- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
Edit: As @[email protected] points out below
You must log in or # to comment.
The gender orientation of the firefox logo is something I haven’t thought about ever.
What’s the point of this?
The point is that you’ve fallen for some idiots on X making up culture war bullshit.
Kit’s supposed pronouns aren’t mentioned by Mozilla anywhere in any Mozilla announcements.
One news site attributes this quote to Mozilla
Kit (he/she/they/them/it) is the user’s constant companion. Wherever they choose to roam, Kit will accompany and guide them with clever, playful encouragement and support — giving the user the confidence to run free.
That’s the one and only place that even remotely mentions it as far as I can tell. And it’s not even a statement that it’s NB or they/them… More like it’s a fictional mascot call it what you want.
Jesus, it’s Clippy all over again.
Mozilla uses “they’re” to refer to Kit, but other than that there’s no explicit statement at all.
Kit is a companion, not a commentator. They’re not here to deliver punchlines. Kit shows up as a small signal that Firefox is working for you, then steps back so you can keep moving.
I used “they” etc. when I don’t know the gender of the person I’m talking about. I feel like that’s the safest assumption.
which is from a notoriously “pro-conservative” twitter account, so safe is highly debatable given that the “conservative” label is often applied to provably false argumentsreplied to the wrong comment
U good b
look i agree the x post is culture war shit, but mozilla does mention the gender of their mascot in their branding resources… but imo this is less of an explicit recognition about the mascot being non-binary and more a function of the mascot being able to be interpreted by humans however they like, and “it” being the term they seem to use simply to increase ambiguity and feelings of personal connection to the mascot for the most people
he/she/they/them/it
I think it’s more a statement that it’s not gendered
I just read the screenshot lol
which is from a notoriously “pro-conservative” twitter account, so safe is highly debatable given that the “conservative” label is often applied to provably false arguments
True, it was just “a fox” for me so far. I didn’t really care about the gender of a drawing. I guess it is a good awareness move though
Feels like a publicity stunt more than a genuine attempt to include non-binary people.
It isn’t, though. They never said that the mascot was non-binary.
they do though via stating its pronouns - even including it, repeatedly referring to it even in their intro blog post as “they”
but that’s because it’s a feature to increase the feeling friendliness of the browser by establishing personal connection via the application of any (or non-) gender by the user no matter their preference rather than intended as a portrayal of a sentient character having made a decision for themselves
Awww bummer. I was excited for the NB fox.
The fox is schrodinger’s gender so… they/them until proven guilty?
that’s exactly it: in context, kit is a feature intended to be interpreted by the user; not a representation of a sentient character having made a conscious choice to be non-binary simply because of mozilla’s chosen pronouns and lack of gender expression
Exactly this. It feels like some kind of nonsense spam or troll.
If I was to take the bait, I might say it was to cover for their CEO making some anti gay marriage political contribution. But that was like 15 years ago, I don’t even know if he’s still CEO or if anyone even remembers.
To me, this feels more like a PR move than an awareness move. Kind of like: “We don’t wanna do anything substantial so uuuuh let’s just make our logo non-binary”.
but it’s not a PR move… their blog post lays out the reasoning: kit is intended to exist in the browser to make users feel good about using the browser. it’s a friendly “congratulations for interacting” and “we’re doing something for your benefit” (as an anthropomorphic representation of that behaviour) character, and a feature of it as an engineered feature is that the user can apply any gender they like. kit hasn’t made a choice to be non-binary; mozilla has made a choice to make kit specifically ambiguous both in aesthetic when drawn and pronouns when written about
It’s a terrible PR move if you don’t say anything about it. They didn’t say “Hey, look! Our mascot is non-binary!” All they did was use they/them pronouns.
It’s a distraction from the real important issue, which is…
…what does the fox say? /j
Wha-pa-pa-pa-pa-pa-pow?!
Ring-di-ding-di-ding-di-ding?
The point is corporations have realizing lgbtq people are fucking just as retarded and easy to manipulate as everyone else
You say they/them and sell shit to a new demographic. It’s the same shit as all the rainbow fucking crap in June.
There’s no actual representation happening here. It’s all just shallow bullshit to sell you shit and manipulate you.
Well, if I was creating a mascot, and I didn’t want to think about their gender orientation… they/them pronouns are what I would use. Mozilla actually didn’t announce the mascot’s gender. People just saw they/them pronouns and made the inference from there.
What’s more is the non binary fox somehow seems more binary.
There’s no point. It’s just some dumb manager fixated over gender identity spreading their ideology
it’s not even that… kit doesn’t have a gender identity: kit expresses ambiguity in gender so that the user can decide for themselves no matter who the user is. kit is a feature; not a character having made a decision about their gender… and their non-gendered pronouns are simply part of that feature
Removed by mod
Edit: this post is literally not true Mozilla didn’t say any of this it’s just a hoax.
Somebody at the Mozilla foundation justifying their pointless job.
By the way this is NOT a new Firefox logo. It’s just the fox mascot drawing that may be used in other parts of the UI like the welcome screen after a new install, or on social media.
The actual logo remains unchanged.
On top of that nowhere in the announcement are the supposed pronouns mentioned: https://blog.mozilla.org/en/firefox/meet-kit/
Actually the whole thing may be bullshit. Literally the only Mozilla reference I can find to Kit’s pronouns is a statement given to like one or two blogs, and it says that any pronoun is acceptable.
Kit (he/she/they/them/it) is the user’s constant companion. Wherever they choose to roam, Kit will accompany and guide them with clever, playful encouragement and support — giving the user the confidence to run free.
That’s attributed to Mozilla here: https://www.neowin.net/news/firefox-has-killed-its-old-mascot-heres-what-the-new-cute-one-looks-like/
All other references seem to be chuds on X claiming that it’s explicitly they/them and acting like Mozilla is making a big deal about that. As if it matters either way.
If you had some kind of reaction to this post you’ve fallen for culture war bullshit propaganda, congratulations.
Solid sleuthing there. Edited the post to include your context.
they do make explicit mention of non-gendered pronouns in their branding guidelines for kit. the intro blog post is an expression of those guidelines
but every announcement by mozilla makes it clear that kit isn’t about taking a stance on gender: it’s simply explicitly about not taking a stance on gender
Its to funny how whenever a Mozilla brand related thing happens its clarified that the firefox logo is not being changed. In no other context of a product receiving a new mascot would a clarification be needed that the logo is still the same.
Not on topic but sure do wonder why they silently pulled the Dino 2 years (I think?) prior and made the browser look boring. I guess it was apart of the master plan to shove a new mascot there and make media attention, + furry bait.
The dino represents Mozilla, not Firefox itself. And yes, for a while, Mozilla didn’t have the dino in its official branding, but it’s now back in there. The flag is a dino head. As per usual, significantly more drama was made about them “removing” the dino than it was worth.
I meant that there was a different dino on the error pages in Firefox.
but that was again not about removing the dino as much as as it was about differentiating mozilla from firefox by taking the mozilla identity from firefox because mozilla is more than firefox and behaves differently to firefox, and giving firefox its own identity which is more friendly
Has anyone even thought about the gender of the original?
Why would you even bother?
Everyone knows the original was a hetro white male.
At risk of being abrasive…
I see blue checkmarks, I downvote. Nothing personal. But I don’t want to support that even indirectly.
Eh at this point I’m just sick and fucking tired watching sexuality become nothing but marketing bait. People’s sexuality and gender are becoming nothing but a two cent market gimmick and it’s fucking insulting.
This isn’t cool representation! It’s hey lgbtq people your stupid and fucking easy. Look we can use the right words. Trust us and buy our shit.
It’s just the fucking corporatization of rainbows in June all over again.
watching sexuality become nothing but marketing bait.
This is what I figured what would happen once people started pushing for more explicit sexuality acceptance. This is the bed they made.
Trust us and buy our shit.
This is also due to people inside said corporations pushing for this shit due to ideological reasons.
*some LGBT:* Give us the positive attention and validation that we crave! *Large Corporations, seeing opportunities:* OK *some LGBT:* No, not like that!
Again, welcome to their bed.
It’s not just corporations. It’s influencer-grifters like Pirat_Nation.
…And, to be blunt, reposters who further spread the ragebait, like OP.
The platforms, ultimately, are what facilitate “marketing bait.” But I dunno what to do about that, as human being simply cannot help themselves once they see stuff like that. It works, apparently.
“Becoming” as though “sex sells” hasn’t been a thing for literally as long as we’ve had the concept of commerce…
Yeah agree
It’s a fucking fox, why does it need to have a specific gender? It was genderless by default they don’t need to announce it one way or another, other than to pander to people.
Good instinct. Pirat_Nation is a grifter/ragebaiting account. No one should be giving him visibility.
I mean, yeah… It’s a blue checkmark account.
At this point, if you’re paying for extra engagement on Twitter, that is beyond “benefit of the doubt.” It seems safe to assume its some kind of attention farm.
Firefox is now exclusive to ternary computers.
No, Mozilla has seen the future of computing. (CS/CE/IT, don’t watch if you don’t want to be frustrated.)
What if… hear me out… what if we remove the focus on gender altogether? What if we stop engendering things that don’t have genders? Like logos… and behavioral attributes…
Just don’t go as extreme as trying to de-gender languages, like Spanish, which is a gendered language (as are several others):
There is no latinx, only latina and latino. Whoever uses latinx unironically can fuck right off, for being an ignorance cringelord.
Since Mozilla actually didn’t and the post is based on a lie, I’ll say congratulations, your reaction is almost certainly what they were hoping for
You don’t think people childishly over-anthropomorphize a lot these days? Cause I do, and that’s what my comment was about.
I mean, if you can provide data which shows that anthropomorphisation - specifically the unwarranted attribution of gender to things which are genderless - is on the rise and can demonstrate, or even articulate what the real-world harm of this is, then maybe I will agree that ranting about it in response to a tweet from an anti-woke twitter user lying about it in order to stir up tired “culture war” arguments isn’t silly
Perhaps we should also rant about the erosion of male-dominated spaces into spaces which are “lame and gay”, given that there are now women who play Warhammer?
Why would I have an issue with women playing warhammer?
I’m explicitly saying that I think assigning things like warhammer (a genderless concept) as being for either men or women is stupid.
The issue I have is everything being put into one of two categories that are essentially irrelevant.
Gender is far less relevant than people make it; its emphasis is a long standing sociological trend that I hope can die as people feel more accepted and secure.
Again, the question is can you demonstrate that this is actually something that is increasing?
The relevance of the second tweet is that it’s from the same person. They’re trying to get an angry reaction from people to help fuel culture war bullshit. And you provided exactly the reaction they were after
There ** was** no “focus on gender”. They just pretended there was so that people like you would amplify the signal. You fell for it without first stopping to check whether or not it was true
I understand. I’m not trying to win an argument or write a thesis.
It’s a mascot, not a logo. So it having a gender isn’t strange.
Also, since its pronouns are (quoting the announcement blog post) “he/him, they/them, she/her, and it” that is very open and not rather post-gender, in my opinion. The focus in the announcement is not on thee mascot’s gender in fact.
Any and all other identities as well. It’s a never ending ad nauseam non evidence based, non measurable and inconclusive debate.
Like we’re in The Beasts’ castle. Sometimes a candleholder is just a candleholder.
Waterfox needs to catch up with a gender-fluid fox
Wait, there is a Waterfox? Is there also an Earth and Air fox? Then we could have an AvatarFox!
Librewolf also needs to come up with something.
@green_copper @ShinkanTrain @cannedtuna Librewolf needs to cut to the chase and adopt a furry mascot.
2Fast2Furry
I’ll switch to whatever browser that has a postgender mascot
Gender-free wolf
As someone who has both LibreWolf and Amarok pinned to the taskbar, I can definitely say the icon similarity is confusing.
Waterfox used to have a fox in the logo but Mozilla didn’t like that so waterfox removed the fox after many threats from Mozilla
The old one was also non-binary. Prove me wrong.
(Honestly, I just don’t care. Load the web page and render some JavaScript already)
Just search for “Firefox Chan”. And maybe keep on SafeSearch too…
And maybe keep on SafeSearch too…
No, I don’t think I will
If you’ve found a non-binary one then I’d love to see what you’re running it on.
Old Russian trinary hardware? That would be quite an achievement!
Malbolge
Or analog computing with opamps
mascots gender says
It’s a fucking red panda.
Do they not have genders?
That’s actually a pretty complex question. Are they even capable of conceptualizing their own internal model of themselves as it compares to their species’ gender norms?
Since they’re not social species, I’d be very surprised if they could.
likely yes. species in general are able to conceptualise gender because it’s necessary for procreation (keep reading; i promise this ends in a view that’s pro-trans but stronger because it’s harder to debate against)
homosexual behaviour in animals among complex species line anthropoids is at minimum of ~10%, so even accounting for preference imo it’s pretty clear mammals are able to conceptualise gender, since gender is about roles specifically rather than sex and this 10% number is about exclusively homosexual sheep (apparently the number is 25% among black swans where the number includes homosexual pairing/parenting/etc instead of just sexual relationships)
anyway, point being even among the most limited term animals tend to be able conceptualise gender
but that’s not at all what the character of a mascot is about: a mascot is inherently an anthropic projection of human behaviour onto an animal (thus basically why furries exist and are pretty closely associated with mascots)
imo firefox mascot can “somewhat legitimately” (and even perhaps “not uncharitably” - just ignorant maybe) be viewed either as less than 10% of animals displaying “transgender” behavour (ie the numbers displaying gendered behaviours that don’t match their sex - ignoring the concept of gender) and thus 10% of firefox mascots should be non-binary (yes i’m mixing those terms because remember this is the charitable but ignorant interpretation) and firefox doesn’t yet have 9 gendered mascots… or it can be viewed as 90% of mascots generally being gendered and thus a specifically non-gendered mascot in the “corpus of mascots” is warranted… but then it could be argued that actually the majority of mascots are non-gendered: perhaps not specifically, but implicitly simply because humans have grown to dislike misogyny and prefer female representation
i’m saying this not because i necessarily agree with the reaction, but because it’s important to understand the alternative viewpoint regardless of agreement in concept. it’s at the very least more complex than the simple argument acknowledges
imo representation is important, as we’ve pretty unambiguously agreed with female representation and even homosexual representation more broadly since about the 90s
Are telling me they fired the previous mascot to hire a gender minority? Smh
Isn’t the old mascot/logo completely non-gendered already?
There was nothing like that with the old fox-that-is-on-fire, so I guess mozilla is making a statement by pointing it out.
Except there’s basically nowhere that Mozilla actually does. The post is misinformation
Except it’s not pointing it out, OP is
I kinda wish that they had pointed it out, but they didn’t.
That’s stupid, it was genderless before until they brought it up.
Mozilla didn’t bring it up. The story is made up by right-wing trolls.
It’s a fox. I like the fox.
the firefox is explicitly (in the case of mozilla firefox) neither fox nor red panda
https://brand.mozilla.com/d/5UkPdpbtt8LS/visual-elements#/-/mascot-1
Its actually a red panda iirc
Firefox is another name for the red panda, but the Firefox browser has always used foxes as logo/mascots. Before that it was called Phoenix, maybe that’s why they decided to just use another fire-related animal name without thinking about it too much.
It uses qubits sorry. Get a quantum computer loser
Maybe it’s meant to run on the old Soviet Setun platform.
