Galin, for the sake of simplicity, please clarify your specific argument into one or two sentences. No quotes or history lessons. Just the point you're trying to make. 300 character limit.

There have been different points in this thread Balrogs, but the main one is that female Dwarves cannot be distinguished from male Dwarves by other folk, not by voice, gait, feature, nor in any way but those noted by Tolkien.

Galin responded: And Tolkien has no need to comment on the scenario of naked Dwarves being considered by other peoples, as he knows he is writing for adult minds who realize that two males cannot produce children.

Glorfindel responded: Actually the Hobbit was a children's book.

Galin responded: And Appendix A does not appear in The Hobbit, nor Tolkien's thoughts about the female Dwarves in Quenta Silmarilion.

Glorfindel responded: The Hobbit and Silmarillion have dwarves in them. Appendix A talks about dwarves of middle earth, therefore it doesn't matter if it isn't in  The Hobbit nor Silmarillion unless, if Appendix A only talks about the dwarves in LOTR.

Galin responded: I'm not sure what this has to do with adults realizing that a race of males can't reproduce.

Just for clarification, Galin. You got confused in all irrelevant postings. I was responding to you saying "he knows he is writing for adult minds who realize that two males cannot produce children." I responded by saying "Actually the Hobbit was a children's book." Not all writings that Tolkien did about dwarves was for adults. So in trying to cover up your irrelevancy, you ended up confusing yourself.

Galin is still digging the hole we dig our holes in.

Ok so I hate to drop the bomb here, but nobody is going to win this, all evidence has been laid out and everybody is free to believe what they will....so we should really move forward. Galin will not move from his position the two are indistinguishable, while the rest of us think a lot of females probably do have male features but are probably not 100% identical. There is not enough definitive evidence to be 100% sure on either side. What we do know has been said and is open for interpretation. This is a great topic that's being ruined with repetitive arguments over the same, unwinnable subject.

To get the train moving again, I am big in studying physiology (aka the way the body works). I was reading an article in a journal recently and came about a section pertaining to pregnancy and child birth. Like everything in life I compared it in some way to Tolkien. So now I'm wondering if there's any mention of death at childbirth? For any of the races? Throughout the middle ages (the time period of ours that Tolkien roughly adheres to), at least half, if not more, of pregnancies ended in either a miscarriage or the mother's death from complications after birth. So was this ever an issue in Middle Earth?

Super random thought time, but perhaps the dwarves grew slowly because birthing was particularly dangerous or difficult for them. At the beginning of time the number of partners was pretty even, but as time went on and more mother's would pass after having sons and not enough daughters, ultimately the number of females, and subsequently dwarves, would decrease. We never hear about any big battle or migration of dwarves after the third age, we just know they sort of...faded away. So maybe it wasn't war or evil that finally defeated the dwarves, but themselves (sort of)???

Yes Balrogs. Interesting point. All of the long life folks had few children, Elves, Dunadain, Dwarves, Ents. I expects this wasting combat over population.

It's clear in my mind. The Dwarves are just like us. They fall in love, they have families, the live long and they all have beards. Dunno what all the fuss is about.

More proof. If they magically pop out of the ground how would Thorin know who his Father and Grandfather were. It's all a massive joke by the Dwarves on the other Children of Illuvatar. Tolkien probably deliberately intended that we would all be discussing this!

I don't know if elves are really tall or not. They could be tall like Tolkien's elves or short like Santa's little helpers.

Not the point at all, which was that Gimli telling us some things but not others does not mean the things he is telling us are not true.

Whats the point of telling the truth if your goal is keeping the truth a secret.

If you want to keep something secret, one option is that you don't say anything.

What lines in Appendix A do you imagine Gimli lied about?

You've really lost the plot Galin. Do you actually read other people's posts or simply glean over them? Your argument is simply unintelligible.

Ah I see I'm doing well

And let's give Christopher Tolkien a longer look here. In QS he comments on Tolkien's writing.

"We learn now that

-- Dwarves live far longer than Men (section 2)

[editing some points here]

-- the Dwarves are bearded from birth, both male and female (section 5)

-- Dwarf-women cannot be distinguished from the Men by those of other race (section 5)

[skipping other points here]

(...) There are notable likenesses to what is said in the Appendices to The Lord of the Rings concerning the Dwarves: thus in Appendix A, II (Durin's Folk) there are references to the fewness of Dwarf-women, who remain hidden in their dwellings, to the indistinguishability of Dwarf-women from Dwarf-men to people of other races, and to the rarity of marriage (III 360)."

Christopher Tolkien

Gimli, if he wanted to keep things secret simply need not have spoken.

Moreover, in my opinion Tolkien's statement that Dwarf-women can in no way (nor in any wise) be discerned from Dwarf-men (by other peoples) including feature, gait, voice -- except that they go not to war and seldom leave their bowers and halls -- does not leave room for...

... the notion that Dwarf-women look feminine enough (feature) to be discerned from Dwarf-men by other peoples. That's a way -- but is not one of the exceptions Tolkien explains is a way. 

Any comments on that?

I would be interested to know what 'hole' you think I am in Glorfindel.

Noting that you are the one who is seemingly claiming that Gimli's information is lies, but yet you didn't answer with respect to which bits of information you believe are not true...

... is it because you can't easily claim all of it is lies? But also that if you accept one thing, but not another, then that might look selective?

And do you plan on actually engaging in the debate further, or are you simply going to continue making assertions or brief characterizations (that CJRT's commentary on the matter is 'useless' for example) without backing anything up.

Since you are too slow to understand, I'll explain it.

Please do, but that was a needless shot in my opinion.

The quote above is useless because it's just all the information as you posted before. A lot of your quotes that you post on here and other topics is what I mean. Different wording but same thing.

Generally speaking and for the sake of argument here, in my experience even slightly different wording can sometimes make all the difference. Or in this case, even just reading CJRT in his own words might make a notable difference compared to paraphrasing him.

Or maybe having two or three quotes about the same thing might help illustrate that Tolkien wasn't changing his mind about something, as he does at times, and makes the point even stronger. 

Choice of word or phrasing matters: like for instance '100% identical' is not the same thing as 'indistinguishable to other peoples'. 

Also some of your quotes just beat around the bush, therefore it's useless. You may think it makes you look intelligent, but in reality it's the opposite.

Maybe these quotes that you think just beat around the bush say something quite direct. In any case I don't think posting citations makes me look intelligent, no matter what you think they say or don't say. 

Don't even ask which ones there are too many. This isn't a lie, it's the truth. Didn't want to make you feel bad or anything, just wanted a better debate next time. So next time you think someone is writing personal remarks then most likely that is the reason.

A better debate... but next time. And your version of the truth is noted.

So to answer you. No. The debate is too redundant now.

So again you do not answer with respect to which statements from Appendix A Durin's Folk you seemingly feel represent Gimli lying in order to preserve secrecy... which would not be that redundant actually, as unless I've forgotten something you haven't noted much in the way of specific statements yet, if any.

Or if that's not your position, were you just making a general point with your earlier statement: 'Therefore we don't know if anything Gimli said in Appendix A was the truth.'

Anything? Brego believes Dwarf-women have beards for example, do you? Do you agree that it's true that Dwarf women are relatively few in number, for a different example?

If you want to drop out here, fine of course. If at some point you want to note which parts of Durin's Folk you seemingly think are lies (at least so far you haven't denied this notion in general), then my question still stands.

Are here we go again, around and around in useless meaningless repeated quotes. Boring. Give up Glorfindel. You can't win.

Do you find your response here boring Brego?

And incidentally, to my mind the arguments that Gimli is either lying or joking, or that Tolkien would have changed his mind given more time, speak to how solid Tolkien's language is in Appendix A, Durin's Folk, and QS.

If you can't find a gap in that armour (if you can't find an alternative interpretation that seems reasonable enough), you then attack with the notion that what is said is a lie or a joke or would have been revised.

No Galin, he doesn't. PT lesson I've learned: If Galin still hasn't budged after 1 page (or a half), then just stop responding. Otherwise it won't end. He'll respond to something else later on. Same thing will probably happen, but at least it'll be something else.

Or everyone could take responsibility for continuing the discussion, as no one else is 'budging' and others are responding or defending their positions in any case. Add taking some responsibility for this response from you Balrogs, which is not about Dwarves obviously, much like the recent posts from both Brego and Glorfindel.

You seem to act like I'm the only one not changing his or her mind, and as if other people are not continuing the debate while holding on to their views.

And my last attempted subject is now ruined and this thread is also about to be ruined. Please move on.

It's not ruined in my opinion. This is quite subjective, but at other forums debate or discussion about something can go on for far longer than this.

Again, simply move on if you want to move on. Or discuss Tolkien at least.

Every post I've made discusses Tolkien.

Except for the last one where you post about a PT lesson you've learned, and so on about me and how you think this thread might be ruined.

I did place blame on everyone by telling them to stop responding. In fact I blamed them more than you, because we know this is just how you are.

I didn't say for you to place 'blame' on anyone.

I said we can all accept responsibility for continuing the discussion while holding on to our own views, as it is a false suggestion that I alone am the only one who won't change his mind and who continues to defend a position.

This isn't a debate. A debate involves the fluid transference of reasonable information back and forth between multiple parties. This is not fluid. This is a stagnant puddle in a room of brick walls trying to throw bricks at each other. It started as a debate and has turned into a series of personal attacks from both sides.

Please show me where I made personal attacks.

Your subtle condescending remarks are seen by everybody but you, just as all of our responses point out your repetitive remarks. Everybody keeps providing new perspectives while you just keep reposting or drawing from the same 4 or 5 statements.

So now you're going to tell me that I'm making personal attacks because you interpret some remark or remarks I make as subtly condescending? And then simply assert [with hyperbole] that 'everybody' sees what you see.

You're right. It is all subjective. It's great you think all women look like men. It's great we think there were probably subtle differences.

Well, if you think any subtle differences do not allow other peoples to distinguish Dwarf-men from Dwarf-women, then we agree.

This debate has been settled because there is no definitive answer. If nobody has changed positions by now, it's not going to happen. Let's move on.

You keep saying move on... while trying to get another subjective summarization in once again, in part about what you think others are doing in this thread.

Well what can I say to anyone who misreads personal attacks into my posts when they are not there (noting that you don't point out any).

I am the author of my posts, not you Balrogs, nor anyone else.

Well Glorfindel, I don't think you (or anyone) get to post your opinions about me or how I post without expecting a response.

And I would much rather the topic had never veered from Tolkien's Dwarves.