honestly it would just be as easy to remove the option, and tbh, i dont think its actually gender that torn is setting rather biological sex, but typically they are used interchangeably for some inexplicable reason
as far as im aware, the only impact it has was for strip clubs(i cant remember if that was removed though), and the character model
the problem with including non-binary(not the problem with being non-bianary) just mearly from the stand point of the game design, you can be biologically male or female but identify as non-binary, however as torn stands it has two character models, which wouldnt be ideal picking one over the other, without maybe a personal choice option
the other option would be have a generic character model for all, not really sure what would be the ideal scenario in that case, id probably be more for just removing it tbh as opposed to alienating any one group
dunno on the surface it doesnt seem like it would be a difficult change to make, but there are a couple things that the devs would need to consider
Not... really? If your statement isn't even correct when it comes to biological gender due to intersex being a thing. And gender is literally a social construct. Most civilisations had options beyond the binary.
We can always remove gender as an option, make it optional or add a non binary option. There's still nothing wrong with keeping preexisting character models cause as far as is visible, only the chest area is really distinctive and that's about it. Plus someone has added a couple of default style profile pictures earlier in this thread and I'm sure more can be found. And honestly, even if the stripclubs thing wasn't removed, you can always choose in the beginning if you want the code to consider you as male or female and that can be shown in job applications for stripclubs.
sorry mate, but its now pay to switch. Sure 50k isnt a lot, but its still a downgrade from being free to change it. And not asking for 64 more settings, just one. Most places have non binary as an option.
Why have gender included at all then? If we have something, lets make it inclusive. Is that really a huge ask? Besides, does Duke flirt with guys? Kinda curious truth be told. If it is largely irrelevant, why is there a problem with inclusion?
1. Intersex... Not even MEDICINE agrees with you. You would look at a grey sky and say it's not the sky because it isn't blue. Intersex is not your license to say a female is not a female. If a dog is born without a tail, can you then call all dogs by some other name? If one dog is born without a tail, can all other dogs choose whether to be a dog or not? Absolutely stupid.
2. The only construct is you separating "biological" and "identity". That's the very definition of construct. See Google, Webster, etc., right now. By definition, gender identity is the construct, not biological gender. So if you truly believe your argument, then you must give up gender identity as being separate from biological.
3. Perhaps you don't understand what constitutes a fact. It doesn't matter one turd what "other" people have done. - So... if other civilizations said there is no such thing as non-binary gender, would you abandon the idea? No, you wouldn't because you don't give a crap about truth. You just want whatever you want. - ...and "most civilisations" did not have non-binary genders ...not even close to "most". Not even in the universe of "most". Do you even consider what comes out of your mouth? Have you considered a career in politics?
Feel free to continue your little personal agenda of delusions, but don't act like it has anything to do with medicine or truth or even intelligence.
I used to be 100% against bullying growing up but seeing the world today and how soft and pussified it's become I'm grateful for the fact I was bullied growing up. It helped me not be as weak as these "all inclusionists" are. Maybe that needs to come back so these cowards can give their balls a tug and learn how to cope with stress instead of running to hide.