Why is XAKU not considered the S+ tier frame, that sits above all others.

[Karyst]

10 hours ago, Xycelium said:

Except, I did that after you outright said that you willingly disregard; not even just a character's pronouns, but just their confirmed identity in general. That's why, I stated that if you do not find it necessary to respect a fictional character, why would I expect you to do the same for someone else? This is basic 1:1 correlation. You could have disproved me at this point, but all you want to do is attack me over it.

Also, you seem really keen on me starting this; when all I said at first "Ya know, I see that Xaku is being discussed, but I'm genuinely confused by how people seem to keep on referring to a different Warframe" and continued on with my post. I don't see how you can construe this as being overtly defensive over anything, since I was genuinely confused while reading the thread. This is exactly why you're being hostile, because it's not normal to see anything I said and turn into me being offended over anything, and you continuing to insult me doesn't help your case at all.

That's why, I stated that if you do not find it necessary to respect a fictional character, why would I expect you to do the same for someone else? This is basic 1:1 correlation. You could have disproved me at this point, but all you want to do is attack me over it.

How about I disprove you instead? 

Disregarding a fictional characters pronounce is not a 'basic' 1:1 correlation, since fictional character and a 'someone else, ie a real person is not one and the same. What you perceived as their 'attack' was due to this false correlation. Furthermore, to respect something that is fictional, I would have to seek a judgment of a psychiatrist on a person that does that. And lastly, we designed Xaku, we shall call it whatever we like. 

[Xycelium]

2 hours ago, sunderthefirmament said:

I'll make a halfhearted and likely futile attempt to course correct here by listing another reason I don't think Xaku is super widely played: their augments.  Sevagoth's augments have helped him become a powerful nuker.  In contrast, Xaku's augments are lackluster at best.  Xaku's 3 augment might have some use, but it's a little tone deaf on DE's part.  Cycling abilities are clunky.  Abilities with excessive tap/holds are clunky.  Look at Lavos and his lack of popularity, and look at the complaints about Titania's 2.  An augment that requires constantly fiddling with a cycling ability isn't going to be one that many players will find immediately approachable or worth the slot.  Xaku's 2 augment is even more tone deaf.  Why would you want a healing augment on a frame whose breakpoints and stat scaling basically scream "glass cannon"?

I agree 100% with you on this. The Relentless Lost's effect by itself is actually quite great, since getting some innate Power Strength and Efficiency is always great, yet it does feel somewhat clunky to have cycle between The Lost in order to effectively use the ability in the first place. And there have been cases where I forget which ability I've already cycled to and it's too late to change my mind. Plus, the augment doesn't really incentivize actually utilizing every variation of The Lost since you can just decide to only use two out of the three and the augment will still activate. Honestly, cycling abilities and hold activation should be looked into, because I actually do struggle myself with figuring out how I would alter them.

Also yeah, Vampiric Grasp is neat, but it's only going to be relevant if you ever find yourself without The Vast Untime up, which shouldn't be most of the time, and even then the requirements to get the healing bonus in the first place is a bit much. Honestly, that augment could benefit from simply having Health Orbs more likely to drop after enemies are killed or hit by the Void Replicas instead of directly healing, that way Xaku can also act as a support Warframe in tandem with healing themselves if they ever do get hit.

Edited September 7 by Xycelium

[GPrime96]

On 2024-09-01 at 10:53 PM, dwqrf said:

Probably because dodge chance for attacks and projectiles will eventually kill you every now and then, and that the damage reduction is just for spells.

Also, he has quite a immobile strip defense.

Very true, RNG defense mechanism isn’t reliable and it got a way better strip by subsuming off The Lost for something like Terrify or Ophanim Eyes. Grasp of Lohk git heavily effected by Jade’s Shadows update and Xata’s Whisper’s a subsume for other frames.

[(PSN)slightconfuzzled]

Everything is relative. Lets say that World War III is announced across all news platforms? If I find out my next door neighbour is an active serial killer, obviously thats not necessarily as important to the world, but its still an issue. Then obviously as far as communication goes, not everyone will always be literal, and being reductive can often make sense in context. Like people emphasising traits of a fictional character not being something that should be taken roo serious. To note though, some people can be more literal than others, and something being fictional or more abstract shouldn't necessarily undermine certain issues. This is also where some peoples personal beliefs, ego, and emotion can come into play as far as framing goes. Like do you want to try using racial slurs against fictional characters? Why not? They are only fictional. Well if you try some of them on this website, you may be warned and banned. Is this an example of the website taking things too seriously, or an example of the individual not having adequate understanding, knowledge and discretion? 

Also as far as framing goes, have you ever met someone who was really obviously angry and upset, but they insisted they weren't? Thats something people can do a lot in other contexts. Also, its something people will often attempt to do as far as framing others behaviour too. Rhetorical techniques, certain types of communication, arguing, so on, for the purposes of sounding more persuasive, compelling, "right", etc. Some people learn such techniques, or styles of communication, but you don't have to. A lot of people pick up such techniques naturally by interacting with others, and from childhood. Also small reminder, such rhetorical techniques or communication styles... its not really about being wrong or right, or truthful or fake, its more complicated than that. One of the most common online is preemptively accusing other people of being "offended", because everyone knows that an "offended person" is very sensitive, fragile, over emotional and prone to needless outbursts. So if they disagree with you over something, if you paint them as the easily offended, well it means you are a cool, calm stoic and reasonable person. However often thats not actually accurate or true, its a technique easily sensitive people often employ. Again to be clear though, some, not all, some actual stoic people may, peoples interactions can be complex. 

The other thing though, is anyone who knows even a small bit about language and communication and how interactions between people can become, as well as some experience in the various settings such communication can occur around (for example online on the internet), well... This is my long way of saying, before you accuse someone of being something, are you actually being 1. Fair. 2. Accurate. 3. Projecting and unintentionally revealing something about yourself? Even if the person you are communicating with, may seem guilty of that as well, often its better to actually address that instead of respond in kind. 

Then finally as far as language goes, it can be often be complex, before we add in different peoples subjective lives and experiences, but they isn't really that needlessly confusing, complicated, or a new English term uses by extremist BBQ WIFI LGBQT+ SJW types. DE, and specifically DE employees, on official Dev Streams, the more casual other streams, generally use certain non binary terminology around Xaku specifically. Other Warframes, will often also be gendered a certain way. Voruna, Wisp, etc as her, Excalibur, Volt, as he. Do you as a random player of the game, have to care or apply similar terminology? No, of course not. Maybe you have never actually witnesses someone at DE talk about the fictional characters that way. Their intent seems clear though. So their can be genuine, neutral ignorance. I say neutral in the good natured sense, different peoples cultures, languages, ages, experiences etc wilful ignorance. Understanding what DE is attempting and intends, but rebuking it. There are some other reactions though too. Like some people reject it by way of attempted reductionist type reasoning. Sort of like the "Bro, its not that complicated, I am just right. lol people are so sensitive these days, not like me, a big tough person haha". It can be that simple, if everyone is being good faith, and avoiding hasty generalisations that passively undermine other peoples views to highlight your own, but if thats not happening... well usually thats where complications lay.  Which can lead to people like me, wanting to run step by step analysis of how such things can happen and why. 

 

On 2024-09-08 at 12:50 AM, dwqrf said:

here is a huge difference between pointing out the right wording, and being angry because we used the wrong wording.

 

I agree. I think some people in this thread are just trying to determine whether you are someone who is sincerely open to better understanding language, terminology and communication, or whether you might be someone who had an established belief system, and using differences in peoples experiences around language, education and communication as a barrier in justifying your beliefs. Which is something people often can do. 

Semi related but when I was younger, I used to think humans only had five senses. Thats actually a bit wrong and inaccurate. Like, it can often be fair to understand why and how many people believe we have five senses, but scientifically speaking, we have much more. Though how many exactly may depend on what one means exactly. Saying we have five main traditional senses, wouldn't be too inaccurate. My example of insisting we only have five, may be though (I say may be in the sense of intent and understanding and interpretation). Also its good to try and remove emotion from such discussions. 

Assuming a user is angry, if they happen to be right about a matter, should it matter if they are angry or not? Like ideally it would be nice if they weren't angry, but an angry man saying 2 + 2 = 4, isn't necessarily wrong. 

Also since tone can be hard to establish through text, what I write above is in a neutral and friendly warm manner. I know you asked another user to "not make a big deal" about it, but you also write your are a linguist no? So you also have the ability to appreciate and enjoy discussions around language and terminology? This is why I hope you find my reply in good faith. 

Take care and all the best to you. 

[(PSN)slightconfuzzled]

On 2024-09-07 at 6:23 AM, Xycelium said:

Jokes aside, I have been seeing a lot of Zephyr more recently as of late, and I remember enjoying her enough to fork over some money for a TennoGen skin for her before. I know she was reworked at some point, but did she get some more buffs recently? I would probably be interested in trying her out, especially for her mobility and CC. 

How do you build her exactly? To reach these goddess heights? No pun intended.

 

The other low key great thing about Zephyr, is for loot hungry people, her 2 is great for breaking boxes. Like since we are talking about Xaku, who in my opinion is the best box breaker in the game (I hear Limbo is also great, but he is one of the few Warframes, I never feel affinity for in play style). 

I am pretty confident, that the reason I have never personally struggled with any resources in this game (think resources for Bile, Entrati Lanthorns, Orokin Cells etc) is because I played so much of Xaku, Zephyr, Mag, and Lavos. All decent to excellent box breakers. Also great at just a lot of different aspects of the game. 

Zephyr is also one of those Warframes, thats a bit like Lavos. When elements are buffed, she is passively buffed as well, because her Tornados ability to group enemies and how that can synergise with certain elements like Blast and Gas specifically. 

Hope you give them a try. They are super underrated! Also they can have some similarities to Xaku, as far as both being underrated, having high damage, seeming a bit like glass cannons, until you sort of figure out their survival techniques, and energy management! 

Take care! 

[SneakyErvin]

On 2024-09-07 at 11:22 AM, dwqrf said:

Don't imply we lack respect and that we don't know things. We just don't use alternative definition of common knowledge, or else all meaning would be lost in the void.

The funny thing is that the person claims people are disrespectful yet perfectly fine with using their prefered pronoun for others since they think it is a more neutral pronoun, even though it is a personally chosen pronoun and not the same as the plural form used in grammar. Which is hilarious since apparently mislabeling people only goes one way. I also tried to explain to them in another thread that Xaku being "them" isnt a gender thing, it is simply because it is a multi-form, which even DE has pointed out is the reason. And people that refer to themselves by a personally chosen "them/they" pronoun are very much not multi-form, since they are still a single individual.

Which also makes sunder's reply to your gramatic use of the word hilarious, since they seem to be under the same impression, that if you arent using the personally picked pronoun "them" you shouldnt use the gramatically correct plural for "them" either. Which just makes me go 🤷‍♂️ and think "wtf is wrong with the world today?". So for Xaku, "they/them" is rooted in that plural, since we are talking about a group of individuals. Where "it" would also fit since we are talking about a construct of pieces from many individuals and not a person. Sunder must also be a hoot in the hood where "are" and "is" are often interchangable and often gramatically incorrect. But hey, maybe there they accept it since they dont wanna look racist.

[zThulsaDoomz]

My question is who considered Xaku S tier?

[Xycelium]

2 hours ago, SneakyErvin said:

The funny thing is that the person claims people are disrespectful yet perfectly fine with using their prefered pronoun for others since they think it is a more neutral pronoun, even though it is a personally chosen pronoun and not the same as the plural form used in grammar.

2 hours ago, SneakyErvin said:

Which also makes sunder's reply to your gramatic use of the word hilarious, since they seem to be under the same impression, that if you arent using the personally picked pronoun "them" you shouldnt use the gramatically correct plural for "them" either.

Not sure why you would write that first sentence when you immediately contradict yourself in the next paragraph, but alright. I mean, you're not wrong for using it, but I don't know why I'm suddenly wrong for doing so too.

25 minutes ago, zThulsaDoomz said:

My question is who considered Xaku S tier?

I guess the OP since they made this thread. I also thought Xaku was pretty strong, but perhaps not now ever since the technical nerf to Grasp of Lohk.

[mac10smg--Toa_of_Green]

12 hours ago, zThulsaDoomz said:

My question is who considered Xaku S tier?

Me

In my heart

:P

[mac10smg--Toa_of_Green]

Also...I just gotta ask...

14 hours ago, SneakyErvin said:

Sunder must also be a hoot in the hood where "are" and "is" are often interchangable and often gramatically incorrect. But hey, maybe there they accept it since they dont wanna look racist.

....????

If you're implying what I think you're implying...

[Marvelous_A]

Xaku is lacking in the survivability department, which is a bigger concern than offensive ability in late game.

[SneakyErvin]

22 hours ago, Xycelium said:

Not sure why you would write that first sentence when you immediately contradict yourself in the next paragraph, but alright. I mean, you're not wrong for using it, but I don't know why I'm suddenly wrong for doing so too.

Except I dont. You kinda just repeat the same thing that Sunder pick on in their reply. The two are not the same, the they (and here their) are not tied to gender identity, the words are simply tied to gramatic rules, where using the plural form instead of he/she is neither uncommon nor incorrect when refering to someone in third person. He/she would have been equally correct, even if Sunder identifies as something else, since it is purely grammar. And that is my point, people these days are getting upset by being "misslabeled" based on simple grammar, because they dont differentiate between their picked gender and the same words used through simple grammar.

It is just a word that can mean several things depending on the context, just as port, which means something different depending on the context. From a place where ships dock, a socket you insert a cable into, one side of a ship/boat or the transfer/expansion of something.

9 hours ago, mac10smg--Toa_of_Green said:

Also...I just gotta ask...

....????

If you're implying what I think you're implying...

Possibly. I'm refering to how some people within a certain culture use is/are/am or has/have etc. without following plural and singular rules. And I'm not saying that is wrong, I'm just saying that the person nitpicking on a non-native (on an international forum at that) likely wouldnt nitpick on them, even though those other people are native english speakers and should likely be just as upsetting for the person if they care that much about grammar.

 

[dwqrf]

il y a 10 minutes, SneakyErvin a dit :

Sunder

I don't understand, who/what is this Sunder. Enlighten me.

[SneakyErvin]

11 minutes ago, dwqrf said:

I don't understand, who/what is this Sunder. Enlighten me.

The fellow that pointed out your use of "they" as singular on page 3.

[dwqrf]

il y a 55 minutes, SneakyErvin a dit :

Possibly. I'm refering to how some people within a certain culture use is/are/am or has/have etc. without following plural and singular rules. And I'm not saying that is wrong, I'm just saying that the person nitpicking on a non-native (on an international forum at that) likely wouldnt nitpick on them, even though those other people are native english speakers and should likely be just as upsetting for the person if they care that much about grammar.

 

[SneakyErvin]

32 minutes ago, dwqrf said:

Yep! "You is" gives me the shivers, so does "could of". I mean ffs natives, get your S#&$ together!

[mac10smg--Toa_of_Green]

....okay, guess I'm doing this.

1 hour ago, SneakyErvin said:

The two are not the same, they (and here their) are not tied to gender identity, the words are simply tied to grammatic rules, where using the plural form instead of he/she is neither uncommon nor incorrect when referring to someone in third person. 

But...it's not plural if it's being used to refer to a single person. That's the whole point of calling it a singular they. Additionally, he/she would be incorrect if the person in question doesn't use either pronoun. Though that's aside the point considering 'they' is infinitely better than he/she just on principle, saying he/she is awkward, is 2 more syllables than necessary, and is a lot more work to type.

Though that ties into my next point...

He/she would have been equally correct, even if Sunder identifies as something else, since it is purely grammar.

...no, it would not.

Look, I understand that many, many more people identify with their assigned gender that with a non-binary pronoun, but in this case if Sunder DID identify as a gender identity aside from the standard masculine and feminine ones, then at that point you're just being rude.

Also...you do know that any pronoun used in any context is...'purely grammar', right? Like, you wouldn't say that 'we' is purely grammar when you use it for your group of friends as opposed to using it in the context of your racial or religious identity.

And that is my point, people these days are getting upset by being "mislabeled" based on simple grammar, because they don't differentiate between their picked gender and the same words used through simple grammar.

Okay, I'll give an example.

I am unsure of your gender, so I'll default to they/them/their. If you clarified your gender, but I continued to refer to you as they/them/their, would you feel at least a little miffed?

Obviously, it is inherently gender-neutral and nothing is implied by me using it anyway, so perhaps you aren't. So, let's say that, instead of using they/them/their, I used - I dunno - feminine pronouns for you if you use he/him, or masculine pronouns if you use she/her. That would most definitely feel off, wouldn't it?

It is just a word that can mean several things depending on the context, just as port, which means something different depending on the context. From a place where ships dock, a socket you insert a cable into, one side of a ship/boat or the transfer/expansion of something.

Wow, almost as if...all grammar is inherently tied to each other and one use isn't necessary mutually exclusive to another use? Who would've thought.

Also...why are you using a noun example in a conversation about pronouns? Personally, I would've used the word 'who', as it can both be used to declare an unknown (i.e. who is this?) or be used to establish an action about a subject (i.e. x is the one who did etc.)

But that last bit...

Possibly. I'm referring to how some people within a certain culture use is/are/am or has/have etc. without following plural and singular rules. And I'm not saying that is wrong, I'm just saying that the person nitpicking on a non-native (on an international forum at that) likely wouldn't nitpick on them, even though those other people are native English speakers and should likely be just as upsetting for the person if they care that much about grammar.

Well, I am a native English speaker, so I guess I can answer that: grammar is made up. It's not this mystical binding force that will immediately smite you down if you say something 'incorrect'.

If those 'certain cultures' say stuff in that way, then at that point it's just a different dialect. Just because I wouldn't say it that way doesn't mean I should stop all conversation just to lecture them on 'proper grammar'.

And yeah, I can see how this argument can be twisted to support your end, but in this case it's different since it's inherently tied to identity. Gender identity and grammar are pretty intrinsically linked to a point where basically every dialect follows the same path.

Apologies if this gets a little long, I just need to make clear what I mean.

I am a guy. I use he/him. If someone were to ignore that and refer to me as she/her, I would want to correct them. Sure, it's not 'grammatically' incorrect, a pronoun is just a pronoun, but from an identity perspective, it's not correct.

For a pedantic example, I genuinely don't understand it when people refer to vehicles, boats, etc. with gendered pronouns; it makes no sense to me. Despite that, however, I understand that it does in fact make sense to them, so I'm not goanna argue about grammar rules declaring that these objects are not inherently gendered and should be referred to as 'it' regardless of context.

Also...

1 hour ago, dwqrf said:

Insert "This is just straight up racist" buzzer here

[Xycelium]

9 hours ago, SneakyErvin said:

Except I dont. You kinda just repeat the same thing that Sunder pick on in their reply. The two are not the same, the they (and here their) are not tied to gender identity, the words are simply tied to gramatic rules, where using the plural form instead of he/she is neither uncommon nor incorrect when refering to someone in third person.

You claim that I am wrong for using 'they' as a pronoun to refer to other people, because it's my own personal pronoun. Yet, when you use it, it's not tied to gender at all and it's actually grammatically correct. That seems to be all under the assumption that I'm using the word intentionally to mislabel others, when in reality it's just because I am fact just using it correctly as with anybody else when it comes to referring someone in third person as well. Which by the way, would be singular, not plural.

This is such blatant prejudice.

[RichardKam]

2024/9/9 PM11点18分 , zThulsaDoomz 说:

My question is who considered Xaku S tier?

To be fair, AoE permanent armor strip and auto-aim turrets were extremely good (keyword: were). Anything around him just turned into wet tissue paper and die, regardless of their levels. He was extremely strong in survival and other endurance missions.

Xaku suffered just like slash. Armor and health scaling rework kind of shifted the entire game from armor strip to raw damage (hence, viral heat). Unfortunately Xaku is too dependent on AoE armor strip.

[Karyst]

15 hours ago, SneakyErvin said:

Yep! "You is" gives me the shivers, so does "could of". I mean ffs natives, get your S#&$ together!

Xaku is a composite of three Warframes that used to be beneficiaries of the Entrati. Throughout the ages, the trio were lost to the Void. Over time, their shattered remnants fused together into the being that is now known as Xaku. This composite is the topic of the current forum melodrama. It is also a singular being since it only takes one slot in the game and not multiple ones. Is you understanding of this?

Edited September 11 by Karyst

[SneakyErvin]

13 hours ago, Xycelium said:

You claim that I am wrong for using 'they' as a pronoun to refer to other people, because it's my own personal pronoun. Yet, when you use it, it's not tied to gender at all and it's actually grammatically correct. That seems to be all under the assumption that I'm using the word intentionally to mislabel others, when in reality it's just because I am fact just using it correctly as with anybody else when it comes to referring someone in third person as well. Which by the way, would be singular, not plural.

This is such blatant prejudice.

The main question is. Do you feel miss labeled and upset when someone happens to say he/she instead of they around you? If so you are likely not looking at it from a pure grammatic PoV, since if you did you wouldnt really care. At that same time you should be even more concerned about always using the proper term towards others before defaulting to any of them. That is my point. And you seem to be of that mindset since you earlier in this thread said it was disrespectful towards a combination of pixels to use the wrong pronoun. And when you feel like that about something unliving (on several stages at that) you seem to very much be of that mindset and not just rooted in regular grammar when it comes to your choice of words.

My use of "they" is simply rooted in my own language, since it is what could be refered to as a respectful adressment of someone. Which dates back to noble and class difference times, aswell as how you are supposed to speak to "elders". Though out word which is best translated to "they" has nothing to do with gender, it is more a word that is rooted in reverence towards an "elevated" person.

So you should really ask yourself why use use one word over another and how you feel when someone uses the words to adress you in the same situations.

7 hours ago, Karyst said:

Xaku is a composite of three Warframes that used to be beneficiaries of the Entrati. Throughout the ages, the trio were lost to the Void. Over time, their shattered remnants fused together into the being that is now known as Xaku. This composite is the topic of the current forum melodrama. It is also a singular being since it only takes one slot in the game and not multiple ones. Is you understanding of this?

That has already been covered by me here in this thread, so no idea why you skipped through posts just to post this. As I said, the reason why Xaku is "they/them" is because it is a multi-form construct i.e a singular with the components of many. Potentially also with 3 distinct somatic echos.

[SneakyErvin]

22 hours ago, mac10smg--Toa_of_Green said:

But...it's not plural if it's being used to refer to a single person. That's the whole point of calling it a singular they. Additionally, he/she would be incorrect if the person in question doesn't use either pronoun. Though that's aside the point considering 'they' is infinitely better than he/she just on principle, saying he/she is awkward, is 2 more syllables than necessary, and is a lot more work to type.

Though that ties into my next point...

First of, why the horrible text color instead of just marking and quoting and following it with an answer? Second of, the root is a plural, but it is also OK to use it to describe a singular in third person. You are also here assuming we know the prefered gender. We dont, hence why either would be OK. And I'm not syaing we should use he/she, I'm saying he, she or they, since it is still an unknown, also third person, so talking about someone overall. So if you are worried about hurting people, "they" is no better than "he" or "she", since it is a personal choice in the end and not some universal default that is better than any other. Since it is no longer just a third person grammar term, it is suddenly a specific gender identity. So a he getting called they in such a situation would be equally as bad as a they being called he.

22 hours ago, mac10smg--Toa_of_Green said:

...no, it would not.

Look, I understand that many, many more people identify with their assigned gender that with a non-binary pronoun, but in this case if Sunder DID identify as a gender identity aside from the standard masculine and feminine ones, then at that point you're just being rude.

Also...you do know that any pronoun used in any context is...'purely grammar', right? Like, you wouldn't say that 'we' is purely grammar when you use it for your group of friends as opposed to using it in the context of your racial or religious identity.

Yes if we knew the gender. But as we dont either is as fine as the other, since we arent looking at a gender conversation, but simple use of grammar. So if you worry about "hurting" someone through simple grammar, dont use neither if you are of the idea someone can get hurt.

22 hours ago, mac10smg--Toa_of_Green said:

Okay, I'll give an example.

I am unsure of your gender, so I'll default to they/them/their. If you clarified your gender, but I continued to refer to you as they/them/their, would you feel at least a little miffed?

Obviously, it is inherently gender-neutral and nothing is implied by me using it anyway, so perhaps you aren't. So, let's say that, instead of using they/them/their, I used - I dunno - feminine pronouns for you if you use he/him, or masculine pronouns if you use she/her. That would most definitely feel off, wouldn't it?

It really depends on why. Since if you are concerned about the gender, it is odd you'd refer to me as they, since I clearly have Ervin as part of my name, a masculine name. So in that case, he would be the safest approach since I've clearly picked that name all on my own. But I am fine with they, since I dont see it as you being concerned with treating my gender correctly or not, I simply see it as you talking to me as someone you dont know, so use it out of the respectful PoV I mentioned in the post above. Since that is what I'm raised with. However, knowing that you are concerned about the gender, it looks odd to me to use they instead of he. Since now I know why you use they, even when the name is clearly masculine. So from safest to worst it would be he/they/she.

23 hours ago, mac10smg--Toa_of_Green said:

Wow, almost as if...all grammar is inherently tied to each other and one use isn't necessary mutually exclusive to another use? Who would've thought.

Also...why are you using a noun example in a conversation about pronouns? Personally, I would've used the word 'who', as it can both be used to declare an unknown (i.e. who is this?) or be used to establish an action about a subject (i.e. x is the one who did etc.)

But that last bit...

Which is pretty much my point to the other poster. Just because a word is used it isnt positively it means what you think it means. The other poster has been hellbent in several threads that certain things are purely gender tied. Hence why the person gets upset over a frame is being "miss gendered"... A thing that doesnt even exsist aside from pixels, with no outspoken preference or a way to care or communicate regarding such a thing.

23 hours ago, mac10smg--Toa_of_Green said:

Well, I am a native English speaker, so I guess I can answer that: grammar is made up. It's not this mystical binding force that will immediately smite you down if you say something 'incorrect'.

If those 'certain cultures' say stuff in that way, then at that point it's just a different dialect. Just because I wouldn't say it that way doesn't mean I should stop all conversation just to lecture them on 'proper grammar'.

And yeah, I can see how this argument can be twisted to support your end, but in this case it's different since it's inherently tied to identity. Gender identity and grammar are pretty intrinsically linked to a point where basically every dialect follows the same path.

Apologies if this gets a little long, I just need to make clear what I mean.

I am a guy. I use he/him. If someone were to ignore that and refer to me as she/her, I would want to correct them. Sure, it's not 'grammatically' incorrect, a pronoun is just a pronoun, but from an identity perspective, it's not correct.

For a pedantic example, I genuinely don't understand it when people refer to vehicles, boats, etc. with gendered pronouns; it makes no sense to me. Despite that, however, I understand that it does in fact make sense to them, so I'm not goanna argue about grammar rules declaring that these objects are not inherently gendered and should be referred to as 'it' regardless of context.

It is no more tied to identity than a non-native speaker using the grammar wrongly. Hence why I pointed out the hypocrisy in picking on someone that has a very high chance not being native on an international forum. And ontop of that ignoring that the words used can also refer to a singular.

I'm also not really sure why you even answer me on this in the first place. Since as I clearly say, there is nothing wrong with that. My question was simply towards the person being anal about grammar towards another. And would that stop him from picking on the grammar of white people from that same culture? Since those exsist aswell and speak the exact same "dialect" as the colored people.

Regarding getting upset. Yeah in real life in face to face situations I'd get annoyed. But on a forum I really cant give a rats ass, since I'm not of some assumption that people will remember the identity of hundreds if not thousands of players that might run into and have a prefered pronoun revealed. And irl I would only care to learn if it is a person that actually ends up in "my group", since outside of that, the chance that I'd ever run into a situation where I'd need to respect their prefered pronoun is likely 0.000001%. And by the time I do interact with them in such a way I would have likely forgotten it anyways. And for day to day convos "you" or "name" works more than well enough, or if talking about the person with others "they" out of respect since I'm not on "you" levels with them.

As to the vehicles. Interesting question. It comes down to the form and the name in many cases. Where you have certain things that screams masculine or feminine, such as curvey shapes often ending up with the object refered to as she and straight lines ending up as he. My granpa had a boat named Ally, it was obviously refered to as she. Overall I'm pretty much of the mindset that objects are it. Sometimes I end up naming something with a regular name, at which point it might be refered to by a gender.

 

[Xycelium]

2 hours ago, SneakyErvin said:

Do you feel miss labeled and upset when someone happens to say he/she instead of they around you?

No, because I also use she/her pronouns. Yet, if someone kept referring to me as 'he/she', I would feel obligated to inform them of what pronouns I do use. It's standard communication and respect.

2 hours ago, SneakyErvin said:

At that same time you should be even more concerned about always using the proper term towards others before defaulting to any of them. That is my point. And you seem to be of that mindset since you earlier in this thread said it was disrespectful towards a combination of pixels to use the wrong pronoun. And when you feel like that about something unliving (on several stages at that) you seem to very much be of that mindset and not just rooted in regular grammar when it comes to your choice of words.

So... me pointing out the correlation of one's logic to disregard the identity of a character would also apply to someone of the same identity... means that I am only able to use pronouns for gender?

Okay.

[MrInubis]

1 hour ago, Xycelium said:

So... me pointing out the correlation of one's logic to disregard the identity of a character would also apply to someone of the same identity... means that I am only able to use pronouns for gender?

Xaku uses "them" not because of gender identity but because its amalgamation of 3 frames. He is "we are legion" type not non binary. You really have some problems. You draw correlation when there is non just to be offended.

Edited September 11 by kuciol

[Karyst]

5 hours ago, SneakyErvin said:

The main question is. Do you feel miss labeled and upset when someone happens to say he/she instead of they around you? If so you are likely not looking at it from a pure grammatic PoV, since if you did you wouldnt really care. At that same time you should be even more concerned about always using the proper term towards others before defaulting to any of them. That is my point. And you seem to be of that mindset since you earlier in this thread said it was disrespectful towards a combination of pixels to use the wrong pronoun. And when you feel like that about something unliving (on several stages at that) you seem to very much be of that mindset and not just rooted in regular grammar when it comes to your choice of words.

My use of "they" is simply rooted in my own language, since it is what could be refered to as a respectful adressment of someone. Which dates back to noble and class difference times, aswell as how you are supposed to speak to "elders". Though out word which is best translated to "they" has nothing to do with gender, it is more a word that is rooted in reverence towards an "elevated" person.

So you should really ask yourself why use use one word over another and how you feel when someone uses the words to adress you in the same situations.

That has already been covered by me here in this thread, so no idea why you skipped through posts just to post this. As I said, the reason why Xaku is "they/them" is because it is a multi-form construct i.e a singular with the components of many. Potentially also with 3 distinct somatic echos.

At the core, this is nothing but pure grammatic gymnastics. To feel miss labeled is a rather new thing that wasn't discussed few years ago. No, I don't feel offended, since using they sometimes in the place of he/she is something  used in languages such as English along other. The whole point was that someone said that we don't respect pronouns of fictional character and assumed that we wouldn't respect an actual real person. That's all.