Thought the topic died but since it sprouted into several offshoots I'm inclined to note further.
My point was an amalgam of Killa, Seth, and Aman's points, plus a little something else tucked into a reasoned and delightfully compact paragraph made in 2 minutes. Of course, reasons go nowhere online, as penis-size, ad hominem and patronizing follow. It's certainly wise to attack my age without even considering the contents of my post, because it throws off credibility without having to discuss. It's juvenile, but I'll elaborate a bit out of boredom and freetime without a laptop to do other stuff.
Kiel noted that he has "written about guys and girls." That is a meaningless statement in the conversation, period. Kiel saying he's "gender-blind" (to paraphrase, and I ask that you not take that term literally) is also pointless, since it does not suddenly mean that women and men are the same with only 'percieved' differences-- it's much more than that, in reality, because there really are differences that many seem to ignore.
So, assuming you read Killa/Seth/Aman's posts, put this in your shake-- differences between men and women growing up in any civilisation is not just something a male teen accused of finding women obfuscating believes-- it's basically why the Feminist movement exists. Women grow up in society and face different challenges than men (and vice versa), and translating that to writing and concocted worlds is more complicated than switching up genitalia, this originally refuting Kiel's original statements about there not being many gender differences and how it shouldn't really affect writing (at least, that's what I got from it.) I think/know it really does if you're a good writer (see Secret of Daphne or even semi-dreck like BuffyVampHunter): so COGs market of gender choice is pointless and meaningless; acting gender-blind ('a human being is just a human being'-esque simplicity) when creating characters is lazy and lends to 2-dimensional characters; and ignoring cultural trends and complexities is a disservice to whatever world you're representing, not to mention the characters. Basically.
After saying basically all that in one paragraph, the response completely ignored it to focus on patronization,
"If you prefer to think of women as mysterious and difficult creatures just because they don't have dicks, that's your prerogative."
"The opposite sex grows less mysterious with age, I promise."
I'm just confused where that comes into play as a response. It misses the point thoroughly and is, as aforementioned, juvenile-- so Mizal prophesied correctly haha.