Alright, I know what you want, so here you go!

Don't you wish... ;)

Actually, "KatAngel" is derived from my real name, which is all the hint I'll give as to what my real name is. And you're the third person to correct my spelling of "per se." And I realized after submitting it that it was the wrong choice of words, but slashdot doesn't let me edit my post, so... there you go. And let's not get into stereotypes. I've talked about them enough on this page already.

I know I asked for the discussion to end, but your statement that I've missed a few things seems based on misunderstanding of what I wrote.

Exactly why I respond by debunking said stereotypes. Just because the sample was small doesn't make it any less worthwhile to introduce the person to a larger dataset. Your statement only reinforces the reasoning behind my response.

Read what I said again. I didn't say I couldn't tell if you were serious, I said I couldn't tell whether or not you believed the stereotype as a "general" truth that applies to "most" women. I already said I realized you weren't being serious, but one can make a joke in jest and still believe that the stereotype on which they based it has validity. Without hearing the tone of your voice, or having prior information as to your personality and beliefs, it was impossible to determine. The same joke made now that we've spoken would, obviously, warrant a different response.

Having had some discussion with you now, I have some insight into what sort of person you are, and that data enables me to fully understand the intentions of your original joke, which were - to me - ambiguous at first. Discussing it further will neither make my initial response nor your initial joke any different, as they are both in the past, so perhaps we should accept that we each misunderstood the other's intentions, and move on.

I didn't mean to imply that dominance had to do with disagreement. What I meant to say was that we both ask before we do anything and ensure that the other approves, so neither one of us has the "last word." If she disapproves, I won't do it, and if I disapprove, she won't. (Trust me - I've had relationships in the past where I've acted as both the dominant and the submissive member, and this isn't one of them. We're mutual.) The point about arguments was meant to say that, in most cases, we share the exact same mindset, so the need for either of us to assume a dominant role doesn't arise. Taken moment by moment, there are times when I'm more dominant, and times when she is, but, in a general sense, we share the role. Anywho...

I know you're just going to take this as me still not getting your point, but I'm going to have to disagree that stereotypes are based on "empirical statistical evidence." More often, they're based on false assumptions and assertions made by the media. Take, for example, the stereotype that all muslims hate America - that is so FAR from being based in empirical statistical evidence that it's not even funny. It's based on a very small faction of the muslim religion that got media coverage due to their actions. That's why I correct stereotypes, whether I get the joke or not, because people who make the jokes quite often seriously believe their stereotypes. And without knowing you, as you said yourself, I can't know whether you are making a joke of type 1 or type 2. Thus, I took the route of "just in case." (Even though I could tell you obviously weren't seriously questioning my gender with your post, there was no evidence whether or not you truly believed emoticons to be a "female" trait.)

Also, it's not always social change that renders a stereotype incorrect. Quite often - I would say more often than not - such stereotypes are incorrect from inception, as in the example above. However, if, after this point, you still disagree with my view, then I think we should just agree to disagree on this point. Further argument will go nowhere, and we're WILDLY off topic from the discussion, which was already wildly off topic from TFA.

You read too much into my post. I was being neither almighty nor defensive. Almighty would mean implying that I was smarter than entity x, or group x. It isn't almighty to be aware that my intelligence is higher than the average, as, I would imagine, are those of a good number of others who frequent slashdot. It takes a certain degree of logical-spacial intelligence to gain a strong affinity for technology. Then again, it's possible I'm overestimating slashdot.

At any rate, even if I *was* being defensive, which I wasn't, it certainly wouldn't have been over the comment that I'm a cat from outer space. I love cats. However, I hear so many stereotypes, perhaps it's merely a matter of instinct to quell them when I hear them, even in jokes. Jokes that rely on stereotypes (especially when those stereotypes are truly believed by a large number of people) fail to amuse me. (And there is a difference between "not amused" and "defensive" or "angry.")

Excuse me. Differences *become less apparent. *mutters*

Does being female necessitate that I be stereotypically so? I remember reading somewhere that "as intelligence increases, differences between gender behavior becomes less apparent." I believe there is truth in that.

Well, that is true. I didn't actually make the mistake, the generations and generations of people who developed and evolved the Latin language did. I was just trying to be a little bit humble and not point out how much of a failure the rest of the world is compared to me.

>.>