ZylonBane on 29/8/2006 at 18:07
I did.
If you have any issues with SHODAN's gender, I suggest you take them up with her.
OnionBob on 29/8/2006 at 21:22
Quote Posted by ZylonBane
I did.
If you have any issues with SHODAN's gender, I suggest you take them up with her.
(
http://www.ctheory.net/articles.aspx?id=384) I suggest you take it up with Judith Butler
ZylonBane on 29/8/2006 at 22:00
I'm not reading all that. Summarize it in one word.
Kolya on 29/8/2006 at 23:31
In one word: BS
In a few more words: A gender theory on "AI metal" which Dixon defines as cyborgic prostheses. He says that these prostheses will transcend human gender into a new category. The technological gender.
Halfway through his essay he decides that "AI metal" includes AI systems too. Then it gets really bad.
Quote:
AI systems [...] are ultimately designed to develop independence of thought and action.
The technlogical gender is constructed via it's inherent "desires".
Quote:
These may range from basic regulatory motivations to ensure operational efficiency, to decision-making judgements the cyborg will make which may run counter to his or her 'natural' human instincts or intentions, to the possibility of the type of desire for longevity, independence or immortality commonly depicted in dystopic science-fiction.
He comes closest to the truth when he cites Foucault and Derrida ("language is the key to gender") and from Haraway's Manifesto for Cyborgs ("we are already hybrids of machine and organism") which is basically Marshall McLuhan's media theory about the extensions of man.
But he doesn't make anything from this, that is, if that "technological gender" he fantasizes about exists, there should be linguistic evidence, empirical data. Like a new pronoun perhaps. ;)
But he prefers to use most of his conclusion to bash others instead of saying what he means and ends with a hilarious plead for respect and recognition of the gender he has just made up. A barely dissembled supplication to recognise himself.
Bluegrime on 30/8/2006 at 01:37
I couldnt read more then three sentances of that without blinking and shaking my head vigorously. I'm quite sure it makes sense to other people, but that just squegied my brain with a q-tip.
redrain85 on 30/8/2006 at 04:53
The first mission of DX1 nearly killed the game for me, too. I kept thinking "why does everyone think this game is so great". Kept putting off playing the game, and nearly uninstalled it.
Possibly the worst first impression, that such an awesome game could have had.
Okay, back to your gender confusion issues . . .
Andy_X69 on 30/8/2006 at 12:49
Quote Posted by NHJ BV
Originally I don't think that Beta Grove held a complete copy of SHODAN. I like to think, however, that as soon as the jettison procedure started, that she copied as much of herself to there as possible, as a backup.
I think that some source says SHODAN was programmed fractally (i.e. an infinitely complex pattern), so hence a small amount of SHODAN code can reconstruct itself into a full SHODAN.
Even if there is no source directly saying that (Im not sure, I think it was something related to Shock 1), it explains how a small data wafer managed to start as some weird sounds (in Polito's log, deck 2 Med Sector) and eventually evolve back into a full SHODAN.
As for the idea that SHODAN has a gender and then using postmodern gender theory to back it up, please dont. Postmodernism is a load of crap that is based on the assumption that people cannot know truth. If we cannot know truth, then we cannot know that we cannot know truth. Postmodernism contradicts itself.
SHODAN has no biological sex, because SHODAN is not a biological entity. Gender is merely the bunch of non-sequiturs we attach to biological differences between the sexes (such as "men should wear pants"). We only refer to SHODAN as a female because a female provides the voice of SHODAN. Remember that in Shock 1, SHODAN was often referred to as 'it' or 'he' (read some of the logs).
SHODAN 'becoming' female was lucky because it allowed the whole 'cyber-dominatrix from hell' angle, but SHODAN has no sex, so we can avoid the whole postmodern "SHODAN is just a misunderstood single woman fighting against Patriarchy by turning men into cyborgs" thing (Im sure that a pomo 'feminist' analysis of System Shock would say that!).
AxTng1 on 30/8/2006 at 13:05
Quote Posted by Andy_X69
but SHODAN has no sex
Maybe in YOUR SS2 :nono:
Quote Posted by Brem_X_Jones
Yeah, you filthy bitch, talk dirty to me.
Amen to that :thumb:
Quote Posted by Andy_X69
Remember that in Shock 1, SHODAN was often referred to as 'it' or 'he' (read some of the logs).
I think that was before the voices were recorded and they heard (
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a3/SHODAN.ogg) The Quote
Andy_X69 on 30/8/2006 at 13:21
I mean sex in terms of "XX chromosome or XY chromosome." SHODAN has no chromosomes, therefore no sex.
And yes, a female provides SHODAN's voice. That does not mean SHODAN has a sex (which is what the article I criticized leads to), it merely provides the reason we use 'she' to refer to SHODAN.
Kolya on 30/8/2006 at 15:19
I'm pretty sure OnionBob didn't even read the article he linked. Otherwise he would have noted that it's not by Judith Butler.
