the unproductive thoughts of a guy you've never heard of

Light-hearted discussions, forum games and anything that doesn't fit into the other forums.

Moderators: Moderators, Celestial Heavens Staff

mr.hackcrag
Archangel
Archangel
Posts: 1435
Joined: 05 Jul 2006

Postby mr.hackcrag » Feb 14 2011, 15:04

dark-whisperer wrote:So there is no problem making them sexual objects.


Actually, there is a huge problem with making them sexual objects. It's even been making Kalah cry since their introduction into homm.

User avatar
Zenofex
Scout
Scout
Posts: 151
Joined: 09 Sep 2010
Location: Dark Balkans

Postby Zenofex » Feb 14 2011, 20:08

Yeah, it's not like you're ignoring how necessity, like in the case of the israelis, trumps the social norms that exclude women from mandatory recruitment in most places, and very likely lead to low voluntary recruitment...

It's not like I'm talking about necessity at all. But you can go ahead and keep talking to yourself.

And that's not even getting into the tortured logic you use (women don't want to fight -> they aren't capable to fight or women aren't as capable as men at something -> they're useless at that thing).

Surely you can do better than just tell what I'm saying. Because in this case you obviously haven't figured out even a small part of it to speak about its logic. Seriously, if you want to make imaginary opponents and argue with their "tortured logic", use a mirror.

Sure, because actually trying to figure it out is too hard, so why not dismiss it as gibberish...

I've given up figuring out other people's attempts to use rhetoric instead of arguments long ago, sorry.

And heaven forbid you try to understand an analogy about your mistakes in logic.

Your analogy is illogical, there's nothing to understand about it. Men grow fat. Women grow fat too. The part of men that don't grow fat and become soldiers is significantly greater than the part of women that don't grow fat and become soldiers. I'll draw you a picture next time, plain text seems to be insufficient.

The fact that you don't even know about the allegory makes you quite unqualified to talk about Plato.

You want me to reproduce it? Do you promise to shut up after that?

And dismissing one claim of someone based on another, unrelated claim is something you should learn not to do any more, it will really help you if you ever want to do anything that has something to do with logic.

In other words, you are admitting that you can't prove anything and are going for ye olde swank that your pe... logic is bigger than mine. :applause: Yesyesyes, I totally missed your point and I'm to qualified to speak about it. And your logic is bigger. Whatever.

Right, they just let women join the army while no on was demanding such a thing... just like they repealed Don't ask Don't tell even if no homosexuals where complaining about it...

OK, one last attempt without drawing (I warn you, I can use only Paint, it won't be pretty). Women - allowed - join - army - women - prefer - not - join - army - women - prefer - do - many - other - things. Hence - women - no - discrimination - army. Discrimination - means - women - want - join - army - men - forbid - women - join - army. OK?

But you seem to have missed the point that wanting to and being a good addition to the army are two different things... ask Joan of Arc.

Joan of Arc didn't really contribute to her army because she was a good soldier but because she was a symbol in which the superstitious Frenchmen believed deeply. And we are not talking about the exceptions here, but about the general rule. Which is that in many countries women are not forbidden to join the army but they prefer not to do it, thus soldier remains a male profession. And the women don't mind. End of story.
Beware Kreegans bearing gifts.

User avatar
OliverFA
Scout
Scout
Posts: 164
Joined: 06 Jan 2006

Postby OliverFA » Feb 15 2011, 15:25

Zenofex wrote:I don't mind a few Amazons, but their approach is blatantly deliberate. Why did they need to turn the Centaurs into females? Well, to fill the female quota for Stronghold, that's why. There are similar cases in all factions and frankly only Inferno looks OK at the moment in this regard.
And even if it's just me, I think that every creature on the battlefield should look like something that's meant to be there, not a runaway from the nearest royal wedding party or bikini model contest. This suspends the entire Haven, I know.


Female Centaurs is Like Male Mermaids... ;|

User avatar
Metathron
Round Table Hero
Round Table Hero
Posts: 2704
Joined: 29 Jan 2006
Location: Somewhere deep in the Caribbean...
Contact:

Postby Metathron » Feb 15 2011, 15:31

Mermen! :-D
Jesus saves, Allah forgives, Cthulhu thinks you'd make a nice sandwich.

User avatar
ThunderTitan
Perpetual Poster
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 23260
Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Location: Now/here
Contact:

Postby ThunderTitan » Feb 17 2011, 12:10

Zenofex wrote:It's not like I'm talking about necessity at all. But you can go ahead and keep talking to yourself.


If you're not then you have moved past your original point and are discussing something very different...


Surely you can do better than just tell what I'm saying. Because in this case you obviously haven't figured out even a small part of it to speak about its logic. Seriously, if you want to make imaginary opponents and argue with their "tortured logic", use a mirror.


I obviously haven't figured out what you think you are saying... so i'll just have to go with the words you're using instead.

Probably why i think your ideas about women and the military are discriminatory and you don't.

I've given up figuring out other people's attempts to use rhetoric instead of arguments long ago, sorry.


Because dismissing something as rhetoric without bringing any arguments to why that is is totally not rhetoric on your part.

Your analogy is illogical, there's nothing to understand about it. Men grow fat. Women grow fat too. The part of men that don't grow fat and become soldiers is significantly greater than the part of women that don't grow fat and become soldiers. I'll draw you a picture next time, plain text seems to be insufficient.


Yes, it's illogical because it's not an 100% perfect fit... aka the same thing and thus not an analogy.

But hey, nitpicking is easier then trying to understand the point and make an argument against it.

[size=0] Of course that's kinda what makes these arguments fun for me... keep going. [/size]

You want me to reproduce it? Do you promise to shut up after that?


No, i want you to understand it... giant difference.


In other words, you are admitting that you can't prove anything and are going for ye olde swank that your pe... logic is bigger than mine. :applause: Yesyesyes, I totally missed your point and I'm to qualified to speak about it. And your logic is bigger. Whatever.



Ok, here's how it works, unlike the size of penises logic actually has an effect on what is and what isn't a good argument...

Actually without logic something isn't even an argument, but, as you pointed out above, simple rhetoric...

Debating an illogical argument any other way but pointing out it's lack of logic is counter to anything resembling a discussion and just devolves into shouting.

Also, Plato's opinion on society has little to do with whether or not the thing with the cave makes sense or not... here's a list to help you with that: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

OK, one last attempt without drawing (I warn you, I can use only Paint, it won't be pretty). Women - allowed - join - army - women - prefer - not - join - army - women - prefer - do - many - other - things. Hence - women - no - discrimination - army. Discrimination - means - women - want - join - army - men - forbid - women - join - army. OK?


Actually they're not allowed in front combat roles in the US... based on the same things you're talking about, women being on the average weaker then men...

Which is like no longer allowing white people to play in the NBA at all because black people are, on average, better players, individual ability be damned...


But the discrimination this was originally about was you saying that they don't belong as units in Heroes because not a lot of women want to join the army... and sorry, but that reminds me of a lot of other arguments like it from a hundred or so years ago about why women shouldn't get the vote...




Joan of Arc didn't really contribute to her army because she was a good soldier but because she was a symbol in which the superstitious Frenchmen believed deeply.


And that's a way better reason to have her on a BF then any ability to swing a sword... maybe those nuns in haven's line-up fulfil the same role.

And we are not talking about the exceptions here, but about the general rule. Which is that in many countries women are not forbidden to join the army but they prefer not to do it, thus soldier remains a male profession. And the women don't mind. End of story.


But we obviously are talking about exceptions here, as any woman that would join the army is to you... the ones in the armies of Heroes 6 are just that then.
Disclaimer: May contain sarcasm!
I have never faked a sarcasm in my entire life. - ???
"With ABC deleting dynamite gags from cartoons, do you find that your children are using explosives less frequently?" — Mark LoPresti

Alt-0128: €

Image

User avatar
ThunderTitan
Perpetual Poster
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 23260
Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Location: Now/here
Contact:

Postby ThunderTitan » Feb 17 2011, 12:15

OliverFA wrote:Female Centaurs is Like Male Mermaids... ;|


I'll take it over the implied bestiality of any lack of female members of the centaur race thanks.

And yes, Mermen, look it up.
Disclaimer: May contain sarcasm!

I have never faked a sarcasm in my entire life. - ???
"With ABC deleting dynamite gags from cartoons, do you find that your children are using explosives less frequently?" — Mark LoPresti

Alt-0128: €


Image

User avatar
vicheron
Marksman
Marksman
Posts: 403
Joined: 06 Jan 2006

Postby vicheron » Feb 18 2011, 11:22

Sex differences between the genders in humans is actually greatly influenced by social forces. Beginning at a very young age, boys and girls are put on different diets and exercise regiments. There's really no way to tell how much of the differences between men and women are a result of genetics and how much are a result of these social forces.

However, we do have evidence suggesting that sexual dimorphism in humans is actually quite a bit lower than it is for most people today. For example, both male and female slaves working on plantations had to perform an equal amount of work. In fact, the only time when female slaves had to do less work was when they were several months into pregnancy. Female slaves pretty much had to do the same amount of work as men from several weeks up to two or three months into pregnancy and when they had to take care of their children. This suggest that in terms of physical endurance, men and women are actually quite close if they are raised and live in very similar environments.

User avatar
ThunderTitan
Perpetual Poster
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 23260
Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Location: Now/here
Contact:

Postby ThunderTitan » Feb 18 2011, 11:52

Doesn't even matter, the only thing that matters is if females meet the minimum physical requirements you also ask of men for whatever the activity is... having more manpower is always better in an army.

Plus, Zenofex already changed the subject from why there shouldn't be so many females to why there aren't many women in modern day armies... i don't even know if he realises he's saying that women are genetically predisposed to not joining the army...
Disclaimer: May contain sarcasm!

I have never faked a sarcasm in my entire life. - ???
"With ABC deleting dynamite gags from cartoons, do you find that your children are using explosives less frequently?" — Mark LoPresti

Alt-0128: €


Image

User avatar
vicheron
Marksman
Marksman
Posts: 403
Joined: 06 Jan 2006

Postby vicheron » Feb 18 2011, 20:24

Behavioral genetics is a very iffy field. Heritability does not always mean inheritability, especially when it comes to behavior. All behavioral genetics can give us are correlations while behaviorism and social psychology can actually give us causes. So far, actual evidence show that environment is a much more powerful force than genetics in most cases.

User avatar
Zenofex
Scout
Scout
Posts: 151
Joined: 09 Sep 2010
Location: Dark Balkans

Postby Zenofex » Feb 20 2011, 12:30

ThunderTitan wrote:If you're not then you have moved past your original point and are discussing something very different...

No, that's what you're thinking but it's none of my concern that you aren't reading other people's posts carefully and are having a discussion with some prejudiced incarnation of The-One-Who-I-Will-Outsmart dummy opponent inside your own head. The original discussion started with creatures which look inept to be on the battlefield like the 45kg skinny Sister. If you think that she's brought there unarmed in a dress for 1000 gold pieces by necessity, then I prefer not to think what do you understand by "necessity".

I obviously haven't figured out what you think you are saying... so i'll just have to go with the words you're using instead.

Probably why i think your ideas about women and the military are discriminatory and you don't.

Women are obviously discriminating themselves since they prefer better paid jobs with less risk involved where they can use their advantages. And do not protest against their few representatives in the army. Go sue them.

No, i want you to understand it... giant difference.

I think I do and say that it has nothing to do with the discussion but only with your version of it.

Yes, it's illogical because it's not an 100% perfect fit... aka the same thing and thus not an analogy.

But hey, nitpicking is easier then trying to understand the point and make an argument against it.

Your point is pretty obvious which does not make it any more correct. The obesity example has nothing to do with the topic and is only smuggled into the discussion as a derailing distraction because you can't provide statistical information information about the number of women who actively consider themselves discriminated (court cases, civil organizations, movements and so on) because the soldier profession is more or less reserved for men.

Ok, here's how it works, unlike the size of penises logic actually has an effect on what is and what isn't a good argument...

Actually without logic something isn't even an argument, but, as you pointed out above, simple rhetoric...

Debating an illogical argument any other way but pointing out it's lack of logic is counter to anything resembling a discussion and just devolves into

So after rephrasing part of the high school material regarding what logic is and how it can make you happy, are you intending to become specific and provide some real arguments in defence of your position or you will stay behind your theory that since women are generally discriminated, then they are discriminated in all special cases without exceptions?

Actually they're not allowed in front combat roles in the US... based on the same things you're talking about, women being on the average weaker then men...

Which is like no longer allowing white people to play in the NBA at all because black people are, on average, better players, individual ability be damned...


But the discrimination this was originally about was you saying that they don't belong as units in Heroes because not a lot of women want to join the army... and sorry, but that reminds me of a lot of other arguments like it from a hundred or so years ago about why women shouldn't get the vote...

The first part - about the women not allowed to go to the front line - IS discrimination and please do point me where I say that something like that is not a discrimination. But let's bring the logic into the discussion again - what does this have to do with the fact that - even though they are not restricted - women prefer not to join the army? The pseudo-argument that they are brainwashed by the society stereotypes won't really help in a court case about discrimination.

And that's a way better reason to have her on a BF then any ability to swing a sword... maybe those nuns in haven's line-up fulfil the same role.

Except that she was heavily armoured and much more heavily guarded. And could hardly be distinguished in the mess of the battle from any other random armoured soldier around her. Now imagine her unarmed, wearing only a screaming yellow robe - that's what an English Longbowman would call a dream target.

But we obviously are talking about exceptions here, as any woman that would join the army is to you... the ones in the armies of Heroes 6 are just that then.

Some of the female creatures in the Heroes VI armies look pretty adequate, thank you. Fate Spinner, Lamas(s)u, Harpy, to some extent even the Centaur (even though there is absolutely no reason why this creature which is just fine as male is turned into female - except that, you know, they decided that each faction should have at least X females). They are however armed and generally look ready for battle. See where I'm going?
Beware Kreegans bearing gifts.

User avatar
vicheron
Marksman
Marksman
Posts: 403
Joined: 06 Jan 2006

Postby vicheron » Feb 20 2011, 22:17

Zenofex wrote:
ThunderTitan wrote:If you're not then you have moved past your original point and are discussing something very different...

No, that's what you're thinking but it's none of my concern that you aren't reading other people's posts carefully and are having a discussion with some prejudiced incarnation of The-One-Who-I-Will-Outsmart dummy opponent inside your own head. The original discussion started with creatures which look inept to be on the battlefield like the 45kg skinny Sister. If you think that she's brought there unarmed in a dress for 1000 gold pieces by necessity, then I prefer not to think what do you understand by "necessity".

I obviously haven't figured out what you think you are saying... so i'll just have to go with the words you're using instead.

Probably why i think your ideas about women and the military are discriminatory and you don't.

Women are obviously discriminating themselves since they prefer better paid jobs with less risk involved where they can use their advantages. And do not protest against their few representatives in the army. Go sue them.

No, i want you to understand it... giant difference.

I think I do and say that it has nothing to do with the discussion but only with your version of it.

Yes, it's illogical because it's not an 100% perfect fit... aka the same thing and thus not an analogy.

But hey, nitpicking is easier then trying to understand the point and make an argument against it.

Your point is pretty obvious which does not make it any more correct. The obesity example has nothing to do with the topic and is only smuggled into the discussion as a derailing distraction because you can't provide statistical information information about the number of women who actively consider themselves discriminated (court cases, civil organizations, movements and so on) because the soldier profession is more or less reserved for men.

Ok, here's how it works, unlike the size of penises logic actually has an effect on what is and what isn't a good argument...

Actually without logic something isn't even an argument, but, as you pointed out above, simple rhetoric...

Debating an illogical argument any other way but pointing out it's lack of logic is counter to anything resembling a discussion and just devolves into

So after rephrasing part of the high school material regarding what logic is and how it can make you happy, are you intending to become specific and provide some real arguments in defence of your position or you will stay behind your theory that since women are generally discriminated, then they are discriminated in all special cases without exceptions?

Actually they're not allowed in front combat roles in the US... based on the same things you're talking about, women being on the average weaker then men...

Which is like no longer allowing white people to play in the NBA at all because black people are, on average, better players, individual ability be damned...


But the discrimination this was originally about was you saying that they don't belong as units in Heroes because not a lot of women want to join the army... and sorry, but that reminds me of a lot of other arguments like it from a hundred or so years ago about why women shouldn't get the vote...

The first part - about the women not allowed to go to the front line - IS discrimination and please do point me where I say that something like that is not a discrimination. But let's bring the logic into the discussion again - what does this have to do with the fact that - even though they are not restricted - women prefer not to join the army? The pseudo-argument that they are brainwashed by the society stereotypes won't really help in a court case about discrimination.

And that's a way better reason to have her on a BF then any ability to swing a sword... maybe those nuns in haven's line-up fulfil the same role.

Except that she was heavily armoured and much more heavily guarded. And could hardly be distinguished in the mess of the battle from any other random armoured soldier around her. Now imagine her unarmed, wearing only a screaming yellow robe - that's what an English Longbowman would call a dream target.

But we obviously are talking about exceptions here, as any woman that would join the army is to you... the ones in the armies of Heroes 6 are just that then.

Some of the female creatures in the Heroes VI armies look pretty adequate, thank you. Fate Spinner, Lamas(s)u, Harpy, to some extent even the Centaur (even though there is absolutely no reason why this creature which is just fine as male is turned into female - except that, you know, they decided that each faction should have at least X females). They are however armed and generally look ready for battle. See where I'm going?


Wow, do you have any idea what you're talking about? You're just completely ignoring all the social forces that influence separation of genders. Women discriminating themselves? What a load of crap. If you actually look at the instances when women could not "discriminate themselves" then you'll see that the sex differences are much smaller than most people realize. As I mentioned before, both male and female slaves working on plantations had to perform an equal amount of work. In fact, the only time when female slaves had to do less work was when they were several months into pregnancy. Female slaves pretty much had to do the same amount of work as men from several weeks up to two or three months into pregnancy and when they had to take care of their children. That clearly shows the effect of culture on sex roles. Cultures that make fewer distinctions between men and women will result in more similarities between men and women.

As for the centaurs, horses actually have less sexual dimorphism than humans. Women can also learn archery more easily than men because they are better at controlling their breathing.

User avatar
Kalah
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 19993
Joined: 24 Nov 2005

Postby Kalah » Feb 20 2011, 22:29

Is this discussion still on topic? Historically inaccurate is fine, but off-topic, no. :D
In War: Resolution, In Defeat: Defiance, In Victory: Magnanimity, In Peace: Goodwill.

mr.hackcrag
Archangel
Archangel
Posts: 1435
Joined: 05 Jul 2006

Postby mr.hackcrag » Feb 21 2011, 0:58

Vicheron, we've already mentioned culture a bunch of times. By the way, are you a fellow anthropologist too?

User avatar
vicheron
Marksman
Marksman
Posts: 403
Joined: 06 Jan 2006

Postby vicheron » Feb 21 2011, 3:40

mr.hackcrag wrote:Vicheron, we've already mentioned culture a bunch of times. By the way, are you a fellow anthropologist too?


Psychologist.

Anyway, this is a fictional universe with magic and all sorts of fantastical elements. The whole idea of some units being made female to fill some "female quota" is very ethnocentric since it assumes that normality equates to being male and that the default should be male while females are deviants.

User avatar
Zenofex
Scout
Scout
Posts: 151
Joined: 09 Sep 2010
Location: Dark Balkans

Postby Zenofex » Feb 21 2011, 7:06

vicheron wrote:Wow, do you have any idea what you're talking about? You're just completely ignoring all the social forces that influence separation of genders. Women discriminating themselves? What a load of crap. If you actually look at the instances when women could not "discriminate themselves" then you'll see that the sex differences are much smaller than most people realize. As I mentioned before, both male and female slaves working on plantations had to perform an equal amount of work. In fact, the only time when female slaves had to do less work was when they were several months into pregnancy. Female slaves pretty much had to do the same amount of work as men from several weeks up to two or three months into pregnancy and when they had to take care of their children. That clearly shows the effect of culture on sex roles. Cultures that make fewer distinctions between men and women will result in more similarities between men and women.

As for the centaurs, horses actually have less sexual dimorphism than humans. Women can also learn archery more easily than men because they are better at controlling their breathing.

Good. Now pray tell what does this meaningless lecture has to do with what I said? The culture, social roles, etc. does have influence, quite a big one, but I think we were talking about discrimination nowadays, not what happened in US 150+ years ago. Why don't you start with the Mesopotamian gender separation if you want to be so historical? You may even prove that there was discrimination in a society where it was pretty legal to kill your wife under certain circumstances. Oh wait, this has nothing to do with the (off-)topic. But do mention it anyway, you'll be following the trend this way.
Beware Kreegans bearing gifts.

User avatar
vicheron
Marksman
Marksman
Posts: 403
Joined: 06 Jan 2006

Postby vicheron » Feb 21 2011, 10:10

Zenofex wrote:Good. Now pray tell what does this meaningless lecture has to do with what I said? The culture, social roles, etc. does have influence, quite a big one, but I think we were talking about discrimination nowadays, not what happened in US 150+ years ago. Why don't you start with the Mesopotamian gender separation if you want to be so historical? You may even prove that there was discrimination in a society where it was pretty legal to kill your wife under certain circumstances. Oh wait, this has nothing to do with the (off-)topic. But do mention it anyway, you'll be following the trend this way.


And discrimination still exist, you've pretty much proved it with your assertion that Ubi tried to meet a "female quota" by making the centaur female. You're assuming that male has to be the norm, even in a fantasy world with a completely different culture than ours.

User avatar
dark-whisperer
Leprechaun
Leprechaun
Posts: 19
Joined: 30 Aug 2007
Location: Serbia

Postby dark-whisperer » Feb 21 2011, 10:39

I don't think that anybody have anything against females on the battleground but forcing some units to be female to fill the quota is just awkward. That nun doesen't look like she belongs there. She looks like she is praying for her life not like she is about to take someones. Her posture and garment is inadequate for that kind of battlefield IMHO. Ok, you can always argue that its fantasy setting and that not every creature have to look menacing but that nun looks too benevolent. Battle is violent environment and units should represent shear brutality of it by their presence. I think that's what Zenofex had in his mind essentially.
Last edited by dark-whisperer on Feb 21 2011, 12:16, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Metathron
Round Table Hero
Round Table Hero
Posts: 2704
Joined: 29 Jan 2006
Location: Somewhere deep in the Caribbean...
Contact:

Postby Metathron » Feb 21 2011, 11:10

dark-whisperer wrote:I don't think that anybody have anything against females on the battleground but forcing some units to be female to fill the quota is just awkward. That nun doesen't look like she belongs there. She looks like she is praying for her life not like she is about to take someones. Her posture and garment is inadequate for that kind of battlefield IMHO. Ok, you can always argue that its fantasy setting and that not every creature have to look menacing but that nun looks to benevolent. Battle is violent environment and units should represent shear brutality of it by their presence. I think that's what Zenofex had in his mind essentially.


But the sisters are there to support (with magic & shooting, presumably), not fight in the front lines. Also, this is a world of might as well as magic, so not all of the same logic of our world applies, therefore they may not require actual armour as their magic or faith serves that function, or something to that effect.

P.S.: I LOLd at the "she is praying for her life" comment. :-D
Jesus saves, Allah forgives, Cthulhu thinks you'd make a nice sandwich.

User avatar
Elvin
Round Table Hero
Round Table Hero
Posts: 5475
Joined: 27 Aug 2006

Postby Elvin » Feb 21 2011, 11:21

In other news D&D clerics suck in the battlefield :devious:
I, for one, am dying to find out what colour they paint Michael's toenails.
- Metathron

User avatar
Tress
Raider
Raider
Posts: 784
Joined: 05 Dec 2007

Postby Tress » Feb 21 2011, 11:24

In other news D&D clerics suck in the battlefield


Which edition, since at least in 3 and 3,5 they were too useful imo, they had spells only bit weaker than wiz/sor, but had lot less restrictions(some spells were even more powerful than mage counterparts), + armor and spontaneous healing.


Return to “Campfire”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests