Not a term, but a lack thereof:
People I have to regularly interact with for work have been excluding “to be”, especially with “needs”, and it’s infuriating.
This issue needs escalated. That report needs fleshed out. Let me know if anything needs cleared up.
Whoever wins…
We lose.
Ha! I use it because I just don’t want the use of “languid” in the language to languish in anguish.
Like I’m lying in the backseat of my parents’ car in the 90s watching the powerlines and the clouds languidly roll by.
It was the “refusal to learn” bit that threw me.
Nothing wrong with not liking a language or having no use for it, but “refusing to learn” implies that there are good reasons to learn and resources to do so, but they refuse to, regardless. Or maybe that’s just my own inference.
Anyway, sorry for being presumptuous. Hard day at work followed by a hard day at home. It’s safer to be rude to strangers online than to people I have to deal with regularly IRL.
Wait, you prefer someone who’s willfully ignorant and intentionality hampers their ability to communicate with most of the world?
Do you also prefer someone who proudly proclaims that they don’t read books?
While I do agree that unity is the way to go in the fight for rights, I can understand why one would want to separate the T from the LGB. It’s an issue of consistency - L, G, and B all describe sexuality, while T describes gender. The two are related, but ultimately separate concepts - one does not inform the other, and grouping them can hypothetically lead ignorant people to think that they are directly related, which could hypothetically lead to non-straight cisfolk experiencing more oppression than they would have otherwise experienced due to the perceived association with transfolk, as non-conforming sexuality is more generally accepted today than non-conforming gender.
That being said, it’s all hypothetical, and what matters is the reality that people from all spectra of nonconformity are regularly oppressed, and in many places, the oppressors treat anyone LGBT+ with the same disdain. So grouping them is vital for the sake of the most oppressed.
The creator of the format is documented as having confirmed the pronunciation is “jif”, but I don’t care. Once he created it and put it into the world, he relinquished his control.
Like we did with Occupy Wall Street or are doing now for Palestine?
Oh, we’ve known. There just isn’t anything we can do about it.
$14 billion. That’s actually pretty hefty. Go, EU regulators! Do what my regulatory-captured country won’t!
I, for one, welcome our new cyborg mushroom overlords.
The obvious answer is to abandon GaaS as a concept and focus making more great single player games like the ones that put Playstation into a clear lead in this generation of the console wars.
However, we’ve seen that a massive failure in the space isn’t enough to deter the truly greedy coughWBcough, so who knows?
Man, I thought I’d found my people in this community, but my perfectly civil comment discussing scientific definitions of ‘sex’ was removed. That shows that this is likely just another echo chamber that can’t abide civil conversation around scientific facts when said facts make people feel icky.
The worst part is I’m on your side. I’m all in on inclusivity and representation. I’m trans. I’m bisexual. I’m just open-minded, seemingly unlike whichever mod removed my comment.
You, apotheotic, seem civil enough. I was looking forward to discussing biological sex with you, maybe expanding my understanding in the process, but it’s not worth trying to have a conversation if I have to worry about my responses being unceremoniously removed. For what it’s worth, your reply has inspired me to do some more reading on the subject.
Reddit mod practices seem to have bled into every corner of Lemmy. Community: blocked. Good riddance.
Eek, this reads like a white person getting upset about someone using “black” instead of “African American”
Who’s being excluded here? My suggestion was to change ‘sex’ in video game character creation to ‘apparent sex.’
Removed by mod
Technically there is an extremely small amount of people born as both sexes (intersex), but they tend to have appearances that favor one sex over the other, so from a game development perspective, they’re covered by having two sex options.
To me, the obvious answer is to do away with the concept of “gender” altogether. It’s a societal construct that doesn’t really need to exist in video game character creation, anyway.
Everybody is born one of two biological sexes: male or female. There. Those are your choices. Call it “apparent sex” and include a pronoun option to allow for players who want to roleplay gender nonconforming characters.
Gestures broadly
Tubgirl.