Character pronoun and identity discussion

I think the two general options are (a) use whatever pronouns the character uses at the point of the story being talked about, or (b) use the pronouns used most recently by the character. Both are potentially confusing, especially in Bridget's case. The former seems most accurate but also considerably more complicated to keep track of. The latter risks spoiler issue arguments, but is consistent with respectful treatment of non-fictional trans people, and given situations like The Umbrella Academy that seems more important.

...and I'd think it would be obvious that you'd use the pronouns used in the English translation (assuming one is available) when you're speaking English, Japanese pronouns in Japanese, etc.

I never said that specifically that thread was hijacked,but issue here is more emotionally charged so that increases the chancces of something happening

I misspoke and edited the post, meant to say that the "crowner could be hijacked" rather than the thread.

My point is, Snap's thread had no issues like that and that was even more emotionally charged. We'll be OK.

Edited by WarJay77 on Aug 10th 2022 at 4:35:11 AM

to reiterate an earlier point, japanese pronouns are completely different and essentially don't function the way they do in english. the closest equivalents you have is "kare" for he and "kanojo" for she, which are very rarely used in that context anyway. japanese is a pro-drop language, meaning that pronouns are dropped when inferred by context, and consequently makes things a lot less convoluted when writing gender-neutral or nonconforming characters — they just drop pronouns when doing so, since that's what you do when talking to anyone. gendered nouns exist, like otoko for man and onna for woman, and those are usually what you use to determine gender instead.

personal pronouns are an entirely different case, and while those are gendered in a way, using them in different ways (even ones that clash with your assigned gender) can reflect your presentation, both in gendered and non-gendered ways — social status, familiarity, etc. masculine, feminine, or neutral speech patterns can be used as a way of showing your identity, but in media especially you'll see characters defying those expectations all the time.

so it's not really worth distinguishing the japanese version's pronouns because you're making an inference based on context either way. whenever someone says "the japanese version uses different pronouns" it's usually nonsense. you combine that with bad faith arguments that japanese people don't understand transgender issues and you get a lot of misinformation on how the language fundamentally works.

I speak Japanese, do so natively, one of my best friends is a JP => EN translator for a major company.

Having seen the original either of us can both tell you this is not something the translators added...

Hell she is wearing a damn trans pride pin on her headband, that's what that brass symbol means.

While you guys are right that the pronouns dont map 1:1, they do map close enough that people can generaly figure it out... your treating it like the pronouns mean nothing, when the reality is it's more a mater of a set of sliding scales between masculine and feminine, and formal and informal.... with the formality scale loosely draging the pronouns to the more masculine side as formality goes up.

Being able to pick up stuff that isnt stated explicitly is a huge part of being able to speak japanese, yet you guys just go unless its directly stated it doesnt mater.

Your more correct then a lot of the posters here, but as you noted the language is heavy on inference, and pronouns contribute to that when they are there, just like every other peice of information present in both what is said and the situation on which it is being said.

So it's also dishonest to say they dont mater at all, just that you cant go by them alone.

Edited by Imca on Aug 10th 2022 at 4:24:31 AM

Right, someone mentioned the symbols earlier!

So do we need a crowner if its explicit in both versions anyway?

That doesn't really sound controversial to require one.

As mentioned before, a crowner does at least give us a concrete decision to point to rather than needing to keep the debate going every time someone wants to use male pronouns. It's protocol mostly.

Crowner it is, then. As for me, I'm going to vote female pronouns because it's what she's referred to as in official media, so it makes sense to go what's considered legit.

Oh, definitely, me too. The only reason I've been campaigning for a crowner is literally just to make sure that the consensus is confirmed without a doubt; but there's no justification for not using She/Her. It's the most cut and dry case so far.

Edited by WarJay77 on Aug 10th 2022 at 7:36:41 AM

×6 thank you for your input! you're totally right. i'm only speaking as someone learning japanese as a second language, so i appreciate having the input of a native speaker.

i'd be cool with a crowner just to set precedent, even if it seems like the consensus is clear

If we do a crowner what would our options be? Would it be the same way the Snap crowner was done with an option for she/her, they/them and he/him?

I don't even think we need a they/them option in this case, but yeah.

BTW as a bit of a side note, I just realized that Arcade Modes seem to have four different "endings": If you lost a round in Stage 1, losing round in Stage 7, losing round in Stage 8, and finally Flawless ending. I don't think that this really changes anything, just figured I'd correct myself a bit.

As for crowner, I'm not really sure what to add as alternate options.

What could even be alternatives other than other pronouns? Or just referring to the character by name?

I don't think we need a crowner for Bridget, as RallyBot walked back his argument in the Edit Banned thread.

Even so, it'd be nice to have on the chance someone else tries to revert Briget's pronouns.

Yeah, that's my thought process. It's just a way to future-proof our decision.

What's the point when it'll inevitably end 20:1 or something along those lines? The consensus here is so obvious that the crowner is unnecessary.

Yeah, I'm not seeing how referencing a near-unanimous crowner would be any more useful or authoritative than referencing a near-unanimous thread decision.

I personally don't think a crowner is necessary since the thread is so overwhelmingly in favor of she/her.

I'll ask the other mods if we can call this in favor of that.

Edited by GastonRabbit on Aug 11th 2022 at 5:48:38 AM

I didn't think a crowner was necessary either but was willing to make one if others agreed. I don't think this is like the other cases where there's for ambiguity.

I'm also weary of a crowner. It feels like putting something that's pretty clear cut in a state that makes it seem less so.

Not to mention the risk that it could draw drama and/or spammers to the wiki.

Maybe we could at least apply the Three-Day Rule and wait until the thread is three days old before calling it (based on votes in posts instead of a crowner), though I don't really see the consensus changing.

Edited by GastonRabbit on Aug 11th 2022 at 5:56:22 AM

That's fair, if people don't want a crowner, then, whatever. Works for me.