EMMYCH'S PROFILE

First of all, wrt to the thread closing: I'm actually on board with that? I'm not here because I want to talk about this stuff with absolutely everyone that's popped into this thread. Some folks have been fine to talk to - even folks who have disagreed with me! - but the main reason I'm in here is because there has been absolutely awful things that have been said that I'm uncomfortable leaving unchallenged, since these awful things directly affect me and people that I care about.

Really my opinion that RMN is a shit place to discuss social justice issues has only strengthened! However:

author=Alichains
It would be useful to have a framework of what's acceptable behavior and what meaningful dissent actually is.

THIS is actually a topic I'm super invested in, since yeah making places Safe for all kinds of folks is indeed possible, albeit difficult. There is no indistinguishable line - the line is actually pretty clear in most places from where I'm standing. Here's the thing: I say RMN is a shit place to talk about this, but the reason I say this is because there are no ground rules for having difficult discussions. This topic has been derailed, littered with slurs both about and directed at people involved in the conversation, and made sour by the presence of folks who's number one goal is to shut the conversation down.

The rough thing about making spaces safer is it involves moderators taking harder stances against abusive behaviour than we've seen here. Like, imo, people flinging the t-slur around? Not okay. Should not be allowed. People making homophobic jokes after pages of talking about why Slurs Are Bad? Not okay. People coming in to derail with "WOW U GUYS ARE ALL FUCKIN STUPID WHY R U STILL HAVING THIS DISCUSSION WOW YOU SHOULD TALK ABOUT IMPORTANT THINGS LIKE VIDEO GAMES YOU CHUCKLEFUCKS LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL"? Boot 'em out.

Basically, if people demonstrate they cannot behave while discussing the topic at hand, they should lose the privilege of participation. People might say this is unfair, and I say: hey, grow the fuck up! You wanna talk about sensitive issues? Then be respectful. You're allowed to disagree, but you do it in a respectful manner. Apologize when you upset somebody. Don't derail. Respect that other people are going to have different life experiences than your own.

This sorta thing facilitates an actual discussion where people can actually learn things if they want to participate and learn. I am a-okay with people's views not lining up 100% with my own, but I'm not okay with people being abusive and awful when that is the case. There has been a lot of abuse in this thread, and until that stuff is outlawed, I gotta maintain: RMN is not the place for social justice discussions.

Idk, if mods ever feeling like talking more, I'd be more than happy to offer suggestions about creating safer spaces...? Like it's not an easy process and it DOES involve making some Tough Calls, and if that's not something you all wanna do, that's your choice!

author=Craze
i made birds fly when you dash, also i thought of pizza the whole time while making this happen

i need to unrust my coding abilities after the long summer so that i can work on karsuman and i's game. i may or may not make this as a training exercise, i have no idea

http://pastebin.com/hrhQ9Dgx (skills)

i'm real into flying birdguys

real into it

cRAZE IF YOU DON"T MAKE A GAME ABOUT FLYING BIRDGUYS SOMEONE ELSE MUST DO THIS THING FOR THE GOOD OF THE COUNTRY

author=Feld
It makes me think of an interesting question though; does the portrayal of a problematic character/theme/setting in a piece mean the the piece itself is intrinsically problematic, or is it more complex than that? Does something that make you uncomfortable mean that piece is objectively uncomfortable or problematic, or is it more complex than that?

It's sort of like when George R.R. Martin responded to criticism that A Song of Ice and Fire was sexist because of its depiction of many women, and his response was "Yes, that's how I wrote Westeros, because Westeros is really fucking shitty."

Can one weave something problematic/uncomfortable into a piece or a narrative and it be okay?

Alright this is a p interesting topic so I would like to nurture this seed of discussion a little.

It's a complex thing! I'll use Chasing Amy as a bad example of this, since it's come up. The problem with a lot of media is that they play plot lines like this too straight. A good commentary should be based on subversion and discussion of the topic, rather than simply including it and saying "SEE DO YOU SEE WHY THIS IS A BAD THING LOOK HOW UNHAPPY THESE CHARACTERS ARE!!!!" which ASOIAF unfortunately falls into, especially when rape happens. In Chasing Amy, yeah, you have the really obviously homophobic guy (the main dude's bff) that flings slurs around... but you also have the main dude, who pursues a woman he KNOWS is a lesbian, and is then rewarded with her by the narrative anyway. This, at it's core, plays into the "oh well all queer women just haven't met the right man yet~" trope, which is lesbophobic.

But hey, I'm actually super invested in seeing misogyny and homophobia and all that jazz challenged in media, since yeah media is an excellent vehicle for starting conversations. A good example: I'm not one of the folks who think Mad Max: Fury Road was feminist gospel, but I can't deny the fact it started a lot of great conversations and was a step in the right direction for movies about women. Present in the movie was a violent patriarchy with implied rape and violence against women. The movie did not linger on these things, but they were There. Sure, it didn't talk about it, but they were There and handled pretty well and kicked off discussions amongst young folks about patriarchy and women's rights. That's a pretty exciting thing! And while the director was a man, he listened to the women around him, and iirc he got his wife to edit/cut the movie, since he wanted a woman to be the one to do that.

Basically IT CAN BE DONE, the key to doing it is 1) let people who are the experts talk about their own oppression, and 2) if you are including a character who experiences oppression that you don't, listen to the folks that have that experience and trust them when they say "this is cool/not cool." It is a difficult, humbling thing to do, but it's also v v v important.

@Sated: I have watched the movie. It made me super uncomfortable, since it echoed experiences I've had with men, like I mentioned above. I get the context. I still think it's lesbophobic. (LIKE SERIOUSLY: men using the word Dyke is lesbophobic. This isn't rocket science.)

Who's makin' snap judgements now? (SPOILERS: It is you. You are the one assuming things.)

;D

author=drenrin2120
Was under the impression that cisgender referred to a societally accepted gender and sexual oriebtation, which would then refer to heterosexuality. So the only connotation is that it refers to hetero lifestyles in the senses that those who are cisgender may not understand what its like to live in a society that does not so easily accept other identities.

Hence the discussion about how cisgender developers portray other orientations.

Sexuality and gender are entirely separate things. You can be straight and trans, you can be queer and cis. You can be trans and queer. These are different things, and people assuming they're the same thing has surprisingly harmful results (aka assuming trans women who like men are just gay men that dress in drag, or that trans women who like women are just straight guys putting on dresses to prey on queer women, etc. etc. etc. you may notice a pattern in that it is usually trans women who are the target of horrible stereotypes and harmful assumptions).