i'm not engaging with him or her i'm not sure what the preferred gender identity is regarding my response to drmies who i notice you've pinged that was both ironic and patronizing but it's no skin off my back not to notice him what i'm not prepared to do is to ignore issues he raises and equally i think he ought to be aware of responses as for the user you refer to he has made a disgraceful attack on me in the past and he continues to respond very agressively you were involved in the duchess of malfi drama that has apparently inspired all this hatred from the user you mention i remind or inform you that edits i made at the article portrait of do a isabel de requesens y enriquez de cardona anglesola that span out of that drama were all reverted not withstanding that the article was started in its entirety from contributions i made at commons about that portrait i think that's pretty disgraceful don't you i documented it all on the talk page in the end this does strike me as an ownership issue at wp fp i made it clear above i'm not interested any more in featured works of art i do finally think that exercise is pretty pointless actually hard to understand but i suppose it's a harmless enough hobby for the most part but i also made it clear that i will continue to oppose nominations that i think are inappropriate september morn is precisely one such nomination whereas the painting is more or less unknown in europe and i had never heard of it its creator paul chabas certainly was known to me sexuality is one of my editing interests you can find an article i am preparing in on a landmark transsexualism case the flak i have had to endure from that group on my oppose is extraordinary the editor you refer to is quite wrong in the assertion he made to the effect that lewis carroll's hatch odalisque is exploitative a bold link provided to an image should we feel the need to remind ourselves how exploitative whereas chabas' paintings are not but this is simply not how chabas is viewed in the literature anne witchard at page of dark chinoiserie directly cites chabas' paintings and carroll's hatch odalisque together via dijkstra et al i'm entitled to point out that and i am entitled to ping your editor about it i really don't want to hear from drmies again here indeed from any of you in the case of drmies i naturally shall respond but i think i've interacted all i need to with the rest of you