Nope. I'm merely pointing out the Law-breaking (lex dei, only kind that matters) Slander in your implication that I am a pederast. DrSteve's post was at worst crude... he did not imply that you are a pederast, he implied that in Boston you might be the victim of the pederastic Cardinal Law. At worse this would be Slanderous to Cardinal Law (though not really, if one admits of the Guilt of the Accessory); Steve was certainly not seeking to "kiddingly" Slander you.
However, when the roles are reversed, you feel compelled to "kiddingly" acuse me personally of being a pederast. And then, when I tweak your deadened conscience with the shame of your Law-Breaking Slanders, you defensively start throwing out pop psychology at me (hmmmm... should we call that "projection" on your part, perhaps?).
This has nothing to do with my being "comfortable in my masculinity" (which is itself a pretty feminized and emasculated phrase, methinks); it has everything to do with your being comfortable in your self-righteousness. You want to be able to carnally slander your opponents, call it "kidding", and yet still pretend that you are not a Law-Breaker against the Ninth Commandment. And you don't much like it when I prick your self-righteous bubble.
But your "Wesleyan Holiness" won't get you to Heaven, xzins, and all your "good works" won't neither. You must repent of sinning against Christians and repent of causing children to stumble by your teaching of false gospel.
But you're not too comfortable with that idea. Nonetheless, it is what Scripture requires of you.
(OP smiles pleasantly)