Get Woke, Go Broke

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT
 

altnameJag:

Silentpony:
No they overlook gameplay because its a game. I imagine if they had sniper Basset Hounds or Space Marines fighting in WW2 gamers would have been equally as 'this is not historically accurate stop pretending it is'
That EA had ladies and Asian men in a 'historically accurate' trailer and people objected, that does not mean those people are sexist and/or racists. In the same way if a 'realistic' game had Canadian soldiers fighting during the Persian war, people objecting are not anti-Canadian.
The game was marketed as 'This is what it was like. See the Samurai proves it' And samurai did not fight with the allied powers. So no, that is not what it was like, and its not anti-samurai to point that out.

...The historically accurate trailer where the lady with WW2 era prosthetics died in the first 12 seconds of action then came back to life to ride on a Jeep, then came back to life again to bludgeon a man to death with a cricket bat?

It was a multiplayer trailer. Showing off customization options.

I just rewatched the trailer. She doesn't die once.

Saelune:

Silentpony:

Saelune:
You keep saying this part as if it wasn't right from the start that racists sexist gits weren't bitching about women and blacks.

People started complaining because of women and blacks being in the game, because they are sexist and racist against them and hate any sort of inclusivity. A lot of people hate inclusivity, they hate diversity, and they use shitty arguments to excuse their bigotry.

And you keep thinking that because someone complains about women, therefore they're sexist. That because no one in 2002 complained about the non-existent female characters in Battlefield 1942, who then complained about females in 2018's Battlefield 5, they MUST be sexists. and that's poor logic. People complain about women in historically accurate games now because up until now no dev had put females in accurate WW2 frontline games, because, not to put too fine a point on, its not historically accurate. That's not sexism, that's getting an F in History 101.

and that's what you're defending. You're defending a Failed mark because the devs wrote in ladies and Japanese men fought for great Britain. And you're wrong. You're incorrect in thinking that actually happened and you're incorrect in thinking pointing that out is sexist/racists.

I am saying that if you want to complain about realism and historical accuracy, you took too long. Bigots are complaining because they are bigots and are using 'historical accuracy and realism' as a thinly veiled excuse to justify their bigotry.

You're defending sexism and racism.

That's utter nonsense. What kind of non-linear timeline do you live in, where in order to preempt detractors calling you sexists you have to have already complained about the thing that's going to happen, before it happens?!
Just so you know, most humans don't have access to the wondrous time-travel powers you do. We kinda' have to take things one day at a time, and people in 2002, 03, 04 and 2010 didn't have the knowledge to complain about British Samurai in 2018 because, well we're mortals that can't break the space/time barrier at will.

Silentpony:

Saelune:

Silentpony:
And you keep thinking that because someone complains about women, therefore they're sexist. That because no one in 2002 complained about the non-existent female characters in Battlefield 1942, who then complained about females in 2018's Battlefield 5, they MUST be sexists. and that's poor logic. People complain about women in historically accurate games now because up until now no dev had put females in accurate WW2 frontline games, because, not to put too fine a point on, its not historically accurate. That's not sexism, that's getting an F in History 101.

and that's what you're defending. You're defending a Failed mark because the devs wrote in ladies and Japanese men fought for great Britain. And you're wrong. You're incorrect in thinking that actually happened and you're incorrect in thinking pointing that out is sexist/racists.

I am saying that if you want to complain about realism and historical accuracy, you took too long. Bigots are complaining because they are bigots and are using 'historical accuracy and realism' as a thinly veiled excuse to justify their bigotry.

You're defending sexism and racism.

That's utter nonsense. What kind of non-linear timeline do you live in, where in order to preempt detractors calling you sexists you have to have already complained about the thing that's going to happen, before it happens?!
Just so you know, most humans don't have access to the wondrous time-travel powers you do. We kinda' have to take things one day at a time, and people in 2002, 03, 04 and 2010 didn't have the knowledge to complain about British Samurai in 2018 because, well we're mortals that can't break the space/time barrier at will.

Stop defending sexism.

For me, a well-written work of fiction has to give one a sense of realism and immersion, at least within the setting. Diversity is fine as long as it does that. It only becomes a negative when it is poorly written and obvious that it has been awkwardly shoehorned in to garner "woke" points, in which case it can destroy my immersion and keep snapping my thoughts back to the current hyper-polarized political clusterfuck that is planet Earth in 2019, which can be really, really annoying.

So I try to do my research and avoid games/movies that do that, if possible, to save myself the annoyance and also because I want to do my part to help those companies "go broke" for putting out such a shitty product.

There are far enough non-"woke" games out there to spend all the time playing. When you take that into account, losing time punishing companies (anything beyond not buying the game) for making "woke" games that people other than you want is childish.

Saelune:
It is entirely possible that a ton of people are racist and sexist and just want to bitch about women and blacks. It is a common thing. It keeps coming up whenever women, non-whites and LGBT people show up in anything, a bunch of bigots start bitching loudly about it.

Bigotry is rampant. You guys can pretend all you want it isnt, but you'd be wrong then.

I don't think so.

Most people are not sexist. There are a lot of people who are racist in the sense of xenophob (i don't like those strange fereigners around here) but the number of racist people in the sense of believing in the superiority of actual races is low too.

And honestly, in Germany i can't remember a single controversy about women, non-whites or LGBT people showing up in anything. And i really don't think your people are that different. But somehow it is always a controversy in the US (and occasionally the UK). And i strongly suspect that is only because your stupid two party system has made that a partisan issue.

I wouldn't be surprised if most of the people who complain about women, homosexuals or non-whites* getting good roles in Hollywood only do so to spite Democrats and their supposed allies, the "SJWs" and don't even care one bit about the actual topic.

And going back to Battlefield V : I don't think the critisism was mostly because of sexism/racism. I do think it was mostly about other issues.

But that also means that the failure of the game was never caused by including women and non-whites. So it does not fit the stupid woke-broke narrative.

*Ok, maybe it is different regarding non whites. You have some baffling and disturbing race issues over there.

Satinavian:

Saelune:
It is entirely possible that a ton of people are racist and sexist and just want to bitch about women and blacks. It is a common thing. It keeps coming up whenever women, non-whites and LGBT people show up in anything, a bunch of bigots start bitching loudly about it.

Bigotry is rampant. You guys can pretend all you want it isnt, but you'd be wrong then.

I don't think so.

Most people are not sexist. There are a lot of people who are racist in the sense of xenophob (i don't like those strange fereigners around here) but the number of racist people in the sense of believing in the superiority of actual races is low too.

And honestly, in Germany i can't remember a single controversy about women, non-whites or LGBT people showing up in anything. And i really don't think your people are that different. But somehow it is always a controversy in the US (and occasionally the UK). And i strongly suspect that is only because your stupid two party system has made that a partisan issue.

I wouldn't be surprised if most of the people who complain about women, homosexuals or non-whites* getting good roles in Hollywood only do so to spite Democrats and their supposed allies, the "SJWs" and don't even care one bit about the actual topic.

And going back to Battlefield V : I don't think the critisism was mostly because of sexism/racism. I do think it was mostly about other issues.

But that also means that the failure of the game was never caused by including women and non-whites. So it does not fit the stupid woke-broke narrative.

*Ok, maybe it is different regarding non whites. You have some baffling and disturbing race issues over there.

Most people are sexist. That's the problem, there is so much sexism that even otherwise decent folk just accept, because it is so ingrained, and I am not excluding myself from this by the way.

Also I tire of the 'I the straight white man don't see any problems, so therefor no problems exist and people are just exaggerating'.

If spite is someone's reason for being a bigot, then they are just a bigot using spite as a shitty excuse.

Also uh, you cant remember any sort of controversy in Germany about minorities? You sure bout that?

Satinavian:
Most people are not sexist. There are a lot of people who are racist in the sense of xenophob (i don't like those strange fereigners around here) but the number of racist people in the sense of believing in the superiority of actual races is low too.

Unfortunately, you're not going to get anywhere with this. Some people have apparently built the foundation of their entire world view upon the indisputable assumption that most men are sexist, most white people are racist, and most straight people are homophobic. In their eyes, it is a fundamental law of the universe and not up for debate. It's like trying to convince a religious zealot that his god doesn't exist.

Saelune:

Also uh, you cant remember any sort of controversy in Germany about minorities? You sure bout that?

About "about women, non-whites or LGBT people showing up in anything", yes. We were talking about this whole representation in media thing. Stop moving goalposts.
Of course Germany has its own problems with minorities. Which are completely different minorities and different problems than in the US. Also seemingly far less severe to be honest.

There is no single game or film or whatever that i know of that sparked a controversy by having the protagonist being a woman or gay or an ethnic minority. Even if i include ethnic minorities that have problems in Germany.

And if we go away from race to homosexuality, well, we don't have a religious right like you do. As for women, well, it was possible for Merkel to be elected chancellor four times in a row now and none of her campaigns or those of her competitors focussed on her gender. As if it didn't really matter to the electorate.

Satinavian:

Saelune:

Also uh, you cant remember any sort of controversy in Germany about minorities? You sure bout that?

About "about women, non-whites or LGBT people showing up in anything", yes. We were talking about this whole representation in media thing. Stop moving goalposts.
Of course Germany has its own problems with minorities. Which are completely different minorities and different problems than in the US. Also seemingly far less severe to be honest.

There is no single game or film or whatever that i know of that sparked a controversy by having the protagonist being a woman or gay or an ethnic minority. Even if i include ethnic minorities that have problems in Germany.

I am not moving goalposts, you are. I mean, now we're talking about movies in Germany when originally we're talking about a video game called Battlefield V.

Kerg3927:

Satinavian:
Most people are not sexist. There are a lot of people who are racist in the sense of xenophob (i don't like those strange fereigners around here) but the number of racist people in the sense of believing in the superiority of actual races is low too.

Unfortunately, you're not going to get anywhere with this. Some people have apparently built the foundation of their entire world view upon the indisputable assumption that most men are sexist, most white people are racist, and most straight people are homophobic. In their eyes, it is a fundamental law of the universe and not up for debate. It's like trying to convince a religious zealot that his god doesn't exist.

Unfortunately too many straight white men are so scared that they might have to take responsibility for their own actions that they go to great lengths to defend bigotry rather than address that bigotry is still a big problem.

Saelune:
I mean, now we're talking about movies in Germany when originally we're talking about a video game called Battlefield V.

your claim was

It keeps coming up whenever women, non-whites and LGBT people show up in anything, a bunch of bigots start bitching loudly about it.

which applies that far beyond Battlefield V.

That is what i answered to. I used literally the same wording as you did. That is not moving goalposts by me.

I don't have seen a controversy in Germany about women in Battlefield V. Or about women or blacks in any other video game. Or in any entertainment medium in generell.

People simply don't complain about that stuff here.

Which is why i don't think people are nearly as racist or sexist as you seem to believe.

Satinavian:

Saelune:
I mean, now we're talking about movies in Germany when originally we're talking about a video game called Battlefield V.

your claim was

It keeps coming up whenever women, non-whites and LGBT people show up in anything, a bunch of bigots start bitching loudly about it.

which applies that far beyond Battlefield V.

That is what i answered to.

I don't have seen a controversy in Germany about women in Battlefield V. Or about women or blacks in any other video game. Or in any entertainment medium in generell.

People simply don't complain about that stuff here.

Do you not see the catch 22 here? 'I don't see anyone complaining, so you shouldn't complain'.

Just because you don't see the problem doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

The reason you don't see those complaints is probably because you are privileged not to. As a white person I was privileged to not have to see most of the problems people of color face in the US, didn't mean those problems didn't exist though.

Satinavian:

People simply don't complain about that stuff here.

In the same sense that "I'm not a racist, but" isn't racism, yes.

Saelune:
Do you not see the catch 22 here? 'I don't see anyone complaining, so you shouldn't complain'.

Reading comprehension ?

I didnt see anyone (rightwingers, MRAs, etc) complain about the (to them unwelcome) presence of women, LGBT, nonwhites in games or other media.

It is the complains of your biggots that i can't hear in Germany. No one talks about how the SJW conspiracy or the left elite has taken over the entertainment industry or similar nonsense. That is stuff i only ever find on the English internet.

I am aware that i might not see discrimination against a group if i am not part of that group but that is another topic.

Satinavian:

Saelune:
Do you not see the catch 22 here? 'I don't see anyone complaining, so you shouldn't complain'.

Reading comprehension ?

I didnt see anyone (rightwingers, MRAs, etc) complain about the (to them unwelcome) presence of women, LGBT, nonwhites in games or other media.

It is the complains of your biggots that i can't hear in Germany. No one talks about how the SJW conspiracy or the left elite has taken over the entertainment industry or similar nonsense. That is stuff i only ever find on the English internet.

I am aware that i might not see discrimination against a group if i am not part of that group but that is another topic.

I too do not see things when I close my eyes.

English internet is a big place. And ya know, I bet the Chinese Internet, which is a thing, doesn't see a lot of complaining. I guess everything must be honkey-dorey in China.

Something Amyss:
[quote="Callate" post="528.1056651.24289375"]But...and Black Panther is a great example of this...even with that positive message that made people feel good, other people felt attacked, and that's going to be an extant problem ion media. Saying "black people can invent thins and be cool" is immediately going to trigger an "you're tearing white people down!" response.

Black Panther has the highest domestic box office gross of any Marvel movie, and fifth worldwide. There are reasons my comment included terms like "a predictor of financial success" and "from a bottom line perspective".

Were there some people griping about BP's race politics? Sure, a few... But they stayed mostly at the outer fringe. The people involved with the movie didn't engage with them. In addition to having a tremendous amount of momentum from the MCU's successful back-catalog, the movie was canny enough to have a few people of non-African descent on both the heroic side and allow the primary villain to be of African-descent, even while allowing said villain to expound on issues that made stance deeper and possibly even sympathetic.

The movie undoubtedly benefited from repeat business and word-of-mouth from African Americans. But it wouldn't have made it to over $700 million if it hadn't been a movie that a majority of people were willing to see, and be seen to see, and talk about.

As near as I can tell, to the extent that anyone is talking about Black Panther on Youtube at this point, it's in regard to the run-up to the Academy Awards.

Whereas with say, Ghostbusters or Star Wars, the bickering remains at a high volume long after their respective movies' release. And to a very real extent, that's because those involved made enormous errors that allowed the controversy itself to become the narrative. Buying a ticket became a political stance. Refusing to buy a ticket became a political stance. Quietly not buying a ticket allowed one to remain above a fray that, wherever you fell, would likely result in someone screaming incoherently at you and presuming to ascribe a complete and negative profile of you.

Any time someone includes a stance or makes a statement with their work before a significant number of people, assuming that stance isn't absolutely beige, someone will disapprove of it. It's been expressed, more than once, that the creation of something that someone won't like is the only sort of creation worth pursuing, and there may be some truth to that.

But again, especially if one is pursuing a niche or mass-market audience, the creator needs to be aware that engaging a disapproving fringe might prove counter-productive. Particularly if the tactics used to engage try to control the narrative in ways that broaden the base of those in the "opposing" camp. When you lump everyone who might have qualms or quibbles about a work in with the same pejorative terms, it doesn't take an advanced degree in PR to recognize that those same people have just been given an incentive to see you fail... And rather than allow that opposition to remain fractured and vague, you've actually helped give it attention and make it more mainstream.

If you say that you wanted to spotlight admirable characters of African descent, sure, there are people who are going to say "hey, that doesn't include me." But maybe not that many, because you're saying you want to shine a positive light on characters of this race, not to deride or exclude those of a different one. And it would to your benefit to continue to speak of your work as a positive, as filling a vacuum in the existing genre, rather than creating an exclusion in a work within one.

But if, conversely, you say, "It's great that this line-up doesn't include any damned white men", which is pretty much exactly what a recent article about the upcoming Terminator re-re-re-boot did... Someone might want to have a word with you about the demographic data. Not to mention the definition of "diversity".

Social media makes bad actors seem louder and more numerous than they otherwise might. It's important to remember that at times the best way to handle a controversy is to not presume to control the narrative in that regard.

As far as "Arrowverse" goes- I've only watched a small portion. (My daughter is a fan of "The Flash".) Some of the attempts to tackle "issues" have been deftly handled; others have been cringe-inducing. (The newly uncloseted Captain Cold works very well by being both matter-of-fact about his sexuality and fun to watch; the first-season episode of "Legends" that took place in the 1950s was, well, the latter.) But it sticks in my mind that the actress playing Iris West in "Flash" got some very harsh feedback, a small portion of which descended to the level of threats. To be clear- I hate that that happened; no one should get that kind of poison directed at them for playing a character as written. But at the same time, if the creators had pigeonholed all derision towards the character as nothing but racism, Iris could well have remained the Dawn Summers of the show- the character who derails all the world-threatening action by being a whiny, manipulative, ego-maniacal mop.

Callate:
Black Panther has the highest domestic box office gross of any Marvel movie, and fifth worldwide.

Which...doesn't change anything. I'm also going to point out that non-white ticket purchases were the primary driver of BP's sales, at almost two-thirds domestically, with over a third of the tickets going to black people. I mean, for all this talk that, it's sort of weird that fewer white people were going, right? Just a coincidence, I'm sure. Point is, its success was driven by a massively igher rate of people of colour showing up, and fewer white people for...some reason. Gosh, it's like they weren't as supportive of a black superhero or something.

There weren't "some" people arguing about race politics. There were a freaking lot. Because BP made a lot of white people feel bad. This isn't to say white people didn't watch or couldn't own the movie, but it does highlight exactly why the "feel attacked" thing is bullshit. You do not need to be attacked to feel attacked, and lifting someone up makes people feel threatened. This is a fractal pattern, which is why people saw the phrase "open to all" and flipped out that they were being excluded. Which is why people saw a movie about Afrofuturism and focused on the lack of white people.

Without the non-white audience stepping up, Black Panther is closer to Thor: the Dark World numbers. Think about that as you use the box office as a defense.

But maybe not that many, because you're saying you want to shine a positive light on characters of this race, not to deride or exclude those of a different one.

And yet, here we are, with a box office that was overwhelmingly non-white in a market that's typically dominated by white people. Here we are, with complaints and plots to bomb the reviews weeks in advance and campaigns to stop it and so on and so on.

Here we are where the same controversies pop up every time someone attempts to "shine a light" on any other culture in nerd territory. Because at least in the real world, there are prestige films and the like. It's not perfect, but at least you get fewer people screeching about BlacKKKlansman or Get Out. Probably also just a coincidence, I'm sure.

Sure, BP did amazing at the box office, and that was mostly on people of colour. And women. Women were also a significant driver here.

This is not a good case for lifting up one group without alienating another. If race, as I am frequently told, didn't matter, surely more white people would show up for B than Thor 2.

As far as "Arrowverse" goes- I've only watched a small portion. (My daughter is a fan of "The Flash".) Some of the attempts to tackle "issues" have been deftly handled; others have been cringe-inducing. (The newly uncloseted Captain Cold works very well by being both matter-of-fact about his sexuality and fun to watch; the first-season episode of "Legends" that took place in the 1950s was, well, the latter.)

And yet, both received flak. Almost like it doesn't matter if it's a good representation, or a good character or anything. almost like they found out Leo had a boyfriend and were dead set against it. People started complaining Constantine was ruined--even thogh he's a canonic bisexual--the minute he flirted with Leo, and hooboy did they get mad when it turned out he had a black boyfriend in Legends season 4, because...well, it's totally not racism or homophobia, that's for sure!

People were offended by Iris being black, and they were offended because XS made on passing comment about another woman being cute or whatever. I barely remember it happening because it was so under the radar it scraped sea floor. People were offended that James Olsen is black. People were offended that Smoak and Stein made passing references to being Jewish. People were offended that Zari is a Muslim, even though it's come up like...twice in the show. People were offended that Alex is gay, and even more baffling, offended that Maggie was gay (which is baffling, because she's been canonically a lesbianbn in comics for a while, and they kept appealing to comics purism). People were offended by literally everything about Black Lightning.

It's not like these people are saying anything mean or nasty about straights/whites/gentiles/whoever, it's that their very existence is seen as an attack on their safe space, where everything used to be a mirror.

Saelune:

I am aware that i might not see discrimination against a group if i am not part of that group but that is another topic.

I too do not see things when I close my eyes.[/quote]

It also so happens that it's never about race/gender/sexuality/whatever. When the ghostbusters movie was announced, people weren't being sexist by hating it (before the creative team said anything mean to the fans, let'sd just get this clear before someone tries to bring that later event up) and it certainly wasn't sexist to insist women couldn't be funny in a comedy movie. The anger when the new Doctor was announced...just announced...wasn't in any way sexist. It wasn't racist to be angry about a black guy starring in Star Wars. Or, you know, ny of the above Arrowverse examples of people getting opissed off by minorities...existing.

It just so happens that the ire is focused solely upon women and minorities in these cases for what I'm assured are totally non-biased reasons.

Saelune:

Silentpony:

Saelune:
I am saying that if you want to complain about realism and historical accuracy, you took too long. Bigots are complaining because they are bigots and are using 'historical accuracy and realism' as a thinly veiled excuse to justify their bigotry.

You're defending sexism and racism.

That's utter nonsense. What kind of non-linear timeline do you live in, where in order to preempt detractors calling you sexists you have to have already complained about the thing that's going to happen, before it happens?!
Just so you know, most humans don't have access to the wondrous time-travel powers you do. We kinda' have to take things one day at a time, and people in 2002, 03, 04 and 2010 didn't have the knowledge to complain about British Samurai in 2018 because, well we're mortals that can't break the space/time barrier at will.

Stop defending sexism.

Wait, hold up. British Samurai? Like William Adams? Did they bring him back to life to fight for England?

Satinavian:

Saelune:
Do you not see the catch 22 here? 'I don't see anyone complaining, so you shouldn't complain'.

Reading comprehension ?

I didnt see anyone (rightwingers, MRAs, etc) complain about the (to them unwelcome) presence of women, LGBT, nonwhites in games or other media.

It is the complains of your biggots that i can't hear in Germany. No one talks about how the SJW conspiracy or the left elite has taken over the entertainment industry or similar nonsense. That is stuff i only ever find on the English internet.

I am aware that i might not see discrimination against a group if i am not part of that group but that is another topic.

I don't understand your argument. Since German forums don't talk about issues, its not an issue?

What do you mean Alt-Righters aren't complaining about diversity? Just in German? Or English?

And I don't have any idea how this goes against what Saelune says. Saelune didnt claim that Germans were complaining. They were talking about demographics in WW2 in Germany

Kerg3927:
For me, a well-written work of fiction has to give one a sense of realism and immersion, at least within the setting. Diversity is fine as long as it does that. It only becomes a negative when it is poorly written and obvious that it has been awkwardly shoehorned in to garner "woke" points, in which case it can destroy my immersion and keep snapping my thoughts back to the current hyper-polarized political clusterfuck that is planet Earth in 2019, which can be really, really annoying.

So I try to do my research and avoid games/movies that do that, if possible, to save myself the annoyance and also because I want to do my part to help those companies "go broke" for putting out such a shitty product.

I can agree wirh not wanting crappy products and getting rid of virtue signaling. The problem arises from this simple fact: far too many male characters are written poorly. That doesn't lead to complaints abour diversity or virtue signaling. If a video game tells how about masculinity, THAT'S VIRTUE SIGNALING. If we just have bunch of white dudes going to war with a jokes guy, leader type, scared guy and medic, THAT'S CRAPPY DIVERSITY. That's terrible writing, just relying on troupes instead of writing characters

trunkage:
I don't understand your argument. Since German forums don't talk about issues, its not an issue?

No.

The argument is the following :

There is no backlash against women etc. in prominent roles in media in Germany. But there seems to be such a backklash in the US.

Why is that ?

Are Americans that much more sexist/racist than Germans ? I find that unlikely. Or does the backlash in the US come not from people being actually sexist/racist but more from people caught up in this bipartisan shitflinging contest you have going on there that see diversity in media just as another issue where Rightwingers or Leftwingers can "win".

Saelune:
I too do not see things when I close my eyes.

English internet is a big place. And ya know, I bet the Chinese Internet, which is a thing, doesn't see a lot of complaining. I guess everything must be honkey-dorey in China.

That is possible. The internet is a big place and the part i see is certainly not representive.

But the same is true for the part of the internet you see. Do all the rightwingers complaining everytime a woman gets a prominent position come by any chance from the same corner of the internet ? Woh big a group are they really and how do you know that.

That said, even i do see some of the rightwing backlash in English. It is not that the English language controversies somehow don't reach me, they do. They just somehow never cross the language barrier and don't have a homegrown equivalent. It is loud enough so to speak.

Satinavian:

trunkage:
I don't understand your argument. Since German forums don't talk about issues, its not an issue?

No.

The argument is the following :

There is no backlash against women etc. in prominent roles in media in Germany. But there seems to be such a backklash in the US.

Why is that ?

Are Americans that much more sexist/racist than Germans ? I find that unlikely. Or does the backlash in the US come not from people being actually sexist/racist but more from people caught up in this bipartisan shitflinging contest you have going on there that see diversity in media just as another issue where Rightwingers or Leftwingers can "win".

As I may have mentioned before, the man sleeping in my bed is from Germany as well. From his perspective, yes the southern US is far more sexist and racist and Germany is far more liberal than much of the US in most aspects. Many of the ideas that are socially acceptable and considerd normal here are not acceptable there. Here, especially in what is called "The Bible belt" they have some pretty backwards ideas on what a woman's role is, and not only do we still have churches who tell women they should be subservant to their husbands, and must obey them, they even tell women that it is their place to remain with a man if he beats her, rapes her and abuses her. We have very large chuches withg thousands of people, including mega churches that teach these things here, so it is not just some small rural mindset but an idelogy that is being taught in numbers. This is how we wind up people electing people like Mike Pence and Steve King in the US, because enough people actually do believe the same as they do in large enouggh numbers to elect these people here.

I had the unfortunate experience of going on a date with a guy like that in high school, however it ended abruptly when I found out what he thought of women. He is a pastor now at a local Church here teaching everyone he can to behave just the same!

Satinavian:

trunkage:
I don't understand your argument. Since German forums don't talk about issues, its not an issue?

No.

The argument is the following :

There is no backlash against women etc. in prominent roles in media in Germany. But there seems to be such a backklash in the US.

Why is that ?

Are Americans that much more sexist/racist than Germans ? I find that unlikely. Or does the backlash in the US come not from people being actually sexist/racist but more from people caught up in this bipartisan shitflinging contest you have going on there that see diversity in media just as another issue where Rightwingers or Leftwingers can "win".

I know some Christians who think that women place is to stay at home to look after children. That they should be subservient. And they're also Millennials, so not old. Now that's not US but seeing places like Westboro, I could imagine its worse than here.

There is some overexaggeration. It's seems to be the way people in the US think they can win arguments. But not all. And here what's happening in Germany, I'm quite surprised you don't think there is much sexism etc.

Saelune:
...

Also uh, you cant remember any sort of controversy in Germany about minorities? You sure bout that?

Ouch, too soon man...

trunkage:
And here what's happening in Germany, I'm quite surprised you don't think there is much sexism etc.

Actually yes, i don't think there is much sexism in Germany. What are your reasons to think otherwise ?

Satinavian:

trunkage:
And here what's happening in Germany, I'm quite surprised you don't think there is much sexism etc.

Actually yes, i don't think there is much sexism in Germany. What are your reasons to think otherwise ?

I would guess it likely varies by region, like everywhere else. There are very liberal areas of the US, and then others you'd think you travelled back in time. From everything I have heard though Germany is nowhere near as bad as parts of the US.

Kerg3927:

Unfortunately, you're not going to get anywhere with this. Some people have apparently built the foundation of their entire world view upon the indisputable assumption that most men are sexist, most white people are racist, and most straight people are homophobic. In their eyes, it is a fundamental law of the universe and not up for debate. It's like trying to convince a religious zealot that his god doesn't exist.

I think it's very likely most, if not all, human beings are prejudiced to some extent. However, there's a large spectrum in there, and a lot of people have prejudices that are very weak and/or unintentional.

The problem is frequently more that calling people prejudiced is very stigmatising, so for people weakly or unintentionally prejudiced who slip up, it is liable to cause offence and elicit aggressive denial rather than encourage introspection. This is compounded by inappropriate accusations and backlash against even reasonable accusations, both of which are highly politicised.

Agema:

Kerg3927:

Unfortunately, you're not going to get anywhere with this. Some people have apparently built the foundation of their entire world view upon the indisputable assumption that most men are sexist, most white people are racist, and most straight people are homophobic. In their eyes, it is a fundamental law of the universe and not up for debate. It's like trying to convince a religious zealot that his god doesn't exist.

I think it's very likely most, if not all, human beings are prejudiced to some extent. However, there's a large spectrum in there, and a lot of people have prejudices that are very weak and/or unintentional.

The problem is frequently more that calling people prejudiced is very stigmatising, so for people weakly or unintentionally prejudiced who slip up, it is liable to cause offence and elicit aggressive denial rather than encourage introspection. This is compounded by inappropriate accusations and backlash against even reasonable accusations, both of which are highly politicised.

This is one of the best posts I've ever seen on here in a while and shows a broader understanding and wider perspective of human nature than I'm used to.

Also @Satinavian don't try to argue with Saelune. A person who once argued in favour of executing people who committed thought crimes.

Here Comes Tomorrow:

Agema:

Kerg3927:

Unfortunately, you're not going to get anywhere with this. Some people have apparently built the foundation of their entire world view upon the indisputable assumption that most men are sexist, most white people are racist, and most straight people are homophobic. In their eyes, it is a fundamental law of the universe and not up for debate. It's like trying to convince a religious zealot that his god doesn't exist.

I think it's very likely most, if not all, human beings are prejudiced to some extent. However, there's a large spectrum in there, and a lot of people have prejudices that are very weak and/or unintentional.

The problem is frequently more that calling people prejudiced is very stigmatising, so for people weakly or unintentionally prejudiced who slip up, it is liable to cause offence and elicit aggressive denial rather than encourage introspection. This is compounded by inappropriate accusations and backlash against even reasonable accusations, both of which are highly politicised.

This is one of the best posts I've ever seen on here in a while and shows a broader understanding and wider perspective of human nature than I'm used to.

Also @Satinavian don't try to argue with Saelune. A person who once argued in favour of executing people who committed thought crimes.

Ah the things I have to put up with around here. Don't forget to say the lie about how I 'think everyone I disagree with is a Nazi', or is that too obvious?

Take a look around you. If you can't look beyond someone's ideological beliefs or political positions to see the humanity within them, you need to do a little tending of your own humanity before passing judgment.

People are just... people. They're just normal folks with normal opinions and slightly prejudiced ideas about any group of people that isn't the one their familiar with. That's just how humans are programmed for their own self-preservation. We get a little nervous about unfamiliar things, we approach with caution, and if it doesn't stab us, burn us, infect us with plague, or otherwise harm us... well... honestly, we usually attempt to breed with it. Sometimes we don't even mind the plague part before the breeding bit. Humans aren't the wisest creatures ever born, despite what we keep telling ourselves.

And the truth is, up until extremist ideologies on the far right and far left BOTH started jumping on board with all the fearmongering and constant politicization of every topic, things were better than they have EVER BEEN. Real, tangible progress was being made. As long as we keep going in the direction we have been up 'til now, gently pushing forward new ideas and mindsets, things only stand to get better.

If we of the mainstream masses let ourselves to succumb to the fear being peddled by extremists and get dragged into their personal vendettas over what shade of prejudice and bigotry is acceptable, a century's worth of progress will be undone regardless of 'which side' comes out on top.

EDIT:

That's not to say that there's not some real 'gems' of monstrosity out there. The dark heart of human nature makes almost any of us capable of exceptional cruelty and horror when the right buttons are pressed. But it's important to remind ourselves that these are outliers, not the norm.

DoctorHeadcrabMD:
Take a look around you. If you can't look beyond someone's ideological beliefs or political positions to see the humanity within them, you need to do a little tending of your own humanity before passing judgment.

People are just... people. They're just normal folks with normal opinions and slightly prejudiced ideas about any group of people that isn't the one their familiar with. That's just how humans are programmed for their own self-preservation. We get a little nervous about unfamiliar things, we approach with caution, and if it doesn't stab us, burn us, infect us with plague, or otherwise harm us... well... honestly, we usually attempt to breed with it. Sometimes we don't even mind the plague part before the breeding bit. Humans aren't the wisest creatures ever born, despite what we keep telling ourselves.

And the truth is, up until extremist ideologies on the far right and far left BOTH started jumping on board with all the fearmongering and constant politicization of every topic, things were better than they have EVER BEEN. Real, tangible progress was being made. As long as we keep going in the direction we have been up 'til now, gently pushing forward new ideas and mindsets, things only stand to get better.

If we of the mainstream masses let ourselves to succumb to the fear being peddled by extremists and get dragged into their personal vendettas over what shade of prejudice and bigotry is acceptable, a century's worth of progress will be undone regardless of 'which side' comes out on top.

EDIT:

That's not to say that there's not some real 'gems' of monstrosity out there. The dark heart of human nature makes almost any of us capable of exceptional cruelty and horror when the right buttons are pressed. But it's important to remind ourselves that these are outliers, not the norm.

....What world do you live in? People are not just "people". You're grossly oversimplifying massive issues societies face across the globe. And all of that "real tangible progress" you're talking about was fought for. It was actively fought for over decades and people are still fighting for it. It wasn't "gentle" and to say that it was is sterilizing the living hell out of history. Progress didn't just magically happen. And to say that current struggles are nothing more than petty vendettas is insulting. The mindset that you're presenting is a very docile one, and one that's anathema to progress.

Silentpony:
I think it gets misapplied and many people don't know what 'social justice' really is. Like take the Battlefield 5 controversy. Its a historical game, aiming for gritty realism. And they added a bionic woman and a Japanese-British samurai to a combat squad.
If it was historical fantasy one could argue the 'inclusive' angle, but its not fantasy. Its straight historical, aiming for realistic.

Wait? When did the Battlefield series become historically accurate? Because the few entries I've seen have been all over the place on the realism scale. BF1 had every other dude packing a machine gun, even ones that didn't exist at the time, a single tank taking out an entire armored division after being shelled and stuck in the mud and losing half it's crew, and a artillery train that apparently uses GPS guided munitions to hone in on one fucking person in a battle. And I'm not even counting bits where a guy in armor plate toting a huge ass machine gun takes down half of an air force by himself.

BF5 may have been set during WW2 but last I checked vehicles couldn't just crash through houses willy nilly and V1's were not used to attack battlefields.

So spare me the "Gritty, Historical Accuracy" bit. A lady with a robot arm feels like it fits right into that particular crazy-train version of WW2.

Nedoras:

....What world do you live in? People are not just "people". You're grossly oversimplifying massive issues societies face across the globe. And all of that "real tangible progress" you're talking about was fought for. It was actively fought for over decades and people are still fighting for it. It wasn't "gentle" and to say that it was is sterilizing the living hell out of history. Progress didn't just magically happen. And to say that current struggles are nothing more than petty vendettas is insulting. The mindset that you're presenting is a very docile one, and one that's anathema to progress.

If you're done shadowboxing, I'll jump back in the ring now. First of all, it's a real bad look when you have to start your argument by dehumanizing people. Kinda makes you look like the bad guy. You might wanna rethink that strategy. Then again, you're clearly a great champion of the cause so I'm sure you know best and we should all just defer to your worldview or get out. I get a whole lot of the ol' "If we're not with you, we're against you" vibes from that 'anathema' comment.

Me, I live in a world where the fighting is done peacefully until it cannot be. Where we fight ideas, not people. Where the goal is a nation of people free to share their ideas and cultures and beliefs without fear of oppression or reprisal. I raged against segregation. I stood up and spoke out for civil rights for all, regardless of race, sexual orientation, religious denomination, or ideology. I railed against the political imprisonment of journalists in foreign nations, opposed letting nations that suppress the rights of women serve as arbiters of human rights law, and I continue to champion these causes in spite of the fact that a lot of the legwork has already been done because the work is NEVER done. It's never going to be. There will always be ignorance and darkness in the world, and it would be insane to just turn a blind eye and ignore it.

That doesn't mean we can't take a look around us and appreciate what we've accomplished thus far. The MAJORITY of all people in this country... a SIZABLE majority... oppose the broken judicial and prison systems. They oppose racism and classism and the growing socioeconomic divide. The vast majority of people in this country supported equal rights for all, regardless of ANY mitigating factor. The vast majority are opposed to discriminatory pay practices. The majority are ALREADY IN SUPPORT of most of the things people touting that 'progressive' label claim to be supporting. The only thing holding back this progress from taking full effect is an archaic legal system built to stymie and oppress revolutionary changes... and that system is about to face the dismal reality that it can't outlive the aging generations and their old ways of viewing the world. We're on the precipice of that moment right now, and oh man is it exciting!

And if somehow all that is anathema to progress, buddy, I don't want anything to do with whatever your definition of progress is. I'll remain content with my 'radical' notion that people just want to feel like their voices are being heard and their concerns are being addressed. The extreme bent that the best way to change the world is by winning hearts and minds.

DoctorHeadcrabMD:

Nedoras:

....What world do you live in? People are not just "people". You're grossly oversimplifying massive issues societies face across the globe. And all of that "real tangible progress" you're talking about was fought for. It was actively fought for over decades and people are still fighting for it. It wasn't "gentle" and to say that it was is sterilizing the living hell out of history. Progress didn't just magically happen. And to say that current struggles are nothing more than petty vendettas is insulting. The mindset that you're presenting is a very docile one, and one that's anathema to progress.

If you're done shadowboxing, I'll jump back in the ring now. First of all, it's a real bad look when you have to start your argument by dehumanizing people. Kinda makes you look like the bad guy. You might wanna rethink that strategy. Then again, you're clearly a great champion of the cause so I'm sure you know best and we should all just defer to your worldview or get out. I get a whole lot of the ol' "If we're not with you, we're against you" vibes from that 'anathema' comment.

Me, I live in a world where the fighting is done peacefully until it cannot be. Where we fight ideas, not people. Where the goal is a nation of people free to share their ideas and cultures and beliefs without fear of oppression or reprisal. I raged against segregation. I stood up and spoke out for civil rights for all, regardless of race, sexual orientation, religious denomination, or ideology. I railed against the political imprisonment of journalists in foreign nations, opposed letting nations that suppress the rights of women serve as arbiters of human rights law, and I continue to champion these causes in spite of the fact that a lot of the legwork has already been done because the work is NEVER done. It's never going to be. There will always be ignorance and darkness in the world, and it would be insane to just turn a blind eye and ignore it.

That doesn't mean we can't take a look around us and appreciate what we've accomplished thus far. The MAJORITY of all people in this country... a SIZABLE majority... oppose the broken judicial and prison systems. They oppose racism and classism and the growing socioeconomic divide. The vast majority of people in this country supported equal rights for all, regardless of ANY mitigating factor. The vast majority are opposed to discriminatory pay practices. The majority are ALREADY IN SUPPORT of most of the things people touting that 'progressive' label claim to be supporting. The only thing holding back this progress from taking full effect is an archaic legal system built to stymie and oppress revolutionary changes... and that system is about to face the dismal reality that it can't outlive the aging generations and their old ways of viewing the world. We're on the precipice of that moment right now, and oh man is it exciting!

And if somehow all that is anathema to progress, buddy, I don't want anything to do with whatever your definition of progress is. I'll remain content with my 'radical' notion that people just want to feel like their voices are being heard and their concerns are being addressed. The extreme bent that the best way to change the world is by winning hearts and minds.

I didn't dehumanize anyone. Saying that "people are just people" is just overly simplistic and dismissive. And I don't understand this response at all. Your original statement was lamenting that the "extremes" were having petty vendettas, fearmongering, and were going to tear down decades of progress. That it didn't matter who "won". But the way I see it, you pretty much are one of those "extremes". Civil rights for all was and kind of still is an extreme unfortunately. The people fighting for civil rights, against voter suppression, for universal healthcare, ending private prisons, fighting against anti-union nonsense and so on, that IS the extreme right now. The overton window has moved so far to the right in this country, that even the simplest, moderately left positions are considered radical. And yes, it is becoming more accepted, but it's still a hard fight against a decades long narrative manufactured by the right. There are still plenty of people convinced that it's all a fairy tale and can't happen.

I'm still baffled by this response. The anathema comment was because you were originally coming off as someone who thought social change just kind of happened. Someone who thinks that everyone just needs to shut up and stop fighting because it was disrupting the "norms". That change would come eventually, with compromise. So I'm pretty damn confused right now. Why even say extremes in the first place then? The "extreme" left has no traction anywhere at all. I don't see tankies and the like organizing rallies and having genuine movement in the political discourse. The "extreme" right on the other hand does. On the left, Democratic Socialism is what's been gaining traction lately, but that's not really extreme at all.

My version of progress is to get in the streets and make your voice heard. To stand in solidarity with people and fight for what's right. To get people to pay attention, and not in a violent way. Like supporting strikes and unions for example. I've gone to the hotel workers' and teachers' strikes in downtown Chicago to support them just a few months ago. There's another one going on right now and I plan on going down to support them too. My original point was that change was made when people went out and made it happen. That's what I think needs to be done. And it's never "gentle". Even peaceful protests asking for simple things are spun as being radical and uncivil. It's always actively fought against.

Whether it's getting someone into office or marching in the streets, it needs to be done. Otherwise people will continue to disconnect and just become content. The "if you're not with us, you're against us" is only true for those actively trying to suppress that, who have always tried to suppress that. Those who are apathetic, those who have given up, those who simply don't give it much mind, those people aren't enemies. Those are the people whose attention that we need to get and have been trying to get. Because yeah, there's plenty of things that are popular with the American people right now. It's just that even if they say they want it, it doesn't mean they think it's a possibility, or even feasible. It's just a nice thought, because for decades they've been told it's just a nice thought. But it's not, it can be real, and in some cases it was real before being taken away. They just need to be convinced. Even if they're dismissive, even if they keep thinking nothing will come of it, we'll keep trying until they do.

Dalisclock:

Silentpony:
I think it gets misapplied and many people don't know what 'social justice' really is. Like take the Battlefield 5 controversy. Its a historical game, aiming for gritty realism. And they added a bionic woman and a Japanese-British samurai to a combat squad.
If it was historical fantasy one could argue the 'inclusive' angle, but its not fantasy. Its straight historical, aiming for realistic.

Wait? When did the Battlefield series become historically accurate? Because the few entries I've seen have been all over the place on the realism scale. BF1 had every other dude packing a machine gun, even ones that didn't exist at the time, a single tank taking out an entire armored division after being shelled and stuck in the mud and losing half it's crew, and a artillery train that apparently uses GPS guided munitions to hone in on one fucking person in a battle. And I'm not even counting bits where a guy in armor plate toting a huge ass machine gun takes down half of an air force by himself.

BF5 may have been set during WW2 but last I checked vehicles couldn't just crash through houses willy nilly and V1's were not used to attack battlefields.

So spare me the "Gritty, Historical Accuracy" bit. A lady with a robot arm feels like it fits right into that particular crazy-train version of WW2.

It became a realistic game when it was marketed as one. That's the problem. When people objected to a woman and Samurai fighting for Great Britain, the response was they didn't know history. The implication being that yes, samurai and crippled women did fight for the British army. That as far as EA is concerned, their game is an accurate representation of WW and the battles fought therein. and they marketed it as one. Regardless if you believe it to be gritty and realistic, EA thinks it is and uses that as a selling point.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here