Why do you want to know that when you've acknowledged in a parallel thread that that wasn't what happened? It's hard for me to read this any other way than a deflection so that you can discuss a different set of events, which didn't happen, where you feel your arguments would fair better.

Given that we're already talking about a hot-button issue which is the subject of conspiracy theories, that seems dangerous.

Yeah, you're trying to catch me on a typo, but it's not gonna work cus I already acknowledged it.

I do know I hit a nerve with that particular scenario. I got all I wanted. Ok, so let's just move on. Let's get to the fun stuff.

So the line stopped at her wearing the BDSM gear. Why? Why not cross that line? Why is it ok for the bear to wear BDSM gear and for her not to?

I misunderstood. I thought we were having a discussion, but I can see you're looking to deliver a monologue. I'll leave you to it.

Lol. All I did was respond to the Adam Sandler move with my own. I'm just trying to speed this up and get to the good stuff already.

Apparently, if it was the kid wearing the BDSM gear, it wouldn't feel like the same thing. It would feel wrong.

Of course, if you, or anyone reading this feels different, speak out.