> No, it was not an honest attempt to understand your point, it was an attempt to ridicule your facile, ridiculous non-point.
This shows that you put people's whims over the truth. You'd rather influence by intimidation than by referencing reality and using reason. I don't think this kind of behavior should be tolerated by this community.
> I'd love to see your study on what most feminists advocate, it would make fascinating reading, what was your methodology?
This is the other side of the same coin. You hold that nothing is true without some sort of research study, knowing full well that such studies are too concretely empirical to be used to draw reliable conclusions (which is why they often appear to disagree with one another). That leaves nothing but whims and intimidation.
This shows that you put people's whims over the truth. You'd rather influence by intimidation than by referencing reality and using reason. I don't think this kind of behavior should be tolerated by this community.
> I'd love to see your study on what most feminists advocate, it would make fascinating reading, what was your methodology?
This is the other side of the same coin. You hold that nothing is true without some sort of research study, knowing full well that such studies are too concretely empirical to be used to draw reliable conclusions (which is why they often appear to disagree with one another). That leaves nothing but whims and intimidation.