it is apparently very concerning to LGBT women?
[I am genuinely curious as to why you left out "Q" in your previous response]


Do you feel it best that the entertainment community should EXCLUDE lesbians deemed "pretty" on screen?

Or, is this some anti-hierarchical demonstration, performative activism, like "The pretty ones are at the top of the pyramid, so the rest of us have to tear them down"?

I guess I showed support for pretty lesbians, so I understand now why you're talking to me like this.


In your initial reply and throughout, you mispresent my post as if what I stated was a definitive, exclusionary proclamation... that "because I like 'pretty' lesbians", it must mean I also wish to exclude everyone else.

Oof. Rotted logic.

Thus, you had to flip that "activist" switch on. I must have caused such an affront because I used the word "pretty", and my post didn't attach a disclaimer proclaiming that "I also believe that all sexualities are just as equal, as well as their looks," to fulfill your vigor of inclusivity.


*Essay Format -- a single statement of why one favors [x], while also having to (forced to) elevate all others to the same level as the favored, resulting in the favored's value moot; meaningless; valueless, though very much inclusive. (your tilted worldview; unnecessary; emotional)

It's also funny that you feel it's okay to say that your favorite color is "blue-grey", without providing such a disclaimer, listing all the reasons why all the other colors are just as valid and should be respected and represented, as light is a spectrum, and as such: so is color. Why didn't you do it?

You didn’t do it. You just wrote, “blue-grey”. You wrote: y = 4; or rather, "I like pretty lesbians".

Yet, you expect me to proclaim all other numbers are just as valid and should be represented when it comes to my initial statement (y = 4).

This is why I say trying to make this political is unnecessary.


You do have a chip on your should:
You’ve misread the OP and prejudged my intentions by creating your own made-up arguments about a revisionist version of my initial post while using exclusionary terms like “only”, “as long as”, and “all women to be lesbian” to fit said made-up, manufactured arguments in your head.

To whom and what are you actually talking to or about?
Do you even know?

You’re arguing with YOURSELF, and perhaps arguing with other people in your own life that I don’t know, and trying to project that all onto me, geez. Get a clue, my friend, I'm not your enemy.


You may have to quadruple down, to secure your nutcase frame of mind (not trying to sound harsh, just poking a little fun; prolly contributions from a lack of REM sleep).

When women pretend to be lesbians for the benefit of straight males, it's just cringe.

I always imagined smoking rates would be at an all-time low, given what is known about the health risks and was actually surprised when I recently read a poll that said the opposite about the global rates, strangely enough. Good to know.

Kristi literally tells Kenny that she's torn emotionally between her GF and him.

And what even is your point?