I find your reply objectionable.

I believe you mischaracterised my argument or completely misjudged my tone. At no point did I suggest the original author's point-of-view was "utterly ridiculous", just that I found it frustrating and to try and emphatically explain the reasons why. There is a world of difference there. The introductory comments about it being a "controversial rant" have been mischaracterised - the idea was to try and minimise any offence to the original author, that I knew it was slightly hijacking the thread, that it may be a fringe viewpoint and that the author would probably disagree with my point-of-view. At no point was I aiming for "chest-beating", nor do I believe that was the tone of the post, but I do apologise if it came across as such. I do believe, however, that had the roles been reversed that I would not be offended if someone put their arguments forward as I did to support their point of view.

I also quite obviously disagree that I'm a "jerk", and I firmly believe that my opinion still matters despite apparently being the "wrong sex" to be able to have one on this matter and that this sort of discussion is not and should not be out of bounds.