What do you look like?

[SA_Scavenger]

Ah, hell no. I'm going to go through your whole post and show you how one determines exactly what you meant. It's really not so hard.

Let's start with the picture, shall we? A gorilla pulling a 'zap' sign, more a point of evolutionary departure in the context of your post, with the added affect of giving the middle finger to people who you feel haven't 'evolved enough'. It's an insult all on its own.

Now let's break your post down, bit by bit. First part. "Someone knows who could that be? Hmm...you Scavenger?"

Once again referring to the gorilla but now trying to appear clever by asking who it is and determining by your use of a rhetorical question, that it's me. Thus bringing me into line with the same evolutionary scale as the gorilla.

Next part. "Seems you are living in the stone age, even there you have made strange 'comments' it seems."

Another method of trying to show someone as a non-evolved member of the Homo Erectus/Neanderthal species by mentioning that they live in the 'stone age'. Commonly known as the time men would club women before engaging in some much maligned rape. So, in essence, you have devolved me from a human to a stone aged gorilla who uses clubs to subdue women and rape them. And the second phrase of your sentence is even better, for 'my comments' are even too devolved for the Stone Age, imagine that? So, I ain't just a person living in the Stone Age but even the Stone Age dwellers, according to you, are more evolved than I.

Now the last part. The part commonly used to 'rectify' the misfit by showing that society is evolving past their point of evolution and is thus 'better' and more 'advanced'.

"There ARE female gamers. I know at least four girls living around my area who are 'gaming'. Get the fact that women are playing on the computer, too in an advancing society with increasing possibilities to get access to computer games and all the other kind of new tech."

Also another common aspect of people with a point to prove is the use of non provable sources, i.e. your 4 girl 'friends'. This is a hot use seller in most online debates, for there is no way on this Green Earth to prove it one way or the other but it sure as day won't stop people from using it. The capitialised use of 'ARE' trying to emphasise that you are right doesn't help much either.

All in all, you didn't have to call me a 'chauvinistic pig', one could determine exactly what you meant just by speaking the English language.

---