Serious, persistent spam-filter problems

I created an account on my primary email address as "Psiborg" quite some time ago, and have been lurking and browsing the fora on a regular basis since then. Earlier today, I finally got around to actually posting.

I posted replies to one thread each in the Off-Topic and Homebrew fora. A little while later, browsing the General Discussion thread, the reproduction thread triggered a train of thought that led to me writing a post regarding the reasoning behind certain morphs, the Fury in particular, having a functional gender at all. Said post ended up being off-topic for the reproduction thread, but (I thought/hoped) interesting enough in its own right, so I decided to post it as a new thread. The post triggered the spam filter, and several attempts to reword it to avoid objectionable language failed to get past the filter.

I saved the attempted post, and went to Website/Forum Talk, where I attempted to create a new thread saying, essentially, what I just said, and asking how to avoid it in the future, offering to PM the text of the post in question to a mod for review if desired. That post was also blocked by the spam filter, despite being totally harmless in content.

I'm now guessing that it was my account, rather than my posts, that were considered spam. I created this account, hoping to be able to post with it and get the issue addressed. (I have no intentions of ever using it after this is settled.)

I realize spam filters are a totally necessary evil, and I don't mean to be bitchy, but being unable to post to ask for guidance in following the requirements[i] is a little frustrating.

I have both posts- the latest version of the attempted General Discussion post, and the first attempt to ask for help- saved on my computer, and would, again, be happy to PM them (or email them) to anyone who'd like to review them. Primarily, though, I'd just like to be able to post normally on my main account (Psiborg), and make sure it's not flagged as a spammer account.

Thank you for your time, and for a great product.

--Psiborg/abroughear

Following up a train of thought triggered by the Reproduction thread, I just finished writing a post for the General Discussion forum regarding why certain morphs, the Fury in particular, would logically have a functional gender at all. It was fairly out-of-topic for the original thread, so I decided to post it as a new thread. It triggered the spam filter, and several attempts to rewrite it in increasingly-less-explicit fashion failed to correct this (in addition to introducing some amusingly absurd phraseology).

I realize spam filters are a necessity, and certainly don't mean to be bitchy about them. I would, however, appreciate any advice regarding how to avoid triggering them while discussing this topic in a mature fashion. I saved the latest version of the text of my attempted post and would be happy to PM it to a mod or reputable forum member for review.

Thanks in advance for whatever help you can provide, and for a truly great game.

--Psiborg

This was inspired by and originally written for the Reproduction thread, but ended up being tangential enough that I decided to post it separately to avoid threadjacking.

I'm baffled by the decision to even include gender-specific "equipment" on certain morphs. Furies, for example, are said to be primarily female, in order to avoid the behavioral problems that typically accompany excess testosterone

1. As these are combat morphs, it seems reasonable to expect militaries (well, infantry, at least), security companies, and so on to be sleeving their people into these on a regular basis.
2. I don't imagine the draft is popular or common anywhere outside of the Jovian "Republic"; therefore, we can assume that volunteer enlistees are being resleeved into female Furies without regard for their original gender.
3. Presumably, these volunteers are okay with this, or at least able to handle it with a little counseling (or psychosurgery).
4. Therefore, the militaries can successfully and practically adapt their personnel to morphs of genders not their own on a large scale. After all, if they [i]couldn't, we'd see either Furies in both genders or very few natural males volunteering for service, and no military with any sense would risk losing talent, knowledge, physical adeptness, or merely a viable ego merely because it happened to be accustomed to a male body.
5. Given all of the above, why wouldn't they simply adapt them to genderless morphs (probably with a visual appearance and form matching one gender or another rather than an androgynous morph, to reduce resleeving stress), and avoid both sets of hormones, pregnancy/BC hassles, and the risk of getting kicked in the balls, all in one go?

Given that the morph's physical capabilities have already been genetically optimized regardless of gender, I can see no clear, objective advantage to the body shapes of either gender. The typical healthy female body shape is carrying a few to several pounds of irregularly-distributed fat in the chest and hips, but I imagine female Furies and Olympians have barely enough curves to be identifiably female, and the remaining differences would be negligible. On the other hand, the shorter stature of most women could be exceedingly convenient in tight spaces, and very few environments in EP are going to necessitate enough long-distance running to give taller, longer-legged morphs a military advantage. With so much endurance built into the morph to begin with, it'd take an even longer run for the difference to become noticeable.

Summary: I can certainly see Furies being visually female, but why, oh why, would they be made functionally so?

Possible Conclusions: (1) Maybe they're not. (2) Maybe the first round of Furies (designed several years ago when counseling for resleeving stress and/or psychosurgery was less advanced) was fully-functional and primarily female; recent versions have the same build and appearance, but are functionally genderless. Presumably the older model is still available for those who prefer it, but it's probably not general-issue any more (though hundreds, if not thousands, are still in service). (3) Healthy sexuality (or at least solitary sexual activity*) is far more important to morale than I allowed for, and troops who can't satisfy themselves somehow get grumpy enough to reduce their combat effectiveness.

Your thoughts?