Added: 7 months ago
From: fhaugen
Views: 26,001
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (74)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • awesomeness! fyi get all the latest tips, tricks, and tools at GooglePlusKit (dot) com

  • brilliant! Oh yea, however, be sure you use your legal name and a clear photo

  • does it matter i mean with name too u can guess the gender lol

  • "Their" is grammatically perfect!

  • @Jetbeard

    A lot of people say "What's that?" It's Pat!

    A lot of people say "Who's he? Or She?"

    A ma'am or a sir, except him or her

    For whatever it might be.

    It's time for androgyny.

    It's just Pat!

  • To clarify: Google+ is asking about biological SEX when the choices offered are "female" and "male." If info about GENDER is requested them "feminine" and "masculine" should be among the options given. But ethical business owners should NOT ask for biological sex or gender info unless they cannot equally deliver their services to all people without this information. For more read my blog post at "The Gender Companion"

  • "You have been added to Soroush's circles". <-- there's your solution. Don't complicate things Google!

  • Why do people become obsessed if they cannot immediately determine if someone is a boy or girl? It's like their world is so confined, that even when they see a person they do not know, they feel threatened if they can't tell someone's gender. Grow up.

  • For me the G+ team missed the point. I don't like the way "Gender female" LOOKS on my public page (the only info under the location map). I wish it were possible to remove my gender from the public page, but still address me all the time grammatically correct as a female. My work around for now is to set the visibility of my gender to "extended circles". This will remove the info from my public profile page and hopefully lead to grammatically correct language in most situations.

  • I really need a privacy option that will let me hide my species. I don't feel comfortable with other people knowing I'm actually a German Shepherd.

  • There is a closed-captioning button.

  • you have a very pleasing voice. you should voice a tutorial fir Google. :P

  • Wow.. gender net neutrality .. yeah.. that really counts as do no evil.. what about user choice? Why wasn't user preference the FOREMOST THOUGHT IN GOOGLE'S MIND? the color of the black bar at google, now the dark muted tones at youtube, or just the fact that users loose all their previous Nickname based work, when they sign up for GGL+ ... google is speaking volumes to me, the clarity of "we don't care about users" shouldn't take so much space, but GGL tries to hide their real mantra.

  • XY has changed the Picture?

  • can you please "It" to the gender options.

  • How about you just change "Greg has added you to his Circules" to "You have been added to Greg's Circules" done!

  • @xDubaRx Yep! This would completely avoid the abominable grammar error.

  • It's kinda sad that people don't understand why Google is doing this.

  • I really do appreciate this. However, I think a "gender neutral" option would be more inclusive for genderqueer people than this "private gender" option.

  • @RitchandFamous - that's right.. because all the people that don't want unknown persons out there callin' us and sayin' "is he available" or "is she there" gotta be queers. In fact even the queers gotta be queers right? (yes, in case you don't get subtle hints I'm calling you stupid for "genderqueer" in your post)

  • @TreborG2 I think you interpreted my comment as "PRIVACY BAD. GENDERQUEER INCLUSIVENESS GOOD". I think there should be a neutral gender pronoun option as well as a gender privacy option. Thank you for your constructive criticism, though!

  • @RitchandFamous There is an "other" option, has been since I signed up at least.

  • @Akkhima Well, that's something

  • Google+ please do better. 

  • Awwww. What a sweet video. :-)

  • @CaptainChaos - "Just don't call me Francis ... or I'll kill ya.. "

  • While I'm obviously happy that Google decided not to discriminate people based on their gender identity (hooray for Google), I can just echo @peterhejlejensen and say that's pretty much worthless, if Google's enforcing ID card names as mandatory for the profile, and possibly using ID card pictures as well. Sure, there are plenty of examples where it's not easy to figure out the gender based on name and picture, but those are statistically not significant...

  • Real names and profile pictures makes this setting moot

  • Thffck sd?

    ddnt ndrstnd a sngl wrd!

    pls sbttl ths, thnks.

  • There need to be more diverse options for "Gender."

  • i arrive nearby to the end of the video, i swear, still don't understand the gender of the speaker on the video. LOL

  • Can you set different genders for different circles?

    Why not let people input their own preferred pronouns in a text field, instead of asking them their gender? It seems like it would be relatively simple in English. Would this be too much of a hassle with the other languages you mentioned? What's stopping you?

  • Google, this would be a perfect opportunity to popularize one of the many proposed gender-neutral personal pronouns. Or make up one of your own, I don't really care. Gender identification issues are built into our language, and it makes writing or talking about non-specific singular persons really challenging. Take the lead with a popular social network and fix an long-standing bug in English by spreading the meme. Thanks!

  • GAY!!

    

  • she's wearing knol tshirt... hope g+ doesnt get lost like knol did ;)

  • Thank you for listening to feedback!

  • How about not requiring your real full name to be public either, Google? You said most people share this publicly anyway, so why not let the minority of people who care about this be happy? Some people want to use your products but not be forced to compromise their identity to strangers. Don't worry, we'll click your ads and let you data mine us, just keep all aspects of our info private if we choose it.

  • Google+ - A Place for Pat

  • Google+ > faceshit

  • There should have been a few higher priority Google+ requirements on your list, namely:

    1. Fragmentation: Huddle vs just adding circle-based group chat to Gtalk?

    2. Huddle w/o having a desktop version of it.

    3. Hangout w/o a mobile version. Are you guys clueless? How could you not anticipate this need before any release? Even without 2.3.4 I am sure you could have figured out an interim solution just like Skype and Qik.

    4. Apple, RIM, Nokia versions should have been out before invites.

  • A profilepicture hopefully defeats the purpose of this useless setting

  • @peterhejlejensen Outward appearance is as meaningful to determining gender as the color of someone's eyes determining their religious preferences.

  • @Taigitsune

    Oh yeah. Everyone is androgyne and gender is merely a label given my society. If everyone thinked like you 1000's of years ago we would be extinct. So you cannot guess anyones gender by their appearance. You are going to get in a heap of trouble in your life. Try to say Madam to a male police officer. Just once

  • @peterhejlejensen Gender is a self-assigned label. Some people who live outside of the gender binary are perfectly capable of reproducing, so we're not in risk of going anywhere as a species. As for your example of a police officer, I'd never assume; I would refer to them as 'officer' until asked to do otherwise. When in doubt, ask.

  • @peterhejlejensen - you mean the requirement of a profile picture that shows a clear image of the persons face so that you can identify gender? Yeah, I'm sure that the people that would prefer not to share their gender are SO MUCH HAPPIER sharing their PHOTO.

    And no, real names are not very useful for determining gender. Apart from the names like "pat" and "alex" that could be either gender, you also have to consider names in other languages that not everyone will be familiar with.

  • @Daniel7860 Not necessarily. Gender isn't tied to personal interests in any particular way. You might have a masculine-looking genetic male who's into knitting doilies or a feminine-looking genetic female who's into motorsports. The possibilities are endless, and no assumption is safe.

  • @Taigitsune @Daniel7860 There's no such thing as a "genetic female". Learn some science, will ya!

  • @tuuLi {{Citation needed}}

  • @Taigitsune First of all, explain to me what a female is. Then, how genes determine your sex. After that, read the "Intersex" article on Wikipedia and die of shame

  • @tuuLi Female is a very broad umbrella term. When I used the term 'genetic female' it was in reference to a person with two X chromosomes. There are also females who have any combination of chromosomes, but my reference was strictly genetic.

  • @Taigitsune *facepalm* I understood what you meant. There's no such thing as a genetic female, and XX is not it. Oh, whatever... Another bloody cissie.

  • @tuuLi Now who's the one throwing labels around? Since you seem to know something the rest of the class didn't learn in biology, perhaps you'd indulge us by sharing, hmm?

  • @Taigitsune What am I, a teacher? Nah. Cissie = cisgender =/= transgender. Get it? Now, buzz off!

  • @tuuLi I am perfectly aware of what cisgender is and it is most certainly not what I was asking you to clarify - nor is it a label that is remotely applicable to me. Put away your claws, sweetheart.

    Since we can't seem to agree on what constitutes a female, I was asking for your opinion.

  • @Taigitsune Wow, are you now? Amazing.

    How is it not applicable? Are you one of 'em genderqueers who think the rules don't apply to them?

    And, don't call me a 'sweetheart' or I WILL use something other than claws on you.

  • @tuuLi So let's see where we are. I asked you for a citation to clarify your assertion that there is no such thing as a genetic female.

    I explained where I'm coming from (elementary-level biology) and acknowledged that there are other variations of female aside from those with a biological basis.

    You've yet to further support your assertion and instead have continued to use epithets.

    Now unless you have some facts to support your assertion, we're done here.

  • @Taigitsune Oh, we've been done for quite some time.

  • @tuuLi For once we agree on something. Cheers!

  • Female-Name Chat Users Get 25 Times More Malicious Messages physorg.com/news66401288.html

  • Singular "they" is grammatically correct. But if it's for pronouns, the field should be labelled "pronouns". And there are other sets of pronouns, like xe, ve, &c.

    Also, "Other" should be "Other, please specify".

  • If it's for grammatical purposes, why not just label the field as "pronoun"? Much less personal that way, and thus much less touchy.

  • Comment removed

  • never knew gender was so sensitive :S

  • wow your bday is 1 day before mine... random

  • Are you going to add that birthday setting soon?

  • a knol shirt, hahaha

  • Transcript for Deaf people please!

  • @ShinyBr3nda hit the "cc" button (this works for almost all the videos)

    

  • Bien!

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more