i dont feel comfortable calling venture they

[bilbo t baggins]

im saying this as nicely as i can but it made me uncomfortable reading that dev update and the guy or girl saying they when addressing venture.

TLDR AT THE BOTTOM


MY POINT:

im not going to use pronouns. for those of you lgbt people who would take offense im not trying to offend. the reason i am making this post is because i just want to put out there, because i can, that i feel it is wrong to be forced to address people in a way that is to their perspective.

just because someone wants to be called a certain something doesnt mean people have to do it. i say this because i hear venture is some form of pronoun called they. i honestly cant tell if the character is a guy or a girl. i wanna say its a guy because i dont see any girl features on his body but i dont really know yet.






A SHORT STORY DISPLAYING AN EXAMPLE:


dont take it personally because its not just pronouns. when i was at a gas station at the end of covid 19, i was just doing my usual runs to the store for my 20 ounce drink. i got it around the same time every day for months. it was a routine before i moved. one day i grab the soda out of the fridge by the door as usual and get in line.

then i hear the words "excuse me sir im in line" coming from behind me. i turn around and there is a lady 20 feet behind where i stood behind the guy getting rung up. i said "come on up" she said "i dont like being close to people im sorry if that bothers you"

i then turned and looked toward the guy in front and waited to be next. she comes up next to me and says the same words again "i dont like being close to people im sorry if that bothers you"

i of course ignored her. i didnt even look at her. she steps forward just ahead of me as if she wanted to compete for the spot in line. i stepped back. i mean she came up and i wasnt gonna react to her. i stood behind her. she walked out the store. 1 minute later im being glared at by a different woman through the door. i look at her and then i look back toward the guy and pay for my drink and i walk out and go about my usual routine.

the next day i did the same thing as always except she wasnt there just as she wasnt the day before the incident. it was just a bump in the road to me nothing more.



MORAL OF THE STORY:

i shouldnt have to adhere to someone elses personal rules. just because someone expects me to do something they want me to do doesnt mean im gonna do it. just as that woman wasnt gonna get me to play her little emotional game of its about me, no company or group of people is gonna force me to call someone something that doesnt feel right to me.

thats really i wanted to share.




TLDR:

i dont feel comfortable calling someone something that isnt biological. gender to me is biology not psychology. and no one is going to force me to address someone a certain way just because they expect me too. its nothing personal and im not trying to be rude. however, i do find it rude to pressure me into calling someone something i dont feel confortable saying. venture to me is most likely a guy because he doesnt seem to have any breasts that i can tell. but i dont know.

[Ignosius]

Dustyskulls a écrit :

Secondly; I read further in - the argument loses strength when he tries to apply it strictly to a human stand point of what counts as intersex and what effects the idea of the sex-binary; It completely discounts anything outside of a single sphere of biology. I will give you points that it is a well written argument, but that's about the most merits I'll give it.

This entire discussion is literally about sex in humans. Why would we care about anglerfish? That does not apply to this situation.

Dustyskulls a écrit :

the true tree {MPEta} a écrit :

Every single Biologists, Scientists and doctors I have talked two have always said that there are two gender, male and female, defined by the X and Y chromosome. None of those people I have talked to have said that gender is on a spectrum.

Quacks don't count.

Yeah, there's no arguing with you. I gave it my best effort.

[Valore]

the true tree {MPEta} a écrit :

There is one rule people are forgetting, you can believe whatever you want to believe but you don't have the right to force those beliefs on me. I am a firm believer in science and biology, and biology tells me that there are two gender, male and female. I am also a believer in Christ and the Bible tells me there are two genders, male and female.

Even if you believe in God, the Bible is not their word. It is their word as INTERPRETED by HUMANS. It says plenty of ridiculous things that are not acceptable in society today, if not outright illegal.

Do you still practice or believe in bigamy? In practicing incest? Stoning people for adultery? Slavery? Genocide?

If you do not, then it is clear that even religious folk like Christians change with the times, and any choice to be ignorant about issues such as non-binary identity, is just that, a CHOICE, not because 'the bible said so'.

[zabloing]

Here before thread gets locked for unproductive argument or whatever.
Hello world!!!

[Dustyskulls]

zabloing a écrit :

Here before thread gets locked for unproductive argument or whatever.
Hello world!!!

Hello! Have a bucket of points!

[zabloing]

Dustyskulls a écrit :

zabloing a écrit :

Here before thread gets locked for unproductive argument or whatever.
Hello world!!!

Hello! Have a bucket of points!

Thanks for the reddit gold kind stranger!

[Dustyskulls]

Ignosius a écrit :

This entire discussion is literally about sex in humans. Why would we care about anglerfish? That does not apply to this situation.
.

It applies when talking about biology - If you slap a two-gender system on one species, and a few sets of species proves it wrong, there's a high chance that the binary system is wrong.
Ah well, you seem to want to walk from the discussion. I don't know you, but have a nice day.

[the true tree]

Dustyskulls a écrit :

Ignosius a écrit :

the true tree {MPEta} a écrit :

Every single Biologists, Scientists and doctors I have talked two have always said that there are two gender, male and female, defined by the X and Y chromosome. None of those people I have talked to have said that gender is on a spectrum.

Quacks don't count.

So experts in their field don't count?

[Dustyskulls]

the true tree {MPEta} a écrit :

So experts in their field don't count?

I very highly doubt you're talking to any expert in any field since your argument initially swung from science and religion to pure religion.

[Ignosius]

Dustyskulls a écrit :

It applies when talking about biology - If you slap a two-gender system on one species, and a few sets of species proves it wrong, there's a high chance that the binary system is wrong.
Ah well, you seem to want to walk from the discussion. I don't know you, but have a nice day.

Like, I'm trying not to be insulting here, but your understanding of science and biology is fundamentally incorrect. That makes a discussion impossible to have.

I think it's best if we just drop it.

[Dustyskulls]

Ignosius a écrit :

Like, I'm trying not to be insulting here, but your understanding of science and biology is fundamentally incorrect. That makes a discussion impossible to have.

I think it's best if we just drop it.

I'm more than happy to drop it. I'm open to being quoted at again with different evidence if you can provide me with something that's not got the church tied to it in any way/shape/form. Might even change my mind and stfu about it.
Edit: Decided to give it a read over seriously anyways - The author's a PhD student under philosophy.

[Valore]

Ignosius a écrit :

Like, I'm trying not to be insulting here, but your understanding of science and biology is fundamentally incorrect. That makes a discussion impossible to have.

I think it's best if we just drop it.

It's a bit hypocritical you say this, when you don't apply the same to ignorance displayed by people like the OP who don't understand the difference between attraction, sexual preference and identity.

Instead, if I recall, you mistakenly thought it was a sign of 'anger' lol

[the true tree]

Dustyskulls a écrit :

Ignosius a écrit :

This entire discussion is literally about sex in humans. Why would we care about anglerfish? That does not apply to this situation.
.

It applies when talking about biology - If you slap a two-gender system on one species, and a few sets of species proves it wrong, there's a high chance that the binary system is wrong.
Ah well, you seem to want to walk from the discussion. I don't know you, but have a nice day.

It is dishonest to say, because this species does this all species must do the same. This does apply to the basic stuff like all species must reproduce and all the other stuff that defines class and kingdoms so on and so on. A platypus lays eggs and is a mammal, does that mean that all mammals lay eggs? A emu can not fly, does that mean all birds can't fly? Anglerfish are in the order Lophiiformes and the species Lophius piscatorius. Humans are in the order Primates and the species ♥♥♥♥ sapiens. Humans and fish are in the same Phylum, this does not mean that because one species of fish does something, a species barely related to it does the same.

[Dustyskulls]

the true tree {MPEta} a écrit :

It is dishonest to say, because this species does this all species must do the same. This does apply to the basic stuff like all species must reproduce and all the other stuff that defines class and kingdoms so on and so on. A platypus lays eggs and is a mammal, does that mean that all mammals lay eggs? A emu can not fly, does that mean all birds can't fly? Anglerfish are in the order Lophiiformes and the species Lophius piscatorius. Humans are in the order Primates and the species ♥♥♥♥ sapiens. Humans and fish are in the same Phylum, this does not mean that because one species of fish does something, a species barely related to it does the same.

You're right. It would be wrong of me to say it definitively, that's why if you notice, I pointed out that there's a high chance it proves the other species idea of a binary system wrong.

And if you're going to go the route of Diogenes, at least bring the chicken with, rather than whipping out a bunch of Plato-esque ideas.
Edit: Also ngl, really funny that Steam censored ♥♥♥♥ in ♥♥♥♥-sapiens.

[the true tree]

Dustyskulls a écrit :

the true tree {MPEta} a écrit :

It is dishonest to say, because this species does this all species must do the same. This does apply to the basic stuff like all species must reproduce and all the other stuff that defines class and kingdoms so on and so on. A platypus lays eggs and is a mammal, does that mean that all mammals lay eggs? A emu can not fly, does that mean all birds can't fly? Anglerfish are in the order Lophiiformes and the species Lophius piscatorius. Humans are in the order Primates and the species ♥♥♥♥ sapiens. Humans and fish are in the same Phylum, this does not mean that because one species of fish does something, a species barely related to it does the same.

You're right. It would be wrong of me to say it definitively, that's why if you notice, I pointed out that there's a high chance it proves the other species idea of a binary system wrong.

And if you're going to go the route of Diogenes, at least bring the chicken with, rather than whipping out a bunch of Plato-esque ideas.

First, Primates and Fish are different in some parts very, so it is not a high likely hood. Second, these are not Plate-esque ideas, these are questions that would be answered yes by your logic.

[Dustyskulls]

the true tree {MPEta} a écrit :

First, Primates and Fish are different in some parts very, so it is not a high likely hood. Second, these are not Plate-esque ideas, these are questions that would be answered yes by your logic.

Firstly, these are very much Plato-esque ideas and arguments in an attempt at "Gotcha". Where's my damn chicken Diogenes?
Secondly; You're right, they are different in some parts. However we're not talking about those parts, we're talking about sexes and the fact that it's not a binary-system.