The Meaning of Life, the Universe, and Everything.
Location:
The Overworld
Join Date:
9/20/2012
Posts:
54
Minecraft:
godnian
Member Details
People this days.... Minecraft is SANDBOX, you create the story. If you say steve is a girl who had a surgery, that is right. If you say the both are genderless, you are right. If you say Alex is girl, Steve is boy, you are right. Every theory is right
Steve was originally conceived as a male, then changed to genderless, then they made Alex which is obviously meant to represent a female, so it's likely that Steve is a male. Plus, they through out the whole "genderless" thing a long time ago when the Ender Dragon was confirmed as a female. As for Darizuka's "theory", I say Steve is male, Alex is female. And while it may not mean much, this is the most canon answer, please read my signature for justification. If you need more, I have the whole story on my profile bio.
(I am a representative of BuildMyBlock | Adam Ferrell | [email protected])
BuildMyBlock- Reliable and easy to use Minecraft hosting supporting Multicraft 2.0. Use Promo-code mcf50 for 50% off first order
People this days.... Minecraft is SANDBOX, you create the story. If you say steve is a girl who had a surgery, that is right. If you say the both are genderless, you are right. If you say Alex is girl, Steve is boy, you are right. Every theory is right
edit: Lawnmower, you made my day with that theory
Errr. Ok. That's one way to look at it.
I have a much easier way based on basic real-life basic common sense along a very simple principle :
"The truth comes out of the mouths of babes."
Some adults that made something say about their own work. But is that really true? 99% of the time a random group of kids (that never played Minecraft) will get it more right than the adult creators, because they don't have any conflict of interest. They don't feel the need to justify their own decisions and their own interpretations because they are not already deeply invested like the creators/players are. They also don't feel the need to protect their work -and thus their own value in properly doing that work-, meanwhile the adult creator is automatically -at least on a subconscious level- biaised because instinctively we humans don't quite like to admit that we made some kind of mistake or botched something.
Say, an artist might think his painting is a masterpiece but a group of kids can easily tell when crap art is crap art. Strong tendency here: On general, kids don't waste time with "context" and "rationale" and "symbolism" and "synergy" and "consistency" of something according to everything else. They are direct, simple, evaluating things "as they see it" at face value. If they see a man they'll say he's a man and not bother with "well, maybe he's in fact a transgender woman". Especially when transgenders hate being branded as the sex they moved away from and do not identify with at all anymore. Kids can accept that and will treat that man as a man even after being explained that transgender thing, because they haven't learned yet to complicate stuff for no good reason, because they don't understand the world yet. We adults do overly complicate stuff for no good reason because that way things get too complicated to understand, so we know we can stop trying to understand, we did that because we realized -back when we were teeneagers- that, as we were understanding the world better and better, we needed to stop understanding it ASAP otherwise we'd go crazy (that is why so many teeneagers seem to act rebellious). Ok end of joke discussion.
For another example, if an electrician comes to repair your fridge and installs cheap chinese parts and says "these are the good proper parts!", and an entire class of kids look at his work and say "those aren't good parts and they're not even the right parts!" , which would you believe? The electrician who charged you 27 bucks for your game license, saying what's done is done and it was perfect that way, or the group of kids saying he must come back and fix his botched job ? If it is the electrician that you believe, you probably also have better odds than the average citizen of being an excellent potential customer for homeopathic bottles of "this water containing the memory of 1/1000000000 of the initial molecule of the poison will surely totally heal you!". If you believe the kids, you probably have above average simple basic common sense.
Well, kids can be super-gullible too but that ain't my point.
So, basically, my point is: when it comes time to say if a duck is a duck, kids without any link to the duck often get it right, more right, more often, and better, than adults who are paid to breed and sell ducks.
So... let's look at NAME + SKIN together:
This is an exam with 2 questions. Both questions are: is the character:
(a) a boy
(b) a girl
(c) genderless
(d) transgender
(e) something else
Note: Check all answers that apply and only those answers.
Steve:
- Mojang says Steve is d: genderless.
- The near entirety of an entire class of kids would say Steve is a: a boy.
Alex:
- Mojang says Alex is d: genderless.
- The near entirety of an entire class of kids would say Alex is b: a girl. A *few* would say : a: a boy + b: a girl
For basic common sense, Mojang scores 1% and the class of kids scores 99%.
The 3-wide arm thing will be handy for creating feminine skins, though.
I think it was a decision to help skin-creators rather than something to add a "female Steve". Both Steve and Alex are genderless, but Alex's model will be nice for creating slender skins.
(The wiki is completely written by the community and not Mojang)
I do not see any evidence to prove other wise tho. It might be community written but it seems to be the only thing to say what they are.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
(I am a representative of BuildMyBlock | Adam Ferrell | [email protected])
BuildMyBlock- Reliable and easy to use Minecraft hosting supporting Multicraft 2.0. Use Promo-code mcf50 for 50% off first order
Let's say: Alex looks feminine. That's true and doesn't imply which gender he/she has.
Btw: I don't like the whole gender discussion and would immediately say Steve is male and Alex is female. But the argument about Alex' name of course is valid, as well as Notch's statement.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
GENERATION 28: When you see this put it in your signature and add 1 to the generation.
edit: Lawnmower, you made my day with that theory
Exactly it can be either.
Alex = Both genders
Alexis = Both (might be odd for a male but possible)
Anything is possible.
and "Alexia Ashford" is a villain in Resident Evil
He scream
Or an effeminate male.
Go to http://minecraft.gamepedia.com/Alex scroll down to Apperarance you will see that sentnce. Alex and Steve is Genderless.
(The wiki is completely written by the community and not Mojang)
Errr. Ok. That's one way to look at it.
I have a much easier way based on basic real-life basic common sense along a very simple principle :
"The truth comes out of the mouths of babes."
Some adults that made something say about their own work. But is that really true? 99% of the time a random group of kids (that never played Minecraft) will get it more right than the adult creators, because they don't have any conflict of interest. They don't feel the need to justify their own decisions and their own interpretations because they are not already deeply invested like the creators/players are. They also don't feel the need to protect their work -and thus their own value in properly doing that work-, meanwhile the adult creator is automatically -at least on a subconscious level- biaised because instinctively we humans don't quite like to admit that we made some kind of mistake or botched something.
Say, an artist might think his painting is a masterpiece but a group of kids can easily tell when crap art is crap art. Strong tendency here: On general, kids don't waste time with "context" and "rationale" and "symbolism" and "synergy" and "consistency" of something according to everything else. They are direct, simple, evaluating things "as they see it" at face value. If they see a man they'll say he's a man and not bother with "well, maybe he's in fact a transgender woman". Especially when transgenders hate being branded as the sex they moved away from and do not identify with at all anymore. Kids can accept that and will treat that man as a man even after being explained that transgender thing, because they haven't learned yet to complicate stuff for no good reason, because they don't understand the world yet. We adults do overly complicate stuff for no good reason because that way things get too complicated to understand, so we know we can stop trying to understand, we did that because we realized -back when we were teeneagers- that, as we were understanding the world better and better, we needed to stop understanding it ASAP otherwise we'd go crazy (that is why so many teeneagers seem to act rebellious). Ok end of joke discussion.
For another example, if an electrician comes to repair your fridge and installs cheap chinese parts and says "these are the good proper parts!", and an entire class of kids look at his work and say "those aren't good parts and they're not even the right parts!" , which would you believe? The electrician who charged you 27 bucks for your game license, saying what's done is done and it was perfect that way, or the group of kids saying he must come back and fix his botched job ? If it is the electrician that you believe, you probably also have better odds than the average citizen of being an excellent potential customer for homeopathic bottles of "this water containing the memory of 1/1000000000 of the initial molecule of the poison will surely totally heal you!". If you believe the kids, you probably have above average simple basic common sense.
Well, kids can be super-gullible too but that ain't my point.
So, basically, my point is: when it comes time to say if a duck is a duck, kids without any link to the duck often get it right, more right, more often, and better, than adults who are paid to breed and sell ducks.
So... let's look at NAME + SKIN together:
This is an exam with 2 questions. Both questions are: is the character:
(a) a boy
(b) a girl
(c) genderless
(d) transgender
(e) something else
Note: Check all answers that apply and only those answers.
Steve:
- Mojang says Steve is d: genderless.
- The near entirety of an entire class of kids would say Steve is a: a boy.
Alex:
- Mojang says Alex is d: genderless.
- The near entirety of an entire class of kids would say Alex is b: a girl. A *few* would say : a: a boy + b: a girl
For basic common sense, Mojang scores 1% and the class of kids scores 99%.
The 3-wide arm thing will be handy for creating feminine skins, though.
I think it was a decision to help skin-creators rather than something to add a "female Steve". Both Steve and Alex are genderless, but Alex's model will be nice for creating slender skins.
I do not see any evidence to prove other wise tho. It might be community written but it seems to be the only thing to say what they are.
Steve is genderless?
Notch said that all creatures on the game are genderless a few years ago on his personal blog. Here is the link if you want to read it.
"Love as a principle and order as the basis; progress as the goal"
And I'm posting this image I posted before!
and the cow has... uh... you can milk it.
"and the chicken/duck/whatevers have heads that look like roosters, but still lay eggs."
"Cows have horns and udders (even if I’ve later learned that there are some cows where the females do have horns)"
Both were taken from the link i posted earlier.
"Love as a principle and order as the basis; progress as the goal"
Btw: I don't like the whole gender discussion and would immediately say Steve is male and Alex is female. But the argument about Alex' name of course is valid, as well as Notch's statement.
GENERATION 28: When you see this put it in your signature and add 1 to the generation.