Bubbles's sexual and romantic interests, to the best of my knowledge, have never been discussed or even hinted at in the comic. It may be that she's never had any sexual or romantic feelings at all before she met Faye. As such, any speculation is pure fancy.
Bubbles was not designed for romance. She was designed for combat.
She did not say she was just a synthetic-in-the-street. An ordinary AI would be ineffective in that chassis, because it has features, sensors, scanners, that a civilian chassis does not. (Take Pintsize, for example. Given a military chassis, he discovered he had a laser he could fire at will, but he could not control it, because he was not designed for it.) She felt the call to serve because she was designed for it.Bubbles was not designed for romance. She was designed for combat.
That's inaccurate. Bubbles told Momo that she was just a synthetic-in-the-street who chose to join the armed forces. The only thing that was designed for combat is her current chassis.
I believed I was well-disposed toward such a role. As an artificial intelligence, I possess skills and features that my human counterparts do not. With this body, I am superhuman. A state of the art weapon that can think, reason, and empathize. What better soldier could there be?
Wrong, wrong, wrong.
Couldn't care less.
If she likes Faye, she likes Faye. Nothing else is comic relevant unless an ex or future partner joins.
Do you think Bubbles was mostly straight until she developed feelings for Faye? Or is she gay? Or bisexual?
There couldn't be. Bubbles's loyalty would override even sexual attraction.
We discuss human sexual orientation in one of a couple of ways: either as an orientation contrary to a human's chromosomal sex, or in terms of the chromosomal sex of their partners1.
...
1 This is not the discussion I want to contribute here. I have my own views, just as you have yours. They may disagree, but they do not conflict. You go your way, and I'll go mine. I have no beef with you.
I would add to that... What exactly is chromosomal sex? Human DNA is - in a manner of speaking - software that tells human cells (hardware) how to behave. So human chromosomal sex is, in fact, assigned in our "software", just as an AI's sex is assigned in their software - which basically means that AI's do have chromosomal sex. It's just defined by a slightly different process than in humans. That raises the question of an AI's gender, or sexual identity...We discuss human sexual orientation in one of a couple of ways: either as an orientation contrary to a human's chromosomal sex, or in terms of the chromosomal sex of their partners1.
...
1 This is not the discussion I want to contribute here. I have my own views, just as you have yours. They may disagree, but they do not conflict. You go your way, and I'll go mine. I have no beef with you.
Yet that position is central to your thesis. You have argued that human sexuality labels don't apply because AI lack chromosomal sex. I would argue that you're wrong precisely because we do not define sexuality in relation to chromosomal sex.
> I have thereby learned a great deal about people who think very differently from myself.
This place is good for that.
This is not the discussion I want to contribute here.
I think that you need a new terminology for the relationships that include AIs. Certainly the terminology of human-to-human relationships is complex enough, but (in Jeph's universe) AIs add another layer to the dynamic.
There's no need to classify Bubbles partnership (romantic or otherwise) with a human-to-human label, as the relationship is not one that a human can have with another human. Indeed, it may be a relationship (from Bubbles standpoint) that only exists as an AI-to-human relationship.
How would you describe a partner for a "straight" Bubbles? How about "gay", with respect to Bubbles? Or "Bi"?
In other words, what do you mean when you ask about a "straight" Bubbles vs a "gay" or "bi" Bubbles?
I've just a thought.I guess I don't see it that way. If I saw one of my friends suddenly getting romantic with someone of their own gender, and I didn't know they swung that way, I would ask some mutual acquaintances if they knew what our mutual friend's orientation was. And if the friend in question walked into the conversation, I would ask them. I know my friends pretty well, for the most part, and I don't think any of them would be offended by the whole thing, regardless of what their actual answer to the question may be.
Is this topic even appropriate? My feeling is that it is not; I would find it unacceptable if someone asked in open forum what my sexual orientation was, so how is asking about Bubbles sexual orientation acceptable?
I've just a thought.
Is this topic even appropriate? My feeling is that it is not; I would find it unacceptable if someone asked in open forum what my sexual orientation was, so how is asking about Bubbles sexual orientation acceptable?
Now, I am as guilty as the rest of the posters here. My apologies to Bubbles and to those others that my contribution to this discussion might have offended.
I've just a thought.
Is this topic even appropriate? My feeling is that it is not; I would find it unacceptable if someone asked in open forum what my sexual orientation was, so how is asking about Bubbles sexual orientation acceptable?
Now, I am as guilty as the rest of the posters here. My apologies to Bubbles and to those others that my contribution to this discussion might have offended.
I've just a thought.
Is this topic even appropriate? My feeling is that it is not; I would find it unacceptable if someone asked in open forum what my sexual orientation was, so how is asking about Bubbles sexual orientation acceptable?
Now, I am as guilty as the rest of the posters here. My apologies to Bubbles and to those others that my contribution to this discussion might have offended.
(click to show/hide)
...
It also denies the reality of how this relationship will be seen by the world at large and denies Bubbles (and Faye) the very real lived experiences of people in lesbian relationships. Those relationships carry a lot of societal baggage with them and denying them that label denies the existence of that baggage. It's a real problem for people, so thank you for bringing it up.
I've just a thought.
Is this topic even appropriate? My feeling is that it is not; I would find it unacceptable if someone asked in open forum what my sexual orientation was, so how is asking about Bubbles sexual orientation acceptable?
Now, I am as guilty as the rest of the posters here. My apologies to Bubbles and to those others that my contribution to this discussion might have offended.
Speaking as someone on the LGB spectrum the topic doesn't bother me for that reason. But I don't see the point of it at all. We have exactly one point of reference when it comes to Bubble's sexuality. She's romantically attracted to Faye. There has been no indication to her romantic or sexual orientation beyond that, past or present. So the entire thread is strictly and literally baseless guesswork.
Do you think Bubbles was mostly straight until she developed feelings for Faye? Or is she gay? Or bisexual?
I'd like to hear theories. This has never really been explored in the comic. We know that Faye was straight as an arrow until possibly developing feelings for Bubbles.
Going off topic here, but the idea of hard-wired loyalty creeps me out. Feels both prescriptive and enforced. Assuming that AI's are able to make free choices, their personality must necessarily be emergent, not pre-programmed.That's what I'm wondering. Does Bubbs' intrinsic loyalty originate with her base programming, something that happened as her personality was complied in the creche that had little or nothing to do with her base code, or did it develop of its own accord? Was she programmed that way because she was created to be a soldier, or was she drawn toward the military because of that personality trait?
Which means they get to own any qualities or vices they possess. At least to the same extent as humans do. Which seems fair enough.
Going off topic here, but the idea of hard-wired loyalty creeps me out. Feels both prescriptive and enforced. Assuming that AI's are able to make free choices, their personality must necessarily be emergent, not pre-programmed.That's what I'm wondering. Does Bubbs' intrinsic loyalty originate with her base programming, something that happened as her personality was complied in the creche that had little or nothing to do with her base code, or did it develop of its own accord? Was she programmed that way because she was created to be a soldier, or was she drawn toward the military because of that personality trait?
Which means they get to own any qualities or vices they possess. At least to the same extent as humans do. Which seems fair enough.
Jeph may or may not choose to drill down that far into this world he's created.
While creating AIs for the military may be frowned upon, it's naive to think someone hasn't tried and won't try again. (There's another story line for Jeph to pursue if he so chooses.) As for Spookybot not letting it happen, they isn't a deity, they're just very good a faking it. They're not omniscient and had to enlist Emily's aid, and they fake omnipresence with multiple linked selves physically present, presumably in the same metropolitan area.Going off topic here, but the idea of hard-wired loyalty creeps me out. Feels both prescriptive and enforced. Assuming that AI's are able to make free choices, their personality must necessarily be emergent, not pre-programmed.That's what I'm wondering. Does Bubbs' intrinsic loyalty originate with her base programming, something that happened as her personality was complied in the creche that had little or nothing to do with her base code, or did it develop of its own accord? Was she programmed that way because she was created to be a soldier, or was she drawn toward the military because of that personality trait?
Which means they get to own any qualities or vices they possess. At least to the same extent as humans do. Which seems fair enough.
Jeph may or may not choose to drill down that far into this world he's created.
Well, two things off the bat- a) she wasn't programmed for the military, she chose it. Her psychological profile certainly played a part in that choice, but it doesn't offer any clues as to how it came about. That leads to b), her choice met with concern and disapproval from the AI community. Assuming they play the role of parent, that implies her choices are emergent and developmental rather than imposed by her creators- why create an AI to make choices you disapprove of?
We know the process of AI creation is barely understood, so manipulating it to create specific traits seems like it would require insight that just isn't available, even to the God AI's. Spookybot also confirmed that they view messing with personality, memory and minds in general as a massive taboo, so again they are unlikely to inflict that on their children.
Finally, if her personality wasn't emergent, it couldn't change over time- the software wouldn't allow it. But she has changed her personality, opening up and becoming more emotionally vulnerable. If she has the ability to develop psychologically now, it seems odd that that wouldn't be a capacity she's always had.
TLDR- Bubbles is loyal, but she wasn't made that way.
While creating AIs for the military may be frowned upon, it's naive to think someone hasn't tried and won't try again. (There's another story line for Jeph to pursue if he so chooses.) As for Spookybot not letting it happen, they isn't a deity, they're just very good a faking it. They're not omniscient and had to enlist Emily's aid, and they fake omnipresence with multiple linked selves physically present, presumably in the same metropolitan area.
Remember, if there's a God in this QC universe, his name is Jeph. He's revealing AI traits like talents and sexuality bit by bit as he goes along.
We are discussing the sexuality of AIs in terms that precisely mirror those for humans.
My question is, has a form of sexuality similar to that of humans arisen as part of the emergence of the AI mind itself, or has it been (consciously or unconsciously) imposed on them, and if so, by whom - the society in which they have emerged, the author, or us, the readership?
Faye has been cheated on before. It will come up between them at some point, but dammit I just want to enjoy the newness of their relationship right now!
What does Faye need most? An emotional center to her life who will never move to New York or shoot himself in the head.
I like "Fayesexual" because it rhymes with "asexual" and therefore brings it to mind.
In a state of angst and confusion and perhaps cognitive dissonance over a shift in her own perceived or self-identified gender preference?
Among people I know, there are more than a few formerly exclusive lesbians and formerly exclusively straight women who either discovered one or two very confusing exceptions, or outright became to some degree bisexual, as they matured. But absolutely no exclusively-straight or exclusively-gay men of my acquaintance have gone through the same thing. I wonder if this is just a small-sample coincidence or if there's a genuine skew there?
I can't think of anyone less likely to cheat than Bubbles, honestly.
This did happen to a male college friend of mine (he's primarily attracted to women, but his boyfriend is the one exception) so it can be true of both men and women :)
I'd be pretty surprised if that happened as well, to put it mildly.
Stop worrying!
Bubbles came into this with an orientation that made it possible to start a romantic relationship with Faye. This is something to celebrate.
Hmmm. someone Bubbles' size and strength has no idea what she's doing and may be processing, um, unfamiliar high-priority input.They might be, and may need to hire more help. They have the wherewithal to solve their own physical intimacy problems, and there are certainly other A/O couples who need the same help. "Love an android/organic? We'll custom build compatible junk for you," may be a little too crass, but they'll come up with something.
Oh Honey. Been there. You do what you need to do, that's how it is but....
Do you suppose they're making enough at Union Robotics now to cover replacements for broken furniture? :lol:
What if an AI whose software says they're male and who identifies as female is transferred into a toaster?
Hmmm. someone Bubbles' size and strength has no idea what she's doing and may be processing, um, unfamiliar high-priority input.They might be, and may need to hire more help. They have the wherewithal to solve their own physical intimacy problems, and there are certainly other A/O couples who need the same help. "Love an android/organic? We'll custom build compatible junk for you," may be a little too crass, but they'll come up with something.
Oh Honey. Been there. You do what you need to do, that's how it is but....
Do you suppose they're making enough at Union Robotics now to cover replacements for broken furniture? :lol:
Done right business could be quite good.
Speaking as someone on the LGB spectrum the topic doesn't bother me for that reason. But I don't see the point of it at all. We have exactly one point of reference when it comes to Bubble's sexuality. She's romantically attracted to Faye. There has been no indication to her romantic or sexual orientation beyond that, past or present. So the entire thread is strictly and literally baseless guesswork.Interestingly, speaking as someone else on the LBG (but not TQ+) part of the world, I *do* find this discussion makes me a bit uncomfortable. If you ask me about my sexuality, I'll ask why you want to know, and, if you have a reasonable justification, I'll tell you. Asking a third party to speculate, though, strikes me as voyeuristic. Ask me, or don't ask at all.
Beyond that, exactly which mucus membranes are involved seems unimportant.That just makes sex sound revolting.
Also I just want to mention that as someone on the LGB spectrum, I really appreciate how respectful this community is to these issues.
That just makes sex sound revolting.
I can go on and on -- the relationship is fascinating. As to sex, the only interesting question to me is whether human/AI relationships have sexual aspects. Beyond that, exactly which mucus membranes are involved seems unimportant.
Thanks! I suppose I took her discomfort as more a combination of "this is my best friend and I don't want to screw this up" and "oh crap what if I made her uncomfortable and upset her"
Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
Would you take a pansexual woman’s opinion? I don’t claim to be an expert on butch/femme dynamics, but Faye has only ever vaguely struck me as butch, not overtly. Dora did comment about it and I started to wonder, but didn’t really entertain the idea.
Which makes me think—Dora has gotten noticeably more feminine as time has gone on, or am I crazy?
I'm not denying that they are a f/f couple. I was presenting it more as food for thought. Perhaps Faye's angst stemming from a different place than just the girl/girl dynamic, that perhaps it isn't even a consideration if she sees Bubbles as more of a masculine than feminine force.
Simply a different viewpoint.
Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
A thought... Is Bubbles really female in the context of this relationship? Or generally really?
She seems to have been generally portrayed as rather masculine to me.
With this in mind, it is also as if Faye could be attracted to Bubbles as a masculine robotic force, rather than a female one?
I feel I am explaining my thoughts rather badly here and I hope that I do not come across as offensive.
Well, two things off the bat- a) she wasn't programmed for the military, she chose it. Her psychological profile certainly played a part in that choice, but it doesn't offer any clues as to how it came about. That leads to b), her choice met with concern and disapproval from the AI community. Assuming they play the role of parent, that implies her choices are emergent and developmental rather than imposed by her creators- why create an AI to make choices you disapprove of?In a nutshell, here's my basic problem with people saying flat-out that Bubbles wasn't programmed for the military. Since the "how" of an AI becoming a conscious intelligence is unknown, you can't say for sure that they could not be programmed with specific traits, or be designed for a specific vocation, such as the military. Since she was a part of a program that made AIs for the military, if it were at all possible to make such programming choices in their initialisation, you can believe the government would have done it. So whether by her initial programming, or by environmental conditioning, I believe her joining the military was planned. Yes, she had to choose the military of her own free will, and could have also not chosen it.
We know the process of AI creation is barely understood, so manipulating it to create specific traits seems like it would require insight that just isn't available, even to the God AI's. Spookybot also confirmed that they view messing with personality, memory and minds in general as a massive taboo, so again they are unlikely to inflict that on their children.
Finally, if her personality wasn't emergent, it couldn't change over time- the software wouldn't allow it. But she has changed her personality, opening up and becoming more emotionally vulnerable. If she has the ability to develop psychologically now, it seems odd that that wouldn't be a capacity she's always had.
TLDR- Bubbles is loyal, but she wasn't made that way.
While creating AIs for the military may be frowned upon, it's naive to think someone hasn't tried and won't try again. (There's another story line for Jeph to pursue if he so chooses.) As for Spookybot not letting it happen, they isn't a deity, they're just very good a faking it. They're not omniscient and had to enlist Emily's aid, and they fake omnipresence with multiple linked selves physically present, presumably in the same metropolitan area.Spookybot didn't need to enlist Emily's aid, as confirmed by the fact that when Emily reported finding nothing in Bubbles' mind where there should have been memories, Spookybot went in personally and confirmed it. We actually know very little about Spookybot, including where they live and how they travel from one place to another. No, they're not a deity, but they seem to have technological capabilities well beyond what anyone else in-universe has even contemplated. As Station said, the speculative sky's the limit.
Remember, if there's a God in this QC universe, his name is Jeph. He's revealing AI traits like talents and sexuality bit by bit as he goes along.
What would you say the difference is between butch and tomboy?Just my thoughts...
Considering the title of the thread., I assumed that polite, respectful discourse into sexuality was welcomed. Clearly it is not.
In a nutshell, here's my basic problem with people saying flat-out that Bubbles wasn't programmed for the military. Since the "how" of an AI becoming a conscious intelligence is unknown, you can't say for sure that they could not be programmed with specific traits, or be designed for a specific vocation, such as the military. Since she was a part of a program that made AIs for the military, if it were at all possible to make such programming choices in their initialisation, you can believe the government would have done it. So whether by her initial programming, or by environmental conditioning, I believe her joining the military was planned. Yes, she had to choose the military of her own free will, and could have also not chosen it.
No, I have nothing but Bubbles' own words to support my opinion that she was, in fact, specifically designed for the military. Whether it was a pre-programmed trait, I cannot say for certain, any more than you can say that it isn't. But she herself said that she was well-suited for it, so it is not unreasonable to believe that it was by design. Even among humans, children of military families are more likely to join the military themselves, even if their parents don't actively encourage them in that direction. They are constantly exposed to it, so it has become a part of them by the time they are old enough to make that choice.
The discussion of "masculine traits" reminded me of one of Akima's unforgettable insights.Which is, of course, why I included quotes around many of the terms I used. The concepts of “masculine” and “feminine” are, to a certain extent, based on the culture in which one exists. What constitutes one or the other would be very different in say 19th century Martha’s Vineyard versus 1980s Savannah. And even more differences present themselves when you bring different countries into the equation.
I can't find the exact quote but it was something close to
"How can it be a masculine trait if I have it?"
I apologize for putting an unpopular opinion or viewpoint out there, and will cease participating in a discussion where my thoughts are clearly not welcome.
My apologies for offending anyone.
I suppose what I am trying to get at is more that I see the possibility of their gender being unimportant to their attraction in their eyes, if that makes any sense. Just something that has been in my mind for a bit I guess.
Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
It's also worth considering how Faye might have reacted to a male chassis in the exact same circumstances - cultural cues may have caused different actions, and the story might have gone in an entirely different and probably less happy direction.
This thread glancingly touches on a fairly dark line of thought - if her chassis has a functional gender, the military thought there was a combat or readiness purpose to her having it. If that sentence does not horrify you, then reread it with empathic and moral filters off.
Given her sister is lesbian, and there IS a genetic component to 'nonstandard' sexuality, it might be worth wondering if Mr. Whitaker was dealing with something that was treated fairly abysmally in the mid-late 80s Southeastern US.
I feel like perhaps the reason Faye was able to connect with Bubbles is perhaps more because she did not forsee any romantic entanglement. She formed the emotional bond before there was even a hint of a physical one to her, making the relationship less "threatening" in context of her own issues.
This thread glancingly touches on a fairly dark line of thought - if her chassis has a functional gender, the military thought there was a combat or readiness purpose to her having it. If that sentence does not horrify you, then reread it with empathic and moral filters off.
That is an interesting idea. But one thing the military (any military) has to deal with is that the people who are soldiers today, if they survive, will eventually be civilians. The 'combat or readiness purpose' may be as simple as making it more likely that an ex-soldier can eventually integrate into society, instead of breaking down with horrifying results to the civilian population, or spending their entire life as an isolated loner working for a criminal enterprise and unable to relate to anyone as a person.... oh wait.
It may also be as simple as creating a soldier who can seamlessly integrate into and relate with the unit s/he'll be serving with. Once you get past 'non-sentient' humans are pretty insistent that the things they interact with WILL BE TREATED as if they have a gender.
Given her sister is lesbian, and there IS a genetic component to 'nonstandard' sexuality, it might be worth wondering if Mr. Whitaker was dealing with something that was treated fairly abysmally in the mid-late 80s Southeastern US.
Last I heard they were saying genetics accounted for something like 30% of the bias, and epigenetics/development for the rest. So, there are a lot of pairs of identical twins where one is straight and one is gay or lesbian - but 30% fewer such pairs than you'd expect there to be if it were entirely down to chance.
This thread glancingly touches on a fairly dark line of thought - if her chassis has a functional gender, the military thought there was a combat or readiness purpose to her having it. If that sentence does not horrify you, then reread it with empathic and moral filters off.
Speaking of terms of referral. Bubbles prefers she/her, and it would be rude to refer to her in any other way. My sense is that AIs prefer "Ai" in the QC-verse. Is 'robot' considered a slur there?All of these terms are at all times descriptive, not prescriptive.
Speaking of terms of referral. Bubbles prefers she/her, and it would be rude to refer to her in any other way. My sense is that AIs prefer "Ai" in the QC-verse. Is 'robot' considered a slur there?All of these terms are at all times descriptive, not prescriptive.
http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=3736 <-- You really think Faye would refer to Bubbles with a slur?
It may be that QC AI adopt human gender identities/pronouns solely for the purpose of socialization and to fit in better with the human society in which they function, like RPG gamers adopting classes that mean no more to them than to flavour their interactions as fighters, magic-users, and theives.
Have we seen a religious attachment to their human gender construct since the triple digit strips?
Their gender identity does seem to be fairly meaningful to them:
[…]
This is pre-singularity when AI's were owned, not free sentients. Since then one can assume they have control over their own switch, but it is still meaningful either way.
Also, consider the emotional attachment and meaning Bubble's found in her armour. If physical form meant nothing more than a D&D class, her decision to go without it would have been nowhere near as meaningful. At the same time, it has been shown from Momo to Winslow that an AI is not bound to the form they were first installed in, and can be transferred if desired. All of this suggests its not just about socialising, but also the preference and choice of the AI in question. For example Winslow:My description above was of a human gender construct, i.e. he/him/his vs. she/her/hers being a matter of convenience, an RPG character class, not physical things like a combat medic's armour. That would be part of Bubbles' embodied form and so form part of her AI gender construct. Nowhere did I claim AI couldn't switch embodiments. Clearly, we've seen May start out… however May started out, try to buy a fighter jet to jump into, get disembodied and sent to robot jail, and get reembodied in a parole-grade humanoid chassis.
"Humanoid please. And I think I'm a boy."
http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=3540
Basically I can't really say one way or another if Faye is butch or not because that's already hard to judge in the first place, but it's basically near impossible to make that sort of call with someone who has been straight up until now. I will certainty agree with Dora that the haircut she got at the end of #3136 (http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=3136) was pretty stereotypical butch looking tho
As for Dora being more feminine, I'm not really sure. Her hair has gotten longer at least, but she hasn't been the focus of any strips in a while.
I don't know, I personally think she looks prettier with her current hair style. But I may be a bit baised since my hair is rather similar.
Mad Cat I don't really have much thoughts on your whole analysis but please be aware of your use of the words "transgendered" and "transgenderism" as those are inaccurate.
As to your policing of my use of langauge around the transgender concept…I mean. Okay. Cool? Not sure what the "your move" is about, this isn't a fight.
I am trans.
Your move.
Mad Cat, we've seen repeated evidence that AI gender identity is not directly tied to their current chassis. Station, for example, identifies as male and he's a space station. Pintsize identifies as male and his chassis doesn't have any gender identifying markers. Evidence all points to their gender identity being part of their code.I wonder whether "code" is the right term here. I thought Bubbles had once basically said that AIs experience gender identity much as humans do. That seems consistent with Winslow saying "and I think I'm a boy" -- it's not something which he felt was discretely written into his code, but rather something which arose from within it and his life-experience.
And for transgenderism I don't even know where the hell that term cropped up from. The only time I ever see it used is by terfs and right wing people talking about "the evil cult of transgenderism" or other similar nonsense.I don't think I've seen 'terf' used anywhere else in this thread. It's an acronym for "Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminist". I won't provide any links; they're pretty nasty people.
@Spider
https://www.tandfonline.com/toc/wijt20/current
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/transgendered
I am using real words correctly. You are trying to police my language. In English, any word can be verbed, and any adjective can be nouned, but transgender as a noun is the epithet you fear.
adjective Usually Offensive.
Speaking of terms of referral. Bubbles prefers she/her, and it would be rude to refer to her in any other way. My sense is that AIs prefer "Ai" in the QC-verse. Is 'robot' considered a slur there?May is the only AI that I can recall expressing negativity to being called a "robot" (http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2754). Many of the other AIs have used that term in reference even to themselves.
...it is appropriate to refer to May as transgendered...May has never been presented as anything but female. We know that she wanted to (and still wants to) be a fighter jet, but she has never given any indication that she has ever not been female. So there is no evidence that she is transgender.
Faye uses robot and AI interchangeably, and Bubbles didn’t seem offended when Faye said “robot.” I would think Faye wouldn’t want to hurt or offend her best friend.
I don’t think robot is a slur.
Speaking of terms of referral. Bubbles prefers she/her, and it would be rude to refer to her in any other way. My sense is that AIs prefer "Ai" in the QC-verse. Is 'robot' considered a slur there?
Speaking of terms of referral. Bubbles prefers she/her, and it would be rude to refer to her in any other way. My sense is that AIs prefer "Ai" in the QC-verse. Is 'robot' considered a slur there?May is the only AI that I can recall expressing negativity to being called a "robot" (http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2754). Many of the other AIs have used that term in reference even to themselves.
And speaking of May......it is appropriate to refer to May as transgendered...May has never been presented as anything but female. We know that she wanted to (and still wants to) be a fighter jet, but she has never given any indication that she has ever not been female. So there is no evidence that she is transgender.
She also has said she likes being a blue robot chick (http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=3302)*sigh* AI gender is not human gender. Human gender is not AI gender. An AI can have a human gender if it feels it should, but doesn't have to. May has a human gender and it's feminine. Great. I'm happy for her and for all of you who see that. But she also has an AI gender, which is FIGHTER JET, which she is not allowed to be. THIS is the concept of gender, say it with me once, please, "AI GENDER", that makes May transgendered in the AI sense. Nowhere have I said anything about May's human gender construct one way or the other. When you have not fully read my original post in this thread, and I say that May is transgendered, it does not mean what you think it means in terms of human gender.
Can we just agree to disagree? I worry that tempers are flaring.
Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
She also has said she likes being a blue robot chick (http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=3302)*sigh* AI gender is not human gender. Human gender is not AI gender. An AI can have a human gender if it feels it should, but doesn't have to. May has a human gender and it's feminine. Great. I'm happy for her and for all of you who see that. But she also has an AI gender, which is FIGHTER JET, which she is not allowed to be. THIS is the concept of gender, say it with me once, please, "AI GENDER", that makes May transgendered in the AI sense. Nowhere have I said anything about May's human gender construct one way or the other. When you have not fully read my original post in this thread, and I say that May is transgendered, it does not mean what you think it means in terms of human gender.
As am I. I descibed AI gender from first principles in a way that may not track the way Jeph thinks of the gender of his AI characters. Maybe to Jeph, the god of this world, it would make sense for a non-humanoid embodied AI to care about biological concepts like masculine and feminine and to desire to have a penis or a vagina. To me, that idea sounds utterly ridiculous, and I've laid out my case for same multiple times now.
Modify message
@pecoros7
For the noun form, which is why I use the adjectival form. It's a technical point, but I feel it's sufficient to avoid the offensiveness. See also: dfn. of "usually".
If I tell someone they are trying to police my language, which I will not permit, they really are trying to police my language, especially despite their claims of not trying to police my language.
I descibed AI gender from first principles in a way that may not track the way Jeph thinks of the gender of his AI characters. Maybe to Jeph, the god of this world, it would make sense for a non-humanoid embodied AI to care about biological concepts like masculine and feminine and to desire to have a penis or a vagina. To me, that idea sounds utterly ridiculous
It's still code, though. AIs have adaptive code, as do humans. Even if a specific gender identity wasn't present at the time of their emergence, it is still part of thier code now. My point is that it's part of thier core personality and not linked to thier current chasis.Mad Cat, we've seen repeated evidence that AI gender identity is not directly tied to their current chassis. Station, for example, identifies as male and he's a space station. Pintsize identifies as male and his chassis doesn't have any gender identifying markers. Evidence all points to their gender identity being part of their code.I wonder whether "code" is the right term here. I thought Bubbles had once basically said that AIs experience gender identity much as humans do. That seems consistent with Winslow saying "and I think I'm a boy" -- it's not something which he felt was discretely written into his code, but rather something which arose from within it and his life-experience.
We have a winner!Quote from: Mad CatAs am I. I descibed AI gender from first principles in a way that may not track the way Jeph thinks of the gender of his AI characters. Maybe to Jeph, the god of this world, it would make sense for a non-humanoid embodied AI to care about biological concepts like masculine and feminine and to desire to have a penis or a vagina. To me, that idea sounds utterly ridiculous, and I've laid out my case for same multiple times now.
Modify message
Do I understand right that you're pointing out that the whole discussion is based on unsupported assumptions, like whether AIs have any reason to have human-style gender at all, making discussion of sexual orientation moot?
Since AIs have no need to be male or female, it would be better writing to have them differ from organic people on this point?
Recasting the idea of gender identity to an internal sense of what job to go into reminds me of some things from the hard sciences where concepts like "acid" and "base" are generalized to situations you might not have expected at first.
Eeeeeeehhhhhhhh. There's plenty of artificial intelligence systems that rely on what we would refer to as "codes", logic programming, predicate logic, case-based reasoning, rule-based systems. These are all incredibly brittle systems and generally suck at general intelligence of a human-type. Witness how hard it was for IBM to make Watson successful at Jeopardy. Now, Watson is being used in vertical siloes, such as the tax code for H&R Block, and in medicine for certain hospitals/insurance companies, where it doesn't have to reason about absolutely everything.It's still code, though. AIs have adaptive code, as do humans. Even if a specific gender identity wasn't present at the time of their emergence, it is still part of thier code now. My point is that it's part of thier core personality and not linked to thier current chasis.Mad Cat, we've seen repeated evidence that AI gender identity is not directly tied to their current chassis. Station, for example, identifies as male and he's a space station. Pintsize identifies as male and his chassis doesn't have any gender identifying markers. Evidence all points to their gender identity being part of their code.I wonder whether "code" is the right term here. I thought Bubbles had once basically said that AIs experience gender identity much as humans do. That seems consistent with Winslow saying "and I think I'm a boy" -- it's not something which he felt was discretely written into his code, but rather something which arose from within it and his life-experience.
This thread glancingly touches on a fairly dark line of thought - if her chassis has a functional gender, the military thought there was a combat or readiness purpose to her having it. If that sentence does not horrify you, then reread it with empathic and moral filters off.
Fortunately, the high-odds likelihood is there will be wacky hijinks of varying types as Bubbles and Faye puzzle out how things work between them to the point that any particular biological normatives being absent ceases to be a concern.
As to gender identification. the only even slightly 'masculine' aspect of Bubbles' affect is her stance in earlier appearances, and that is less masculine and more soldier on post. She's a she, just a very crisp and solid she.
RE the whole 'Fayesexual' line: I'd say El Goonish Shive beat QC to the punch on that particular compounding, albeit with a different character. It's a simple reference to "this character is attracted to this character, regardless of respective genders and gender identities at the moment". Faye is actually the better question - her orientation has to this point always been heterosexual, she clearly identifies as female, and clearly identifies Bubbles as female.
Given her sister is lesbian, and there IS a genetic component to 'nonstandard' sexuality, it might be worth wondering if Mr. Whitaker was dealing with something that was treated fairly abysmally in the mid-late 80s Southeastern US. It's also worth considering how Faye might have reacted to a male chassis in the exact same circumstances - cultural cues may have caused different actions, and the story might have gone in an entirely different and probably less happy direction.
Y’all need to settle down, damn
I think sniktchtherat is confusing sex and gender. Sex is physical. gender is psychological. The only outward appearance on bubbles' chassis of sex is a larger chest, all the better to install larger, stronger myomer synthetic muscles into to give her superhuman upper body strength as, clearly, Ofc. Basilisk does not have, and a distinct lack of male genitalia. There would be no physical evidence of gender, as that is a trait solely of the software that runs on said hardware, i.e. of the AI personality that got installed into it, i.e. the essence of Bubbles.
As has been mentioned, Bubbles' gender would be Bubbles' gender regardless of what chassis she inhabits. If something were to happen to Bubbles' combat chassis and she had to be installed in a chassis that looked more like Momo, Bubbles' gender, and sexual orientation most likely, would remain unchanged in the transfer. I only say most likely because with a completely new chassis may come new sex organs and thus new possibilities for sexual expression that may resonate with her gender identity in a complementary way, or a destructive way, which may itself affect her sexual orientation.
Sex is about what you have, bodily. Gender identity is about who you are and how you think. Sexual orientation is about who you're attracted to and what you want to do with who you're attracted to. This is why people like me are called, most specificly, transsexuals. We don't want to change our genders. We want to change the physical sex of our bodies, a task that is quite difficult for a biologicly embodied entity, but almost trivial for embodied AI in the QC-verse.
So what happens when bodies are easy to change? In QC, AI have the option of changing chassis. But at some point in the not-too-distant future (probably in time for our greatgrandkids anyway) body modification for humans will become indistinguishable from being born that way.
Imagine that a man can decide in January that he wants to try being a woman, start taking some pills, and by the end of February, be a woman - physically, hormonally, and in every other way, six inches shorter, fifty pounds lighter, with whatever bustline/etc she decided on. So she stops taking the pills, acquires a nice wardrobe, and makes her way from there. Maybe a few years later, when she has a husband and a couple of kids, she and her husband decide to swap, so they both start taking pills, and a couple of months later they change their designations from "husband" to "wife" and "wife" to "husband" and the kids take a few weeks to get used to it and the oldest decides maybe he ought to be a daughter instead of a son and does that, and life goes on.
What happens to identities like transgender etc, if physical transition is easy, complete, permanent, reasonably quick, and works both directions so you can try it and if you decide it was a mistake you can just go back? Is the identity defined by the difficulty and acceptance issues associated with presenting an unexpected gender for your sex? If the difficulties of presenting completely go away, if there's nothing for people to base any non-acceptance on, does it still exist?
For extra-crunchy self-concept questioning, we have identified the specific bit of brain morphology that determines whether someone is primarily disposed to be androsexual or gynosexual or both (turns out that 'gay' and 'straight' are non-categories in the brain). People who have that kind of body mod tech, can likely change that at will, as well.
I feel like this is pretty much true of the entire forum. You make ANY opinion comment and you are violating someone's ideals or a fictional character's boundaries or idk the laws of grammar or some shit.
In a similar way, if I tell someone they are trying to police my language, which I will not permit, they really are trying to police my language, especially despite their claims of not trying to police my language. The naked term "transgender" has, for me, been coopted by the transphobes as an epithet. I will not use it. Case closed. Move on.
Equating someone's gender with their physical appearance and capabilities is no different from equating one's gender with their biological sex.Clearly, subtlety is not your forté. You also appear to have foregone knowledge of the principle Form follows function (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Form_follows_function). The function, in the case of human sex/gender that a person wishes to fulfill informs the form of the person they become through growth. However, sometimes, a person's desired function (read: gender) is at odds with their form (read: sex). This is when a person is said to be transgendered or transsexual.
Bubbles is a combat android. That is her physical appearance. Her gender is female.
May wants to be a fighter jet. That is a physical body. Her gender is female. If she ever gets her wish, she would be a female fighter jet.
Emily wants to be a toaster. If she ever gets her wish, she would be a female toaster.
Physical appearance, personality, or even societal role, are not the same thing as gender.
Clearly, subtlety is not your forté.
I have never before encountered a non-binary person who has the language preferences expressed by Mad Cat here.I am not non-binary. I am MtF. I am transitioning from one of two options to the other of two options. My gender is feminine. My pronouns are she/her/hers. I don't know where you got the idea that I am NB. Transgendered is not synonymous with non-binary.
The robo-psychology of an AI that inhabits the bulldozer may, but does not have to, possess within it a human-like gender of being masculine or feminine. Bubbles is a combat medic and android. Her function does not inherently require either human sex nor a human gender. She has, however adopted one. Good for her. But she is not human.
All of which I have discussed at length. Thank you for caring enough about what I have to say to quote/reply to it, but not enough to read what I have written foundationally to support it.The robo-psychology of an AI that inhabits the bulldozer may, but does not have to, possess within it a human-like gender of being masculine or feminine. Bubbles is a combat medic and android. Her function does not inherently require either human sex nor a human gender. She has, however adopted one. Good for her. But she is not human.
While none of that is clearly wrong, I would suggest that it is taking a simplistically mechanistic view of AIs. In Jeph's world of QC, AIs are not now manufactured, they are an emergent development, and we do not know what might or might not be characteristic of such AIs other than what Jeph has shown us.
I think the problem with that argument is that what you have written foundationally to support it does not apply to the QC universe unless it's what the author wants to do.I'm sorry. Perhaps I haven't ready QC as diligently as you have. Has Jeph shown us a toaster that expresses the desire to get pregnant and raise a family? A multi-ped tank that wants to get some women up on his jock? A city bus that is looking forward to the weekend off to go get her tires rotated with the other girl-busses? Has there been any behaviour from non-humanoid (Pintsize is humanoid) AIs actually demonstrated by the author that can only be characterized as clearly evincing one human gender (masculine) or another (feminine)?
And therefore it doesn't apply to those within the QC universe, such as Bubbles.
I think the problem with that argument is that what you have written foundationally to support it does not apply to the QC universe unless it's what the author wants to do.I'm sorry. Perhaps I haven't ready QC as diligently as you have. Has Jeph shown us a toaster that expresses the desire to get pregnant and raise a family? A multi-ped tank that wants to get some women up on his jock? A city bus that is looking forward to the weekend off to go get her tires rotated with the other girl-busses? Has there been any behaviour from non-humanoid (Pintsize is humanoid) AIs actually demonstrated by the author that can only be characterized as clearly evincing one human gender (masculine) or another (feminine)?
And therefore it doesn't apply to those within the QC universe, such as Bubbles.
I'll wait.
He had a former humanoid embodiment from which he had a preexisting relationship with Hannelore, did he not? He also has a humanoid avatar.
He appears as a hologram of a male human.
Y’all need to settle down, damn
I feel like this is pretty much true of the entire forum. You make ANY opinion comment and you are violating someone's ideals or a fictional character's boundaries or idk the laws of grammar or some shit.
He appears as a hologram of a male human.
Sure, but his physical body is a super-massive space station suitable for multiple human inhabitants. Calling that humanoid seems a bit of a stretch.
The character of Jeremy started out as an industrial arm, but he never expressed a desire to have a relationship with Seven, until he became more humanoid. http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=3431
http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=3376 <-- Bit of robopsychology from Jeph. Or is this more roboneurology? So hard to robotell.
He appears as a hologram of a male human.
Sure, but his physical body is a super-massive space station suitable for multiple human inhabitants. Calling that humanoid seems a bit of a stretch.
He loves Hannelore. I'm not sure where that fits in but it's important.
He appears as a hologram of a male human.And we can argue until the cows come home about which, for Station, came first, a masculine human-like gender or the male holoavatar. the fact remains that no AI in QC has exhibitted a human-like gender without a humanoid form of some kind. How AIs experience machine gender divorced from a need to socialize with humans has never been explored in-canon.
My contention has never been that with humanoid form comes human-like gender. My contention has now refined to, we never see an AI without a humanoid form (holoavatars count) express a human-like gender. Winslow… may count, or not. I mean he fell down and his stubby limbs couldn't right himself. Does he even count as humanout in iPad form? Either way, his full-on humanoid form was imminent, so it would make sense that he would feel the need to lock in whaever human-like gender he may want at that point.He appears as a hologram of a male human.
Sure, but his physical body is a super-massive space station suitable for multiple human inhabitants. Calling that humanoid seems a bit of a stretch.
He loves Hannelore. I'm not sure where that fits in but it's important.
He does, yes. But the question seemed to be to what extent is an AI's humanlike personality traits a result of a humanoid chassis. To me the implication over the course of the comic has been that an AI's personality is emergent and has features independent of the body they're in. So an AI that isn't humanoid still behaves authentically as humanlike. That includes their gender identity- if Winslow says "I think I'm a boy.", that's a statement that deserves to be taken as true, not dismissed as if it were a casually chosen social lubricant.
What would you say the difference is between butch and tomboy?"Butch" is more a deliberate choice about one's own appearance, "tomboy" is more about interests and behaviors? A butch person wants to be perceived as butch, a tomboy doesn't really give a good God damn, she just wants to go gig frogs with her brothers and would go in her Sunday dress if mom wouldn't raise Hell about it.
My contention has never been that with humanoid form comes human-like gender. My contention has now refined to, we never see an AI without a humanoid form (holoavatars count) express a human-like gender. Winslow… may count, or not. I mean he fell down and his stubby limbs couldn't right himself. Does he even count as humanout in iPad form? Either way, his full-on humanoid form was imminent, so it would make sense that he would feel the need to lock in whaever human-like gender he may want at that point.He appears as a hologram of a male human.
Sure, but his physical body is a super-massive space station suitable for multiple human inhabitants. Calling that humanoid seems a bit of a stretch.
He loves Hannelore. I'm not sure where that fits in but it's important.
He does, yes. But the question seemed to be to what extent is an AI's humanlike personality traits a result of a humanoid chassis. To me the implication over the course of the comic has been that an AI's personality is emergent and has features independent of the body they're in. So an AI that isn't humanoid still behaves authentically as humanlike. That includes their gender identity- if Winslow says "I think I'm a boy.", that's a statement that deserves to be taken as true, not dismissed as if it were a casually chosen social lubricant.
More like I'm taking him at his word from the immediately PREVIOUS (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=3539) strip. "And I promise to always wear pants, no matter what my anatomical situation ends up being." Yeah. Winslow clearly had a strong sense of his human-like gender being masculine and wasn't a sentient iPad at all.My contention has never been that with humanoid form comes human-like gender. My contention has now refined to, we never see an AI without a humanoid form (holoavatars count) express a human-like gender. Winslow… may count, or not. I mean he fell down and his stubby limbs couldn't right himself. Does he even count as humanout in iPad form? Either way, his full-on humanoid form was imminent, so it would make sense that he would feel the need to lock in whaever human-like gender he may want at that point.He appears as a hologram of a male human.
Sure, but his physical body is a super-massive space station suitable for multiple human inhabitants. Calling that humanoid seems a bit of a stretch.
He loves Hannelore. I'm not sure where that fits in but it's important.
He does, yes. But the question seemed to be to what extent is an AI's humanlike personality traits a result of a humanoid chassis. To me the implication over the course of the comic has been that an AI's personality is emergent and has features independent of the body they're in. So an AI that isn't humanoid still behaves authentically as humanlike. That includes their gender identity- if Winslow says "I think I'm a boy.", that's a statement that deserves to be taken as true, not dismissed as if it were a casually chosen social lubricant.
What bothers me about this is the implication that a sentient AI's reported experience is taken as being inauthentic. If someone says to me "I am a boy", how can I assume they are mistaken?
More like I'm taking him at his word from the immediately PREVIOUS (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=3539) strip. "And I promise to always wear pants, no matter what my anatomical situation ends up being." Yeah. Winslow clearly had a strong sense of his human-like gender being masculine and wasn't a sentient iPad at all.My contention has never been that with humanoid form comes human-like gender. My contention has now refined to, we never see an AI without a humanoid form (holoavatars count) express a human-like gender. Winslow… may count, or not. I mean he fell down and his stubby limbs couldn't right himself. Does he even count as humanout in iPad form? Either way, his full-on humanoid form was imminent, so it would make sense that he would feel the need to lock in whaever human-like gender he may want at that point.He appears as a hologram of a male human.
Sure, but his physical body is a super-massive space station suitable for multiple human inhabitants. Calling that humanoid seems a bit of a stretch.
He loves Hannelore. I'm not sure where that fits in but it's important.
He does, yes. But the question seemed to be to what extent is an AI's humanlike personality traits a result of a humanoid chassis. To me the implication over the course of the comic has been that an AI's personality is emergent and has features independent of the body they're in. So an AI that isn't humanoid still behaves authentically as humanlike. That includes their gender identity- if Winslow says "I think I'm a boy.", that's a statement that deserves to be taken as true, not dismissed as if it were a casually chosen social lubricant.
What bothers me about this is the implication that a sentient AI's reported experience is taken as being inauthentic. If someone says to me "I am a boy", how can I assume they are mistaken?
We've also seen spider-like and cephalopod embodied AIs. You seem to be indicating that they have no choice but to have human-like male/female genders. My only contention is… no, they don't.
To be fair though, Jeremy and Winslow both had traditionally male names before they acquired a humanoid form.My contention has never been that with humanoid form comes human-like gender. My contention has now refined to, we never see an AI without a humanoid form (holoavatars count) express a human-like gender. Winslow… may count, or not. I mean he fell down and his stubby limbs couldn't right himself. Does he even count as humanout in iPad form? Either way, his full-on humanoid form was imminent, so it would make sense that he would feel the need to lock in whaever human-like gender he may want at that point.He appears as a hologram of a male human.
Sure, but his physical body is a super-massive space station suitable for multiple human inhabitants. Calling that humanoid seems a bit of a stretch.
He loves Hannelore. I'm not sure where that fits in but it's important.
He does, yes. But the question seemed to be to what extent is an AI's humanlike personality traits a result of a humanoid chassis. To me the implication over the course of the comic has been that an AI's personality is emergent and has features independent of the body they're in. So an AI that isn't humanoid still behaves authentically as humanlike. That includes their gender identity- if Winslow says "I think I'm a boy.", that's a statement that deserves to be taken as true, not dismissed as if it were a casually chosen social lubricant.
To be fair though, Jeremy and Winslow both had traditionally male names before they acquired a humanoid form.
I would assume they chose their own names, as May chose her name after Dale suggested it.
Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
Lots of stuff
That being the case, the best any of us can do is to make our choices carefully to cause the least offense to the fewest people possible. Since the owner of the forum wants radical inclusiveness the moderator team is going to guide the use of language in that direction. We're escalating to using the mod power of Asking Politely. Please pick whatever language for a marginalized group which the most members of it find most inclusive.
So what happens when bodies are easy to change? In QC, AI have the option of changing chassis. But at some point in the not-too-distant future (probably in time for our greatgrandkids anyway) body modification for humans will become indistinguishable from being born that way.
Imagine that a man can decide in January that he wants to try being a woman, start taking some pills, and by the end of February, be a woman - physically, hormonally, and in every other way, six inches shorter, fifty pounds lighter, with whatever bustline/etc she decided on. So she stops taking the pills, acquires a nice wardrobe, and makes her way from there.
Maybe a few years later, when she has a husband and a couple of kids, she and her husband decide to swap, so they both start taking pills, and a couple of months later they change their designations from "husband" to "wife" and "wife" to "husband" and the kids take a few weeks to get used to it and the oldest decides maybe he ought to be a daughter instead of a son and does that, and life goes on.
I am actually confused by how that particular argument broke out on this thread since Bubbles isn't even trans.
It does seem like here more than other places that these kind of arguments break out even though there seems to be a lot of effort to avoid it.
No hard feelings?
The character of Jeremy started out as an industrial arm, but he never expressed a desire to have a relationship with Seven, until he became more humanoid. http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=3431
http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=3376 <-- Bit of robopsychology from Jeph. Or is this more roboneurology? So hard to robotell.
I jusg wanted to input that as someone who identifies and loves the phrase "genderqueer" I will happily isolate myself to "genderfluid" for those who are uncomfortable with "queer" and that is a word we've been reclaiming for decades. and even with my identity every once in awhile I feel a chill when I hear the word "queer" because I remember when it was universally scary.
And one other aside. I use Xie, Xem, Xer, and also she/her and there are many situations where I am fine with just she/her. Unless someone specifically states it's too complicated to use xie xem and xer. I've had people directly ask me what pronouns I prefer and when I give them a non binary option they say something snide about it being a pain in the ass. Because they weren't being respectful, they were being tools.
And as a natural consequences of quim bags who really just want ask if I am an it I will often rankle and get on edge when asked my gender identity.
To bring it back on topic I see Bubbles as attracted to being cared about and letting her guard down enough to feel something for someone who treats her like a human being.
I've only ever fallen for one bloke and sure we had a lot of common ground cause he had experienced prejudice for being trans and I experienced prejudice for being a dyke but.. Primarily I fell for him because he treated me with such overwhelming compassion and respect I couldn't help but love him. And I was, and still am a lesbian. But sometimes your heart finds happiness in a new place.
No hard feelings from me, certainly. I would offer to shake your hand, but this is the internet and I'm touch averse anyway. But may we consider our hands shaken in spirit?
There's no evidence of it but we're wrong to overlook the possibility of Bubbles being non-binary. In that case words like "lesbian" would be a poor fit.While I realize it's not necessarily true, I would think that Bubbles would have given some indication if she did not consider herself female. After all, Momo, Emily, Hannelore, and Winslow all call her Miss Bubbles, and she has never corrected any of them (I know, she did object when Faye asked if she could call her that, but Bubbles objected to every nickname Faye tried to use). The child on the street said "Look at the strong robot lady", and Bubbles gave no negative reaction, and even proceeded to joke with the child about being able to lift schools. Sam referred to Bubbles as "THE SUPER COOL GIANT ROBOT LADY WHO IS RESTRAINING SKULLMASTER" and later said "You're the coolest lady I ever saw" and Bubbles didn't correct her. Even Evie (Amanda's girlfriend) called her a "a super bad-ass AI lady" and the only things Bubbles objected to were being compared to nuclear weapons and treated as a sociology case study.
Bubbles is a lady.Have you asked them what pronoun they prefer?
Letting someone call you 'she' or 'miss' does not make you female. Identifying as female makes you female.Like I said, I know it’s not necessarily proof that she identifies as female. But seriously, how many females do you know who make a point of stating that they are female? The only time I’ve ever heard someone make a point of stating that they were female was a coworker who, to be fair, did not look or act at all feminine, and they were correcting someone who had assumed that they were a man.
It's an assumption -- a reasonable one, to be sure, but an assumption. OTOH, formal American English is only now moving away from 'he/him' and towards 'they/them' for persons of unknown gender. The NYT Style Guide only made that move last year, I'm pretty sure that the WSJ Style Guide hasn't. I haven't checked AP.Letting someone call you 'she' or 'miss' does not make you female. Identifying as female makes you female.Like I said, I know it’s not necessarily proof that she identifies as female. But seriously, how many females do you know who make a point of stating that they are female? The only time I’ve ever heard someone make a point of stating that they were female was a coworker who, to be fair, did not look or act at all feminine, and they were correcting someone who had assumed that they were a man.
Letting someone call you 'she' or 'miss' does not make you female. Identifying as female makes you female.(Apparently, the forum ate my response. Sorry if this is a dupe.)
Letting someone call you 'she' or 'miss' does not make you female. Identifying as female makes you female.(Apparently, the forum ate my response. Sorry if this is a dupe.)
Yes, that's exactly my point. Bubbles apparently prefers 'she/her' -- but that does not me she identifies as female. Perhaps she's just used to that form of address and has decided it isn't worth fighting that battle on top of everything else.
My point is exactly the one I asked: No one has ever asked her. We assume she's female, but if it's a matter of real interest, perhaps we should, you know, ask her?
My point is exactly the one I asked: No one has ever asked her. We assume she's female, but if it's a matter of real interest, perhaps we should, you know, ask her?The thought occurs to me, should we ask her? Is it actually an important detail, or is it just insatiable human curiosity? If it’s just curiosity, is it really anyone else’s business? If she does not feel the need to correct anyone, then why do we need to concern ourselves with why she does not correct them?
I am very confident Bubbles is a woman for one reason: Jeph used "she" and "her" when he posted her profile in 3004. As much affection as Jeph expresses for his characters, I cannot imagine he would misgender her like that in his own comic.
Bubbles's profile in 3004 (http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=3004)
Asking Bubbles that (if she is a lady) seems to me like asking the ocean if it’s the ocean.
Honestly, where are y'all getting this "Bubbles in nonbinary" and "not sure about Bubbles' gender" stuff??? Literally the first comic she appeared in was titled "HER name is Bubbles."
Given Bubbles' distinct personality, I would assume this would have happened with anyone who did what Faye did.Should I assume that by “did what Faye did”, you mean patiently but persistently getting Bubbles to come out of her shell?
If it had been Steve or Elliot or literally anyone else, it likely would have played out the same way
I jusg wanted to input that as someone who identifies and loves the phrase "genderqueer" I will happily isolate myself to "genderfluid" for those who are uncomfortable with "queer" and that is a word we've been reclaiming for decades. and even with my identity every once in awhile I feel a chill when I hear the word "queer" because I remember when it was universally scary.
And one other aside. I use Xie, Xem, Xer, and also she/her and there are many situations where I am fine with just she/her. Unless someone specifically states it's too complicated to use xie xem and xer. I've had people directly ask me what pronouns I prefer and when I give them a non binary option they say something snide about it being a pain in the ass. Because they weren't being respectful, they were being tools.
And as a natural consequences of quim bags who really just want ask if I am an it I will often rankle and get on edge when asked my gender identity.
To bring it back on topic I see Bubbles as attracted to being cared about and letting her guard down enough to feel something for someone who treats her like a human being.
I've only ever fallen for one bloke and sure we had a lot of common ground cause he had experienced prejudice for being trans and I experienced prejudice for being a dyke but.. Primarily I fell for him because he treated me with such overwhelming compassion and respect I couldn't help but love him. And I was, and still am a lesbian. But sometimes your heart finds happiness in a new place.
One of my partners tells me this last paragraph is pretty similar to her perception of herself.
Looking back, it's amazing how far Clinton has come. He sees AIs as people now, I'm not sure he was there before. It took time for him to get there. He's someone who is obviously fine with Faye and Bubbles having a relationship, but he wasn't always so enlightened and understanding towards AIs.I think with Clin-ton it was the forest trees thing though in his case he was fan focused on the tech and didn't know to step back to see the person.
IIRC when we first met Clinton he was just barely 21, other than Sam the youngest human in the cast. It's been a couple years in the story line and he's done some growing up. (Sam seems to have stayed in her early teens. I think Jeph and Jim must be gathering their strength to deal with her as the mid-teen years hit. Here she'd be the tomboy who wears Carharts, raises hogs in 4-H, and ends up with a full scholarship to veterinary school at the State University, but I don't know if it works that way in New England. I guess I could see her ending up with an early PhD in marine biology, too.)
I am starting to feel a bit silly for having started this topic.
I am starting to feel a bit silly for having started this topic.
You shouldn't ever feel silly for starting a conversation*. Conversations are good. We expose ourselves to all sorts of ideas that we may not have expected from the original impetus for that conversation. And if we do it right, we integrate those new ideas into how we see the world.
*Unless that conversation is asking if the ocean is the ocean. That would be silly. :-D
*Unless that conversation is asking if the ocean is the ocean. That would be silly. :-D
*Unless that conversation is asking if the ocean is the ocean. That would be silly. :-D
What is Bubbles' gender? Please help, it's unclear from the comics... :laugh:
You win the thread.*Unless that conversation is asking if the ocean is the ocean. That would be silly. :-D
What is Bubbles' gender? Please help, it's unclear from the comics... :laugh:
Not a stupid question. Just a very broad hint to take the asker to an optometrist :-P
Given Bubbles' distinct personality, I would assume this would have happened with anyone who did what Faye did.Should I assume that by “did what Faye did”, you mean patiently but persistently getting Bubbles to come out of her shell?
If it had been Steve or Elliot or literally anyone else, it likely would have played out the same way
But...Bubbles thinks Faye is very hot (as evidenced by her conversation with Clinton). I haven't seen any indication that she thinks Elliot or Steve are hot.
I mean yes, there's an emotional aspect which is probably more important, but you can't deny that she's physically attracted to Faye too. Like Momo is to Sven. God. Sven would eat Momo alive. She is too sweet and innocent.
Looking back, it's amazing how far Clinton has come. He sees AIs as people now, I'm not sure he was there before. It took time for him to get there. He's someone who is obviously fine with Faye and Bubbles having a relationship, but he wasn't always so enlightened and understanding towards AIs.
The only stupid question is the unasked one.I've heard people ask some pretty stupid questions. Like a student asking the professor "will this be on the test?"
Remember, there are no stupid questions.Quite agree.
Only stupid people.