Blissful Skirt is....cringe.

[Atoclone.4810]

10 minutes ago, Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:

.  It is heavily biased toward one political demographic, hidden in childlike diction.  I'd much prefer Rubi be straight with us, rather than slyly hoping nobody's noticed.  

Being understanding and caring towards someone who wants to wear clothes other than the ones their original assigned gender is  pigeon holed into is not political, it's common decency .

[Lucy.3728]

3 hours ago, Kanok.3027 said:

My favorite shortbow and very first legendary.

Was my first legendary too, but I reskinned it the second I equipped it. The failed version skin looks better than the end result.

 

 

[Kinurak.5307]

Again, clothes have no gender, getting you undies in a twist about it is silly. Let people wear what they want. If i want my charr to wear the bikini bottoms i am allowed to, sure you may not like it, maybe even find it disgusting, but you ALREADY HAVE THE TOOLS NEEDED TO HIDE THE OFFENDING SKINS. This isnt some political issue, this isnt some "gay agenda" its people's own insecurities and their own beliefs that cause this behaviour. So stop. Let people enjoy what they enjoy. 

[VAHNeunzehnsechundsiebzig.]

1 hour ago, PixelHero.5849 said:

As a Scottish man (indeed, of Clan Scott) who regularly wears a kilt and long socks, this conversation is amusing to me. 

Most of you appear to take this as a matter of modern sexuality... exploration, but for me, it's hilariously traditional old school.  Kilts are a traditional form of dressing for men in my family and modern pleated skirts were invented so women could participate in cultural heritage festivals, both because women traditionally did not wear kilts and to simultaneously allow them to maintain their femininity.  That's why kilts have tartan, but pleated skirts are usually just plaid.  In reality of course, nowadays no one is going to be stopping a woman from choosing to wear a kilt if she wants to, but usually you only see it in pipe bands or military outfits.

However, my in game character clearly never learned how to sit properly with a kilt.  Gentlemen, if you ever decide to wear a kilt the traditional way, do NOT sit like that.  Highlanders tend to not have much patience with such.

 

**edit:  sorry, it's the /sleep **

and that kilt was invented by the english to make you look dumb and more easily controlled. 

[ArchonWing.9480]

13 hours ago, Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:

Please acknowledge that disgust is an involuntary reaction.  Albeit one that is not shared equally among the population.  Expression of disgust is legitimate, and like all other emotions is deserving of consideration.  

Yes, but as humans we tend to prefer listening to those that learn to moderate said involuntary functions and channeling them to higher ones. Those that don't, are generally considered childish, and tend to get treated as such.

[Kinurak.5307]

1 minute ago, VAHNeunzehnsechundsiebzig. said:

and that kilt was invented by the english to make you look dumb and more easily controlled. 

Got proof of that? 

[PixelHero.5849]

1 hour ago, Kinurak.5307 said:

Got proof of that? 

The history of the kilt is a bit fuzzy in parts and while crass, he's not entirely wrong either.  The original great kilt (rather than the small/walking kilt I was referring to) is definitely not English, having been derived from the brat worn all the way back to Roman times (where it was notable that they took OFF the kilt before battle).  However, by the mid 1700s the walking kilt was quite common.  Nobody agrees on who invented it with some claiming it was invented back in 1690, but once it became popular the English proceeded to ban it in an attempt to stamp out Highland culture after the Jacobite Risings.  This, and several other attempts to eliminate Highland culture, had the opposite effect and instead Lowland Scots stopped being terrified of the Highlanders and began to view them as fiercely independent brethren who retained what they had lost by living in cities.  (this was the age of the "noble savage" afterall)  Once the ban was lifted, a great appropriation of the Highland traditions, garb, and Gaelic culture began among all of Scotland. 

Following the American Revolutionary war and the subsequent revolution in France, the English were understandably disturbed by the 1820 "Radical War" in Scotland.  Seeking to qualm the unrest, a great visit by King George IV of England in 1822 was very carefully arranged by Sir Walter Scott to encourage this new view of Scottish culture as a way to associate being Scottish with culture, music, and ways of dress rather than being independent from England.  King George appeared in a kilt himself and praised Scottish customs as he became the first monarch to visit Scotland in over 200 years.  Despite wearing pink tights under the kilt and having to be pushed on to a horse as a result of being obese, this effort was largely successful in solidifying the image of Scottish national heritage, and further cemented the "invented tradition" among the Lowland Scots.

So yes, but no.  Like many of the banned traditions of the time, Highland culture was donated to the Lowlands (where 90% of Scots lived), but was at least partially based in real and historical foundations.  Yes, the English did seek to promote the idea of the noble Highlander heritage among the Lowland Scots in an attempt to quell uprising, but they didn't invent the kilt as an attempt to brainwash the masses either.  The lowland kilt was actually common even among northern Lowlanders by the time it was banned, though only a generation or two old at the time of its banning, not ancient and treasured tradition.

Edited Thursday at 10:01 PM by PixelHero.5849

[Kinurak.5307]

8 minutes ago, PixelHero.5849 said:

The history of the kilt is a bit fuzzy in parts and while crass, he's not entirely wrong either.  The original great kilt (rather than the small/walking kilt I was referring to) is definitely not English, having been derived from the brat worn all the way back to Roman times (where it was notable that they took OFF the kilt before battle).  However, by the mid 1700s the walking kilt was quite common.  Nobody agrees on who invented it with some claiming it was invented back in 1690, but once it became popular the English proceeded to ban it in an attempt to stamp out Highland culture after the Jacobite Risings.  This, and several other attempts to eliminate Highland culture, had the opposite effect and instead Lowland Scots stopped being terrified of the Highlanders and began to view them as fiercely independent brethren who retained what they had lost by living in cities.  (this was the age of the "noble savage" afterall)  Once the ban was lifted, a great appropriation of the Highland traditions, garb, and Gaelic culture began among all of Scotland. 

Following the American Revolutionary war and the subsequent revolution in France, the English were understandably disturbed by the 1820 "Radical War" in Scotland.  Seeking to qualm the unrest, a great visit by King George IV of England in 1822 was very carefully arranged by Sir Walter Scott to encourage this new view of Scottish culture as a way to associate being Scottish with culture, music, and ways of dress rather than being independent from England.  King George appeared in a kilt himself and praised Scottish customs as he became the first monarch to visit Scotland in over 200 years.  Despite wearing pink tights under the kilt and having to be pushed on to a horse as a result of being obese, this effort was largely successful in solidifying the image of Scottish national heritage, and further cemented the "invented tradition" among the Lowland Scots.

So yes, but no.  Like many of the banned traditions of the time, Highland culture was donated to the Lowlands (where 90% of Scots lived), but was at least partially based in real and historical foundations.  Yes, the English did seek to promote the idea of the noble Highlander heritage among the Lowland Scots, but they didn't invent the kilt as an attempt to brainwash the masses either.  The lowland kilt was actually common even among northern Lowlanders by the time it was banned, though only a generation or two old at the time of its banning, not ancient and treasured tradition.

That was an interesting read! Thank you!

[Morvran.8265]

2 hours ago, Atoclone.4810 said:

Being understanding and caring towards someone who wants to wear clothes other than the ones their original assigned gender is  pigeon holed into is not political, it's common decency .

One could argue that in most places of the world this is considered a fetish, not a mainstream thing. Respecting that is also common decency, and banning discussion while forcing your social norms on the rest of the world is not only tyrannical but also alienating.

 

2 hours ago, Kinurak.5307 said:

Again, clothes have no gender, getting you undies in a twist about it is silly. Let people wear what they want. If i want my charr to wear the bikini bottoms i am allowed to, sure you may not like it, maybe even find it disgusting, but you ALREADY HAVE THE TOOLS NEEDED TO HIDE THE OFFENDING SKINS. This isnt some political issue, this isnt some "gay agenda" its people's own insecurities and their own beliefs that cause this behaviour. So stop. Let people enjoy what they enjoy. 

The clash of 2 ideological belief systems is inherently political. Also the "clothes have no gender" thing is a silly claim, even you know that. We wouldn't be having this discussion if it wasn't.

[Kinurak.5307]

11 minutes ago, Morvran.8265 said:

One could argue that in most places of the world this is considered a fetish, not a mainstream thing. Respecting that is also common decency, and banning discussion while forcing your social norms on the rest of the world is not only tyrannical but also alienating.

 

The clash of 2 ideological belief systems is inherently political. Also the "clothes have no gender" thing is a silly claim, even you know that. We wouldn't be having this discussion if it wasn't.

Clothes in and of their own arent gendered. its US, people, who decided that only a certain group can wear a specific clothing piece. Clothes dont identify as male or female. its us that decided that at some point.how hard is it to let people just be themselves, fine, you dont like it. doesnt mean others cant like it.

[Zebulous.2934]

Well if the U.S. didn't speak English, there are plenty of languages that pointlessly gender objects. One type of furniture may have male prefixes attached.  A type of granite will be inexplicably female.  Things like that.

Clothing would certainly have gendered prefixes or suffixes attached.  Someone speaking English as a second language may suffer cognitive dissonance, cringe.  Historical media used this dissonance for comic relief, the absurd is funny.

There are far too many points of view on the internet.  It is easy to assume that someone shares a culture with you.  What you find commonplace or casual could be outlandish and uncomfortable to another culture.  

So just forget the attitudes you learned while growing up.  Every little prejudice you learned from every adult you have ever met. Ignore each time your subconscious pokes you with an objection.   Sounds rather exhausting though.

 

[willow.8209]

Clothing and clothing colors being necessarily gendered is not as ancient as it might seem. Nor are our inherited mores as steadfast. 

The Surprisingly Recent Time Period When Boys Wore Pink, Girls Wore Blue, and Both Wore Dresses (todayifoundout.com) 

Degendering Fashion: The Origins of Gendered Fashion (seamwork.com) 

How the 'beauty of fluidity' went mainstream in fashion (bbc.com) 

[willow.8209]

1 hour ago, Zebulous.2934 said:

Sounds rather exhausting though.

I found that reviewing the early version of my worldview was exhausting mainly because, as you said, most of it was imposed on me. Some of it contradicted my own nature so it had always been a burden to me.

Discarding prejudices though, that's very freeing. Once you get a good start, it seems more like putting a bit of attention towards general politeness. 

[Zebulous.2934]

14 minutes ago, willow.8209 said:

 Once you get a good start, it seems more like putting a bit of attention towards general politeness. 

Politeness on this internet? I'm shocked by such a notion!

Edited yesterday at 02:25 AM by Zebulous.2934

[Obfuscate.6430]

I don't know how to share images on this forum but I made the skirt work on my Asura:
https://i.imgur.com/Fd0GFJW.jpeg
https://i.imgur.com/095tagq.jpeg
https://i.imgur.com/bZWPpyI.jpeg

I think it's cute! 
I also think people are allowed not to like it but I don't know how realistic it is to expect Arenanet to do something about it.
Letting people have a safe harbor to be themselves, be colorful, or be silly is not something that has to be "fixed". You are allowed not to like it, but it's not actually a problem. 
That's not to say that how you feel doesn't matter. I think all of us at some time have thought something in the game was off, and some came to the forums to say so but I am not sure what kind of response you're hoping for, especially when lots of folks probably really love this item. 
 

Edited yesterday at 02:52 AM by Obfuscate.6430

[Blood Red Arachnid.2493]

8 hours ago, Atoclone.4810 said:

Being understanding and caring towards someone who wants to wear clothes other than the ones their original assigned gender is  pigeon holed into is not political, it's common decency .

I'll say this again:  you are arbitrarily putting the feelings of one person over another when you say this.  I could just as easily say that it is common decency not to cross-dress, as countless people in all over the world find it be uncomfortable to see, particularly minority ethnicities.  You're not being understanding and caring towards them.  You're dismissing their feelings in lieu of gender politics.  

When I say I want Rubi to straight with us, I want you to be straight with us as well.  Cut the motte-and-bailey fallacy, and just admit that your preference is the correct one and thus everyone who disagrees doesn't matter because they're wrong.  

[CaptainAngelStar.1479]

All this madness over an optional piece of clothing.  Phew.

[Nash.2681]

On 10/2/2024 at 10:35 PM, Atoclone.4810 said:

takemymoney.gif

+1 !!

[willow.8209]

1 hour ago, Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:

I'll say this again:  you are arbitrarily putting the feelings of one person over another when you say this.  I could just as easily say ... [it might be]  uncomfortable to see,

It's not arbitrary at all: other people get to pick what they wear, and you get to pick what you wear. Nobody gets to pick what anyone else wears. Everyone decides for themselves, and everyone is polite about it. Nobody gets to pick what they see unless it's on their own TV/phone, because that's the type of thing they personally control.

You see other people making their own choices, and that, my friend, is a beautiful thing. 

It's called self-determination. 

Edited yesterday at 05:54 AM by willow.8209

[willow.8209]

2 hours ago, Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:

as countless people in all over the world find it be uncomfortable to see, particularly minority ethnicities.

um so you may know this but people from marginalized ethnicities are not a monolith. And gender assumptions/clothing is not what I've seen ethnically marginalized strangers* on social media asking others to speak up about (in fact a lot of evidence suggests that colonialism is what has suppressed ideas about the multiplicity of genders in favor of a supposed gender binary).

(*personally most people I actually know tend to just want a compassionate ear and for me to gain a better understanding of their situation--which is the same as I want as a person with not just a disability but also a stigmatized illness label or three). 

I would say the evidence from a physiological standpoint strongly supports sex being a continuum or at the very least having more than two clusters. This evidence can be found by searching the internet, but it's only supportive of the point about gender clothing and the ones I did link address that more directly. 

from the articles I linked above:
 

Quote

This binary framework for clothing is also evident in a colonial and racial context. Europeans saw the lack of strong gendered dress distinction in many Asian and African societies as evidence of cultural backwardness

Quote

Gender-neutral clothing has a long history. Across the world and the millennia, items such as tunics and togas, kimonos and sarongs, have been worn by both sexes. Momo Amjad of The Future Laboratory – a strategic foresight consultancy based in London – cites several examples of third-gender communities with a long past. Among them are the traditional Māhū people in Native Hawaiian and Tahitian cultures, the pan-gender roles of nádleehi people in the Navajo Nation, and the eunuchs, intersex people, asexual or transgender people known as the Hijra across South Asia. 

There are in fact many ancient cultures which recognize 3 - 5 genders.

Cultures That Recognize More than Two Genders | Britannica

Quote

Throughout history, many cultures have recognized gender identities other than male and female. Nonbinary people have often occupied unique positions in their societies, serving as priests, artists, and ceremonial leaders. Here are some nonbinary genders recognized by cultures around the world.
...
Hindu society features the gender hijra, the most common nonbinary identity recognized in India today.... In recent centuries a stigma arose against hijras, prompted by British colonialism
...
The Bugis ethnic group of South Sulawesi, Indonesia, recognizes three genders beyond the binary. 
...

you can easily find more such references with a simple search.

Edited yesterday at 07:01 AM by willow.8209

[Noidea Incognito.9607]

I am telling you people; it's these blasted Comics that started this "Skirt Hype"! Regrettably created by two of our own... The Charr Empire Apologizes. 

 

[ArchonWing.9480]

2 hours ago, Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:

I'll say this again:  you are arbitrarily putting the feelings of one person over another when you say this.  I could just as easily say that it is common decency not to cross-dress, as countless people in all over the world find it be uncomfortable to see, particularly minority ethnicities.  You're not being understanding and caring towards them.  You're dismissing their feelings in lieu of gender politics.  

When I say I want Rubi to straight with us, I want you to be straight with us as well.  Cut the motte-and-bailey fallacy, and just admit that your preference is the correct one and thus everyone who disagrees doesn't matter because they're wrong.  

I feel like the problem is you are confounding "I don't think people should wear this" with "No! Stop wearing that!"  or "Nobody should be able to wear that as the same things". One is an opinion, and the others is imposing your beliefs on someone.

It's like how some people are vegans and find eating meat disgusting, and people shouln't eat meat. That's perfectly fine for them to think that. But if they come up to me while I'm eating a burger and tell me that I'm disgusting, then frankly I'm going to order a second one, because at that point I could care less about their feelings.

It's extremely arbitrary. But it's also caused by the result of one's actions that your feelings have been reduced in priority by others.

And honestly, are we going to live life walking on eggshells, on the off chance it may offend someone across the world?

 

 

Edited yesterday at 07:31 AM by ArchonWing.9480

[Morvran.8265]

9 hours ago, Kinurak.5307 said:

Clothes in and of their own arent gendered. its US, people, who decided that only a certain group can wear a specific clothing piece. Clothes dont identify as male or female. its us that decided that at some point.how hard is it to let people just be themselves, fine, you dont like it. doesnt mean others cant like it.

Men and women wore different clothes since the dawn of civilization. Claiming otherwise is just a trendy thing to do in America right now. The rest of the world isn't so on board with pretending otherwise, so skins like these can be immersion breaking since they can immediately pinpoint which movement is pushing their views on them in their freetime.

[Atoclone.4810]

3 hours ago, Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:

I'll say this again:  you are arbitrarily putting the feelings of one person over another when you say this.  I could just as easily say that it is common decency not to cross-dress, as countless people in all over the world find it be uncomfortable to see, particularly minority ethnicities.  You're not being understanding and caring towards them.  You're dismissing their feelings in lieu of gender politics.  

When I say I want Rubi to straight with us, I want you to be straight with us as well.  Cut the motte-and-bailey fallacy, and just admit that your preference is the correct one and thus everyone who disagrees doesn't matter because they're wrong.  

i'll be straight with you, i fully believe that people should be able to be who they are with out nasty little bigots harassing them. yep there are countries which prosecute them, there are countries that have prevented women from voting, persecuted folks for religious beliefs and all other heinous things. we should just leave them be so as not to offend them?

now please, off you pop, there's a fantastic community in gw2 that understands that some folk are different and that's ok. this is not a game for those that wish to persecute and hate on others.

Mods, time to lock this thread i think. you're just giving the bigots a platform

[Kinurak.5307]

43 minutes ago, Morvran.8265 said:

Men and women wore different clothes since the dawn of civilization. Claiming otherwise is just a trendy thing to do in America right now. The rest of the world isn't so on board with pretending otherwise, so skins like these can be immersion breaking since they can immediately pinpoint which movement is pushing their views on them in their freetime.

Good thing i am not American then. Lemme tell ya, people here in europe are pretty chill about letting dudes were woman clothes and vice versa. Sure, it will raise eyebrows here and there, get a few giggles, but we alliw people to be themselves for the most part.