In light of Nexus Mods and Mod DB banning the No Pronouns mod for Starfield, I figured I would look around for alternative sources and collect them in one place for others’ convenience. This seems like a good place to put them.

Trusted

Caution Advised

    • firebreathingbunny@kbin.socialOP
      11·
      1 year ago

      There’s no such thing as a non-binary person any more than there is such a thing as personal pronouns. The game can’t make a character into something that literally doesn’t exist.

      • squid@feddit.uk
        4·
        1 year ago

        Well the mod you want will not align genetic gender to they’re perceived gender. Also were playing a game that introduces magic… I’m sure you can suspend your believe for pronounce.

        • firebreathingbunny@kbin.socialOP
          11·
          1 year ago

          The mod does what it’s supposed to by removing the nonsensical concept of personal pronouns that doesn’t objectively exist in the real world. A slightly more involved mod would rename body types A and B to male and female and set the appropriate pronouns accordingly. I’ll post that, too, when it comes out.

          • squid@feddit.uk
            1·
            1 year ago

            No such thing as objectivity, we live in the abstract and we give meaning. Pronounced are more of a respectful approach, if your friend said “don’t call me “(insert what ever)” I find it is disrespectful”, you’d stop, same for disabilities, where I’m from we had lots of derogatory names for disabled people and most people will not use those names as its disrespectful.

            You are witnessing the natural progression of language, kick and scream all you want but well be there with you or without you

              • Eggyhead@artemis.camp
                5·
                1 year ago

                I mean, the absurdity of your argument that a sci-fi space rpg can’t meet your standards of “reality” because of a mere ignorable, pre-existing and commonly used pronoun aside, I’m going to have to step in on this particularly low-hanging morsel…

                The rules of English grammar are objective.

                If English grammatical rules were objective, we’d all still be talking the way people did way before Shakespeare. Actually, Shakespeare’s writings wouldn’t exist today if English grammar wasn’t at all subjective because he flat out made up a ton of words and phrases we still use today. Also, you’ve heard of poetry, right?

                “It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.” (Macbeth, Act 5, Scene 5)

                • firebreathingbunny@kbin.socialOP
                  1·
                  1 year ago

                  Which grammar rule changed since Shakespeare’s time? The reason students can still read and understand Shakespeare’s works is that the grammar remains the same. Congratulations, you owned yourself.

                  • stopthatgirl7@kbin.social
                    4·
                    1 year ago

                    Ironically, one of the biggest changes from Shakespeare’s time and now concerned pronouns. We stopped using “thou/thee” as the informal 2nd person and began to only use what had been the formal 2nd person, “you,” and stopped using the verb conjugations for them.

                    Meanwhile, the 3rd person singular “they” has been in use since Chaucer’s time.

                  • Eggyhead@artemis.camp
                    2·
                    1 year ago

                    Just off the top of my head: In some US dialects, rather than a single word changing between negative and positive form (e.g. “I didn’t take any pictures”), instead an entire sentence is shifted into a negative mode (“I didn’t take no pictures”). Traditional grammar rules would dictate that as a double negative, implying the speaker did in fact take pictures, but only an idiot would actually choose interpret it that way.

                    Next, we have the impact of the internet. “lol” might occasionally be spoken aloud in many circumstances as a substitute for “that’s funny” or something similar. Colloquial written English is all over the place. We now not only use “lol”, but “fwiw,” “afaik,” and many others.

                    Then there’s emoji. We’re basically using glyphs to express ideas, not unlike how kanji works, and traditional rules of grammar don’t always apply when you’re expressing an idea through pictures, though it’s interesting when it does. Animated GIFs and memes often butcher grammar rules without sacrificing any understanding of intent.

                    A simple google search turns up many more examples than I could possibly be aware of.

                    Now it’s your turn. Feel free to explain why you think using “they” as a singular pronoun applies as a grammar rule violation in the 21st century. If you can’t use more than a typical snarky one or two-liner, you should just consider this argument lost and rethink your life.

              • squid@feddit.uk
                1·
                1 year ago

                Yes they are objective but every year a new dictionary comes out with new words and meanings, this is humanity turning the abstract into meaning. I’d like to see you get by with the vocabulary of a 16th century Brit.