Phenom, you obviously feel I have made a personal attack on you. I did not intend to and I am sorry if you feel that it was. I simply feel that the word muscular has been "thrown around" a bit loosly. You and I are allowed to disagree on this matter.
No, I did not feel attacked on a personal level. (Annoyed, yes, but not attacked.) I am careful to avoid getting caught up in personal bickering. Debating points however are fair game. If you cite something I have posted I would expect that you would be prepared for me to respond, as I would expect anyone else on this board to do if I cited something they posted.
Before writing this response, I went back and reread what I wrote. In that response, and in this one too, I responded to your points with fact, and reason. I provided examples, kept my assertions within that which I knew with confidence to be true and correct, and I thought through what I wanted to say. At worst, I employed some sarcastic humor, and when writing in a serious tone, my style of writing is often seen as cold. I instead consider it to be an effort towards precision and accuracy.
By all means we are allowed to disagree. You disagreed with me, and I disagreed right back. Were this not a thread about celebrities none of this would have come up in the first place. But you are applying a standard to the celebrities which is in my opinion, not realistic and not relevant to the thread. If this thread was about female athletes instead and someone began talking about some college track athlete with no discernible muscle size or tone I would be among the first in line to agree with you if you thought she did not deserve mention.
Message boards work on the principle of discussing things relevant to the subject and title of a thread within that thread and of creating separate threads to talk about other matters. I feel I have stayed relevant to the thread, and feel you are operating under expectations not appropriate to this particular thread.
I spent a good amount of time on my initial post. I had a criteria that I stuck to and within reason, I tried to cite photos or videos for those that were either lesser known or likely to be contested. (Such as Blalock who atrophied much of her muscle, likely at the insistence of the producers.) When you put in effort that way, yeah, its kind of annoying when people criticize without first getting their facts straight or stray from the context of the thread. Annoyance makes for good fuel when writing a rebuttal in a debate. 😀
I hope this has provided some clarification, I have no desire to bicker or flame with you, I just happen to disagree with you, and see no problem in debating to that end. Cool? ::)
phenoms
PS – It's "phenoms" with an "S", not "phenom". I must say, I was deeply hurt and offended by such an egregious and unthinkable…. ok not really. lol But it is fun having an excuse to use the word "egregious". 😉
Oh darn, there I go being unclear again. By "not really", I mean that I wasn't really offended, not that phenoms does not really have an "S" at the end. Cause it does have an "S" on the end… umm I mean phenoms has an "S" on the end, and not that "it" has an "S" on the end. Then "it" wouldn't be "it", it would be "its" and that might then lead to confusion as to whether or not "its" should be "its" or "it's". Oh dear.
Semantics is our friend. ;D
My Deviant Art Page (old stuff):
phenoms.deviantart.com
My Booru Gallery (new stuff):
phenoms.booru.org
Also
www.thevalkyrie.com/picthumb/p/phenoms/index00.htm
www.thevalkyrie.com/picthumb/p/phenom_fett/index00.htm
.
