I never said they did.fiendishchicken wrote...
No it doesn't. As I said above, people don't just switch their sexuality overnight.
CrutchCricket wrote...
Is "fallacy" your new catchphrase?Taboo-XX wrote...
You have, once again, presented fallacies to justify your opinion. Please present an actual argument.
I stated my opinion in the above posts. AU is fine. Not in canon.
Or just a convenient way to ignore what you don't agree with?
(1) Miranda is heterosexual because all her past relationships are with men
(2) the last two users of the dating logs are not necessarily male
(3) Therefore (1) is not necessarily true
Is that clear enough for you?
Pro tip: The key words there is "necessarily". I'm not arguing that (1) is false. But I am arguing that you do not have sufficient grounds to dismiss its opposite.
CrutchCricket wrote...
I never said they did.fiendishchicken wrote...
No it doesn't. As I said above, people don't just switch their sexuality overnight.
Gay spouse cases are usually about a realization and it may be gradual.
Objectively speaking, I agree, one doesn't simply go gay (or straight) at the snap of a finger.
But it's a question of self-discovery (and possibly self-delusion).
That's not my claim. I do belive that's a strawman.Taboo-XX wrote...
YOU must show that she's bisexual.
fiendishchicken wrote...
CrutchCricket wrote...
I never said they did.fiendishchicken wrote...
No it doesn't. As I said above, people don't just switch their sexuality overnight.
Gay spouse cases are usually about a realization and it may be gradual.
Objectively speaking, I agree, one doesn't simply go gay (or straight) at the snap of a finger.
But it's a question of self-discovery (and possibly self-delusion).
It can happen, but it will be a lifelong journey. And it is rare. Past 25, most people are set in their ways in terms of sexuality.
That's stupid.CrutchCricket wrote...
That's not my claim. I do belive that's a strawman.Taboo-XX wrote...
YOU must show that she's bisexual.
I never said she was bisexual. I said she could be because nothing contradicts it.
You believe the dating logs contradict it. I think that's irrelevant but even playing along I have shown that this is not necessarily the case because the gender of the last two participants is ambiguous.
CrutchCricket wrote...
That's not my claim. I do belive that's a strawman.Taboo-XX wrote...
YOU must show that she's bisexual.
I never said she was bisexual. I said she could be because nothing contradicts it.
You believe the dating logs contradict it. I think that's irrelevant but even playing along I have shown that this is not necessarily the case because the gender of the last two participants is ambiguous.
katcrave wrote...
fiendishchicken wrote...
CrutchCricket wrote...
I never said they did.fiendishchicken wrote...
No it doesn't. As I said above, people don't just switch their sexuality overnight.
Gay spouse cases are usually about a realization and it may be gradual.
Objectively speaking, I agree, one doesn't simply go gay (or straight) at the snap of a finger.
But it's a question of self-discovery (and possibly self-delusion).
It can happen, but it will be a lifelong journey. And it is rare. Past 25, most people are set in their ways in terms of sexuality.
Oh come on. We all know homosexuality is contagious! Haven't you watched Fox News?
Modifié par fiendishchicken, 01 octobre 2012 - 06:21 .
CrutchCricket wrote...
That's not my claim. I do belive that's a strawman.Taboo-XX wrote...
YOU must show that she's bisexual.
I never said she was bisexual. I said she could be because nothing contradicts it.
You believe the dating logs contradict it. I think that's irrelevant but even playing along I have shown that this is not necessarily the case because the gender of the last two participants is ambiguous.
Modifié par Taboo-XX, 01 octobre 2012 - 06:22 .
CrutchCricket wrote...
Oh that's right, I'm "picking fights" and "being offensive".Babi_Siha wrote...
You are one to talk about with that very diplomatic reply. You are the one acting hostile, not Taboo.
First post of the day, merely reminding people not to be so militant and this is what I get. And I'm the hostile one.
She tells you what she is. She is not a cyborg.krukow wrote...
That's stupid.
She could be a cyborg, because nothing contradicts it.
Missing the point here. She is portrayed as straight in the games, but there is no evidence that she is completely unable to ever share intiminate moments with a female.krukow wrote...
I feel this is getting massively off topic.
Back on topic.
Miranda is straight. She's interested in Men (Jacob, Male Shep), and not interested in Women. We know this because of meta-gaming. There is enough evidence in the one direction, and no evidence in the other, that we can draw a conclusion. Any other opinion is just trolling.
Modifié par Mr Massakka, 01 octobre 2012 - 06:28 .
She never says she's not a cyborg.CrutchCricket wrote...
She tells you what she is. She is not a cyborg.krukow wrote...
That's stupid.
She could be a cyborg, because nothing contradicts it.
THIS. Most likely. Not absolute.Taboo-XX wrote...
In the abscence of evidence the most likely answer is no.
Modifié par CrutchCricket, 01 octobre 2012 - 06:25 .
Now you are just getting unreasonable.krukow wrote...
She never says she's not a cyborg.CrutchCricket wrote...
She tells you what she is. She is not a cyborg.krukow wrote...
That's stupid.
She could be a cyborg, because nothing contradicts it.
And, she admits that she was grown and created in a lab.
Who's to say robot parts weren't included??
I was already accused of of that when I said it.Babi_Siha wrote...
You can remind people, that's fine. But when you ask someone if you're touching a sensitive spot then you are trying to get to that person.
So you can act as innocent as you want, but on your first post you were in fact the one trying to pick a fight and trying to offend someone else, don't try to pretend otherwise.
Nope, I'm using the same logic. She never says she isn't a cybor, or that she has no robot parts. So my interpretation of the character is that she's a cyborg. It's just as valid as you bi-miri people.Mr Massakka wrote...
Now you are just getting unreasonable.krukow wrote...
She never says she's not a cyborg.CrutchCricket wrote...
She tells you what she is. She is not a cyborg.krukow wrote...
That's stupid.
She could be a cyborg, because nothing contradicts it.
And, she admits that she was grown and created in a lab.
Who's to say robot parts weren't included??
Mr Massakka wrote...
Missing the point here. She is portrayed as straight in the games, but there is no evidence that she is completely unable to ever share intiminate moments with a female.
It is very unlikely, but it's not impossible. I'm sure there are individuals who can give you an experience report how they changed their sexuality in adult life.
Lawson was focusing on genetics, not robotics.krukow wrote...
She never says she's not a cyborg.
And, she admits that she was grown and created in a lab.
Who's to say robot parts weren't included??
He worked with husk technology the only time we see him, and that includes robotics.CrutchCricket wrote...
Lawson was focusing on genetics, not robotics.krukow wrote...
She never says she's not a cyborg.
And, she admits that she was grown and created in a lab.
Who's to say robot parts weren't included??
You really gonna keep this up?
In ME3 decades after Miranda was created.krukow wrote...
He worked with husk technology the only time we see him, and that includes robotics.
Miranda is a cyborg, and you can't offer any evidence I'm wrong.
But it's possible she's a cyborg, and therefor my interpretation is completely valid.CrutchCricket wrote...
In ME3 decades after Miranda was created.krukow wrote...
He worked with husk technology the only time we see him, and that includes robotics.
Miranda is a cyborg, and you can't offer any evidence I'm wrong.
No there is no evidence that she doesn't have artificial parts. But most likely, she doesn't.
Modifié par Taboo-XX, 01 octobre 2012 - 06:35 .
Retour en haut