You're the one who posted "40 things I hate about antis" or whatever it was.

Critiquing the anti-choice view is something that pro-choice proponents are naturally going to do on an all-purpose GL forum that does not insist we only allow anti-choicers to express their view, or lacks a policy that makes discussing these particular issues against the posting rules. We do not get our voice out in many places, so yes, you are going to have to put up with it here, no matter how annoying it is for you. That is not the same thing as singling out a specific individual as some type of prime representative of a whole viewpoint, as you did with me. That makes it more personal than ideological.

You've been writing twenty times as much as anybody else.

Doubtless a major annoyance for those who disagree with my views, no doubt. Sorry, bro. But others here believe these are words that deserve to be read somewhere, including many fence-sitters who simply lurk at the board without registering. And I have a lot to say, yes. But none of those posts singled you or anyone else out specifically as a personal attack. I do not do that to you, Ethan, because I see you as a anti-choicer, not the anti-choicer despite you're being a particularly prominent voice on the anti-choice camp at times. Yes, we cannot help with having some personal issues due to our years of strong disagreements and heated exchanges, but I try not to make it too personal because at its core, this issue is not about me and you.

Others who disagree with me tend to do it in a line or two,

If that makes you take things more personally from me than them, and makes me appear as the pro-choicer in your eyes rather than a pro-choicer, than again, sorry but too bad. That's how I roll, and many who do not dislike my words have no problem with it. I will write as much as I want, and if more words from someone means you take it more personal from them than others who reply with only one or two lines, then too bad. You are always free to respond to them here, where there are not many places outside of here that I can do the same. If that makes me alarm you a lot more than them, then also too bad. The point is, I didn't single you out personally.

And I have little doubt, if any, as to why you do what you do, because you are not too hard to analyze, especially when we all see countless hundreds just like you all over the political sphere, not just in this community. It doesn't take a Ph.D. in psychology or an M.D. in psychiatry to do that; it takes simple skills of very frequent observation of the same type of person all over social media ad nauseum. And yes, others do analyze you similarly here, even if in less words than I do.

My reaction is fully explained by your differences in that regard from any other recent posters here.

Your reaction is fully explained by the fact that I am more verbal than most of your opponents (when Dante isn't on hiatus), and you do not like having your own verbosity and relentless promotion of your side of the fence matched, since your side is not used to much opposition of your arguments outside a few cyber-locales in the MAP community. Hence, you take it more personally from me than from others. Nevertheless, I still do not single you out personally as the very subject head of a post, even if I do sometimes offer you up for comparison to a point I'm trying to make in a post of a more general topic that is not just about you alone.