"Jesus, they have unibrows and bald heads, how are they not seen as men? Unless you're Anita Sarkeesian, I don't think this will trigger anyone."
I kind of agree with you, I usually think of them all as male but right now you could at least AGRUE that they're genderless humanoids and just all kinda look that way because they're not actually humans and if you choose to stick a name tag on one and call it "Sally" it wouldn't be that misplaced... When you start adding more gender-relevant visuals it gets rid of any chance of being seen as genderless. It's an all male society, which is a little annoying as-is from an equality/representation standpoint (It's really not about being "triggered" which is such a dumb concept IMO. It just gets old being a girl and seeing most things depicted as male, not like raving bite your head off "triggered" mad, but low key annoyance of "christ! why's it always gotta be boys? Where the girls at?" and feels refreshing to be represented which is what equality is about), but then it's also an all boy-love baby making society and there's no argument to be made otherwise and you drop into politics. I'm hardly a die-hard feminist but I just dislike the idea of trying to turn something arguably genderless in a game without gendered mobs into something that's clearly masculine. I would also be against making them distinctly feminine, but that would require a more dramatic series of changes. I feel like with the current design one more drop in the "sterotypically male" bucket and there's no chance of them being ever viewed as female or genderless.
Still though, I feel that it won't matter to most people. We had Steve and everyone recognizes him as a male, the Ender Dragon is female, I doubt anyone would have a problem with this. If you're gonna talk about politics, then go to Reddit or Tumblr, I doubt this'll anger anyone.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
A God that holds you over the pit of Hell, much as one holds a spider or some loathsome insect over the fire, abhors you, and is dreadfully provoked. - Jonathan Edwards
You say it won't matter to most people but I'm not the only person to have brought it up as a serious concern for them. So it DOES matter to SOME people, yes? It mattered enough for them to put in Alex even though you could customize Steve to look female, which is a model that, I will note again, does not breed. Neither does the Ender Dragon.
How is the dragon female? Is it female because, like the cows it's capable of reproduction? By that theory isn't everything in the game female? Is it because it guards an egg? Why can't it be male if it's guarding an egg since many male birds and occasionally reptiles guard nests? And some breeds of reptiles reproduce asexually. And since it's a magical creature it really has nothing to do with gender at all. The egg could just be a crystal made of compressed magic for all we know. The dragon has whatever gender you associate with it. I never gave the dragon a gender at all because I didn't think it had one. Villagers are representations of humans and they reproduce. It's a different situation.
Also you can't just tell someone to get off of a website because you don't like their opinion. Having said that, I agree with you. I don't want politics in minecraft. Therefore you should be equally against the more masculine appearance. The more gendered the villagers become the more politics will become a topic of discussion in minecraft. So keep genders out of it and we keep the political discussion out of it. That's all I want. If you want to keep political statements out of minecraft, don't make the villagers an undebatable gender.
"The point of Alex is to have a skin model with different dimensions; the apparent gender depicted is irrelevant to the reason for its creation."
Then you can't use Alex as an argument for why gendered mobs are OK since her gender is irrelevant. Can't have it both ways.
Also, they totally did it for diversity, especially because on the console versions of the game your skin is not customizable. You have to buy pre-made skins but they gave Alex away for free. If they just wanted a skinny person they would have just made something like "skinny steve" and ignored the fact that they didn't have a female base skin and saved a few bucks at that even. But that would have looked awfully jerkish when they wanna do it to "represent the diversity of our playerbase" (their words) so they made a custom skin that was female. If they didn't care about gender diversity I doubt we would have ever gotten Alex tbh. (Not that I can prove that, but it's a pretty logical progression. How many games focus on body diversity for specifically skinny people instead of gender diversity? "Oh yeah! We need to represent lanky people FAR more than we need to represent women. Let's just throw the girl part on as an after thought." That doesn't make much sense at all.)
Also also... Love that you are not even trying to defend your original argument and are just nitpicking on something that really, you're right, has no relevance on whether or not a breedable mob should represent a gender and invite political discussions and stances into Minecraft.
"I'm not sure what the conversation about feminism and triggering is about"
I said that putting facial hair on villagers makes them look distinctly male. I also said that I think that facial hair should not happen for that reason because it drags gender and lgbtq politics into a breedable Minecraft mob that is currently making a passing attempt at being genderless. I'm not the only one but every person who has brought it up has literally been told that their opinion doesn't matter and to shut up about it and I was simply agreeing with that assessment but otherwise gave my support. Then some folks made silly arguments about how the Alex model, dragon eggs, and horns on cows must mean gendered mobs in Minecraft is OK, which I said was silly. And then I was told to stop talking about not liking something because it brings gender politics into Minecraft, which is exactly why I expressed that I don't like it in the first place. I think that about sums it up so far.
"The point of Alex is to have a skin model with different dimensions; the apparent gender depicted is irrelevant to the reason for its creation."
Then you can't use Alex as an argument for why gendered mobs are OK since her gender is irrelevant. Can't have it both ways.
You seem to have forgotten that you brought up Alex in the first place, as an example of why gender did matter; my statement wasn't taking the stance of "Alex as evidence that gender doesn't matter," but refuting the stance of "Alex as evidence gender does matter." These are two different things.
Also, they totally did it for diversity, especially because on the console versions of the game your skin is not customizable. You have to buy pre-made skins but they gave Alex away for free.
I take it you don't play console much, because they gave plenty of other skins away for free too. Sure, Alex is there for diversity in skin choices, but that doesn't mean her apparent gender matters; unless, of course, you're intending to argue that the selection of cat-themed skins are to represent people who sexually identify as cats. It's entirely a cosmetic thing, and shouldn't be taken as the implementation of gender diversity.
If they just wanted a skinny person they would have just made something like "skinny steve" and ignored the fact that they didn't have a female base skin and saved a few bucks at that even.
"Skinny Steve" would look repetitive; they simply created a base that was visually distinct for cosmetic reasons. And I fail to see how creating a single new skin would "save a few bucks," as it would literally take minutes with any decent art program. That's a few cents, maybe.
"represent the diversity of our playerbase" (their words)[citation needed]
Also also... Love that you are not even trying to defend your original argument and are just nitpicking on something that really, you're right, has no relevance on whether or not a breedable mob should represent a gender and invite political discussions and stances into Minecraft.
I am defending my original argument, and I find it quite irritating that you still don't see that. My argument is that the cosmetic appearance of
I said that putting facial hair on villagers makes them look distinctly male.
This is less an argument and more just for the fun of it, but:
I also said that I think that facial hair should not happen for that reason because it drags gender and lgbtq politics into Minecraft.
The thing that drags gender into Minecraft is the people that think that there secondary and tertiary characteristics are integral parts of a gender.
I'm not the only one but every person who has brought it up has literally been told that their opinion doesn't matter and to shut up about it and I was simply agreeing with that assessment but otherwise gave my support.
And I can see your problem with this; don't get me wrong there. The only reason I'm fighting for the side I've chosen is because I don't believe that thick eyebrows and beards necessitate gender, and any argument that assumes that as a basis is by its very foundation logically unsound.
Then some folks made silly arguments about how the Alex model, dragon eggs, and horns on cows must mean gendered mobs in Minecraft is OK, which I said was silly.
Alex model: Originally your argument. Dragon eggs: Perhaps a sign of female dragons, but just as easily laid by a hermaphroditic species; not necessarily Jean's egg. Horns on cows: Admittedly not a primary sexual characteristic, but that doesn't inherently disprove hermaphroditic cows.
And then I was told to stop talking about not liking something because it brings gender politics into Minecraft, which is exactly why I expressed that I don't like it in the first place. I think that about sums it up so far.
Villagers with beards doesn't inherently bring gender politics into Minecraft; it's those who think that only males can have beards that do that.
Cherio, you spent a lot of time nitpicking something that we already established as irrelevant so I'll let the Alex thing fall. You're quite capable of lokking up the mojang announcement post yourself if you want citation. You clearly have the internet.
"I am defending my original argument, and I find it quite irritating that you still don't see that. My argument is that the cosmetic appearance of"
Of?
"Alex model: Originally your argument"
Pardon. I read the whole thread before I posted to see if I was the only person concerned with the gendering (to which I found I was hardly the only person to bring it up) and it wad the OP who said that because of Alex we should have gendered breedable mobs.
"The thing that drags gender into Minecraft is the people that think that there secondary and tertiary characteristics are integral parts of a gender.
Villagers with beards doesn't inherently bring gender politics into Minecraft; it's those who think that only males can have beards that do that."
That's not accurate at all. If it were just a case of a small minority of people who felt that way then it would be one thing. But you're asking an entire society to ignore a biological fact about gender that you literally cannot disprove because it is fact which is that over 90% of women cannot grow heavy beards and mustaches and over 90% of men CAN.
You're also asking an entire society to ignore biologically ingrained visual clues around gender. And admittedly we are moving away from that as a society but we're not there yet and we will likely never move away from it entirely because gender has 100,000,000 years of being highly relevant to our biological success and until we breed with machines it will continue to do so. Not all women have breasts and some men have "man boobs" but you still brought up cow udders as inherently female and horns (granted, inaccurately) as male therefore proving all cows to be "both" genders. Even you rely on secondary visual clues for assessing gender. And that's OK because it's not just you. It's almost everyone who does this and it's important for reproduction. As it stands, villagers are already seen as overwhelmingly primarily male, and I can prove this with my aforementioned google search.
And you're right. Individually, any one or two secondary/tertiary characteristic is irrelevant. Heavy facial hair might not be inherently male if they also had breasts and long flowing locks and makeup like the person in your picture. And I'd be OK with that. But they DON'T. They already have multiple characteristics that make them look male, so much that they overwhelmingly are associated as male already. If the person in your picture was bald, with no breasts and a unibrow and no makeup do you think ANYONE could look at that person and say "Oh yeah. That could possibly be anything but a male based on the visual clues I see."? You're not asking for the villagers to look like your picture (which I'd be fine with). You'd be asking them to look like this;
And then to say "Oh yeah. That looks conceivably genderless! Absolutely! I do not associate that with being inherently male!". Which is pretty much impossible to do.
So my argument is the moment you put facial hair on them you solidify the fact that they are male. And of COURSE when you take a "genderless" mob and put MULTIPLE secondary male characteristics on them, especially extremely prominent ones like facial hair people will say "That is a gender". And of COURSE you will then have people (many of which have been in the thread already) say "I'd prefer it if the villagers had women too" or "I don't like the facial hair because that's a thing only guys have", which is bringing gender politics into it. And it's not because of backwards societal thinking. It's because of biology.
OR. You could drop the whole gender thing entirely and put some other, non-relevant trait on the villagers that serves the SAME purpose but has no relation to gender at all (like hair length/style, since outside of men being more likely to be bald hair is based on the individual, or something like jewelry or maybe thin/fat models). Because it hurts NOTHING to do it, and fixes a serious problem that multiple people see with the suggestion and brought up multiple times.
I don't really appreciate that the OP and others have literally shouted everyone making this argument off the thread either. That's hardly taking serious consideration of a common criticism... Which is what this forum is supposed to be for. It's supposed to let you find serious flaws in your idea and rectify them. Not give people pats on the back for bullying the "heathens" who don't give full support off of the thread just because they see a problem. So as long as someone's responding to me, I'll answer back.
There's no reason for the facial hair to be there when you could replace it with something that is FACTUALLY irrelevant to gender rather than based off of highly weighted personal perceptions. That's my argument.
A God that holds you over the pit of Hell, much as one holds a spider or some loathsome insect over the fire, abhors you, and is dreadfully provoked. - Jonathan Edwards
You're being offended by a texture on a mob, a texture that isn't even in the game, a texture that has absolutely no relevance to anything outside of this thread! You are essentially just ranting and railing on something pointless. Who cares whether villagers have beards?
Oops, silly me. The answer is: You, and nobody else.
You are being confrontational. There's no reason to be. I honestly don't know why you would bother to write dozens of paragraphs, thousands of words to "defend" yourself. Although, perhaps that's just me. I can barely keep writing this, only powered by my sheer rage towards you.
You are being personally offended by something that does not concern you. Chill. Move on.
Sorry, sugar cube. Innaccurate to say the least. I'm just the only one to refuse to be bullied off the thread by the OP or their antagonists. Sounds like you're a little butthurt there. Need some aloe gel?
Page 1:
"There are two things that bother me though. Having facial hair on the villagers takes away that they are gender less. (I would love there be girl and boy villagers but Mojang wouldn't likely do that as everything else is gender less.)"
Page 2:
"But we don't need the facial hair, sure it's possible [/i]for a woman to have facial hair but I think it's best to leave the facial hair out."
"I like the overall idea of diversity, but going too far, like into adding genders could cause some probably, and I don't think is a good idea."
Page 3:
"About the only problem is that the facial hair undermines the concept of them being gender neutral, and adding female Villagers wouldn't be a good idea."
"The only issue I have is that it kind of hurts the androgyny of the villagers, which is present in just about every mob in the game including themselves. Mojang seem quite strictly against giving mobs genders, and these villagers seem very masculine for the most part."
"Besides, this adds a whole bunch of implications of race and gender which Mojang was specifically avoiding."
"Having a girl skin that does nothing to change how the game works is different than having breed-able mobs having genders."
Page 4:
"Although, I have to say I agree with the "no gender in minecraft" argument. To solve that, why not have a bit more diversity in head hair and a bit less in facial hair?"
"I'm in agreement with most everyone here, the idea is really good except for the facial hair."
"Drop the texture variants that aren't sufficiently gender-neutral. "Some males (respectively, females) have that feature which is typically female (respectively, male), so it's all a-o-kay!" just doesn't cut it as an excuse."
Should I go on? Those are all quotes from different people.
Yet somehow these villagers HAD eyelashes but, like 2 whole people thought they were silly and they got pulled for being "too controversial" (OPs words). How are eyelashes controversial but not BEARDS? Eyelashes are barely even vaguely gender specific, but not as controversial as facial hair? How does this not smack of a gender bias to people? :/
Sorry, sugar cube. Condescending, but whatever. Innaccurate to say the least. I'm just the only one to refuse to be bullied off the thread by the OP or their antagonists. Wow, you sound like a social justice warrior. In fact, that's the best way to describe you. "I'm right in my petty and pointless squabble of my manufacturing, and anyone who disagrees with me is a horrible evil monster!" They weren't "bullied" off, they simply were not as maddeningly persistent and single-minded as you are.Sounds like you're a little butthurt there. Need some aloe gel? Condescending more. Tone it down a bit, that's nearly flaming you've got there. Using "flaming" in the loosest sense possible, of course.
Page 1:
"There are two things that bother me though. Having facial hair on the villagers takes away that they are gender less. (I would love there be girl and boy villagers but Mojang wouldn't likely do that as everything else is gender less.)"
Page 2:
"But we don't need the facial hair, sure it's possible for a woman to have facial hair but I think it's best to leave the facial hair out."
"I like the overall idea of diversity, but going too far, like into adding genders could cause some probably, and I don't think is a good idea."
Page 3:
"About the only problem is that the facial hair undermines the concept of them being gender neutral, and adding female Villagers wouldn't be a good idea."
"The only issue I have is that it kind of hurts the androgyny of the villagers, which is present in just about every mob in the game including themselves. Mojang seem quite strictly against giving mobs genders, and these villagers seem very masculine for the most part."
"Besides, this adds a whole bunch of implications of race and gender which Mojang was specifically avoiding."
"Having a girl skin that does nothing to change how the game works is different than having breed-able mobs having genders."
Page 4:
"Although, I have to say I agree with the "no gender in minecraft" argument. To solve that, why not have a bit more diversity in head hair and a bit less in facial hair?"
"I'm in agreement with most everyone here, the idea is really good except for the facial hair."
"Drop the texture variants that aren't sufficiently gender-neutral. "Some males (respectively, females) have that feature which is typically female (respectively, male), so it's all a-o-kay!" just doesn't cut it as an excuse."
Should I go on? Those are all quotes from different people. While I can appreciate someone who goes out of their way to gather actual, concrete evidence, I'm afraid you missed my point completely. So I was wrong about it being only you. Big deal. My point wasn't that you were alone in your argument, my point was that you are taking something totally irrelevant and blowing it way out of proportion. Acting like an entitled jerk. Wasting your time, and that of everyone that reads your posts.
Yet somehow these villagers HAD eyelashes but, like 2 whole people thought they were silly and they got pulled for being "too controversial" (OPs words). How are eyelashes controversial but not BEARDS? Eyelashes are barely even vaguely gender specific, but not as controversial as facial hair? How does this not smack of a gender bias to people? :/ The reason here is not a political one, bus a design one. Minecraft pixels are large. Any eyelashes you added would just be unrecognizable, ugly black marks.
Excuse me, but you have proved my point all too well, gathering every vaguely related post in the thread just to prove a point I wasn't even trying to make. You're looking at the wrong things, flipping the script to suit your purpose, and acting like an… I believe "entitled jerk" was the term I used, as every other word I could think of would get me a warning.
It's not that big of a deal. You're acting like it is. Making a huge post to counter me is only proving my point. Calm down and stop acting like some know-it-all, holier-than-thou white knight.
"While I can appreciate someone who goes out of their way to gather actual, concrete evidence, I'm afraid you missed my point completely. So I was wrong about it being only you. Big deal. My point wasn't that you were alone in your argument, my point was that you are taking something totally irrelevant and blowing it way out of proportion. Acting like an entitled jerk. Wasting your time, and that of everyone that reads your posts... ...It's not that big of a deal. You're acting like it is"
It's actually a VERY big deal because lots of players thought that this was a big deal and said so only to meet rudeness or irrelevant arguments back and/or be completely ignored. There are about 1/4 of the posts in this thread before I posted relating to how the facial hair should be removed. Then the entire forum was literally told not to express complaints about the facial hair by multiple people INCLUDING the op. Go look yourself.
Beyond my first post which was plenty polite explaining that I wanted to keep exactly these sorts of discussions away from Minecraft, I have only responded to posts directed at me, which have included several telling me to stfu and get off the thread.
I won't do that. If you'd like to back down and/or acknowledge that it's worth talking about and that people should not be told to stop talking about it if they want to, I will happily stop talking about it to you (which only started because you started talking first.) If you'd like to keep making vaguely insulting posts at me (and then being pissy that I make vaguely insulting posts back? I mean if you can't take it, why are you dishing it out?) please feel free. I can do this aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaall year long. I work from home. I got plenty of time to spare an hour in the morning or evening to respond to posts.
How is it irrelevant exactly for me to be responding to posts directed at me in a debate that is on-topic for the suggestion? It is a GREAT suggestion... As soon as you remove gender relevant visuals.
"The reason here is not a political one, bus a design one. Minecraft pixels are large. Any eyelashes you added would just be unrecognizable, ugly black marks."
That would be fair, if the OP hadn't claimed repeatedly that the eyelashes were removed for controversy reasons and that they removed them because people didn't like female gendering of villagers throughout the thread. I agree, the eyelashes would be pretty dumb, but that is hardly what someone calls controversy.
"gathering every vaguely related post in the thread just to prove a point I wasn't even trying to make"
I'm not quite sure how quotes specifically directly relating to how there's not support for facial hair are only vaguely connected. Maybe you should make your point more clear instead of making false and unrelated claims intended to insult me into doing what you ask? I am not a mind reader. I genuinely thought you were trying to tell me I was the only person who cared about this and therefore I should stop talking about it. I responded to you because that is factually wrong and I won't just leave a thread because I am told to.
If you want to avoid discussions like this, don't put gendering features on breedable mobs in minecraft. It's that simple and that's all I have been attempting to express this whole time.
"Calm down and stop acting like some know-it-all, holier-than-thou white knight."
Not really sure how replying to posts directed towards me with factual information is being a "white knight" or a "know-it-all". I'm not going crazy with man-hating or flipping out about it being unjust. I'm not butting into conversations I'm not a part of, insulting people or even telling them to not talk about it. I'm just responding to posts directed towards me in discussion... Kind of like you did just now? (I can't believe you wrote BACK when someone addressed you! Ugh! Only SJWs defend their positions!)
I even tried to move away from it by discussing some heredity and coding that someone else suggested. But as long as other people are responding of COURSE I am going to respond back. Replying to posts directed towards me that are on topic is hardly being a white knight. That's called discussing a topic.
I find it especially ironic that your brought up how I was in the wrong for being personally offended by something that doesn't involve/concern me when you proceeded to respond to a debate that you weren't part of in the slightest that didn't involve/concern you, that you were personally offended by.
I also note that you did the same thing to someone else who brought up a great point with the villagers and racism that I chose not to pursue (but agree with). I think I'm seeing a pattern here. Why do you want to shut down serious discussions about potential problems with this suggestion related to social justice so badly?
So tl;dr
Lots of people care about it, and I'll stop talking about it when other people do. I won't stop just because you try to get me to stop (especially rudely). It's completely reasonable to respond to a post that is made directed specifically towards me and if you think otherwise, please stop responding to posts directed towards you from now on.
Also don't gender in Minecraft. Because that leads to controversy.
So tl;dr Thank you. I couldn't slog through another thousand words of your tripe if I felt like it.
Lots of people care about it, and I'll stop talking about it when other people do. So... You'll post about this forever. I honestly don't know what I expected. I won't stop just because you try to get me to stop (especially rudely). Says the one that tried to offer me burn cream. I didn't need it, by the way. It's completely reasonable to respond to a post that is made directed specifically towards me and if you think otherwise, please stop responding to posts directed towards you from now on. I'm not saying you shouldn't respond, I'm saying you shouldn't respond like this suggestion will end the world as we know it unless it doesn't have beards. (God forbid that happen.) Argue like you're arguing for a minor aesthetic change instead of all that is holy, and maybe you'll get just a little more respect. Your posts are just so long.
Also don't gender in Minecraft. Because that leads to controversy. Yes, god forbid something be controversial! What a horrible thing, controversy! The combat update summoned up a ton of controversy, but was it pulled back? No! Because that would be stupid. The term for you and your like is "vocal minority", the few that speak the loudest and thus seem far more numerous than they actually are. A simple poll would prove this. This controversy you speak of is mostly of your own making.
Okay, now that that's wrapped up, I have one last thing to say before I go.
Yes, I'm going.
I was an idiot for starting this conversation. You are indeed one of the SJWs of myth. I thought that you might not be; that if I firmly reminded you how ridiculous you were being, you would tone it down a bit. Clearly, I was wrong. You are a Social Justice Warrior, and I'm merely mortal. I don't have the supernatural patience and charisma to make you do anything.
I don't really see how a few pixels situated in a certain place can really get someone to argue their point on the internet to this extent like you insulted their religion, or something.
Like, if you changed all of the villagers into dartboards with beards, what would that signify? they're male Dartboards? Dartboards clearly can't have genders, and I don't think a thing that breeds by literally staring at someone has a gender either.
Or maybe I just don't see the importance with this.
you shouldn't respond like this suggestion will end the world as we know it unless it doesn't have beards. (God forbid that happen.) Argue like you're arguing for a minor aesthetic change instead of all that is holy, and maybe you'll get just a little more respect. Just because a post has a lot of information in it doesn't mean that it's over-reacting. Never have I said that I am better than anyone or that this is the end of the world so please do not put word in my mouth. I merely have an opinion that I back up with facts and am willing to stick to my guns.
I'm sorry you have little patience for reading things that are long, and no desire for equality as well. Unfortunately, making an argument like "Well SOME girls can have beards so you're wrong!" requires an explanation longer than the post before it. That's the problem with rebutting unthoughful posts with thoughtful ones.
The term for you and your like is "vocal minority", the few that speak the loudest and thus seem far more numerous than they actually are. A simple poll would prove this.
Are you seriously denying that a significant number of other people don't care about this? Incidentally, I counted since I'm just sitting around waiting for a plumber and you don't feel like checking your facts. Including only my first post there are about 98 supports and 20 partial/supports with comments about gendering or facial hair being out of place. That's TECHNICALLY a minority. Technically. But it means people DO care. I've just been more vocal than them because I am willing to reply to people's rebuttals with my own.
You are indeed one of the SJWs of myth.
You mean, a person who is willing to reply to people who say things that are factually inaccurate or insulting? The horror. You seem to forget that you and I are PEOPLE. I have things I care about as I'm sure you do and some things I choose to stick to my guns on. But because I choose to respond to people on the internet about something I care about I am no longer human, I am some mythical creature instead. That's so sad. Have you never tried to argue a point that you care about firmly before?
I thought that you might not be; that if I firmly reminded you how ridiculous you were being, you would tone it down a bit. Clearly, I was wrong.
You thought that by insulting me and telling me that I was alone in my beliefs that I would go away or do as you demanded? Why did you expect that? How often has insulting people gotten them to do what you wanted?
-`-`-
Tankman261:
"I don't really see how a few pixels situated in a certain place can really get someone to argue their point on the internet to this extent like you insulted their religion, or something.
Like, if you changed all of the villagers into dartboards with beards, what would that signify? they're male Dartboards? Dartboards clearly can't have genders, and I don't think a thing that breeds by literally staring at someone has a gender either.
Or maybe I just don't see the importance with this."
But dartboards aren't alive, breeding or representing humans. Even if they were, if you DID have to assign a gender to a dartboard with a beard, would it be female? (Amusingly, dartboards ARE female in some languages.)
Some people think it's very important that mobs remain genderless. I understand that this doesn't always make sense to some people. But imagine if they all DID have beards, and they bred. Can you honestly tell me that nobody associates villagers as human and that none of those people will associate bearded villagers breeding with gay sex and LGBTQ issues and that nobody will start a commentary on it? I can produce some evidence to support this concept but that's apparently too forceful and long to read...
It's important to me, personally (and many others on the thread), to see the mobs remain genderless because I am a girl and a massive amount of media is depicted as masculine for a baseline and Villagers are already mostly depicted as masculine. It's a little upsetti to see nothing but guys everywhere. It makes the classic "cis white male" (a term I honestly hate because it only ever gets used in this context) feel like "normal" and "baseline" and totally ordinary which mans being a girl is NOT ordinary. It makes women feel upset or sad. They perceive that they are being treated as less important, like they are an afterthought, when they are over half the population. It's subtle, it's an annoyance at best, but there's a lot of little annoyances like that and they build up and make it hard to speak out against anything. It can make women GENUINELY think that they are worth less than men if it's said enough times and it becomes status-quo. So it matters having female representation in media and video games, especially when you are already the minority in that group. And if you don't care about it, that's OK. You don't have to. But those of us who DO care about it would simply like to express that without being told our opinion is invalid, how responding to posts directed at us is over-reacting, or how unreasonable we are for experiencing emotions or how we're crazy for being upset over insults. A common experience among women is being told that what they experience isn't real and/or is invalid for some silly reason (like how you shouldn't be against beards on villagers because 1% of women can grow beards) even though they are the ones experiencing it.
Imagine if this were a topic about making villagers have boobs or wear flowing pink dresses with big hair bows. You can bet it would get flamed into oblivion and get no support. Nobody would freak out and say that men are "over reacting" for not wanting boobs and bows on villagers and how they are just crazy MRAs for it. Nobody would tell them that their opinions are completely invalid because manboobs exist. It would be laughable.
I'm just on the other side of the aisle and think equally strongly that they shouldn't be masculine. And in reality, I'd prefer that villagers be neither, because I'm not crazy and demand that everything be a girl. I even support this idea very strongly in theory. I just want a genderless feature to remain genderless.
you shouldn't respond like this suggestion will end the world as we know it unless it doesn't have beards. (God forbid that happen.) Argue like you're arguing for a minor aesthetic change instead of all that is holy, and maybe you'll get just a little more respect. Just because a post has a lot of information in it doesn't mean that it's over-reacting. Never have I said that I am better than anyone or that this is the end of the world so please do not put word in my mouth. I merely have an opinion that I back up with facts and am willing to stick to my guns.
I'm sorry you have little patience for reading things that are long, and no desire for equality as well. Unfortunately, making an argument like "Well SOME girls can have beards so you're wrong!" requires an explanation longer than the post before it. That's the problem with rebutting unthoughful posts with thoughtful ones.
The term for you and your like is "vocal minority", the few that speak the loudest and thus seem far more numerous than they actually are. A simple poll would prove this.
Are you seriously denying that a significant number of other people don't care about this? Incidentally, I counted since I'm just sitting around waiting for a plumber and you don't feel like checking your facts. Including only my first post there are about 98 supports and 20 partial/supports with comments about gendering or facial hair being out of place. That's TECHNICALLY a minority. Technically. But it means people DO care. I've just been more vocal than them because I am willing to reply to people's rebuttals with my own.
You are indeed one of the SJWs of myth.
You mean, a person who is willing to reply to people who say things that are factually inaccurate or insulting? The horror. You seem to forget that you and I are PEOPLE. I have things I care about as I'm sure you do and some things I choose to stick to my guns on. But because I choose to respond to people on the internet about something I care about I am no longer human, I am some mythical creature instead. That's so sad. Have you never tried to argue a point that you care about firmly before?
I thought that you might not be; that if I firmly reminded you how ridiculous you were being, you would tone it down a bit. Clearly, I was wrong.
You thought that by insulting me and telling me that I was alone in my beliefs that I would go away or do as you demanded? Why did you expect that? How often has insulting people gotten them to do what you wanted?
-`-`-
Tankman261:
"I don't really see how a few pixels situated in a certain place can really get someone to argue their point on the internet to this extent like you insulted their religion, or something.
Like, if you changed all of the villagers into dartboards with beards, what would that signify? they're male Dartboards? Dartboards clearly can't have genders, and I don't think a thing that breeds by literally staring at someone has a gender either.
Or maybe I just don't see the importance with this."
But dartboards aren't alive, breeding or representing humans. Even if they were, if you DID have to assign a gender to a dartboard with a beard, would it be female? (Amusingly, dartboards ARE female in some languages.)
Some people think it's very important that mobs remain genderless. I understand that this doesn't always make sense to some people. But imagine if they all DID have beards, and they bred. Can you honestly tell me that nobody associates villagers as human and that none of those people will associate bearded villagers breeding with gay sex and LGBTQ issues and that nobody will start a commentary on it? I can produce some evidence to support this concept but that's apparently too forceful and long to read...
It's important to me, personally (and many others on the thread), to see the mobs remain genderless because I am a girl and a massive amount of media is depicted as masculine for a baseline and Villagers are already mostly depicted as masculine. It's a little upsetti to see nothing but guys everywhere. It makes the classic "cis white male" (a term I honestly hate because it only ever gets used in this context) feel like "normal" and "baseline" and totally ordinary which mans being a girl is NOT ordinary. It makes women feel upset or sad. They perceive that they are being treated as less important, like they are an afterthought, when they are over half the population. It's subtle, it's an annoyance at best, but there's a lot of little annoyances like that and they build up and make it hard to speak out against anything. It can make women GENUINELY think that they are worth less than men if it's said enough times and it becomes status-quo. So it matters having female representation in media and video games, especially when you are already the minority in that group. And if you don't care about it, that's OK. You don't have to. But those of us who DO care about it would simply like to express that without being told our opinion is invalid, how responding to posts directed at us is over-reacting, or how unreasonable we are for experiencing emotions or how we're crazy for being upset over insults. A common experience among women is being told that what they experience isn't real and/or is invalid for some silly reason (like how you shouldn't be against beards on villagers because 1% of women can grow beards) even though they are the ones experiencing it.
Imagine if this were a topic about making villagers have boobs or wear flowing pink dresses with big hair bows. You can bet it would get flamed into oblivion and get no support. Nobody would freak out and say that men are "over reacting" for not wanting boobs and bows on villagers and how they are just crazy MRAs for it. Nobody would tell them that their opinions are completely invalid because manboobs exist. It would be laughable.
I'm just on the other side of the aisle and think equally strongly that they shouldn't be masculine. And in reality, I'd prefer that villagers be neither, because I'm not crazy and demand that everything be a girl. I even support this idea very strongly in theory. I just want a genderless feature to remain genderless.
You are going to get this thread locked, please take your discussion to Reddit or Tumblr as this place is not for arguing. Also, why are you talking about politics on a forum about Minecraft?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
A God that holds you over the pit of Hell, much as one holds a spider or some loathsome insect over the fire, abhors you, and is dreadfully provoked. - Jonathan Edwards
"You are going to get this thread locked, please take your discussion to Reddit or Tumblr as this place is not for arguing. Also, why are you talking about politics on a forum about Minecraft?"
That's hardly my intention... And I doubt it will happen. It has stayed pretty much on topic. If serious discussion of the flaws of a suggestion are not permitted in the suggestions forum, why is it there? I think the idea of biome specific races in villagers is also worth discussing and is a serious issue, I have simply chosen not to pursue it. That's about race politics. Would that discussion also not be allowed?
Also are you asking me why gender politics is being discussed in a minecraft suggestion that is proposing making villagers look inherently male? Do you not think that it would become a serious commentary on gender politics in the media if this were implemented? You genuinely couldn't imagine a headline like "IS MINECRAFT ENDORSING GAYS!?" coming out of this, showing up on some TMZ article or similarly base news source and that spreading through media?
"You are going to get this thread locked, please take your discussion to Reddit or Tumblr as this place is not for arguing. Also, why are you talking about politics on a forum about Minecraft?"
That's hardly my intention... And I doubt it will happen. It has stayed pretty much on topic. If serious discussion of the flaws of a suggestion are not permitted in the suggestions forum, why is it there? I think the idea of biome specific races in villagers is also worth discussing and is a serious issue, I have simply chosen not to pursue it. That's about race politics. Would that discussion also not be allowed?
Also are you asking me why gender politics is being discussed in a minecraft suggestion that is proposing making villagers look inherently male? Do you not think that it would become a serious commentary on gender politics in the media if this were implemented? You genuinely couldn't imagine a headline like "IS MINECRAFT ENDORSING GAYS!?" coming out of this, showing up on some TMZ article or similarly base news source and that spreading through media?
Unfortunately, I have to disagree. You aren't discussing the inherent flaws with this suggestion, you are discussing parts about it that personally offend you. Just because you dislike villagers with beards, that doesn't mean this is a bad suggestion, and, really, people will go to Reddit or Tumblr to discuss this stuff. If you could keep it off of this forum, that would be nice.
Of course, you could also shift the discussion to actual flaws this suggestion has, like implementing it, and how, but who's asking?
Still though, I feel that it won't matter to most people. We had Steve and everyone recognizes him as a male, the Ender Dragon is female, I doubt anyone would have a problem with this. If you're gonna talk about politics, then go to Reddit or Tumblr, I doubt this'll anger anyone.
A God that holds you over the pit of Hell, much as one holds a spider or some loathsome insect over the fire, abhors you, and is dreadfully provoked. - Jonathan Edwards
You say it won't matter to most people but I'm not the only person to have brought it up as a serious concern for them. So it DOES matter to SOME people, yes? It mattered enough for them to put in Alex even though you could customize Steve to look female, which is a model that, I will note again, does not breed. Neither does the Ender Dragon.
How is the dragon female? Is it female because, like the cows it's capable of reproduction? By that theory isn't everything in the game female? Is it because it guards an egg? Why can't it be male if it's guarding an egg since many male birds and occasionally reptiles guard nests? And some breeds of reptiles reproduce asexually. And since it's a magical creature it really has nothing to do with gender at all. The egg could just be a crystal made of compressed magic for all we know. The dragon has whatever gender you associate with it. I never gave the dragon a gender at all because I didn't think it had one. Villagers are representations of humans and they reproduce. It's a different situation.
Also you can't just tell someone to get off of a website because you don't like their opinion. Having said that, I agree with you. I don't want politics in minecraft. Therefore you should be equally against the more masculine appearance. The more gendered the villagers become the more politics will become a topic of discussion in minecraft. So keep genders out of it and we keep the political discussion out of it. That's all I want. If you want to keep political statements out of minecraft, don't make the villagers an undebatable gender.
I'm not sure what the conversation about feminism and triggering is about, but as for the original topic of this post,
FULL SUPPORT
And now for some things that I'm less proud of:
I just took the Minecraft Noob test! Check out what I scored. Think you can beat me?!
To take the test, check out
http://minecraftnoobtest.com/test.php
The point of Alex is to have a skin model with different dimensions; the apparent gender depicted is irrelevant to the reason for its creation.
I support this, this, and this. And this now. Also this.
"The point of Alex is to have a skin model with different dimensions; the apparent gender depicted is irrelevant to the reason for its creation."
Then you can't use Alex as an argument for why gendered mobs are OK since her gender is irrelevant. Can't have it both ways.
Also, they totally did it for diversity, especially because on the console versions of the game your skin is not customizable. You have to buy pre-made skins but they gave Alex away for free. If they just wanted a skinny person they would have just made something like "skinny steve" and ignored the fact that they didn't have a female base skin and saved a few bucks at that even. But that would have looked awfully jerkish when they wanna do it to "represent the diversity of our playerbase" (their words) so they made a custom skin that was female. If they didn't care about gender diversity I doubt we would have ever gotten Alex tbh. (Not that I can prove that, but it's a pretty logical progression. How many games focus on body diversity for specifically skinny people instead of gender diversity? "Oh yeah! We need to represent lanky people FAR more than we need to represent women. Let's just throw the girl part on as an after thought." That doesn't make much sense at all.)
Also also... Love that you are not even trying to defend your original argument and are just nitpicking on something that really, you're right, has no relevance on whether or not a breedable mob should represent a gender and invite political discussions and stances into Minecraft.
"I'm not sure what the conversation about feminism and triggering is about"
I said that putting facial hair on villagers makes them look distinctly male. I also said that I think that facial hair should not happen for that reason because it drags gender and lgbtq politics into a breedable Minecraft mob that is currently making a passing attempt at being genderless. I'm not the only one but every person who has brought it up has literally been told that their opinion doesn't matter and to shut up about it and I was simply agreeing with that assessment but otherwise gave my support. Then some folks made silly arguments about how the Alex model, dragon eggs, and horns on cows must mean gendered mobs in Minecraft is OK, which I said was silly. And then I was told to stop talking about not liking something because it brings gender politics into Minecraft, which is exactly why I expressed that I don't like it in the first place. I think that about sums it up so far.
You seem to have forgotten that you brought up Alex in the first place, as an example of why gender did matter; my statement wasn't taking the stance of "Alex as evidence that gender doesn't matter," but refuting the stance of "Alex as evidence gender does matter." These are two different things.
I take it you don't play console much, because they gave plenty of other skins away for free too. Sure, Alex is there for diversity in skin choices, but that doesn't mean her apparent gender matters; unless, of course, you're intending to argue that the selection of cat-themed skins are to represent people who sexually identify as cats. It's entirely a cosmetic thing, and shouldn't be taken as the implementation of gender diversity.
"Skinny Steve" would look repetitive; they simply created a base that was visually distinct for cosmetic reasons. And I fail to see how creating a single new skin would "save a few bucks," as it would literally take minutes with any decent art program. That's a few cents, maybe.
I am defending my original argument, and I find it quite irritating that you still don't see that. My argument is that the cosmetic appearance of
This is less an argument and more just for the fun of it, but:
The thing that drags gender into Minecraft is the people that think that there secondary and tertiary characteristics are integral parts of a gender.
And I can see your problem with this; don't get me wrong there. The only reason I'm fighting for the side I've chosen is because I don't believe that thick eyebrows and beards necessitate gender, and any argument that assumes that as a basis is by its very foundation logically unsound.
Alex model: Originally your argument. Dragon eggs: Perhaps a sign of female dragons, but just as easily laid by a hermaphroditic species; not necessarily Jean's egg. Horns on cows: Admittedly not a primary sexual characteristic, but that doesn't inherently disprove hermaphroditic cows.
Villagers with beards doesn't inherently bring gender politics into Minecraft; it's those who think that only males can have beards that do that.
I support this, this, and this. And this now. Also this.
Would you mind posting them here?
You make me weep tears of joy
Cherio, you spent a lot of time nitpicking something that we already established as irrelevant so I'll let the Alex thing fall. You're quite capable of lokking up the mojang announcement post yourself if you want citation. You clearly have the internet.
"I am defending my original argument, and I find it quite irritating that you still don't see that. My argument is that the cosmetic appearance of"
Of?
"Alex model: Originally your argument"
Pardon. I read the whole thread before I posted to see if I was the only person concerned with the gendering (to which I found I was hardly the only person to bring it up) and it wad the OP who said that because of Alex we should have gendered breedable mobs.
"The thing that drags gender into Minecraft is the people that think that there secondary and tertiary characteristics are integral parts of a gender.
Villagers with beards doesn't inherently bring gender politics into Minecraft; it's those who think that only males can have beards that do that."
That's not accurate at all. If it were just a case of a small minority of people who felt that way then it would be one thing. But you're asking an entire society to ignore a biological fact about gender that you literally cannot disprove because it is fact which is that over 90% of women cannot grow heavy beards and mustaches and over 90% of men CAN.
You're also asking an entire society to ignore biologically ingrained visual clues around gender. And admittedly we are moving away from that as a society but we're not there yet and we will likely never move away from it entirely because gender has 100,000,000 years of being highly relevant to our biological success and until we breed with machines it will continue to do so. Not all women have breasts and some men have "man boobs" but you still brought up cow udders as inherently female and horns (granted, inaccurately) as male therefore proving all cows to be "both" genders. Even you rely on secondary visual clues for assessing gender. And that's OK because it's not just you. It's almost everyone who does this and it's important for reproduction. As it stands, villagers are already seen as overwhelmingly primarily male, and I can prove this with my aforementioned google search.
And you're right. Individually, any one or two secondary/tertiary characteristic is irrelevant. Heavy facial hair might not be inherently male if they also had breasts and long flowing locks and makeup like the person in your picture. And I'd be OK with that. But they DON'T. They already have multiple characteristics that make them look male, so much that they overwhelmingly are associated as male already. If the person in your picture was bald, with no breasts and a unibrow and no makeup do you think ANYONE could look at that person and say "Oh yeah. That could possibly be anything but a male based on the visual clues I see."? You're not asking for the villagers to look like your picture (which I'd be fine with). You'd be asking them to look like this;
And then to say "Oh yeah. That looks conceivably genderless! Absolutely! I do not associate that with being inherently male!". Which is pretty much impossible to do.
So my argument is the moment you put facial hair on them you solidify the fact that they are male. And of COURSE when you take a "genderless" mob and put MULTIPLE secondary male characteristics on them, especially extremely prominent ones like facial hair people will say "That is a gender". And of COURSE you will then have people (many of which have been in the thread already) say "I'd prefer it if the villagers had women too" or "I don't like the facial hair because that's a thing only guys have", which is bringing gender politics into it. And it's not because of backwards societal thinking. It's because of biology.
OR. You could drop the whole gender thing entirely and put some other, non-relevant trait on the villagers that serves the SAME purpose but has no relation to gender at all (like hair length/style, since outside of men being more likely to be bald hair is based on the individual, or something like jewelry or maybe thin/fat models). Because it hurts NOTHING to do it, and fixes a serious problem that multiple people see with the suggestion and brought up multiple times.
I don't really appreciate that the OP and others have literally shouted everyone making this argument off the thread either. That's hardly taking serious consideration of a common criticism... Which is what this forum is supposed to be for. It's supposed to let you find serious flaws in your idea and rectify them. Not give people pats on the back for bullying the "heathens" who don't give full support off of the thread just because they see a problem. So as long as someone's responding to me, I'll answer back.
There's no reason for the facial hair to be there when you could replace it with something that is FACTUALLY irrelevant to gender rather than based off of highly weighted personal perceptions. That's my argument.
Wew lad.
A God that holds you over the pit of Hell, much as one holds a spider or some loathsome insect over the fire, abhors you, and is dreadfully provoked. - Jonathan Edwards
Wow... I don't know what to say.
You're being offended by a texture on a mob, a texture that isn't even in the game, a texture that has absolutely no relevance to anything outside of this thread! You are essentially just ranting and railing on something pointless. Who cares whether villagers have beards?
Oops, silly me. The answer is: You, and nobody else.
You are being confrontational. There's no reason to be. I honestly don't know why you would bother to write dozens of paragraphs, thousands of words to "defend" yourself. Although, perhaps that's just me. I can barely keep writing this, only powered by my sheer rage towards you.
You are being personally offended by something that does not concern you. Chill. Move on.
"The answer is: You, and nobody else."
Sorry, sugar cube. Innaccurate to say the least. I'm just the only one to refuse to be bullied off the thread by the OP or their antagonists. Sounds like you're a little butthurt there. Need some aloe gel?
Page 1:
"There are two things that bother me though. Having facial hair on the villagers takes away that they are gender less. (I would love there be girl and boy villagers but Mojang wouldn't likely do that as everything else is gender less.)"
Page 2:
"But we don't need the facial hair, sure it's possible [/i]for a woman to have facial hair but I think it's best to leave the facial hair out."
"I like the overall idea of diversity, but going too far, like into adding genders could cause some probably, and I don't think is a good idea."
Page 3:
"About the only problem is that the facial hair undermines the concept of them being gender neutral, and adding female Villagers wouldn't be a good idea."
"The only issue I have is that it kind of hurts the androgyny of the villagers, which is present in just about every mob in the game including themselves. Mojang seem quite strictly against giving mobs genders, and these villagers seem very masculine for the most part."
"Besides, this adds a whole bunch of implications of race and gender which Mojang was specifically avoiding."
"Having a girl skin that does nothing to change how the game works is different than having breed-able mobs having genders."
Page 4:
"Although, I have to say I agree with the "no gender in minecraft" argument. To solve that, why not have a bit more diversity in head hair and a bit less in facial hair?"
"I'm in agreement with most everyone here, the idea is really good except for the facial hair."
"Drop the texture variants that aren't sufficiently gender-neutral. "Some males (respectively, females) have that feature which is typically female (respectively, male), so it's all a-o-kay!" just doesn't cut it as an excuse."
Should I go on? Those are all quotes from different people.
Yet somehow these villagers HAD eyelashes but, like 2 whole people thought they were silly and they got pulled for being "too controversial" (OPs words). How are eyelashes controversial but not BEARDS? Eyelashes are barely even vaguely gender specific, but not as controversial as facial hair? How does this not smack of a gender bias to people? :/
Excuse me, but you have proved my point all too well, gathering every vaguely related post in the thread just to prove a point I wasn't even trying to make. You're looking at the wrong things, flipping the script to suit your purpose, and acting like an… I believe "entitled jerk" was the term I used, as every other word I could think of would get me a warning.
It's not that big of a deal. You're acting like it is. Making a huge post to counter me is only proving my point. Calm down and stop acting like some know-it-all, holier-than-thou white knight.
"While I can appreciate someone who goes out of their way to gather actual, concrete evidence, I'm afraid you missed my point completely. So I was wrong about it being only you. Big deal. My point wasn't that you were alone in your argument, my point was that you are taking something totally irrelevant and blowing it way out of proportion. Acting like an entitled jerk. Wasting your time, and that of everyone that reads your posts... ...It's not that big of a deal. You're acting like it is"
It's actually a VERY big deal because lots of players thought that this was a big deal and said so only to meet rudeness or irrelevant arguments back and/or be completely ignored. There are about 1/4 of the posts in this thread before I posted relating to how the facial hair should be removed. Then the entire forum was literally told not to express complaints about the facial hair by multiple people INCLUDING the op. Go look yourself.
Beyond my first post which was plenty polite explaining that I wanted to keep exactly these sorts of discussions away from Minecraft, I have only responded to posts directed at me, which have included several telling me to stfu and get off the thread.
I won't do that. If you'd like to back down and/or acknowledge that it's worth talking about and that people should not be told to stop talking about it if they want to, I will happily stop talking about it to you (which only started because you started talking first.) If you'd like to keep making vaguely insulting posts at me (and then being pissy that I make vaguely insulting posts back? I mean if you can't take it, why are you dishing it out?) please feel free. I can do this aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaall year long. I work from home. I got plenty of time to spare an hour in the morning or evening to respond to posts.
How is it irrelevant exactly for me to be responding to posts directed at me in a debate that is on-topic for the suggestion? It is a GREAT suggestion... As soon as you remove gender relevant visuals.
"The reason here is not a political one, bus a design one. Minecraft pixels are large. Any eyelashes you added would just be unrecognizable, ugly black marks."
That would be fair, if the OP hadn't claimed repeatedly that the eyelashes were removed for controversy reasons and that they removed them because people didn't like female gendering of villagers throughout the thread. I agree, the eyelashes would be pretty dumb, but that is hardly what someone calls controversy.
"gathering every vaguely related post in the thread just to prove a point I wasn't even trying to make"
I'm not quite sure how quotes specifically directly relating to how there's not support for facial hair are only vaguely connected. Maybe you should make your point more clear instead of making false and unrelated claims intended to insult me into doing what you ask? I am not a mind reader. I genuinely thought you were trying to tell me I was the only person who cared about this and therefore I should stop talking about it. I responded to you because that is factually wrong and I won't just leave a thread because I am told to.
If you want to avoid discussions like this, don't put gendering features on breedable mobs in minecraft. It's that simple and that's all I have been attempting to express this whole time.
"Calm down and stop acting like some know-it-all, holier-than-thou white knight."
Not really sure how replying to posts directed towards me with factual information is being a "white knight" or a "know-it-all". I'm not going crazy with man-hating or flipping out about it being unjust. I'm not butting into conversations I'm not a part of, insulting people or even telling them to not talk about it. I'm just responding to posts directed towards me in discussion... Kind of like you did just now? (I can't believe you wrote BACK when someone addressed you! Ugh! Only SJWs defend their positions!)
I even tried to move away from it by discussing some heredity and coding that someone else suggested. But as long as other people are responding of COURSE I am going to respond back. Replying to posts directed towards me that are on topic is hardly being a white knight. That's called discussing a topic.
I find it especially ironic that your brought up how I was in the wrong for being personally offended by something that doesn't involve/concern me when you proceeded to respond to a debate that you weren't part of in the slightest that didn't involve/concern you, that you were personally offended by.
I also note that you did the same thing to someone else who brought up a great point with the villagers and racism that I chose not to pursue (but agree with). I think I'm seeing a pattern here. Why do you want to shut down serious discussions about potential problems with this suggestion related to social justice so badly?
So tl;dr
Lots of people care about it, and I'll stop talking about it when other people do. I won't stop just because you try to get me to stop (especially rudely). It's completely reasonable to respond to a post that is made directed specifically towards me and if you think otherwise, please stop responding to posts directed towards you from now on.
Also don't gender in Minecraft. Because that leads to controversy.
Okay, now that that's wrapped up, I have one last thing to say before I go.
Yes, I'm going.
I was an idiot for starting this conversation. You are indeed one of the SJWs of myth. I thought that you might not be; that if I firmly reminded you how ridiculous you were being, you would tone it down a bit. Clearly, I was wrong. You are a Social Justice Warrior, and I'm merely mortal. I don't have the supernatural patience and charisma to make you do anything.
I don't really see how a few pixels situated in a certain place can really get someone to argue their point on the internet to this extent like you insulted their religion, or something.
Like, if you changed all of the villagers into dartboards with beards, what would that signify? they're male Dartboards? Dartboards clearly can't have genders, and I don't think a thing that breeds by literally staring at someone has a gender either.
Or maybe I just don't see the importance with this.
you shouldn't respond like this suggestion will end the world as we know it unless it doesn't have beards. (God forbid that happen.) Argue like you're arguing for a minor aesthetic change instead of all that is holy, and maybe you'll get just a little more respect.
Just because a post has a lot of information in it doesn't mean that it's over-reacting. Never have I said that I am better than anyone or that this is the end of the world so please do not put word in my mouth. I merely have an opinion that I back up with facts and am willing to stick to my guns.
I'm sorry you have little patience for reading things that are long, and no desire for equality as well. Unfortunately, making an argument like "Well SOME girls can have beards so you're wrong!" requires an explanation longer than the post before it. That's the problem with rebutting unthoughful posts with thoughtful ones.
The term for you and your like is "vocal minority", the few that speak the loudest and thus seem far more numerous than they actually are. A simple poll would prove this.
Are you seriously denying that a significant number of other people don't care about this? Incidentally, I counted since I'm just sitting around waiting for a plumber and you don't feel like checking your facts. Including only my first post there are about 98 supports and 20 partial/supports with comments about gendering or facial hair being out of place. That's TECHNICALLY a minority. Technically. But it means people DO care. I've just been more vocal than them because I am willing to reply to people's rebuttals with my own.
You are indeed one of the SJWs of myth.
You mean, a person who is willing to reply to people who say things that are factually inaccurate or insulting? The horror. You seem to forget that you and I are PEOPLE. I have things I care about as I'm sure you do and some things I choose to stick to my guns on. But because I choose to respond to people on the internet about something I care about I am no longer human, I am some mythical creature instead. That's so sad. Have you never tried to argue a point that you care about firmly before?
I thought that you might not be; that if I firmly reminded you how ridiculous you were being, you would tone it down a bit. Clearly, I was wrong.
You thought that by insulting me and telling me that I was alone in my beliefs that I would go away or do as you demanded? Why did you expect that? How often has insulting people gotten them to do what you wanted?
-`-`-
Tankman261:
"I don't really see how a few pixels situated in a certain place can really get someone to argue their point on the internet to this extent like you insulted their religion, or something.
Like, if you changed all of the villagers into dartboards with beards, what would that signify? they're male Dartboards? Dartboards clearly can't have genders, and I don't think a thing that breeds by literally staring at someone has a gender either.
Or maybe I just don't see the importance with this."
But dartboards aren't alive, breeding or representing humans. Even if they were, if you DID have to assign a gender to a dartboard with a beard, would it be female? (Amusingly, dartboards ARE female in some languages.)
Some people think it's very important that mobs remain genderless. I understand that this doesn't always make sense to some people. But imagine if they all DID have beards, and they bred. Can you honestly tell me that nobody associates villagers as human and that none of those people will associate bearded villagers breeding with gay sex and LGBTQ issues and that nobody will start a commentary on it? I can produce some evidence to support this concept but that's apparently too forceful and long to read...
It's important to me, personally (and many others on the thread), to see the mobs remain genderless because I am a girl and a massive amount of media is depicted as masculine for a baseline and Villagers are already mostly depicted as masculine. It's a little upsetti to see nothing but guys everywhere. It makes the classic "cis white male" (a term I honestly hate because it only ever gets used in this context) feel like "normal" and "baseline" and totally ordinary which mans being a girl is NOT ordinary. It makes women feel upset or sad. They perceive that they are being treated as less important, like they are an afterthought, when they are over half the population. It's subtle, it's an annoyance at best, but there's a lot of little annoyances like that and they build up and make it hard to speak out against anything. It can make women GENUINELY think that they are worth less than men if it's said enough times and it becomes status-quo. So it matters having female representation in media and video games, especially when you are already the minority in that group. And if you don't care about it, that's OK. You don't have to. But those of us who DO care about it would simply like to express that without being told our opinion is invalid, how responding to posts directed at us is over-reacting, or how unreasonable we are for experiencing emotions or how we're crazy for being upset over insults. A common experience among women is being told that what they experience isn't real and/or is invalid for some silly reason (like how you shouldn't be against beards on villagers because 1% of women can grow beards) even though they are the ones experiencing it.
Imagine if this were a topic about making villagers have boobs or wear flowing pink dresses with big hair bows. You can bet it would get flamed into oblivion and get no support. Nobody would freak out and say that men are "over reacting" for not wanting boobs and bows on villagers and how they are just crazy MRAs for it. Nobody would tell them that their opinions are completely invalid because manboobs exist. It would be laughable.
I'm just on the other side of the aisle and think equally strongly that they shouldn't be masculine. And in reality, I'd prefer that villagers be neither, because I'm not crazy and demand that everything be a girl. I even support this idea very strongly in theory. I just want a genderless feature to remain genderless.
You are going to get this thread locked, please take your discussion to Reddit or Tumblr as this place is not for arguing. Also, why are you talking about politics on a forum about Minecraft?
A God that holds you over the pit of Hell, much as one holds a spider or some loathsome insect over the fire, abhors you, and is dreadfully provoked. - Jonathan Edwards
"You are going to get this thread locked, please take your discussion to Reddit or Tumblr as this place is not for arguing. Also, why are you talking about politics on a forum about Minecraft?"
That's hardly my intention... And I doubt it will happen. It has stayed pretty much on topic. If serious discussion of the flaws of a suggestion are not permitted in the suggestions forum, why is it there? I think the idea of biome specific races in villagers is also worth discussing and is a serious issue, I have simply chosen not to pursue it. That's about race politics. Would that discussion also not be allowed?
Also are you asking me why gender politics is being discussed in a minecraft suggestion that is proposing making villagers look inherently male? Do you not think that it would become a serious commentary on gender politics in the media if this were implemented? You genuinely couldn't imagine a headline like "IS MINECRAFT ENDORSING GAYS!?" coming out of this, showing up on some TMZ article or similarly base news source and that spreading through media?
Unfortunately, I have to disagree. You aren't discussing the inherent flaws with this suggestion, you are discussing parts about it that personally offend you. Just because you dislike villagers with beards, that doesn't mean this is a bad suggestion, and, really, people will go to Reddit or Tumblr to discuss this stuff. If you could keep it off of this forum, that would be nice.
Of course, you could also shift the discussion to actual flaws this suggestion has, like implementing it, and how, but who's asking?