Assigning a gender identity to a browser icon will surely change society.
I think we should just rename the browser Transfox, Pridefox or Queerfox and get it over with.
And develop the idea of colorways to allow users to express themselves even more, by having costumes (themes) that feels sexy. Perhaps some naked feets in there.
What, what gender was the original logo? Did anyone here even think of the firefox logo having a gender? Or am i just out of touch?
Classic masculine fox logo got cancelled for not having pronouns. We’re thriving.
It was engendered, and no.
Why the fuck does Firefox need non binary mascot?
It’s right-wing trolling that it’s specifically non-binary. It’s just iconography they use throughout Firefox, when displaying error messages or the like.
Was war denn das alte Maskottchen? Das Tier im Logo hätte ich zumindest nie als ein spezifisches Geschlecht bestimmen können.
What was particularly binary about the old mascot?
This is not the logo, it’s a new mascot. Firefox did not have a mascot before, just a logo.
This is how you do a non gendered mascot, it’s clearly a fox. Fucking Salesforce and its horrible “Astro” which has no gender, also, no ethnicity, wears several costumes on top of each other AND has no mouth.
It’s the perfect corporate identity : a being deprived of cultural origin, identity and opinions.
“Astro” which has no gender, also, no ethnicity, wears several costumes on top of each other AND has no mouth.
… And it must scream … Because it’s involved with Salesforce.
A correction to make from the research I did:
Mozilla did not say that Kit is non-binary or uses they/them pronouns. Nor did they use they/them pronouns for Kit in official material. They pointedly avoided using pronouns for Kit at all, to keep it ambiguous. It seems like their intention is for the user to see Kit as whatever gender they want Kit to be.
Oh that’s kind of neat.
Better than some other decisions Mozilla has made recently…
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.
https://brand.mozilla.com/d/5UkPdpbtt8LS/visual-elements#/-/mascot-1
Ah, I had not found that page from my research. That seems to explicitly represent the intention that Kit can be whatever gender people want Kit to be.
That’s a weird way of saying non-binary. Especially considering that they/them pronouns can be used for anybody and that’s kind of the point
Let me explain the angle that I am coming at this from:
I am trans. I am not specifically non-binary, but I appreciate all types of trans and non-binary representation in media, and want to support it. I appreciate it because it shows that the creator is willing to stand up for my people, and because it helps to normalize our existence to the audience of the media. Both of those reasons depend on how explicit the representation is, because both depend on the average viewer of the media being aware of the character being trans and/or non-binary.
To me, this does not seem like explicit non-binary representation at all. Kit could be considered to be whatever gender the user wants, maybe even subconsciously. I don’t think Mozilla’s intention is for it to be subtle non-binary representation, either, I think that their intention is for users to be able to view Kit however they want - which would be a binary gender in most cases. They leave the door open for non-binary users to see Kit as non-binary too, which is better than being openly hostile, but in the current environment trans and non-binary people need actual allies to push back against the rampant hostility they face. So I don’t see this as a reason to specifically support Firefox. They’re just doing the bare minimum by not being openly hostile.
To contrast with that, take the mascot of Honkai: Star Rail, Pom-Pom. The developer, MiHoYo, is located in China, so they are legally barred from showing explicit LGBTQ+ representation. However, they go right up to that line and even arguably over it on many occasions, going basically as far as they can without saying it explicitly. Pom-Pom is no exception. All of the characters in the game refer to Pom-Pom with they/them pronouns specifically, including characters who know Pom-Pom very well. That goes far beyond what Mozilla did with Kit, because the implication that Pom-Pom is enby is quite clear and consistent. Mozilla never once used they/them pronouns to refer to Kit from what I have seen, and Mozilla could say outright that Kit is non-binary if they wanted to, so them not doing so is a choice.
Reminds me on sesame streets response to the “are Bert and Ernie gay” thing.
“They’re not gay. They’re not straight. They’re puppets.”
Oh I completely agree with you! My comment was more directed at Mozilla over this whole kind of weird thing, not at anything you said. I’m sorry
Compile it from source
It’s interpreted.
Firefox has been rewritten as a Perl/Tk script.
Even I, fluent in both, am appalled at the idea.
Wait, so Firefox is switching to (web)Kit?
