Also, if you ever need a non-shitty teammate for a multi-day, hit me up. I'm half-decent by my own estimate.

I don't play multi-days, but for real-time its perfect :)

A = Men
B = Manly Behaviour

X = Gay
Y = Gayish Behaviour


C = Women
D = Womanly Behaviour

A = Men
X = Gay

C = Woman


There exists A with Y. There exists A with D. There exists X with B.


Not all but most A have B. Not all but most X have Y. Not all but most C have D.


X is a subset of A. You don't like D in A. You don't like Y in A.


A doesn't imply B. X doesn't imply Y. A doesn't imply D.

===================================

Test 1 :

You don't like A (AND) D.

You don't like A (AND) Y.

Conclusion : You don't like D and Y. You don't like A.

Test 2 :

You don't like A (OR) D.

You don't like A (OR) Y.

Conclusion : You don't like D and Y.




Summary :

Step 1 : Men doesn't imply manly behavior.

Step 2 : Hating manly behavior doesn't imply hating men.

Step 3 : Hating manly behavior inside man implies either just hating manly behavior or hating both combined.

Step 4 : Both solutions are followed.


Solution A :

You don't like men, gayish behavior, womanly behavior.

Solution B :

You don't like womanly behavior in men. You don't like womanly behavior in woman. You may only like manly behavior. (Quote : Men shouldn't act [behave] like [most] women.)

It is possible you may like lesbian behavior in women.


From dictionary, manly is qualities traditionally ascribed to men. So is womanly. Gayish is an unknown word. Manly and womanly are used described qualities regarded as ideally appropriate and good.

You don't like some qualities. You express traits for a few personal traits. Everyone can have those traits. Hating men and those traits means hating both.


Proof complete.

Hostile, brilliant :D

I doubt anyone would argue with this

Perfect, Hostile.

Nicely wrote Hostile, I was thinking of writing something like this earlier but didn't have the energy.

Though I believe your conclusion in Test 1 is slighty incorrect:
"You don't like A." is not implied by the 2 statements given, as there are more arguments that can be used in conjunction with A.
Counter-example: You like A (AND) B.

It might have been an overlook by you and berdan, but my conclusion is that it is not infered that he hates men, and this conclusion is in fact impossible to draw from the information given.

I hope I am correct in this correction! :)

Again, nice work, I love logic!

Edit: Oh, I wanted to add again that the word "fag" was not used by berdan, and continuing to claim that he did is in fact slander.

Edited 7/16/2015 07:13:15

I'm just going to leave this here (scroll down to berdan's response to the obvious troll/fascist NIGHT):

https://www.warlight.net/Forum/99590-m-homo?Offset=40

I think we've reached the point where we have to acknowledge that berdan is homophobic and misogynistic.

He's just a businessman from the Victorian era.

I'm just waiting to hear his lame excuse this time, followed by a lengthy post that uses formal logic to clarify a point that's not even being debated and inadvertently help berdan cover his bigotry.

We should have a berdan drinking game-

take a shot every time he says he's really talking about "gayish behavior" when he's insulting someone by calling them "gay" for doing something that has nothing to do with sexual orientation and has no association whatsoever with "gayish"-ness

a sip every time he denies agreeing with NIGHT's claim that everything went wrong when women were given the right to vote (despite having clearly agreed with NIGHT and calling him "smart" earlier)

...

actually, bad idea. I don't want to die from an alcohol overdose.

Edited 7/16/2015 08:04:48

.

Edited 7/17/2015 03:02:46

... and just when I thought this forum thread couldn't get any more derailed.

.

Edited 7/17/2015 03:02:55

Being gay, and acting gay, are not the same thing.

The word gay itself is derived from behavior, it was only later used to describe homosexuals because so often they acted in a gay way (that's flamboyent and extrovert) because homosexuality was illegal. So this behaviour was used to identify themselves, hence the idea of "gay identity")

These days often homosexuals don't act in a gay way, and the word "gay" is now more often used in reference to homosexuality, rather than flamboyent behavior.

Both meanings are still valid though, and still used.

There is another meaning for gay also: "foolish, stupid, or unimpressive"

For me it makes sense that berdan was using this last definition of gay, as this was the behaviour diplayed by his partner. But saying that, he said about "gay behavior" but this could be a simple language complication, seeing as he is Polish and therefore probably drunk. I'll wait for clarification on this point.

I'm glad the false accusations of him using the word "fag" have been dropped.

(Edit: Changed the definition of gay to the one from Google to make it clearer and more objective)
See here: https://www.google.co.uk/#safe=off&q=gay+definition

Edited 7/16/2015 11:32:22

Can we all just agree to BL berdan?

I assume they are, because very few women play warlight, such as other online games.

Actually, four of the top five of the 1v1 ladder are currently women. ^_^

Just stop, and get on with your lives.





Your pathetic

Can we all just agree to BL berdan?

And night?

Seriously though, night, are you trying to get literally every single person on the forums to hate you? Because it seems you're making significant progress. If you hate the community so much, why are you still here...?

I had slightly wondered if Night might by Knyte for a time because they seemed to have very similar views, but I took it back upon seeing Night flame Knyte.

I have no clue who's alt we're dealing with, but they must be a very lonely troll determined to tick off as many users as possible.

I'm gonna guess Kellen or American Empire.

@ Fleecemaster

I used AND as exclusive. There are only one item in each group in my comparaison. Unless I am comparing the conjunction (Venn Diagram) of proprieties of Men and Manly Behavior.



My main point is Being part of Women, Men, Gay doesn't imply a certain behavior and can be inter-changeable (Man with Womanly Behavior).

It means that it is either you don't like a certain behavior OR don't like a certain behavior in group of people. To hate a certain behavior in group of people, you can hate the behavior itself or behavior + group of people.

The possibility of a conjunction is complex. The two items are of two different natures.


If we use Test 2, we can use the definition of Manly/Womanly as qualities. Everyone has manly/womanly qualities and there is probably some shared by both (Manly/Womanly) in the traditional sense. If you don't like SOME QUALITIES in a specific group with strong aversion, you are very likely to hate the group itself.

It is hard to infer from the information given that he hates the group. Manly/Womanly qualities is a generalization and not a set of definite elements. A generalization is often used as proof to a certain argument. A generalization on a group of people (+negative bc of "hate"/"aversion") is in almost all cases, a way to inferior(ize) this group of people.

Example :
Women don't know how to drive. Those who don't know how to drive are dangerous. Women are dangerous when driving and shouldn't be allowed.


Gay have gayish behavior. I hate gayish behavior. I hate gays and they shouldn't be allowed to live.


Generalizations are used on a specific group. Otherwise, it is not a generalization (Ideal Qualities Men and Women have).

The words Manly and Womanly are generalizations of a group.

Edited 7/16/2015 16:22:26