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.
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
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.
Most people default to “this entity is male” without more context. I do it too, it’s a bit of an issue I try to be aware of but regularly fail. Male is default, female is marked; that’s why the stereotypical “girl” character in video games is just the “boy” character but with eye lashes and lips and maybe high heels. (And non-binary doesn’t exist, obv /s)
So I can see this as making the non-genderedness explicit.
Edit: I don’t have the spoons to elaborate on “male is default”. Can someone else maybe jump in? Thx.
Example in Czech:
Generic Fox (Liška) is a girl
Generic Wolf (Vlk) is a boy
Because our words themself have genders.
Fox: Liška (girl) Lišák (boy) but default if you don’t knoe the sex of the animal is in this case the girl version.
This differs per language. And in german (if I’m not mistaken) fox is Der Fuchs, so boy.
I’m using boy/girl instead of male/female, because … I don’t know, that is how I think about it.
And in german (if I’m not mistaken) fox is Der Fuchs, so boy.
That’s true, but the grammatical gender has nothing to do with the actual gender. Nobody thinks that all foxes are male, just as nobody thinks that spoons (Der Löffel) are male or the street (Die Straße) are female. They can also change depending on the amount. For example, if we take “Haus”, which means house, we say “Das Haus” if we talk about a single house, which would be neutral, but refer to multiple houses as “Die Häuser”, which would be female. Nobody thinks houses become female once there’s more than one tho.
I don’t disagree, my point was that atleast in my case, if Im not given the gendre of an animal, I fallback to the gramatical gender. At-least in czeck, since it requires me to chabge the shape of the word to express the “other” gender.
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
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.
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
I think it’s more a statement that it’s not gendered
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.
Most people default to “this entity is male” without more context. I do it too, it’s a bit of an issue I try to be aware of but regularly fail. Male is default, female is marked; that’s why the stereotypical “girl” character in video games is just the “boy” character but with eye lashes and lips and maybe high heels. (And non-binary doesn’t exist, obv /s)
So I can see this as making the non-genderedness explicit.
Edit: I don’t have the spoons to elaborate on “male is default”. Can someone else maybe jump in? Thx.
That highly depends on the language.
Example in Czech: Generic Fox (Liška) is a girl Generic Wolf (Vlk) is a boy
Because our words themself have genders. Fox: Liška (girl) Lišák (boy) but default if you don’t knoe the sex of the animal is in this case the girl version.
This differs per language. And in german (if I’m not mistaken) fox is Der Fuchs, so boy.
I’m using boy/girl instead of male/female, because … I don’t know, that is how I think about it.
That’s true, but the grammatical gender has nothing to do with the actual gender. Nobody thinks that all foxes are male, just as nobody thinks that spoons (Der Löffel) are male or the street (Die Straße) are female. They can also change depending on the amount. For example, if we take “Haus”, which means house, we say “Das Haus” if we talk about a single house, which would be neutral, but refer to multiple houses as “Die Häuser”, which would be female. Nobody thinks houses become female once there’s more than one tho.
I don’t disagree, my point was that atleast in my case, if Im not given the gendre of an animal, I fallback to the gramatical gender. At-least in czeck, since it requires me to chabge the shape of the word to express the “other” gender.