|valtyr (valtyr) wrote in scans_daily,|
If your school is a good one, it should have taught you that you need to read papers before citing them. Feel free to check that with your professors.
obviosly you couldnt handle the serious ones
These would be the ones you haven't read?
I know what Im talking about, you on the other hand are not talking about nothing but guessing.
No, you don't. If you knew what you were talking about you'd be able to support it. I haven't guessed anything - I've asked you to support your statements. You're unable to do it.
yet you insist to go after the adhominem.
No, I haven't. I have at no point said that any of your personal qualities render your arguments invalid, which is what ad hominem is.
I dont know whats your problem, you fail to elaborate your arguments, you dont have any theory or example, you are not interested in my arguments yet you said you would try to understand.
I haven't made any arguments, that's why. I'm asking you to support your argument, and you are unable to provide any evidence.
I argue that sex has an impact (among other variables) on gender and that impact must not be overlooked
Riiiight, what I asked you to support originally was: The fact that both genders are completly equals is a mistake from feminist theory (the term is out dated in academy work, I call myself into gender studies not "feminism") Men and Woman are different and that is good thing.. How has that become: sex has an impact (among other variables) on gender? These goalposts have shifted so far they're cricket stumps.