I just. ugh.

so i shared this on facebook:

and these are the comments that followed:

Friend: Because this analogy once properly thought through doesnt justify the argument...the appearance of another person is to the appearance of another person as the taste of gummy worms is to the taste of actual worms. sight is to sight as gummy is to actual worm wont match up in an argument. However, i DO think the question in question no pun intended, is ignorant. People should be able to like whatever they see fit without being questioned

me: its not about looks. in a sense it is about taste. being with a girl vs being with a guy is more similar to taste. so, trust me the analogy works.

my Grandmother: So have you "tasted" both to be able to compare?

me: yes ma'am, i have dated both

Grandmother: cool! :)

and then i added this:

The analogy is saying that if you date someone of an appearance (a girl who looks like a guy) then why not date the real thing, well, if you eat something of an appearance, why not eat the real thing? That is why the analogy works so well. Just because they look the same, doesn't make them the same. They are entirely different things, just like a male and female are. say a female is the gummy. just because she looks like a real worm, doesn't make it the same as a real worm. saying that we (lesbians) should just date a guy because we date someone that looks like a guy is the same as the analogy.