Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Merkuri" data-source="post: 4253350" data-attributes="member: 41321">My current PC actually referred to the warforged in the group like that.&nbsp; She was from Thrane, who I believe actively disregards the part in the Treaty of Thronehold where they made warforged free beings.&nbsp; The warforged PC and I roleplayed out some nice scenes where she began to realize he was more alive than she thought, and by the time he left the group she was starting to refer to him as &quot;he&quot;.And to address the concept of villain robots being genderless and hero robots being gendered, I think that happens because villain robots usually do not have much of a personality, but hero robots, who the reader/viewer gets to know well, do have personality.&nbsp; Whenever you give a robot personality it's almost a requirement to also give it a gender.&nbsp; I think you'll find that whenever villain robots have personalities they also have genders.Part of it is like what another poster was saying about &quot;it&quot;.&nbsp; &quot;It&quot; may be technically acceptable to call a person of unknown gender, but think about how insulting it would sound to actually use it.&nbsp; If you're in the room with someone who picks up the phone with an unknown person and you want to know what that person says, you wouldn't ask, &quot;What did it say?&quot;&nbsp; You'd be much more likely to say &quot;what did they say&quot; or &quot;what did he say&quot;?&nbsp; And you would absolutely NEVER refer to somebody you had actually seen as &quot;it&quot;.&nbsp; If you were referring to a bus driver you didn't see well from the back of the bus, you'd never say, &quot;It forgot to give that person change.&quot;It's becoming outdated mostly because it seems sexist, but it's long been the standard to refer to an unknown gendered person as &quot;he&quot;.&nbsp; &quot;It&quot; has a connotation of referring to objects, so referring to sentient objects (robots/constructs) as &quot;it&quot; seems to insinuate that they are objects, not people.&nbsp; This is probably why warforged PCs are highly encouraged (or required, depending on where you read) to have a gender.&nbsp; Genderless beings too easily become &quot;its&quot; in the human mind, and it's much easier for players to identify with a &quot;he&quot; or a &quot;she&quot; than an &quot;it&quot;.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Merkuri, post: 4253350, member: 41321"] My current PC actually referred to the warforged in the group like that. She was from Thrane, who I believe actively disregards the part in the Treaty of Thronehold where they made warforged free beings. The warforged PC and I roleplayed out some nice scenes where she began to realize he was more alive than she thought, and by the time he left the group she was starting to refer to him as "he". And to address the concept of villain robots being genderless and hero robots being gendered, I think that happens because villain robots usually do not have much of a personality, but hero robots, who the reader/viewer gets to know well, do have personality. Whenever you give a robot personality it's almost a requirement to also give it a gender. I think you'll find that whenever villain robots have personalities they also have genders. Part of it is like what another poster was saying about "it". "It" may be technically acceptable to call a person of unknown gender, but think about how insulting it would sound to actually use it. If you're in the room with someone who picks up the phone with an unknown person and you want to know what that person says, you wouldn't ask, "What did it say?" You'd be much more likely to say "what did they say" or "what did he say"? And you would absolutely NEVER refer to somebody you had actually seen as "it". If you were referring to a bus driver you didn't see well from the back of the bus, you'd never say, "It forgot to give that person change." It's becoming outdated mostly because it seems sexist, but it's long been the standard to refer to an unknown gendered person as "he". "It" has a connotation of referring to objects, so referring to sentient objects (robots/constructs) as "it" seems to insinuate that they are objects, not people. This is probably why warforged PCs are highly encouraged (or required, depending on where you read) to have a gender. Genderless beings too easily become "its" in the human mind, and it's much easier for players to identify with a "he" or a "she" than an "it". [/QUOTE]

Verification