Pink is quite fashionable.

[Hovik]

You didn't realize calling someone "gay" as though the word carries intrinsic negative meaning is insulting to gay people?

Sounds to me like all three of you (housemate included, hi there) assumed I consider being gay to be a bad thing.
Also, didn't call him gay. Just saying that was a statement that was rather homosexual in nature.

What's the point of even making such a statement other than to imply that it's somehow bad? "That's the gayest thing I've ever read" implies that there's something intrinsically negative or noteworthy about being gay or gay things.

Stop backpeddling.

[Reforged]

Sounds to me like all three of you (housemate included, hi there) assumed I consider being gay to be a bad thing.
Also, didn't call him gay. Just saying that was a statement that was rather homosexual in nature.

What's the point of even making such a statement other than to imply that it's somehow bad? "That's the gayest thing I've ever read" implies that there's something intrinsically negative or noteworthy about being gay or gay things.

Stop backpeddling.

Backpeddling? I'm not backpeddling pal. You've based your entire arguement on an assumption. If I said "thats the most political statement I've ever read" does that imply I have something against politics?
Lets get real shall we? The "negative" commentations weren't in there, you read it that way and shame on you for doing so.
Now are we done here or are you going to actually finish up accusing me of being homophobic after the countless times I've debated for the gay right to marry?

[Hovik]

What's the point of even making such a statement other than to imply that it's somehow bad? "That's the gayest thing I've ever read" implies that there's something intrinsically negative or noteworthy about being gay or gay things.

Stop backpeddling.

Backpeddling? I'm not backpeddling pal. You've based your entire arguement on an assumption. If I said "thats the most political statement I've ever read" does that imply I have something against politics?
Lets get real shall we? The "negative" commentations weren't in there, you read it that way and shame on you for doing so.
Now are we done here or are you going to actually finish up accusing me of being homophobic after the countless times I've debated for the gay right to marry?

I'm not saying you're homophobic; what I'm saying is that your choice of wording is extremely lacking. I read your statement as I did because that's the implicature it engenders. You're trying to play cute semantic games with me, dude.

If I said "thats the most political statement I've ever read" does that imply I have something against politics?

It might not directly implicate that politics is bad, but it does implicate that there is something wrong with it being political. Similarly, saying "That's the gayest statement I've ever read" implicates that there is something wrong with being gay.

You're seriously going to sit here and argue that you meant it as a neutral statement with no pragmatic baggage whatsoever? If that's the case, why make the point to say anything at all? I'm not working with an assumption; I'm working with basic linguistics. The very fact that you said something about it "being gay" indicates that there is something notable about it being gay that, pragmatically, implicates negativity. Don't you even dare try to shame me because I read your post in the manner that its pragmatics warrants. That isn't on me; it's all on you.

[Erinome]

I'm gayer than a football bat. I like it that my name is now purplish-pink. It reminds me of penis heads, kitten noses, and the velvet insides of bunny rabbit ears. I am constantly being showered with blessings, but his name is not life, it's Julio, and he plays the futbol. **SIGH**

Happy birthday, Vae!

[Reforged]

Backpeddling? I'm not backpeddling pal. You've based your entire arguement on an assumption. If I said "thats the most political statement I've ever read" does that imply I have something against politics?
Lets get real shall we? The "negative" commentations weren't in there, you read it that way and shame on you for doing so.
Now are we done here or are you going to actually finish up accusing me of being homophobic after the countless times I've debated for the gay right to marry?

It might not directly implicate that politics is bad, but it does implicate that there is something wrong with it being political. Similarly, saying "That's the gayest statement I've ever read" implicates that there is something wrong with being gay.

You're seriously going to sit here and argue that you meant it as a neutral statement with no pragmatic baggage whatsoever? If that's the case, why make the point at all? The very fact that you said something about it "being gay" indicates that there is something notable about it being gay that, pragmatically, implicates negativity. Don't you even dare try to shame me into reading your post in the manner that its pragmatics warrants. That isn't on me; it's all on you.

It implicates no such thing and yeah, I am seriously going to argue that with you. Why make the point? Why make the point "This is the hottest day we've had in months"?
Why make the point "Thats the most dramatic novel I've ever read"? Are you being serious? Why the hell should I conform to the way you interpret stuff? Suffice to say it was said without negative commentations.
This is a ridiculous attempt at mud slinging and I'm not going to take it.
Fuck you man, thats messed up.

[Tiberius]

Interesting. According to the Dulux paint range, our new colour is fairly close to one which they call "Queen's Honour", though admittedly ours has less green in the RGB mix so making it a little brighter. Still it's the nearest match I could find.

Subtle reference to the Jubilympics, Tibes?

I'm a republican and I think the Olympics is a big waste of money...so no. The colour was chosen by Violet. It's the same one she has.

[Hovik]

It might not directly implicate that politics is bad, but it does implicate that there is something wrong with it being political. Similarly, saying "That's the gayest statement I've ever read" implicates that there is something wrong with being gay.

You're seriously going to sit here and argue that you meant it as a neutral statement with no pragmatic baggage whatsoever? If that's the case, why make the point at all? The very fact that you said something about it "being gay" indicates that there is something notable about it being gay that, pragmatically, implicates negativity. Don't you even dare try to shame me into reading your post in the manner that its pragmatics warrants. That isn't on me; it's all on you.

It implicates no such thing and yeah, I am seriously going to argue that with you. Why make the point? Why make the point "This is the hottest day we've had in months"?
Why make the point "Thats the most dramatic novel I've ever read"? Are you being serious? Why the hell should I conform to the way you interpret stuff? Suffice to say it was said without negative commentations.
This is a ridiculous attempt at mud slinging and I'm not going to take it.
Fuck you man, thats messed up.

"Implicate" and "imply" are not the same thing.

"This is the hottest day we've had in months" is a meaningful sentence in the context of it being hot outside. If it's cold outside, and someone were to utter this, it would be construed as having meaning other than the basic meaning, i.e. pragmatic meaning. For example, it could be construed with sarcasm. This is an implicature.

Saying "That's the gayest thing I've ever read" does not have any value in a neutral sense. Why would you say it if you didn't mean to implicate something about being gay or gay things? No, what happened here is you used a word that carries with it a lot of social stigma and historical baggage as though it had something to do with the particular characteristics with which you associated it.

I could literally watch two men having sex and say "that's gay," and I would be factually correct. That would be a neutral statement.

On the other side of the coin, I could see a man hug his best friend and say "that's gay" and be factually incorrect; however, the implicature that statement would engender in that context would be something to the effect of "being gay is noteworthy" or "being gay is abnormal such that I feel the need to comment on it."

At the very least, your statement implies that there are certain things (like colors or behaviors outside of homosexuality) that can be classified as "gay," and they are these very stereotypes we need to destroy by not associating them with the word "gay."

I'm not slinging mud; I'm simply trying to defeat the misuse of a word that doesn't need to have anymore inappropriate and irrelevant associations.

[Erinome]

I think he was just fucking with mehmet, who isn't fond of gayness.

[kılıç_mehmet]

I think he was just fucking with mehmet, who isn't fond of gayness.

I didn't even read the said post.
Now that I read it, I have to say it's really not worth replying to.

[Autumnlicious]

I think he was just fucking with mehmet, who isn't fond of gayness.

Good point. Raphiel, what was your original intent in calling the coloration 'gay'?