It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
Cyberpunk 2077Anybody who says CDPR pandering to social justice warriors are dead wrong an doesnt have a tiny clue about how the Cyberpunk universe works(206 posts) (206 posts) 
(206 posts) 
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
This is my favourite topic
Posted January 04, 2020
avatar
Yunipuma: No. What you get is a surrogate without even a "male" tag on it.
And it has no reasons to be as you start with only a minimal mods.
Once again - slow transformation of human being into cyborg is absolutely cannon in cyberpunk. But you have to start with your natural body mainly intact (as you do not have the money for mods) and your natural sex (not gender as gender is just an abstaction created by Freid's folowers).
And CDPR cut that out.
avatar
xgribbelfix: How did they cut it out?
To quote Marthe Jonkers: "Our character creation menu, for instance, compared to the last demo we now give you so many more options. For instance, you don't choose your gender anymore. You don't choose, 'I want to be a female or male character' you now choose a body type."
So there used to be an explicit choice of 'genders' -- to borrow her misnomer for what was clearly meant to be 'sexes' -- and it was deliberately removed and replaced by separate selectors for voice type and body type -- no, neither of these nor the combination of both is equal to 'sex'. Furthermore, the previously present 'gender' (that is ,'sex') options were replaced by a system in which you can create unnatural abominations like a woman's body, a man's voice and god knows what 'gender', or a man's body, a woman's voice and god knows what 'gender'.



avatar
cLaude83: Nice try, but I was developing both software and to a lesser extent hardware before your parents had the accident.

That's some insightful self-analysis you're projecting there.
avatar
lace_gardenia: Classy.
I invariably am. It comes with breeding. I genuinely feel some slight pity that you have never even had that opportunity due to your provenance.
Posted January 04, 2020
avatar
lace_gardenia: You need some computer help there, boomer-sama?
avatar
cLaude83: Nice try, but I was developing both software and to a lesser extent hardware before your parents had the accident.

avatar
Ryvors: Its unbelivable how narrow minded and ignorant this Yunipuma is.. like you talking to a brick wall :D

let him be because as i said everything you say hes just ignoring it and forcing his "truth". These people are the worst, they dont know they are stupid and delusional. Like a fanatic.
avatar
cLaude83: That's some insightful self-analysis you're projecting there.
im open to everything as long as its not pure stupidty, and you are just prooving my point trying to insult me instead of really think about what we are trying to say to you guys.
Posted January 04, 2020
avatar
thepayne78: Lol wasn't intentional have edited the comment.
avatar
lace_gardenia: Hehe, it was autocorrect trying to "help", right? :)
Lol nope I can't blame autocorrect just a matter of me not paying attention or proofreading before hitting poast my message lol.
Posted January 05, 2020
avatar
cLaude83: Nice try, but I was developing both software and to a lesser extent hardware before your parents had the accident.

That's some insightful self-analysis you're projecting there.
avatar
Ryvors: im open to everything as long as its not pure stupidty, and you are just prooving my point trying to insult me instead of really think about what we are trying to say to you guys.
Uh-huh. Sure you are. Okay then, that bring us back to:
avatar
cLaude83: - Why is CDPR suppressing critical questions about their games on their own forum and on Steam?
- Why did GOG remove a joke tweet saying "Classic PC games #WontBeErased on our watch. Yeah, how's that for some use of hashtags?"?
- Why did GOG then apologize for that tweet, saying "Yesterday, we posted a tweet containing a trending hashtag as a pun. The tweet was neither intended as a malicious attack, nor as a comment to the ongoing social debate. GOG should focus only on games. We acknowledge that and we commit to it."?
- Why was the author of he first tweet, Sean 'Linko' Halliday, then still fired and subsequently libeled by GOG?
- Why did CDPR remove a joke tweet saying "Did you just assume my gender?"
- Why did CDPR then apologize for that tweet, saying "Sorry to all those offended by one of the responses sent out from our account earlier. Harming anyone was never our intention."?
- Why did CDP and daughter companies then revise hiring policy so as to increase the number of lurid-haired feminazis and gender blenders employed?
- Why is Galaxy 2.0 suddenly so much greedier with the personal data it gathers?
You really are going to have to do better than:
avatar
Ryvors: None of your points were prooven :) and you are completely wrong and dont have any clue about this genre. Your previous comment clearly shows your lack of understanding on this topic.
Because they clearly are factual and thereby 'proven' -- bit of a strange word to use when talking about undisputed events. And deflecting by pretending I talked about the genre doesn't work, because I hadn't, other than to say that made a weak argument, based on false comparisons, that has already been shot to bits several times in other topics. If you want to address those, do that in those topics -- I can't be arsed to go through the same charade of a discussion about them again.
Posted January 05, 2020
avatar
Yunipuma: Exactly my point! But your English is naturally more good at formulating it.
Unfortunately with this one topic, for some strange reason, it doesn't seem to matter how good someone is at formulating the point. It's strange that this has even become a thing.

It's really as simple as looking at any other animal and asking the question - how do you know if it's male or female? Just apply that same line of thinking to ask if a human is male or female, it's really that simple. It's not a complicated concept, and yet here we are, large respected game companies are changing their games unnecessarily.
Posted January 06, 2020
avatar
Yunipuma: Exactly my point! But your English is naturally more good at formulating it.
avatar
devoras: Unfortunately with this one topic, for some strange reason, it doesn't seem to matter how good someone is at formulating the point. It's strange that this has even become a thing.

It's really as simple as looking at any other animal and asking the question - how do you know if it's male or female? Just apply that same line of thinking to ask if a human is male or female, it's really that simple. It's not a complicated concept, and yet here we are, large respected game companies are changing their games unnecessarily.
Don't give them the idea to start giving their poor pets sex changes, please. It's already bad enough that people are trying to force feed their dogs and cats vegetarian diets, they don't need any further abuse.

Also, your argument accounts only for macroscopic external physical attributes, but I would argue that ones sex is not decided what appendages cling to your body, since these can be mutilated. Rather one should look at the chromosomal content of ones cells: XX = female, XY = male, XXY = hermaphrodite (extremely rare). Of course, this only encourages people to start messing around with the chromosomal content of poor defenseless embryos, but making that a serious felony is the next step.
Posted January 09, 2020
avatar
cLaude83: XXY = hermaphrodite (extremely rare).
XXY is not a hermaphrodite. XXY is the so-called Klinefelter syndrome and XXY is clearly male and not hermaphrodite.
None of the trisomies of the sex chromosomes will ever lead to a hermaphrodite. That's not how human genetics work. As long as you have at least one Y chromosome(or more specifically an SRY), you are genetically male and if not, you are genetically female, period.

Just to make it clear, there are actually no real hermaphrodites in humans. This would require complete duplication of the genital organs, which would then also have to differentiate into different sexes. It is rare to find both ovarian and testicular tissue in a human, but this is not related to trisomie of sex chromosomes. In humans there are almost exclusively pseudohermaphrodites, in which the sex is only phenotypically unclear, but these people still have a clear genetic gender.

Humans are and remain gonochore. Each human cell is either male (has an SRY) or female (has no SRY). Hermaphroditism verus occurs when you have two different gene sets with different sexes. This is due to a local mutation or fusion of two fertilized ova.
Posted January 09, 2020
avatar
cLaude83: XXY = hermaphrodite (extremely rare).
avatar
A_B_raxis: XXY is not a hermaphrodite. XXY is the so-called Klinefelter syndrome and XXY is clearly male and not hermaphrodite.
None of the trisomies of the sex chromosomes will ever lead to a hermaphrodite. That's not how human genetics work. As long as you have at least one Y chromosome(or more specifically an SRY), you are genetically male and if not, you are genetically female, period.

Just to make it clear, there are actually no real hermaphrodites in humans. This would require complete duplication of the genital organs, which would then also have to differentiate into different sexes. It is rare to find both ovarian and testicular tissue in a human, but this is not related to trisomie of sex chromosomes. In humans there are almost exclusively pseudohermaphrodites, in which the sex is only phenotypically unclear, but these people still have a clear genetic gender.

Humans are and remain gonochore. Each human cell is either male (has an SRY) or female (has no SRY). Hermaphroditism verus occurs when you have two different gene sets with different sexes. This is due to a local mutation or fusion of two fertilized ova.
Thank you for correcting me with this short and informative digest :) I have not actively followed genetics research for over a decade now, so I will take your superior/more up-to-date knowledge for granted.
When I wrote the above, I was thinking of Dutch Olympic athlete Foekje Dillema, and misremembering Dillema as having Klinefelter, but a quick internet search shows that Dillema suffered rather from ovotesticular DSD 46XX/46XY in approximately 1:1.
Post edited January 09, 2020 by cLaude83
Posted January 09, 2020
avatar
A_B_raxis: XXY is not a hermaphrodite. XXY is the so-called Klinefelter syndrome and XXY is clearly male and not hermaphrodite.
None of the trisomies of the sex chromosomes will ever lead to a hermaphrodite. That's not how human genetics work. As long as you have at least one Y chromosome(or more specifically an SRY), you are genetically male and if not, you are genetically female, period.

Just to make it clear, there are actually no real hermaphrodites in humans. This would require complete duplication of the genital organs, which would then also have to differentiate into different sexes. It is rare to find both ovarian and testicular tissue in a human, but this is not related to trisomie of sex chromosomes. In humans there are almost exclusively pseudohermaphrodites, in which the sex is only phenotypically unclear, but these people still have a clear genetic gender.

Humans are and remain gonochore. Each human cell is either male (has an SRY) or female (has no SRY). Hermaphroditism verus occurs when you have two different gene sets with different sexes. This is due to a local mutation or fusion of two fertilized ova.
avatar
cLaude83: Thank you for correcting me with this short and informative digest :) I have not actively followed genetics research for over a decade now, so I will take your superior/more up-to-date knowledge for granted.
When I wrote the above, I was thinking of Dutch Olympic athlete Foekje Dillema, and misremembering Dillema as having Klinefelter, but a quick internet search shows that Dillema suffered rather from ovotesticular DSD 46XX/46XY in approximately 1:1.
Intersex population figures article on Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersex#Population_figures

According to their reference, Klinefelter happens in 0.1% - 0.2% of male births.

Intersex conditions in general (of which Klinefelter is one) are mentioned to happen in 1.7% of the population, so let's say 1% for simplicity, giving us around 75 million people or so...
Posted January 09, 2020
avatar
cLaude83: Thank you for correcting me with this short and informative digest :) I have not actively followed genetics research for over a decade now, so I will take your superior/more up-to-date knowledge for granted.
When I wrote the above, I was thinking of Dutch Olympic athlete Foekje Dillema, and misremembering Dillema as having Klinefelter, but a quick internet search shows that Dillema suffered rather from ovotesticular DSD 46XX/46XY in approximately 1:1.
avatar
lace_gardenia: Intersex population figures article on Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersex#Population_figures

According to their reference, Klinefelter happens in 0.1% - 0.2% of male births.

Intersex conditions in general (of which Klinefelter is one) are mentioned to happen in 1.7% of the population, so let's say 1% for simplicity, giving us around 75 million people or so...
You should only be adding up the figures for rows that are labeled with sex specificity 'none' though, and then correct for the large fraction that does not make it to adulthood -- whether due to medical complications, or due to their backwards culture killing them in infancy.
And that is the most liberal estimate: going by A_B_raxis's suggested SRY criterion, you'd get zero confirmed cases ever of someone being neither male nor female.

Edit: Though there is a hypothetical possibility of auto-fertile hermaphrodity -- interestingly exactly in the case of 46XX/46XY chimerism: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14767058.2017.1291619
Post edited January 09, 2020 by cLaude83
Posted January 09, 2020
avatar
lace_gardenia: Intersex population figures article on Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersex#Population_figures

According to their reference, Klinefelter happens in 0.1% - 0.2% of male births.

Intersex conditions in general (of which Klinefelter is one) are mentioned to happen in 1.7% of the population, so let's say 1% for simplicity, giving us around 75 million people or so...
avatar
cLaude83: You should only be adding up the figures for rows that are labeled with sex specificity 'none' though, and then correct for the large fraction that does not make it to adulthood -- whether due to medical complications, or due to their backwards culture killing them in infancy.
And that is the most liberal estimate: going by A_B_raxis's suggested SRY criterion, you'd get zero confirmed cases ever of someone being neither male nor female.

Edit: Though there is a hypothetical possibility of auto-fertile hermaphrodity -- interestingly exactly in the case of 46XX/46XY chimerism: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14767058.2017.1291619
The 1.7% figure is from the page:

"Blackless, Fausto-Sterling et al., said in two articles in 2000 that 1.7 percent of human births (1 in 60) might be intersex, including variations that may not become apparent until, for example, puberty, or until attempting to conceive.[138][139] Their publications have been widely quoted,[53][140][141] though aspects are now considered outdated, such as use of the now scientifically incorrect term hermaphrodite.[142] Eric Vilain et al. highlighted in 2007 that the term disorders of sex development (DSD) had replaced "hermaphrodite" and improper medical terms based on it."
Posted January 09, 2020
avatar
cLaude83: You should only be adding up the figures for rows that are labeled with sex specificity 'none' though, and then correct for the large fraction that does not make it to adulthood -- whether due to medical complications, or due to their backwards culture killing them in infancy.
And that is the most liberal estimate: going by A_B_raxis's suggested SRY criterion, you'd get zero confirmed cases ever of someone being neither male nor female.

Edit: Though there is a hypothetical possibility of auto-fertile hermaphrodity -- interestingly exactly in the case of 46XX/46XY chimerism: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14767058.2017.1291619
avatar
lace_gardenia: The 1.7% figure is from the page:

"Blackless, Fausto-Sterling et al., said in two articles in 2000 that 1.7 percent of human births (1 in 60) might be intersex, including variations that may not become apparent until, for example, puberty, or until attempting to conceive.[138][139] Their publications have been widely quoted,[53][140][141] though aspects are now considered outdated, such as use of the now scientifically incorrect term hermaphrodite.[142] Eric Vilain et al. highlighted in 2007 that the term disorders of sex development (DSD) had replaced "hermaphrodite" and improper medical terms based on it."
Yeah, I read it. But since not all hermaphrodites (as we were taught in my day)/intersex (as wikipedia and you call them) are either both male and female, or neither male nor female, it is still correct to say that hardly anyone cannot be unambiguously classified into one of two sexes (and their corresponding 'genders', if you want to detach that concept). Which brings me back to the point I was trying to make in response to devoras, that you should not look at external body attributes, but at a genetic level to determine someone's sex.
Posted January 09, 2020
avatar
lace_gardenia: The 1.7% figure is from the page:

"Blackless, Fausto-Sterling et al., said in two articles in 2000 that 1.7 percent of human births (1 in 60) might be intersex, including variations that may not become apparent until, for example, puberty, or until attempting to conceive.[138][139] Their publications have been widely quoted,[53][140][141] though aspects are now considered outdated, such as use of the now scientifically incorrect term hermaphrodite.[142] Eric Vilain et al. highlighted in 2007 that the term disorders of sex development (DSD) had replaced "hermaphrodite" and improper medical terms based on it."
avatar
cLaude83: Yeah, I read it. But since not all hermaphrodites (as we were taught in my day)/intersex (as wikipedia and you call them) are either both male and female, or neither male nor female, it is still correct to say that hardly anyone cannot be unambiguously classified into one of two sexes (and their corresponding 'genders', if you want to detach that concept). Which brings me back to the point I was trying to make in response to devoras, that you should not look at external body attributes, but at a genetic level to determine someone's sex.
Do you regularly ask for a genetic sample before you call anyone "he" or "she"?
Posted January 09, 2020
avatar
cLaude83: Yeah, I read it. But since not all hermaphrodites (as we were taught in my day)/intersex (as wikipedia and you call them) are either both male and female, or neither male nor female, it is still correct to say that hardly anyone cannot be unambiguously classified into one of two sexes (and their corresponding 'genders', if you want to detach that concept). Which brings me back to the point I was trying to make in response to devoras, that you should not look at external body attributes, but at a genetic level to determine someone's sex.
avatar
lace_gardenia: Do you regularly ask for a genetic sample before you call anyone "he" or "she"?
Yeah, I always wink at them seductively and ask them to follow me so they can give me a sample of their DNA. Then if they try to make it sexual, I refuse to talk to them (including calling them he/she), because they clearly don't know that gametes are haploid and therefore can't be used to determine their correct pronoun -- hence they are not worth talking to. This accounts for the majority of people. The remainder are happy to give me a sample of diploid cells and wait for analysis before I stop calling them 'it'. Does that satisfy your curiosity? :D
Posted January 09, 2020
That's still overcomplicating the issue to a silly degree.

Technically whether you're classified as a male or female of your species just depends on which reproductive cells you have to put towards the reproduction of your species, sperm or eggs. It's really that simple. Then your average, or common, physical characteristics are largely dependent on that, and on your species. For example, a female anglerfish is larger than a male one, or a male gorilla is larger than a female one. Those two examples aren't controversial statements, they're just the facts of reality for those species. You could, theoretically, have a female gorilla larger than a male(though I expect the chances of that are slim to the extreme) but that just means that particular gorilla is an outlier, it doesn't mean that one example is indicitive of all gorillas.

I've managed to get through many many years of life by just using my eyes and ears to identify others. Of course you will have outliers that are further away from the average, but by and large it's pretty easy to identify whether someone is male or female just by looking at them.
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
This is my favourite topic
Community
Cyberpunk 2077Anybody who says CDPR pandering to social justice warriors are dead wrong an doesnt have a tiny clue about how the Cyberpunk universe works(206 posts) (206 posts) 
(206 posts)