“I will say, however, that it is no great demonstration of one’s intellect, (and you are clearly capable of intelligence), to write off another’s ideas as ‘stupid’.

Why? Are there no stupid ideas? Should they not be called stupid? Would a smart person call them anything else? You assume I use the term lightly; I don’t. If I called something stupid, it’s because I believe, after due reflection using all of my intellectual powers, that it is stupid. What else would you have me do “as a demonstration of intellect”? (Is that why we’re here? I thought I was demonstrating disagreement.)

What you call three-dimensional chess I call a four-sided triangle. You posit something called “post-patriarchal masculinity” without demonstrating what about it is masculine. That’s because nothing about it is “masculine,” i.e., specific to the male gender role. There is plenty in my comment to disagree with, but you chose instead an ad hominem assault on my style, as if it excused your not grappling with the substantive critique. That’s on you.

You say you found a number of comments unclear. Which ones?