RACE AND GENDER IN GAMES

Posts

NeverSilent
Got any Dexreth amulets?
6131
author=mawk
who on earth convinced people that a pedantic tangent where you hunt through a person's game page to accuse them of 'playing the victim' is okay? you throw nonsense in someone's face and then act like you've won a moral victory when you eventually shout them out of the conversation altogether
I agree that SnowOwl's way of discussing things seems unnecessarily polarising and spiteful and not very helpful to me. But it's also true that emmych based part of their argument on the idea that games like Luxaren Allure get a lot of backlash for their themes, which then turned out to be inaccurate at best. I don't think the conclusions SnowOwl drew from that are correct, but the pure fact is not as irrelevant as you make it sound.


author=mawk
also it's the easiest thing in the world to say you're against discrimination! focus less on shouting 'I'm on your side' and more on truly putting that into practice thru self-reflection and awareness of the circumstances
With pleasure. Care to elaborate?
slash
APATHY IS FOR COWARDS
4008
author=SnowOwl
Why even engage in a discussion if all you're going to do is come in and disrupt the discussion currently going on to go: "Hi people this has almost nothing to do with the current discussion, but hey, look at how badly people treat me, look at how mean people are to me, look at me, me, me. Bohohoho why won't you pity me I am upset now, bye."

this is, 100%, exactly what you're doing by repeatedly shrieking about one throwaway sentence from a post two pages ago

I'm glad to know that you've rested your case and we can all move on.
author=NeverSilent
I agree that SnowOwl's way of discussing things seems unnecessarily polarising and spiteful and not very helpful to me. But it's also true that emmych based part of her argument on the idea that games like Luxaren Allure get a lot of backlash for their themes, which then turned out to be inaccurate at best. I don't think the conclusions SnowOwl drew from that are correct, but the pure fact is not as irrelevant as you make it sound.

refer to penta's post; they outline it better than I could. suffice it to say that discussion is impossible while people are harrying the people involved with increasingly loud and narrow demands to prove that the discrimination they've seen actually happened. someone whose only involvement in this kind of discussion is to try and disprove accounts of bigotry cannot claim neutrality, and you cannot have a discussion of social issues with all logic and no context.

author=NeverSilent
With pleasure. Care to elaborate?

part one: listen to people, and recognize that your own perspective is not impartial
part two: repeat
author=kentona
This is what I was reading yesterday:
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/04/13/mute-button
http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-rise-of-the-college-crybullies-1447458587
https://leapmanifesto.org/en/the-leap-manifesto/
http://www.macleans.ca/politics/ottawa/the-leap-manifesto-and-where-the-ndp-will-land/
http://www.mcgilldaily.com/2014/11/everything-problematic/
https://rebeccarc.com/2013/04/15/intersectionality-and-identity-politics/
http://www.calgarysun.com/2016/03/20/wrongly-accused-of-being-pedophile-on-facebook-bc-man-faces-online-witch-hunt
http://www.mirror.co.uk/tech/fired-nintendo-worker-alison-rapp-7737634
https://www.thenation.com/article/problem-public-shaming/

and just a collection of quotes from other articles I recently-ish read (no particular order or logical grouping):


What I am seeing is a lot of overreaction, assumptions, opinions being elevated to sacred belief, stronger in-group love/out-group hate dynamics, the demonization of white males, an idealistic shift in the federal NDP, and the dangers of virtual pillory.
I don't know why you posted those links, I did never disagree with the fact that overreactions exist. However, you snippet of wisdom is like telling people that one should be rational, very few will disagree with that message, but nevertheless, few will go "right, I need to be more rational" upon hearing it. The same goes to your message, most will agree with it, the hard part is actually reaching out to people. Unfortunately, you can't even reach yourself with your own message of awareness over sensitivity, so how can you expect to reach others? I'm not telling you that what you're saying is wrong, I'm telling you that you are delivering your message in a way that has zero chance of reaching others and that the first step to change that should be to reach yourself.

I do disagree with mob-shaming. For whatever it's used for.

Again, I never promoted mob shaming. When I posted "If you disagree that's fine" that was right after I strongly suggested that you may be a hypocrite. How did you interpret what's basically "it's okay if you disagree with the idea that you're being hypocritical" as meaning "mob shaming is acceptable"? Those two aren't even remotely similar.
The way I read it kentona is a laid-back guy and if there's any possible drama waiting that could easily avoided, he'll just avoid it.
I don't think looking at overreactions or reactions is needed to justify that standpoint (since a lot of folks were speaking up about it not being the big deal it seemed to be made out to them). If you feel more comfortable staying within the usual tropes and comfort zones, you feel more comfortable.

I don't see anything wrong with that, but the ones who are fine with doing their thing and ignoring the few or the many annoyances or who would are interested in bringing out a different angle to things should be encouraged to do their thing.

@Mawk: Clear communication. Give an example, say one thing that you could figure out with that logic and point it out. It's good manners to do so.
NeverSilent
Got any Dexreth amulets?
6131
@mawk:
Good points. I agree. And I'll do my best to keep your suggestion in mind. I can't promise I'll always be able to, but I'll certainly try.

P.S.: In case it might come across the wrong way, I am not trying to be ironic or sarcastic in this post. I honestly mean what I just said.
sorry if I came off as pithy in my own response, yeah. I'm not really an authority on it, but I do feel that being able to self-reflect is kind of critical to the whole thing. it's easy not to realize when a situation isn't really about you, for instance, and when it's best not to dominate a conversation but to support the people with more to say
author=mawk
who on earth convinced people that a pedantic tangent where you hunt through a person's game page to accuse them of 'playing the victim' is okay? you throw nonsense in someone's face and then act like you've won a moral victory when you eventually shout them out of the conversation altogether

that is unacceptable by any standard and I am ashamed to be a part of the same forum as this

She didn't even leave because of me, she left before I even answered her. So whatever moral victory I won, I give it all to NeverSilents comment that by the way was as far from aggressive enough to make someone upset as a comment can possibly be. Honestly I don't even know why she got upset.
NeverSilent
Got any Dexreth amulets?
6131
author=mawk
it's easy not to realize when a situation isn't really about you, for instance, and when it's best not to dominate a conversation but to support the people with more to say
Hm. I don't know. We're all individuals with our own ideas and perspectives after all, and I think we should be allowed to bring them into a conversation like this even if we're not directly the subject of said conversation. After all, neither we as humans nor the issues we are discussing exist in a vacuum. I agree it's only a sign of decency to hear the people out who have a more personal stake in such a discussion an take their arguments seriously, but I also reserve for myself the right to question the logic of these arguments when it seems necessary.

Either way, my main reason for even entering this discussion was to try and encourage people to actually communicate and try to understand each other, rather than flinging accusations and generalisations back and forth. I don't think I've been doing a very good job at that, though, so I'll have some self-reflection to do as well...


Edit: SnowOwl, there is no moral victory to be had here whatsoever. This is not a fight.
that's 'they', SnowOwl. if you really want to pretend you didn't come here with hate in your heart, not purposely misgendering people would be a good start.

another good exercise in plausible deniability would be not to claim innocence in response to a post that doesn't actually ever mention you by name, but by behaviour, but lmao
LockeZ
I'd really like to get rid of LockeZ. His play style is way too unpredictable. He's always like this too. If he ran a country, he'd just kill and imprison people at random until crime stopped.
5236
author=mawk
you cannot have a discussion of social issues with all logic and no context.
I will actually disagree with this point. In fact I think context is the death of these discussions when they happen between strangers. Bringing up someone's individual situation is what makes that person volatile and emotional, which effectively ends all useful conversation.

I think you'll find a lot less hate in these topics if you just talk in general terms and let people decide for themselves how and when to apply whatever wisdom they gleam. It might seem less "useful" but I'm pretty sure literally anything is more useful than a dozen pages of screaming.
author=NeverSilent
Edit: SnowOwl, there is no moral victory to be had here whatsoever. This is not a fight.

Are you sure? It comes with a big shiny trophy.
author=mawk
that's 'they', SnowOwl.

I understand you even less than usual.
kentona
I am tired of Earth. These people. I am tired of being caught in the tangle of their lives.
21227
author=LockeZ
author=mawk
you cannot have a discussion of social issues with all logic and no context.
I will actually disagree with this point. In fact I think context is the death of these discussions when they happen between strangers. Bringing up someone's individual situation is what makes that person volatile and emotional, which effectively ends all useful conversation.

I think you'll find a lot less hate in these topics if you just talk in general terms and let people decide for themselves how and when to apply whatever wisdom they gleam. It might seem less "useful" but I'm pretty sure literally anything is more useful than a dozen pages of screaming.

Nope. Speaking in general terms will rile up people, as they then make assumptions upon assumptions and pronounce judgement on that.
author=PentagonBuddy
edit: And can we at least try to remember emmych has publicly said they are not a woman and do not use "she"? They've mentioned this in the past and SnowOwl I know you, specifically, show up often enough to have seen this at least once. They deserve that much respect, and if anyone sincerely didn't know here's another mention.
Well, myself, I agree with taking them into consideration.
Fact is - if it has emotional context and ties to the people posting - not acknowledging them will not make them go away. If people are conntected to the topic and have personal experiences relating to it, they will be affected by them in one way or another. Trying to keep them completely out of the way will likely just make them pop up below the surface.
Meaning, they will still be there, only you aren't actually able to talk about them and sort things out. Talking about things and sorting things out and creating understanding and showing respect for one another should be core to meaningful conversation.

It would be "nice" if you could have all logical discussion, but we aren't dealing with ideal situations in an ideal world.
For me a huge part of communication is to listen to other's concern and try to find compromises and acknowledge both logical and emotional perspectives.
Like, if you want to write characters trying to stay clear of any drama, then that there must be motivation for you there somewhere. It may not be logical or necessarily all true, but the fact you feel better when you do it this way is still a reason for you in itself. Ignoring one or the other would muddle things up.
author=mawk
author=PentagonBuddy
edit: And can we at least try to remember emmych has publicly said they are not a woman and do not use "she"? They've mentioned this in the past and SnowOwl I know you, specifically, show up often enough to have seen this at least once. They deserve that much respect, and if anyone sincerely didn't know here's another mention.

I just went with what the avatar seemed to be, which was a woman. I don't come into contact with emmych apart from these threads at all.
Craze
i bet she's a diva with a potion popping problem
13616
<-- til i'm a woman now
slash
APATHY IS FOR COWARDS
4008
TBF I also kind of associate people with their avatars, but I also know how to read and apologize when I screw up.
Doesn't matter why, just keep it in mind for the next times, and everyone's happy ~
ESBY
extreme disappointment
1060
anybody seen any picnickers round here? i need to know for, uhhhhhh, research
also, please dont play with matches in forests