Gender/Racial Locking in 2019

Reproduction is irrelevant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by linay

Uh, what? I wasn't talking about hacking body parts, so don't even go there. Have we learned about a new sex for human reproduction?

---

Then make your responses more clear, because all I got out of that was forcing a binary choice on individuals without consent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rachcouture

Reproduction is irrelevant.

---

Hahahahahaha

On the bright side, if enough people took that stance we wouldn't have a problem after too long.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rachcouture

I'd argue it's a little of both, really. Anyone denying some sort of innate gender qualities on a biological level when things like hormonal baths are being studied is disregarding an entire population of both cisgender and transgender people alike. Still, there is plenty to imprint on people. See: the gender stereotypes present in this thread.



I don't think anyone is disagreeing with that. The issue is people outright denying both a. the existence of variations, and b. that sex/gender is a lot more complicated than what was taught several decades ago.

---

I agree, I think outdated information is prevalent, but the issue is more about framing than the data. Both sides of the argument broadly do the wrong thing with the data. Either they go to black and white, or they take it out of context to dump the core intent that the average layman understands. For extremely practical purposes, its easy to say "Yeah there are pretty much two 'sexes'." That statement isnt true factually, but it represents the core idea that most people fall under the two sets which make up the extreme majority - male and female. The problem with the counter argument is the typical distortion of the facts. Intersex and other genetic outliers do exist, but they do not make up a significant proportion of the population. However, their existance is used in a fashion to downplay the core intent of their being two predominant sexes. It's played up like there are just as many intersex people as male and female, and usually argued this way to fight against other aspects of the sex/gender debate. It's disingenuous and spreading wrong perceptions. IMO that is just as bad a point as the opposite side.

I thought this thread was about a big roe dude wanting to wear a dress? Let men wear dresses!

I was equally perturbed that I don't think I can wear those nice kicks that are male only!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SturmChurro

I thought this thread was about a big roe dude wanting to wear a dress? Let men wear dresses!

---

And high heels. A dress without a decent pair of heels is useless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SturmChurro

I thought this thread was about a big roe dude wanting to wear a dress? Let men wear dresses!

---

Be a caster/healer?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Melichoir

And high heels. A dress without a decent pair of heels is useless.

---

Exactly. Roe's want to look fabulous too!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whiskeybravo

Hahahahahaha

On the bright side, if enough people took that stance we wouldn't have a problem after too long.

---

Laugh if you want, but it's true. A woman that's had a hysterectomy is still a woman. A man that's had a vasectomy is still a man. Fertility or lack there of doesn't define someone's sex/gender. But hey, if this is the hill you want to die on, go right ahead.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Melichoir

The problem with the counter argument is the typical distortion of the facts. Intersex and other genetic outliers do exist, but they do not make up a significant proportion of the population. However, their existance is used in a fashion to downplay the core intent of their being two predominant sexes. It's played up like there are just as many intersex people as male and female, and usually argued this way to fight against other aspects of the sex/gender debate. It's disingenuous and spreading wrong perceptions. IMO that is just as bad a point as the opposite side.

---

No one in this thread has done that, however. Even WhiteArchmage's post is more of a misguided oversimplification than anything else. Granted, I'm not a fan of taking neutral positions like this; occasionally there just isn't a grey area to sit in, and this, imo, is an example of one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SturmChurro

I thought this thread was about a big roe dude wanting to wear a dress? Let men wear dresses!

I was equally perturbed that I don't think I can wear those nice kicks that are male only!

---

Same. I wanna see Roe men in cute AF heels. :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SturmChurro

I thought this thread was about a big roe dude wanting to wear a dress? Let men wear dresses!

I was equally perturbed that I don't think I can wear those nice kicks that are male only!

---

It's nice to meet individuals who are just as intellectually inclined as I. Here here let men wear dresses and let women wear Male clothes.

☆☆☆☆☆ stars for you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rachcouture

And yet it still has effects that relate more to being intersex than anything else. Dated terminology doesn't change that whatsoever. Regardless, there are other examples that affect women, and some that can affect both (i.e. X0/XY mosaicism) making this a moot argument. Sex is not as simple as binary no matter how much you want it to be.

---

This affects less than 1% of the world's entire population. Exceptions are never good grounds for the rule. I'm afraid sex is as simple as binary. As I said before, there is no way around it. It's indisputable which is why the term "gender" is used instead to cover the grey area. Biological sex refers specifically to the sex organs a person possesses. In 99% of cases worldwide, biological sex can be determined under 12 weeks after conception (varies from case to case). It is based off of the chromosomes assigned much earlier in the process of fetal development, and there are only two possible results. This person has either male or female sex organs.

We can argue about intersex and even transgender (true TG and not trans-trenders), but these are a rare, rare exception. However, in their cases the term "gender" is appropriate to what they identify with. Again though, this is going to be either male or female. Two choices. Gender fluid people - go back and forth between male and female. Two choices. Genderless people don't identify with either male or female. Two choices.

To put it shortly: Your identification card is going to have one of two sexes printed on it.

Frankly I'm happy there are limits to what each gender can wear. And fortunately the people who want to parade their males in bras and heels are not the majority so I'm not worried about Yoshi caving in any time soon. They struggled enough with the bunny outfits from the GS, I doubt they would take it this far.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Melichoir

Ill try to keept his brief: This is the "tabula Rasa" position - men and women are blank slates at birth and are conditioned by society. To quickly illustrate why this argument fails without to much effort, the core position of Trans Identity is that it is something people are born into. A genetic factor. Since this is the case, explain how can Trans people be Trans if men and women are blank slates?

---

I'll admit to being behind in my trans reading, and there's some debate right now on if trans individuals even need corrective surgery (from which I'll stay away because, as said, I'm behind on my trans-issues reading) my original point was about how social characteristics that we consider "manly" or "womanly", especially as how clothing and personal appearance are seen (it IS what the thread is about), have been socially constructed instead of being biological.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Melichoir

You mention erasing homosexuality, but pushing that Gender isnt related to the biological and some of what we do is influenced by our sex and genes comes across as erasing Trans people. Itd be like saying a person's sexuality is purely societal, that people choose their sexuality.

---

I mentioned erasing homosexuality because the quote was "men and women complement one another", which heavily implies male/male and female/female relationships don't exist or don't count. I'll avoid getting into an argument about it because it's besides the point. Although it's been noted that (visible) homo-, bi-, and/or pan- sexuality is more prevalent in places where it's more accepted... which is sort of a chicken and egg kind of dilemma.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Melichoir

Humans are not binary when it comes sexes, but we are heavily bimodal - sex is a 'spectrum, but an extremely vast majority of the population are discernibly male and female genetically. This is the same for any other genetic variations that are not part of the average (which keep getting brought up.) Even those that do have genetic variances, most of those still display outward sex characteristics that are predominately Male or Female. The issue is framing, though. On one side of the argument, people are saying flat out there are only two sexes cause of Chromosomes. They are wrong, as intersex is a thing. The otherside, however, is playing up intersex and other genetic outliers in a fashion to say "Sex is a spectrum so saying male and female is irrelevant." This is disingenuous (and wrong) as it seeks to muddy the water by implying a false truth with facts taken out of context. The false truth being that there is no such thing as two predominant sexes and that everything is interchangeable.

---

I am agreeing with this point, it's mostly how we percieve said sexes socially (i.e. gender) that we get into further problems. I wasn't about to do a whole essay on the OF (there's still some papers I haven't read and I'd need a refresher on others).

That said, this is likely an argument that has no bearing on the actual thread :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rachcouture

No one in this thread has done that, however. Even WhiteArchmage's post is more of a misguided oversimplification than anything else. Granted, I'm not a fan of taking neutral positions like this; occasionally there just isn't a grey area to sit in, and this, imo, is an example of one.

---

Sorry! I didn't want to pull all my saved articles and look through my books for a forum post but here we are lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rachcouture

Same. I wanna see Roe men in cute AF heels. :(

---

+1

I understand why they don't retroactively go back and make things cross glamour in regards to old items. That's a lot of work for not a lot of pay-off quite frankly, especially in regards to older glamours. However I would like to see them allow glamours across gender going forward. There's been a few too many times I've honestly preferred the male version of an outfit and wished I could wear it on my female character or vice versa.

Every time I look at the forums there is another thread like this! Gender blah blah, sexist blah blah.

"But why do you read it then?!" You may ask. Because it's like watching the Jerry springier show or a train wreck, try as you might you can't.look.away!

For everyone's sanity mostly mine anytime a thread devolves into lectures and debates on gender they should be locked!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rachcouture

Laugh if you want, but it's true. A woman that's had a hysterectomy is still a woman. A man that's had a vasectomy is still a man. Fertility or lack there of doesn't define someone's sex/gender. But hey, if this is the hill you want to die on, go right ahead.

---

You seem to at least be an expert on taking quotes out of context.

Even though it wasn't my comment, Reproductive organs =/= Fertility. Why is the woman still a woman? Why is the man still a man? Because they still have the bodily parts to make them such, obviously. Furthermore, there are plenty of people who aren't fertile but have never had those procedures done. Very poor example on your part.

Besides, you (and others) seem to be glossing over the fact that reproductive organs aren't the only thing that makes up gender. WhiteArchMage seems to trample on the idea that throughout history certain attributes have been associated with a particular gender. For example females being more creative and empathetic, males being more logical or prone to violence. What W.A.M fails to point out, in some ancient cultures it was considered ideal for a person to achieve a balance of aspects from both genders to be complete. Women embracing the attributes of men, men embracing the attributes of women to achieve a higher state of consciousness. I think the most historical information in this regard comes from ancient Egypt, but the concept is mimicked in some modern cultures a well. Whether these are truly in nature or whether they are formed by society is rather irrelevant - the fact remains that sexes do indeed exhibit different behavior within a fairly predictable pattern.

A man wants to wear women's clothing, but what makes a particular piece of cloth suitable for a woman to wear to begin with? Your imagination?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rachcouture

Stop relying on your high school biology education. Science evolves as we learn more.

---

It's true, we have much better technology in this day and age than ever before. Gender Dysphoria has likely been a medical condition since the beginning of time, but where we used to be able to do nothing about it - perhaps there are things we can do now. I still don't see any evidence what-so-ever that would remove this from being a medical condition. It is what it is, we all get dealt a different hand in life.

Of all the MMORPGs I have played, never have I seen real-world issues be brought into a game forum so much... And this even includes all the true gender locked games I have played.I'm just going to assume everyone is just bored out of their minds at this point.

I cannot to wait to see in 2020 what would be next controversial!

Stop spreading your american gender politics bs here

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thatusernameistaken

Not another one.

---

you say this but we just got ANOTHER thread talking about butt sliders like cmon pervy people yet when people post something like this everyone boos and cries

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whiskeybravo

You seem to at least be an expert on taking quotes out of context.

---

Because 'Hahahahahaha' is so much to go on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whiskeybravo

Even though it wasn't my comment, Reproductive organs =/= Fertility. Why is the woman still a woman? Why is the man still a man? Because they still have the bodily parts to make them such, obviously. Furthermore, there are plenty of people who aren't fertile but have never had those procedures done. Very poor example on your part.

---

1. It's exactly what you meant, and you know it. Don't backtrack.
2. Body parts don't define it, either. If it were that convenient, transgender and intersex people simply wouldn't exist.
3. It's a perfect example. You just don't like it because it doesn't support your ignorance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whiskeybravo

Besides, you (and others) seem to be glossing over the fact that reproductive organs aren't the only thing that makes up gender. WhiteArchMage seems to trample on the idea that throughout history certain attributes have been associated with a particular gender. For example females being more creative and empathetic, males being more logical or prone to violence. What W.A.M fails to point out, in some ancient cultures it was considered ideal for a person to achieve a balance of aspects from both genders to be complete. Women embracing the attributes of men, men embracing the attributes of women to achieve a higher state of consciousness. I think the most historical information in this regard comes from ancient Egypt, but the concept is mimicked in some modern cultures a well. Whether these are truly in nature or whether they are formed by society is rather irrelevant - the fact remains that sexes do indeed exhibit different behavior within a fairly predictable pattern.

---

Not mentioning something because it wasn't even part of the discussion is a far cry from glossing over.

What you are discussing are socially ingrained gender roles; that is why you see an obvious pattern. There is, however, ultimately nothing biologically innate about any of those personality qualities whatsoever. A man can be soft and an excellent caregiver (single fathers), and a woman can be incredibly violent and sociopathic (one of the many female serial killers to exist throughout).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whiskeybravo

A man wants to wear women's clothing, but what makes a particular piece of cloth suitable for a woman to wear to begin with? Your imagination?

---

It's subjective.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whiskeybravo

It's true, we have much better technology in this day and age than ever before. Gender Dysphoria has likely been a medical condition since the beginning of time, but where we used to be able to do nothing about it - perhaps there are things we can do now. I still don't see any evidence what-so-ever that would remove this from being a medical condition. It is what it is, we all get dealt a different hand in life.

---

It's not a medical condition. Medical procedures can, however, help. There is a big difference.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jin-

Stop spreading your american gender politics bs here

---

It's always funny to read comments like this. OP just wanted more options. It was the naysayers that turned it into a political discussion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rachcouture

It's always funny to read comments like this. OP just wanted more options. It was the naysayers that turned it into a political discussion.

---

Another intellectual ☆☆☆☆☆ stars for you my friend.

I never knew asking to wear women's clothes could be so dangerous. People just dont know how to have fun these days.

And the naysayers dont suprise me. I'm disturbing their "Safe White Space" with my diverse and equal ideologies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nyvara

Every time I look at the forums there is another thread like this! Gender blah blah, sexist blah blah.

"But why do you read it then?!" You may ask. Because it's like watching the Jerry springier show or a train wreck, try as you might you can't.look.away!

For everyone's sanity mostly mine anytime a thread devolves into lectures and debates on gender they should be locked!

---

My sentiments exactly. I mean, *clears throat for extreme sarcasam*, its 2019 for crying out loud! I shouldn't have to see these ludicrous threads keep popping up!

How to take quotes of of context 101

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by linay

It is as far as the normative effect of sexual difference is concerned: reproduction. There is no third sex for humans from which a new human individual can be conceived.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rachcouture

Reproduction is irrelevant.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rachcouture

Fertility or lack there of doesn't define someone's sex/gender.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whiskeybravo

Reproductive organs =/= Fertility.

---

1. Not sure what point I made that I appear to be backtracking
2. Body parts do make a huge, if not the biggest, impact on determining gender
3. No, it's still a terrible example

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rachcouture

What you are discussing are socially ingrained gender roles; that is why you see an obvious pattern. There is, however, ultimately nothing biologically innate about any of those personality qualities whatsoever. A man can be soft and an excellent caregiver (single fathers), and a woman can be incredibly violent and sociopathic (one of the many female serial killers to exist throughout).

---

I don't think you are in a position to define what is biological and what is not, nor am I quite frankly. My point was that regardless of whether you think they're created biologically or socially, they do in fact exist. Nice of you to assume that because I didn't mention how lines can be crossed that I'm somehow oblivious to lines being crossed all the time. In the case of "men being soft" or "women being violent", we don't then say that men are always soft, or women are always violent - they remain exclusive to their "ingrained gender role" and we simply make an exception in that particular case.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rachcouture

It's subjective.

---

Subjective based on what?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rachcouture

It's not a medical condition. Medical procedures can, however, help. There is a big difference.

---

It is indeed, and if you fail to acknowledge that then you'll never escape it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rachcouture

You just don't like it because it doesn't support your ignorance.

---

Right back at ya.

I honestly would love to see a Roe in a lolita dress. ^_^

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whiskeybravo

I don't think you are in a position to define what is biological and what is not, nor am I quite frankly.

---

Then why are you still here spreading your misinformation?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kyrausagi

I honestly would love to see a Roe in a lolita dress. ^_^

---

So swole, but so cute.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rachcouture

So swole, but so cute.

---

Yes, I wouldn't mind to have a Roe,Hroth, ect.... to look elegant and cute with! ^_^

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rachcouture

So swole, but so cute.

---

Emphasis on the swole. Swole cute bois need love

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JunkhogMakison

And the naysayers dont suprise me. I'm disturbing their "Safe White Space" with my diverse and equal ideologies.

---

Care to clarify your statement here on "safe white spaces"?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mistyregions

Because it's the designer vision for gender locked gear and races, stop forcing things. If you dont respect the artist and designer vision for the game, please find another one and forcing your opinions and wants and desires into something that wasn't intended for.

---

God forbid the playerbase ask for something that would add to the game while not removing from it in any way shape or form

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zeylos

God forbid the playerbase ask for something that would add to the game while not removing from it in any way shape or form

---

Blasphemy, I mean F me for wanting to have fun and get my money's worth right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JunkhogMakison

And the naysayers dont suprise me. I'm disturbing their "Safe White Space" with my diverse and equal ideologies.

---

Some people just feel the need to be hateful and there's no getting around that, unfortunately.

But it'd be nice to see less disparity between men and women's gear in the future, if nothing else. It'd just be nice if I was able to see a girl's cute top, try it on and not see something that might as well be a different item altogether. Or see it's only for women, find the equivalent item for men, and find out there's nothing even aesthetically similar about the two.

This thread is going places and not a good place mind you. Just give our swole bois their dresses and heels and let's call it a day.

They keep using the excuse of to much gear and the challenge/ hassle of adapting gear to different genders/new races(and genders...). How long will we as paying customers allow that excuse to continue? These are not features wanted by a few of the community, but by a substantial amount of the player base. One would think that with so much demand a true and ardent focus to these concerns would be paramount in their plans, as of the previous producers letter, it seems that race gender lock and subsequent gear unlocking (by virtue of the same arguments) is still back burner fair...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JunkhogMakison

Blasphemy, I mean F me for wanting to have fun and get my money's worth right?

---

Since you didnt respond, gonna ask again, care to clarify the following underlined comment:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JunkhogMakison

...And the naysayers dont suprise me. I'm disturbing their "Safe White Space" with my diverse and equal ideologies.

---

Shouldnt take more than a sentence or two to clarify what you mean, right?

IRL you can wear whatever you want, and barring some obvious exceptions I will support you. This isn't real life though, this is a video game and we all operate within the strict confines of its creators. It is what it is, either accept it or play something else that doesn't offend you.

Maid outfit for Male roe!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Melichoir

Since you didnt respond, gonna ask again, care to clarify the following underlined comment:

Shouldnt take more than a sentence or two to clarify what you mean, right?

---

Your a smart individual you can figure it out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Awha

Maid outfit for Male roe!!

---

Amen to that brother. Well shall clean the world of Eorzea of all its toxins and look swole while doing so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JunkhogMakison

Your a smart individual you can figure it out.

---

I like how calling someone white or straight is used as an insult now.

What a world we live in where people preach inclusion and equality and also insult people by calling them straight and white in the same sentences.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Melichoir

Since you didnt respond, gonna ask again, care to clarify the following underlined comment:



Shouldnt take more than a sentence or two to clarify what you mean, right?

---

When people say things like that it usually means they're racists.

It's somehow become alright or even cool to disparage people on the basis of their race/sexuality/whatever again except now it's only okay when you're saying rude things about cishet white men or people who fall into at least some of those categories.

Tl;dr- they're likely an sjw and not worth anyone's time.