is an Inexplicit protagonist gender too confusing for readers?

[Discount_Blade]

This is exactly why I make a point about being careful not to mention my gender or ethnicity online. I am certain by this point everyone has assumed my gender and maybe even my ethnicity, but the only time I ever call someone on it is if they start acting up like this.

(Otherwise, I will just accept whatever gender pronouns or ethnic assumptions someone wants to paint me with. So long as you are not acting like an idiot, you can call absolutely anything you like. I revoke that privilege as soon as you start acting like an SJW, at which point I get quite a bit of enjoyment over calling them out, or just acting like an idiot in witch case I say "hey, please stop.")

Honestly, I can't stand these sorts. These types who just want to virtue signal in order to feel good about themselves or bully others harm the cause of the people who advocate for real civil rights.

I can't tell if you're replying to Bellum who was in agreement with me against Cipiteca, or replying to Bellum about me.

 

[Jemini]

I can't tell if you're replying to Bellum who was in agreement with me against Cipiteca, or replying to Bellum about me.

It was the "in agreement." You might have seen, my comment was pretty anti-SJW insanity.

Anyone who genuinely cares about improving the situation on any of the myriad of civil rights fronts absolutely hates SJW virtue signaling types for their stupidity and self-centered bullying ways doing far more harm than good to some genuine good causes.

(An excellent example of the fact that these SJW types genuinely do not care about the causes they claim to support is that ridiculous word they came up with to refer to the Latin American community. (Latinix.) That word is actually unpronounceable in Spanish, meaning there is 0% chance an actual person from the culture came up with it (other than it being a troll.) A lot of people from that community have even come to start considering that word as a slur, which is why I placed the term under spoilers. And yet, this virtue signaling crowd insists upon continuing to use that horrible word. This is why it's not just that these people are misguided, they are straight up racist.)

 

[Cipiteca396]

I can't tell if you're replying to Bellum who was in agreement with me against Cipiteca, or replying to Bellum about me.

They're most likely agreeing with you, though I can't understand why.

Makes perfect sense to me. You just didn't use it correctly. Thats on you.

And how is something without a gender "designed" for someone? Everyone has a gender.

I'm starting to get the impression you're genuinely clueless, rather than actively trying to be rude.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_identity

This is a good place to start. Sorry if it seemed like I was picking a fight for no reason.

TLDR: Not everyone has a gender. So writing a story that can appeal to a boy, a girl, or anyone else, is a nice thing to do. It isn't necessary, but that's no reason to tell someone else not to bother.

 

[Jemini]

They're most likely agreeing with you, though I can't understand why.

I like to think of myself as a pragmatist. I care about civil rights causes, but right now there are a bunch of left-wing racists who just want to wear a mask that says the words "civil rights activist" on it, and use it as a shield to bully people and then turn around and start acting in incredibly racist manners that they disguise as advancing the cause.

The left, right now, has done a lot of damage to civil rights. So, I enjoy calling this out in such a way that will also cause non-left people to begin taking a genuine interest in civil rights causes.

For instance, my internet persona is genderless and raceless, but at the same time it's every gender and every race. This started out being because I think this is how people should be on the internet. It's stupid to give out your personal information on the internet. However, since this nonsense has erupted, it also became a little fun to consider how my genderless online persona fits into all this stuff. I normally don't make a big deal about it, but in cases like this I like to bring it up if the situation seems appropriate.

There is also the aspect I brought up just before you ninjad me with your post. The use of a certain word the SJWs use that is incredibly racist against the Latin American community. I'm not going to repeat it here, you can go up and see for yourself.

I personally consider myself politically independent anyway, so I have no issue with giving the radical left up for lost at this point. So, I act in this way in order to simultaneously drag the moderate left back from the precipice and help them to see that they do not want to associate with those crazies, while also perhaps interesting some right-wing individuals in championing some causes. (More the former than the latter, but so long as you are not a tribal extremist who demonizes all right-wingers as Nazies you are probably aware that they are not at all against civil rights. In fact, the right-wing loves civil rights causes. The right means to preserve what is, and "what is" involves a lot of civil rights law on the books. It's just that the right believes in Martain Luther King rather than Malcom X.)

 

[Cipiteca396]

I like to think of myself as a pragmatist. I care about civil rights causes, but right now there are a bunch of left-wing racists who just want to wear a mask that says the words "civil rights activist" on it, and use it as a shield to bully people and then turn around and start acting in incredibly racist manners that they disguise as advancing the cause.

For instance, my internet persona is genderless and raceless, but at the same time it's every gender and every race.

And yet you're happy to vilify others by throwing around stupid twitter lingo like SJW and virtue signaling purely for the sake of insulting (presumably me, though you never directly mentioned me), while supporting someone like that^.

Honestly, that guy is just someone to be Ignored. But you are just a hypocrite. So many of the things you say directly contradict how and why you say them. And it's made so much worse because occasionally you say something I can agree with. If anyone who's on the fence about something like Gender reads your posts, they may actually think it's acceptable to treat people like garbage just because they don't conform to their standards of sex or gender.

I'd prefer not to talk about this with you anymore. If you want to go back to the topic, then that's fine.

 

[Discount_Blade]

And yet you're happy to vilify others by throwing around stupid twitter lingo like SJW and virtue signaling purely for the sake of insulting (presumably me, though you never directly mentioned me), while supporting someone like that^.

Honestly, that guy is just someone to be Ignored. But you are just a hypocrite. So many of the things you say directly contradict how and why you say them. And it's made so much worse because occasionally you say something I can agree with. If anyone who's on the fence about something like Gender reads your posts, they may actually think it's acceptable to treat people like garbage just because they don't conform to their standards of sex or gender.

I'd prefer not to talk about this with you anymore. If you want to go back to the topic, then that's fine.

Don't know what to tell you. We won't agree here and I have nothing respectful to say to you on the subject because I don't respect your opinions or find them valid, beyond acknowledging that you find them so. I certainly agree with your right to have your opinions, but I also know that I have the right to consider them absurd as well as have the right to voice my opinion about how I find your views absurd. That's the thing with many people. They believe people shouldn't have the right to say anything that goes against the "feel goods" at all because someone's feelings might get hurt.

If your going to have an opinion that is controversial, and then speak said opinion in an open space, like this forum, then you have to accept the consequences of people calling you out on it. You don't get to dictate how someone can and can't respond (and people just really don't seem to understand this extremely simple fact). You have no authority to do so and also have no right to demand I "be polite" if I don't agree and wish to express that I don't. Your feelings are irrelevant. Academic debates or open discussions held in class, they could care less about how the subject matter affects you emotionally because no one will care in the professional world. I know, I've had to do them in uni and as a historian, emotions are irrelevant in my line of work. You can't have your cake and eat it too. (as the saying goes).

Agree to disagree I suppose. Or ignore me. Makes me no difference. Kudos either way.

 

[Jemini]

And yet you're happy to vilify others by throwing around stupid twitter lingo like SJW and virtue signaling purely for the sake of insulting (presumably me, though you never directly mentioned me), while supporting someone like that^.

Honestly, that guy is just someone to be Ignored. But you are just a hypocrite. So many of the things you say directly contradict how and why you say them. And it's made so much worse because occasionally you say something I can agree with. If anyone who's on the fence about something like Gender reads your posts, they may actually think it's acceptable to treat people like garbage just because they don't conform to their standards of sex or gender.

I'd prefer not to talk about this with you anymore. If you want to go back to the topic, then that's fine.

There is absolutely a group of racist bullies on the left who deserve all the demonization that can be heaped upon them. If you think you might be among that group, you might want to look around yourself a little and consider what you are doing.

(And I don't mean anti-white racists either. I made a fairly good case earlier on how they are racist against Mexicans. I would even go so far as saying they love seeing Mexicans die, and I can justify that claim as well going by what's happening on the boarder right now. They are racist against black people, the liberal cities in America have more anti-black racism than any other place on the planet, and vaccine passports are a policy that is being used right now as a means by which to oppress the black community. They are racist against Asians, as well. I'm sure you've heard of the SAT score issues.)

Not going to point any fingers (unless politicians get brought into this.) So long as we are just talking amongst ourselves, I'm just gonna hate the crime and not the criminal on this one while encouraging any such people to really do some soul searching and ask themselves what they are really doing these things for. Is it to promote civil rights? Or is it just for the thrill of winning internet arguments? If you are all about bullying others and are not doing genuine work to help support people who are struggling with issues, then you are a member of those "SJWs" that I was referring to. If you claim to be anti-racist, all the while promoting policies that disproportionately harm minority communities, then you are a member of those "SJWs" that I was referring to.

Moving along from that though, you mentioned something about me being harmful toward gender causes. Thus far, in this conversation at least, I have only laid out the fact that my internet persona is genderless. Nothing more, nothing less. I would like to know how it is you justify that as damaging toward people who are on the fence about gender.

Since you have brought this up though, I might as well lay out what my stance is on this issue. Gender issues are a rather sticky area. Perhaps it would be more wise to avoid the topic all together, but it is also not one where I am going to hold my tongue. Gender is an issue where every policy you can possibly come up with is going to hurt someone. If you come up with a policy favoring the gender conforming individuals, you harm the gender non-binary. If you come up with a policy favoring non-binary individuals, you will harm female athletes and gender conforming children. (Specifically children. Adults are secure enough in their sexuality not to be harmed.)

Anyone who does not start off by acknowledging the precarious nature of the topic and how much harm favoring the gender non-binary is capable of doing is a dangerous individual. Either they are ignorant to the potential harm, in which case all is good if they will stop and think a little after hearing the other side of the issue. Otherwise, they are either aware or just refuse to listen. If that's the case, they are a complete sociopath. The type who would gladly cause permanent crippling damage to a person and say that it is somehow justice. These are people who should not be listened to.

Not discounting that we should do something for gender non-conforming individuals. However, it is a conversation that is so precarious that both sides need to fully acknowledge the damage these policies can cause before you even begin to approach the issue of what should be done about it.

 

[Cipiteca396]

There is absolutely a group of racist bullies on the left who deserve all the demonization that can be heaped upon them. If you think you might be among that group, you might want to look around yourself a little and consider what you are doing.

Not going to point any fingers. Just gonna hate the crime and not the criminal on this one while encouraging any such people to really do some soul searching and ask themselves what they are really doing these things for. Is it to promote civil rights? Or is it just for the thrill of winning internet arguments? If you are all about bullying others and are not doing genuine work to help support people who are struggling with issues, then you are a member of those "SJWs" that I was referring to.

Thus far, in this conversation at least, I have only laid out the fact that my internet persona is genderless. Nothing more, nothing less. I would like to know how it is you justify that as damaging toward people who are on the fence about gender.

Since you have brought this up though, I might as well lay out what my stance is on this issue. Gender issues are a rather sticky area. Perhaps it would be more wise to avoid the topic all together, but it is also not one where I am going to hold my tongue. Gender is an issue where every policy you can possibly come up with is going to hurt someone. If you come up with a policy favoring the gender conforming individuals, you harm the gender non-binary. If you come up with a policy favoring non-binary individuals, you will harm gender conforming children. (Specifically children. Adults are secure enough in their sexuality not to be harmed.)

Anyone who does not start off by acknowledging the precarious nature of the topic and how much harm favoring the gender non-binary is capable of doing is a dangerous individual. Either they are ignorant to the potential harm, in which case all is good if they will stop and think a little after hearing the other side of the issue. Otherwise, they are either aware or just refuse to listen. If that's the case, they are a complete sociopath. The type who would gladly cause permanent crippling damage to a person and say that it is somehow justice. These are people who should not be listened to.

This thread isn't about politics. Although it's great that you aren't a racist, nobody brought it up. You are putting yourself on a pedestal, saying how great you are for hating all those leftist racist jerks.

This post is about a writing style that does not depict the protagonist as any particular gender, in order to reach a wider audience. If the poster really wanted to ensure they had an audience, they would aim for a male audience from one of the nations that enjoy reading web novels. Instead, they are hindering themselves by trying for a genderless character. Meaning, the audience they want to appeal to is female, genderless, or androgynous. That is why gender is relevant, not because I brought it up.

The opposing poster claims that, under absolutely no circumstances does that audience deserve to have their desires validated. When I told them to fuck off... You agreed with them, and started ranting about politics and how much of a piece of shit (people like these) were for arguing with them.

This isn't about government policy. It isn't a case where you can say, "Think of the children! "

This is a case where you actively entered a place meant for non-binary people and said, "Fuck you. You don't have the right to have something special for yourself, because it doesn't take MY feelings into account. Your 'justice' is a crime that brings harm to people who matter, like cis-people who could be corrupted by your ideas."

This isn't a wishy washy, sticky political issue. It's just a personal attack, disguised as... Social Justice. That's why I called you a hypocrite.

 

[Jemini]

This thread isn't about politics. Although it's great that you aren't a racist, nobody brought it up. You are putting yourself on a pedestal, saying how great you are for hating all those leftist racist jerks.

This post is about a writing style that does not depict the protagonist as any particular gender, in order to reach a wider audience. If the poster really wanted to ensure they had an audience, they would aim for a male audience from one of the nations that enjoy reading web novels. Instead, they are hindering themselves by trying for a genderless character. Meaning, the audience they want to appeal to is female, genderless, or androgynous. That is why gender is relevant, not because I brought it up.

The opposing poster claims that, under absolutely no circumstances does that audience deserve to have their desires validated. When I told them to fuck off... You agreed with them, and started ranting about politics and how much of a piece of shit (people like these) were for arguing with them.

This isn't about government policy. It isn't a case where you can say, "Think of the children! "

This is a case where you actively entered a place meant for non-binary people and said, "Fuck you. You don't have the right to have something special for yourself, because it doesn't take MY feelings into account. Your 'justice' is a crime that brings harm to people who matter, like cis-people who could be corrupted by your ideas."

This isn't a wishy washy, sticky political issue. It's just a personal attack, disguised as... Social Justice. That's why I called you a hypocrite.

Wow... I think you might be suffering from some selective amnesia on this one. The most polite thing I can say is that you should go back in this thread and re-read what people have been saying, because you seem to be attributing some things to me that I have never said here.

You were the one who attacked me for demonizing the left. I just pointed out there are very racist people on the left who deserve to be demonized, and made good on what I stated earlier. That being, my goal is to try to prevent moderate leftists from associating with those insane left-wing racists. I view this as a very real and present problem, and you strike me as the kind of person who needs to hear this message.

And now, it looks like you are playing one of those games where you continuously attack people, asking them to justify themselves. As they justify themselves, you move the goal posts in a circle and blame the other person for getting off topic, when YOU are the person who brought this discussion off topic to start with.

My first post was about how I have, myself, experimented with writing gender non-binary characters, and sharing that my results where horrible. I then went on to say that if you want to more effectively appeal to people so everyone can identify with your character, you write a character who is struggling with things that your audience can relate to. The gender and ethnicity of the character themselves absolutely does not matter.

I did make a comment about being creatively bankrupt if you attempt to write a character who conforms to the audience's gender/ethnicity specifically and explicitly in order to have them identify with the character. That is because this is a fact. If the only way you can think of to have your audience relate to a character is to give them the same features and sex organs, then you are creatively bankrupt. That method is objectively the least effective method available, and I just finished giving the most effective method in the paragraph above. Furthermore, if done poorly, making a character that conforms to your gender and ethnicity and asking you to identify with them just because of that can come off as EXTREMELY insulting.

This strikes me as another case of you being fairly out of touch with the real issues on this matter.

 

[Cipiteca396]

Don't see how it matters either way. Male. Female. I mean, what else should there be? If someone needs to have gender removed to feel "included", then they are sad little things whose opinions I don't really think should be adhered to. It's like listening to the serial killer talk about whether or not murder is called for in some particular situation.

Feel free to un-include yourself, then. You'd be the serial killer in this situation. A male would obviously be less concerned with it since there are millions of Male Protagonist stories..

Lol okay snowflake. Can't see how I'm the serial killer in that scenario but sure......

And there are plenty of female protagonist stories also so that was a bit of a retarded statement. Half of my favorites list on RR is female-protags and they are pretty much action-oriented stories for the most part. So uh....your point is?

Oh no, don't tell me, you're going to start screeching about "the patriarchy!!" too huh?

This is exactly why I make a point about being careful not to mention my gender or ethnicity online. I am certain by this point everyone has assumed my gender and maybe even my ethnicity, but the only time I ever call someone on it is if they start acting up like this.

(Otherwise, I will just accept whatever gender pronouns or ethnic assumptions someone wants to paint me with. So long as you are not acting like an idiot, you can call absolutely anything you like. I revoke that privilege as soon as you start acting like an SJW, at which point I get quite a bit of enjoyment over calling them out, or just acting like an idiot in witch case I say "hey, please stop.")

Honestly, I can't stand these sorts. These types who just want to virtue signal in order to feel good about themselves or bully others harm the cause of the people who advocate for real civil rights.

I can't tell if you're replying to Bellum who was in agreement with me against Cipiteca, or replying to Bellum about me.

It was the "in agreement." You might have seen, my comment was pretty anti-SJW insanity.

Anyone who genuinely cares about improving the situation on any of the myriad of civil rights fronts absolutely hates SJW virtue signaling types for their stupidity and self-centered bullying ways doing far more harm than good to some genuine good causes.

(An excellent example of the fact that these SJW types genuinely do not care about the causes they claim to support is that ridiculous word they came up with to refer to the Latin American community. (Latinix.) That word is actually unpronounceable in Spanish, meaning there is 0% chance an actual person from the culture came up with it (other than it being a troll.) A lot of people from that community have even come to start considering that word as a slur, which is why I placed the term under spoilers. And yet, this virtue signaling crowd insists upon continuing to use that horrible word. This is why it's not just that these people are misguided, they are straight up racist.)

Sorry, so many of these weirdoes confuse me.

Not everyone has a gender? Yeah no, thats for people who are incapable of comprehending biology. Meaning people who like to live in fantasies because the real world is too hard or (insert random dumbass buzzword nonsense). Everyone has a gender, and since we can't agree on this, this discussion is pointless. Lol, but I'm the clueless one. Yeah, sure bud. Can't even understand biology and you're calling me clueless. Lol. Hilarious!


Probably because they are making decisions grounded in reality....unlike you apparently. So which gender are you? Cleft? Unicorn? Acorn? Supreme-Style Pizza?

Oh but they'll definitely fight for their right to act outraged......XDDD

My first post was about how I have, myself, experimented with writing gender non-binary characters, and sharing that my results where horrible. I then went on to say that if you want to more effectively appeal to people so everyone can identify with your character, you write a character who is struggling with things that your audience can relate to. The gender and ethnicity of the character themselves absolutely does not matter.

I did make a comment about being creatively bankrupt if you attempt to write a character who conforms to the audience's gender/ethnicity specifically and explicitly in order to have them identify with the character. That is because this is a fact. If the only way you can think of to have your audience relate to a character is to give them the same features and sex organs, then you are creatively bankrupt. That method is objectively the least effective method available, and I just finished giving the most effective method in the paragraph above. Furthermore, if done poorly, making a character that conforms to your gender and ethnicity and asking you to identify with them just because of that can come off as EXTREMELY insulting.

And it's made so much worse because occasionally you say something I can agree with.

when YOU are the person who brought this discussion off topic to start with.

I'd prefer not to talk about this with you anymore. If you want to go back to the topic, then that's fine.

 

[Biggest-Kusa-Out-There]

Ahh what, you would have a problem with someone calling you "Ano kata?" (That person.)

Lol, Ok, joking aside, I never said that Japanese was inclusive. Only that it was easy to write in the gender neutral. English is actually worse on every single one of the points you brought up. It's either similarly as dismissive, or it just becomes awkward as you keep repeating a person's name way too often.

Also, in Japanese, it is somewhat common to use a person's name more often than you would in English, so there is a perfectly polite form of gender neutral in Japanese.

If you want a truly "inclusive" form of gender-neutral speech though, you are going to have to look outside of the major world languages and start scouring through languages spoken by some indigenous tribal societies.

I don't know why this is about me now... but I don't think a Japanese person would refer to me in that way, lol.

That is why I gave the example of an animal in a documentary for the ideal gender neutrality. Only objects are free of it in most cases.

Names are not gender pronouns, they are individual identifiers... that's why everyone has one and is hopefully not too common to have 10 john smiths in a room of 11. So calling people by name is not un-gendering them.

And yeah, I did mention languages began brazilians years ago so they don't hold up to post modernity. Not even a tribal language would hold up to the demands of twitter.

Looks like this thread went to shit...

 

[Jemini]

Looks like this thread went to shit...

Honestly, it was inevitable. This is the reason why there are several forums out there that ban all discussion of gender.

Once again, this is the SJWs ruining good things for everybody. (I am laying 80% of the blame against SJWs. People reacting to the SJWs, such as @Discount_Blade, receive only 20% of the blame even when they are the ones who bring this stuff up first. Wouldn't be raging at them and the good causes they had tainted if they hadn't started the fire in the first place.)

 

[SailusGebel]

Looks like this thread went to shit...