this post was submitted on 11 Apr 2026
15 points (94.1% liked)

Memes

15623 readers
710 users here now

Post memes here.

A meme is an idea, behavior, or style that spreads by means of imitation from person to person within a culture and often carries symbolic meaning representing a particular phenomenon or theme.

An Internet meme or meme, is a cultural item that is spread via the Internet, often through social media platforms. The name is by the concept of memes proposed by Richard Dawkins in 1972. Internet memes can take various forms, such as images, videos, GIFs, and various other viral sensations.


Laittakaa meemejä tänne.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Edit: As @bdonvr@thelemmy.club points out below

  1. This is just a mascot and is not a new logo
  2. The blog referencing Mozilla’s statement on the mascots gender says, (he/she/they/them/it), use whatever pronoun you prefer.
top 27 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] realitaetsverlust@piefed.zip 1 points 1 week ago (3 children)

The gender orientation of the firefox logo is something I haven't thought about ever.

What's the point of this?

[–] bdonvr@thelemmy.club 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The point is that you've fallen for some idiots on X making up culture war bullshit.

Kit's supposed pronouns aren't mentioned by Mozilla anywhere in any Mozilla announcements.

One news site attributes this quote to Mozilla

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.

That's the one and only place that even remotely mentions it as far as I can tell. And it's not even a statement that it's NB or they/them... More like it's a fictional mascot call it what you want.

[–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

look i agree the x post is culture war shit, but mozilla does mention the gender of their mascot in their branding resources… but imo this is less of an explicit recognition about the mascot being non-binary and more a function of the mascot being able to be interpreted by humans however they like, and “it” being the term they seem to use simply to increase ambiguity and feelings of personal connection to the mascot for the most people

[–] bdonvr@thelemmy.club 1 points 1 week ago

he/she/they/them/it

I think it's more a statement that it's not gendered

[–] zarkanian@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago

Well, if I was creating a mascot, and I didn't want to think about their gender orientation... they/them pronouns are what I would use. Mozilla actually didn't announce the mascot's gender. People just saw they/them pronouns and made the inference from there.

[–] Lumidaub@feddit.org 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Most people default to "this entity is male" without more context. I do it too, it's a bit of an issue I try to be aware of but regularly fail. Male is default, female is marked; that's why the stereotypical "girl" character in video games is just the "boy" character but with eye lashes and lips and maybe high heels. (And non-binary doesn't exist, obv /s)

So I can see this as making the non-genderedness explicit.

Edit: I don't have the spoons to elaborate on "male is default". Can someone else maybe jump in? Thx.

[–] FellowHuman@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

That highly depends on the language.

Example in Czech: Generic Fox (Liška) is a girl Generic Wolf (Vlk) is a boy

Because our words themself have genders. Fox: Liška (girl) Lišák (boy) but default if you don't knoe the sex of the animal is in this case the girl version.

This differs per language. And in german (if I'm not mistaken) fox is Der Fuchs, so boy.

I'm using boy/girl instead of male/female, because ... I don't know, that is how I think about it.

[–] realitaetsverlust@piefed.zip 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

And in german (if I’m not mistaken) fox is Der Fuchs, so boy.

That's true, but the grammatical gender has nothing to do with the actual gender. Nobody thinks that all foxes are male, just as nobody thinks that spoons (Der Löffel) are male or the street (Die Straße) are female. They can also change depending on the amount. For example, if we take "Haus", which means house, we say "Das Haus" if we talk about a single house, which would be neutral, but refer to multiple houses as "Die Häuser", which would be female. Nobody thinks houses become female once there's more than one tho.

[–] FellowHuman@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

I don't disagree, my point was that atleast in my case, if Im not given the gendre of an animal, I fallback to the gramatical gender. At-least in czeck, since it requires me to chabge the shape of the word to express the "other" gender.

[–] kieron115@startrek.website 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

the four genders are 00, 01, 10, and 11.

[–] underisk@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

That's not even a full byte! Surely we can spare 6 more bits and support 255 genders.

[–] gegil@sopuli.xyz 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] underisk@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

gotta account for people who say "no" to "gender?"

[–] gegil@sopuli.xyz 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] underisk@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

i guess were getting into the philisophical question of "is 'no gender' a gender?"

[–] gegil@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 week ago

Everything is a gender if you are brave about it.

[–] adam_y@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Such wildly fake outrage.

The real outrage should be that we care what the pronouns of any corporate mascot are.

They aren't real. They aren't able to feel. Corporations are not people.

"It" until you are open source and then we talk.

Same goes for Ronald McDonald.

[–] pupbiru@aussie.zone -1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

imo even in socialist societies brands need some protection because it’s possible to have higher quality or “differently moral” products still where people can choose the cost trade-offs of the products they use which means one product shouldn’t be able to use the investment/differentiation of another product in brand (and to a point ux research as this disincentivises usability and feeling over brochureware and copying investment in non-tangibles) to pretend to be the different product

mozilla can be legitimately pro-foss-software in its mission and not include pro-foss-everything in furtherance of that single goal

even then though mozilla provides downloads of their kit assets

heck even marketing - to a point - is necessary to foss software… linux probably wouldn’t have taken off without the investments of microsoft and apple in making consumer hardware both usable (relative to early computers) and marketable

[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

At risk of being abrasive...

I see blue checkmarks, I downvote. Nothing personal. But I don't want to support that even indirectly.

[–] Holytimes@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Eh at this point I'm just sick and fucking tired watching sexuality become nothing but marketing bait. People's sexuality and gender are becoming nothing but a two cent market gimmick and it's fucking insulting.

This isn't cool representation! It's hey lgbtq people your stupid and fucking easy. Look we can use the right words. Trust us and buy our shit.

It's just the fucking corporatization of rainbows in June all over again.

[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

It's not just corporations. It's influencer-grifters like Pirat_Nation.

...And, to be blunt, reposters who further spread the ragebait, like OP.

The platforms, ultimately, are what facilitate "marketing bait." But I dunno what to do about that, as human being simply cannot help themselves once they see stuff like that. It works, apparently.

[–] NostraDavid@programming.dev 1 points 1 week ago

watching sexuality become nothing but marketing bait.

This is what I figured what would happen once people started pushing for more explicit sexuality acceptance. This is the bed they made.

Trust us and buy our shit.

This is also due to people inside said corporations pushing for this shit due to ideological reasons.

*some LGBT:* Give us the positive attention and validation that we crave! *Large Corporations, seeing opportunities:* OK *some LGBT:* No, not like that!

Again, welcome to their bed.

[–] bdonvr@thelemmy.club 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

By the way this is NOT a new Firefox logo. It's just the fox mascot drawing that may be used in other parts of the UI like the welcome screen after a new install, or on social media.

The actual logo remains unchanged.

On top of that nowhere in the announcement are the supposed pronouns mentioned: https://blog.mozilla.org/en/firefox/meet-kit/

Actually the whole thing may be bullshit. Literally the only Mozilla reference I can find to Kit's pronouns is a statement given to like one or two blogs, and it says that any pronoun is acceptable.

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.

That's attributed to Mozilla here: https://www.neowin.net/news/firefox-has-killed-its-old-mascot-heres-what-the-new-cute-one-looks-like/

All other references seem to be chuds on X claiming that it's explicitly they/them and acting like Mozilla is making a big deal about that. As if it matters either way.

If you had some kind of reaction to this post you've fallen for culture war bullshit propaganda, congratulations.

[–] ApertureUA@lemmy.today 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Not on topic but sure do wonder why they silently pulled the Dino 2 years (I think?) prior and made the browser look boring. I guess it was apart of the master plan to shove a new mascot there and make media attention, + furry bait.

[–] Ephera@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The dino represents Mozilla, not Firefox itself. And yes, for a while, Mozilla didn't have the dino in its official branding, but it's now back in there. The flag is a dino head. As per usual, significantly more drama was made about them "removing" the dino than it was worth.

[–] ApertureUA@lemmy.today 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I meant that there was a different dino on the error pages in Firefox.

[–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 1 points 1 week ago

but that was again not about removing the dino as much as as it was about differentiating mozilla from firefox by taking the mozilla identity from firefox because mozilla is more than firefox and behaves differently to firefox, and giving firefox its own identity which is more friendly