Jump to content

  

60 members have voted

  1. 1. Would you want a bigoted setting?

    • Yes
      48
    • No
      12


Recommended Posts

Posted

I am now, since you said so. Please explain: what part of what I'm saying constitutes a microaggression?

 

Everything.

If one side can play with words and definitions, so can the other.

 

 

 

 

Are you aware that if ANY action has impact then such double-standards alos have a negative impact, despite your protests that it's all i nthe name of justice and fairness. This apologist, ass-kissing behavior might actually do more harm than good.

Yes, I am aware of that possibility. I'm also aware of the possibility that it might help. Look, you guys were whining about your "white knights" for a quite a while here before anyone spoke up. You clearly don't enjoy that being challenged much. That's a form of privilege too.

 

Challenged? No. Annoyed more like it.

Privilige? Not really.

 

 

 

D) Why wouldn't I want to tell jokes about them? I make fun of everyone and everything else (myself  and God included), so why the heck should they be exempt like some sacred cow?

Uh... I dunno. Most people don't actually enjoy going out of their way to hurt people's feelings, as a general rule. Personally, I consider people who derive enjoyment out of doing that bullies, and I don't care much for them. How about you?

 

Telling jokes is "going out of ones way" now? It is done deliberately to hurt people?

Ok..is there anything related to minorities that isn't "going out of ones way"?

 

Mind you, I am a member of a specific minority group. I run into misconception and prejudice and ignorance all the time. Yes it's damn annoying. Yes I sometimes want to slap people. No, my group doesn't get any kind of protection from anyone.

And I often laugh at jokes aimed at my group because frak it - relax and enjoy the little things in life.

No, I don't want to institute thought police or pressure or guilt-trip people to change their minds - as enticing as it may sound.

 

You can't get rid of peoples prejudices easily...sometimes not at all. That is something that can only be done trough time and exposure. Trying to force change only generates resistance. Being hypocritical about it only makes matters worse.

* YOU ARE A WRONGULARITY FROM WHICH NO RIGHT CAN ESCAPE! *

Chuck Norris was wrong once - He thought HE made a mistake!

 

Posted

Im not sure but i think that everything will have some kind of soul but propably (for example animals) will have something like lesser lesser souls .. but im almost 100% that enemys like lich, banshees, demons, etc will also have soul and even propably bigger stronger then normal humans, the soul system in eternity and whole (bigger, smaller) souls are propably to some kind of justyfication that some people have power to kill dragons and others not.

 

Secondly the soul system is relevant to magic users, so if we encounter a monster that will have magic he will propably also have soul .. at least thats what i think is logical ...

Posted

 

 

I'm awestruck by this extremely well-thought-out, intelligently argued answer. Not to mention your (usual) impeccable spelling.

 

 

OH excuseeeee me princes-..  I mean, Glorious Master of Mankind.

 

Not all of us mortals are blessed with english being their native language or the power to remain fully focused and concetrated when typing 24/7, regardless what they are doing.

Truly my spelling mistake is a crime without equal and I must flog myself to death in shame. If only I could come up with such masterfull, well-thought out responses like attacking someone elses spelling!

Truly  the highest point of internet debating that will never be surpassed.

 

And linking random internet articles! A master-stroke. It's not like the internet is full of all kinds of articles and counter-articles on all manenrs of sensitive issues (like global warming). Surely if I were to link an internet article on global warming, I would definatley prove my point to everyone beyond a shadow of doubt.

 

 

 

Good-good-let-the-butthurt-flow-through-

 

I riddle you this: if it acts like a retard, argues like a retard and, in addition to the above, spells like a retard, what might that be?

 

I linked you to peer reviewed articles published in respected journals such as The Yale Law Journal (ranked by citations as second, out of more than 900 journals on its field) or the Harvard Educational Review (ranked by impact over 29 years as sixth). But fear not! Your Mighty Butthurt can easily overcome such insignificant things as the scientific method, or impact factors, or any of this uncomfortable, messy, nerdy research stuff. Which you seem to avoid at all costs, not linking even to one article supporting your argument, but screaming loudly about how they must exist.

"Lulz is not the highest aspiration of art and mankind, no matter what the Encyclopedia Dramatica says."

 

Posted

Telling jokes is "going out of ones way" now? It is done deliberately to hurt people?

Ok..is there anything related to minorities that isn't "going out of ones way"?

Doing something offensive because you didn't know better happens all the time. If someone points it out to you, you feel bad for a little, you aplogize, you try not to do it again, and you move on. At least that's the way most decent people function.

 

Doing something offensive when you know it's offensive is, IMO, just a **** move, unless there is just cause. (Yeah, sometimes there is.)

 

Telling racist or sexist jokes about minorities is such a **** move. I'm sure there would be some circumstance where this rule doens't hold, but as a general guideline it's pretty solid.

 

This isn't that complicated, really. All I'm saying is that it's a **** move to knowingly do stuff that makes people uncomfortable (without due cause). Acting in ways that tells members of minority groups that they're lower-status makes them uncomfortable. Ergo, it's a **** move and you shouldn't do it. That's really it.

 

Personally I don't bring up a minority member's minority status at all unless they do it first, and then I do my best to listen to what they have to say rather than trying to talk about it.

 

Mind you, I am a member of a specific minority group. I run into misconception and prejudice and ignorance all the time. Yes it's damn annoying. Yes I sometimes want to slap people. No, my group doesn't get any kind of protection from anyone.

And I often laugh at jokes aimed at my group because frak it - relax and enjoy the little things in life.

No, I don't want to institute thought police or pressure or guilt-trip people to change their minds - as enticing as it may sound.

Being a member of an oppressed minority doesn't give you license to be a **** to other minorities. Regrettably it's a very human thing to do. If you're picked on, you find someone weaker than you to pick on in your turn, which makes you feel better. This happens all the time and is behind a lot of the nastiness that goes on in human society. Being, say, black doesn't give you license to pick on, say, gays.

 

I think it's a better approach all in all to flip that right around. Instead of going "I have to put up with this **** so they should too," go "I don't enjoy putting up with this ****, so I shouldn't pour the same **** on them."

You can't get rid of peoples prejudices easily...sometimes not at all. That is something that can only be done trough time and exposure. Trying to force change only generates resistance. Being hypocritical about it only makes matters worse.

Exposure is exactly what I'm attempting here. I'm simply expresing my disapproval of what I consider dickish attitudes, in the hopes that it will shift the social climate so that such dickish attitudes become less socially acceptable. It would be groovy if you saw the error of your ways but, as you say, that's unlikely to happen overnight. However, I think it's conceivable that this little discussion has left a little mark somewhere, with you or with someone else, so at just mmmaybe they'll feel a teeny bit less comfortable the next time they want to crack a real funny nignog joke.

 

Also, prejudices. You can't ever get rid of them. That's just how our minds function. You can, however, watch those prejudices -- make room for the possibility that they don't reflect reality, and make an effort not to act reflexively on them.

  • Like 2

I have a project. It's a tabletop RPG. It's free. It's a work in progress. Find it here: www.brikoleur.com

Posted

I riddle you this: if it acts like a retard, argues like a retard and, in addition to the above, spells like a retard, what might that be?

 

You? :dancing:

* YOU ARE A WRONGULARITY FROM WHICH NO RIGHT CAN ESCAPE! *

Chuck Norris was wrong once - He thought HE made a mistake!

 

Posted

 

I riddle you this: if it acts like a retard, argues like a retard and, in addition to the above, spells like a retard, what might that be?

 

You? :dancing:

 

 

Your wit is truly comparable to a most remarkably gifted five-year-old child. Congratulations.

"Lulz is not the highest aspiration of art and mankind, no matter what the Encyclopedia Dramatica says."

 

Posted (edited)
Doing something offensive because you didn't know better happens all the time. If someone points it out to you, you feel bad for a little, you aplogize, you try not to do it again, and you move on. At least that's the way most decent people function.

 

Doing something offensive when you know it's offensive is, IMO, just a **** move, unless there is just cause. (Yeah, sometimes there is.)

 

Telling racist or sexist jokes about minorities is such a **** move. I'm sure there would be some circumstance where this rule doens't hold, but as a general guideline it's pretty solid.

 

 

 

I will feel bad only if *I* feel there is reason for me to feel bad.

Jokes are jokes. The whole point of it is that they are making fun of someone or something. Are all blondes in he world insulted when someone tells a blonde joke? No?

 

 

 

This isn't that complicated, really. All I'm saying is that it's a **** move to knowingly do stuff that makes people uncomfortable

Acting in ways that tells members of minority groups that they're lower-status makes them uncomfortable. Ergo, it's a **** move and you shouldn't do it. That's really it.

 

No, it's a **** move to do it for the sole purpose of being a d*** and "hurting" others.

 

A persons life should not fall to walking on eggshells around easily offended poeple. It's so easy to make people uncomfortable.

And often times you really can't avoid hurting someone. - especially with conflict of oppinion.

 

A joke is NOT telling them they are of lower status.

Perceptions.

 

 

 

 

Exposure is exactly what I'm attempting here. I'm simply expresing my disapproval of what I consider dickish attitudes, in the hopes that it will shift the social climate so that such dickish attitudes become less socially acceptable. It would be groovy if you saw the error of your ways but, as you say, that's unlikely to happen overnight. However, I think it's conceivable that this little discussion has left a little mark somewhere, with you or with someone else, so at just mmmaybe they'll feel a teeny bit less comfortable the next time they want to crack a real funny nignog joke.

 

 

 

Interestingly enough I consider such apologetic, special snowflake behavior as inherently harmfull and logicly wrong, and I hope to shift social climate too.

So don't cross your fingers on me seeing the "error of my ways" as that would require my ways to be in error to begin with. Which they are not.

 

I'm gonna treat everyone the same. Period.

Edited by TrashMan

* YOU ARE A WRONGULARITY FROM WHICH NO RIGHT CAN ESCAPE! *

Chuck Norris was wrong once - He thought HE made a mistake!

 

Posted

 

 

I riddle you this: if it acts like a retard, argues like a retard and, in addition to the above, spells like a retard, what might that be?

 

You? :dancing:

 

 

Your wit is truly comparable to a most remarkably gifted five-year-old child. Congratulations.

 

 

While thank you.

Coming from an aomeba, that's a nice compliment.

 

So tell me - you done with the tounge fencing? Or do you want to throw more not-so-veiled insults at me? Because if you have even a fraction of the intellect you claim to have, you know where insults lead on forums...

Just in case you don't know it - thread lockage.

 

So maaaaabye - just maybe - you should consider toning down your rethoric.

Or more preferable, if my posts offend you that much, there's an ignore option. Lords knows I will take it if this continues.

* YOU ARE A WRONGULARITY FROM WHICH NO RIGHT CAN ESCAPE! *

Chuck Norris was wrong once - He thought HE made a mistake!

 

Posted (edited)

 

 

 

While Why thank you.

Coming from an aomeba amoeba, that's a nice compliment.

 

So tell me - you done with the tounge tongue fencing? Or do you want to throw more not-so-veiled insults at me? Because if you have even a fraction of the intellect you claim to have, you know where insults lead on forums...

Just in case you don't know it - thread lockage.

 

So maaaaabye maybe - just maybe - you should consider toning down your rethoric. rhetoric

Or more preferable, if my posts offend you that much, there's an ignore option. Lords knows I will take it if this continues.

 

 

 

I'm not insulting you, I'm stating sad facts: for the spelling, you need to look no further than the paragraphs above. Regarding wits: "no, you're the stupid-head" is an argument most people above the age of ten generally don't use.

 

Your ignorance does not offend me. Your imperviousness to facts and unwillingness to do basic research I find mildly distasteful, but not upsetting.

 

If you're still incapable of providing an argument rooted in facts and research, and no longer have a desire to engage in - to use your charming expression - tongue fencing in a manner most reminiscent to what can be witnessed in kindergarten, I am perfectly willing to consider this exchange over.

Edited by aluminiumtrioxid

"Lulz is not the highest aspiration of art and mankind, no matter what the Encyclopedia Dramatica says."

 

Posted

Jokes are fine, but it all depends on the audience.  You don't go in front of a gay community and make gay jokes, then say "relax guys, it's just a joke!"  You might not realize it, but something you consider a joke is not a joke to other people.  Sure, I make racist jokes a lot, but only with my friends, who also make jokes like that and know that they are only jokes.  I never make jokes like that outside of that group of friends, because people are easily offended.  I don't feel like I'm "walking on eggshells my whole life".  Is it really that vital to your life that you make jokes like that in front of people who would be offended by them? 

 

All I'm saying is that just because you think one way, it doesn't mean that everyone else does too.  You might know what your purpose is for telling a joke, but other people can't read your mind, and therefore don't know what your intention is.  Sure, some people may understand it's a joke, but some people might not.  They might think you are pretending it's a joke, just so that you can say something bad about them without getting in trouble.  Is it worth getting in a nice joke at the expense of someone's feelings?

Posted

Trashman and Aluminiumtrioxid, could you both stop your childish attacks on eachother and get back to actually arguing your points. Trashman, I'm no native speaker either, but I have a great ally, it's the Firefox English dictionary plug-in, turn it on in any field you can type text in, and voilá.

 

I do think you guys demonstrate well that you do not need cultural bias, racism, sexism, or bigotry to have conflict and be **** to another.

Remember: Argue the point, not the person. Remain polite and constructive. Friendly forums have friendly debate. There's no shame in being wrong. If you don't have something to add, don't post for the sake of it. And don't be afraid to post thoughts you are uncertain about, that's what discussion is for.
---
Pet threads, everyone has them. I love imagining Gods, Monsters, Factions and Weapons.

Posted (edited)

I'm not insulting you, I'm stating sad facts: for the spelling, you need to look no further than the paragraphs above. Regarding wits: "no, you're the stupid-head" is an argument most people above the age of ten generally don't use.

 

Your ignorance does not offend me. Your imperviousness to facts and unwillingness to do basic research I find mildly distasteful, but not upsetting.

 

If you're still incapable of providing an argument rooted in facts and research, and no longer have a desire to engage in - to use your charming expression - tongue fencing in a manner most reminiscent to what can be witnessed in kindergarten, I am perfectly willing to consider this exchange over.

 

You wouldn't know a fact if it ran over you in a Death star.

Just like you missed that the long maaaaybe is not a typo - it's deliberate to show sarcasm in how it is said.

 

And for the record, "No, you are the stupid-head" implies the first poster called the second one a stupid-head. And stupid-head is ALSO an argument that most people above age of ten don't use, so I hope that foot of your tastes good.

 

 

So feel free to think of me as an ignorant who refuses to acknowledge facts. I will do the same in regards to you and we can both go on our merry way, being insufferable d*** in eachoters eyes.

Edited by TrashMan

* YOU ARE A WRONGULARITY FROM WHICH NO RIGHT CAN ESCAPE! *

Chuck Norris was wrong once - He thought HE made a mistake!

 

Posted (edited)

Trashman and Aluminiumtrioxid, could you both stop your childish attacks on eachother and get back to actually arguing your points. Trashman, I'm no native speaker either, but I have a great ally, it's the Firefox English dictionary plug-in, turn it on in any field you can type text in, and voilá.

 

I do think you guys demonstrate well that you do not need cultural bias, racism, sexism, or bigotry to have conflict and be **** to another.

 

have argued my point. I provided Trashman with articles about how institutional racism exists in judicial practice, the health care system (especially in regard to mental health care), the education system etc. I took care to point out that said articles were published in some of the most respected journals of their respective fields, and were subjected to peer review. His extremely elaborate and scientifically grounded response was: "bull****". When I pointed out that this constitutes as a definite lack of an argument, he started to derail the conversation about my (arguably uncalled for) side comment regarding his spelling. After this, he continued to ignore every single one of my attempts to get the conversation back from the realm of name-calling into arguments, and flinged increasingly more childish insults at my general direction.

I think I'm not the unreasonable one here.

 

And, back to the topic, this kind of summarizes my stance on this matter. We can have more than enough conflict without alienating any part of the audience. You can have a good story without bigotry, racism or sexism. There is nothing to be lost by not including these themes in the game. So, if it costs us nothing, why not make it more enjoyable to people who get enough crap in real life to be extremely annoyed if they see the same **** in their entertainment, too?

 

 

Just like you missed that the long maaaaybe is not a typo - it's deliberate to show sarcasm in how it is said.

 

stupid-head is ALSO an argument that most people above age of ten don't use

 

 

So feel free to think of me as an ignorant who refuses to acknowledge facts. I will do the same in regards to you and we can both go on our merry way, being insufferable d*** in eachoters eyes.

 

 

Which doesn't change the fact that "maybye" is not a word in the english language.

 

And I, being the responsible adult I am (imagine ironic tone), didn't use it. I might have implied something about your mental age and intellectual faculties, but, let's face it, you've given me ample reason to do so.

 

You're not an insufferable **** in my eyes. Just misguided and not very bright.

Edited by aluminiumtrioxid

"Lulz is not the highest aspiration of art and mankind, no matter what the Encyclopedia Dramatica says."

 

Posted

And, back to the topic, this kind of summarizes my stance on this matter. We can have more than enough conflict without alienating any part of the audience. You can have a good story without bigotry, racism or sexism. There is nothing to be lost by not including these themes in the game. So, if it costs us nothing, why not make it more enjoyable to people who get enough crap in real life to be extremely annoyed if they see the same **** in their entertainment, too?

 

What about drug usage? Won't someone who has faced that problem in real life find it disturbing? How about rape? Slavery? Hunger?Child killing? If someone is close to child killing incidents in US may have negative emotions about this.

 

I disagree partly with your stance because if a creator sit and think what someone out there can find disturbing,, he will run out of options very fast. Mature themes based on real life from their nature can rub some people the wrong way. For me the creators should be free to put everything they want in their work. If their creative vision doesn't include sexism for example because in their setting it doesn't make sense to have it, then good. The highlighed part is the key. If their artistic vision is of a bleak world where nothing good happens and racism,sexism and whateverism are the norms, they should go for it.

 

If someone is so offended and realy can't stand something, nobody forces him to play the game. I don't think someone should put something offensive in the game just for shock value or by trying to be edgy and dark, but he shouldn't be afraid to put something either.

  • Like 1
Posted

I will feel bad only if *I* feel there is reason for me to feel bad.

Then you're a highly unusual person. Most humans don't have that kind of control over their emotions.

 

Jokes are jokes. The whole point of it is that they are making fun of someone or something. Are all blondes in he world insulted when someone tells a blonde joke? No?

Have you considered asking a few blondes how they feel around a group of guys telling each other blonde jokes?

 

No, it's a **** move to do it for the sole purpose of being a d*** and "hurting" others.

I disagree. If you know something is likely to offend and you do it regardless, then that's still a **** move -- even if your primary purpose wasn't to cause offense. Unless, of course, your reasons for making that move are more important than the offense being caused. In my opinion, getting a laugh isn't good enough reason to cause offense.

 

A persons life should not fall to walking on eggshells around easily offended poeple. It's so easy to make people uncomfortable.

And often times you really can't avoid hurting someone. - especially with conflict of oppinion.

That is quite true. If you get too afraid of hurting someone's feelings, then you get afraid of expressing yourself, and that's not good too. You have to strike a balance somewhere.

 

A joke is NOT telling them they are of lower status.

Perceptions.

I disagree. The effect of microaggressions -- such as offensive jokes told "in good fun" has been studied a quite a bit. They actually do more psychological damage over time than overt aggressions. The reason is that it's socially costly to react to them. Just swallowing those little insults day after day wears down your self-esteem. Then you build defenses, such as taking it out on some other group. That's depressing and totally unnecessary.

  

Interestingly enough I consider such apologetic, special snowflake behavior as inherently harmfull and logicly wrong, and I hope to shift social climate too.

Wel-l-l... you're not so much attempting to shift the social climate as maintain it. There's been a huge shift already. A few years ago, this kind of discussion we're having would've been inconceivable in gamer/geek/atheist/F/OSS circles; all of these groups are now grappling big-time with these issues. I don't see any sign of this shift slowing down or reversing.

 

So don't cross your fingers on me seeing the "error of my ways" as that would require my ways to be in error to begin with. Which they are not.

 

I'm gonna treat everyone the same. Period.

Heh, well, I wasn't exactly expecting you to go "Wow, PJ -- you know, I think you're right. I see the evil of my ways now and will start doing my best to feel everyone welcome in the social space I inhabit, instead of maintaining hostile environments like I've been doing until now."

 

So you do your thing, and I'll continue to do my thing, i.e., to be the occasional party-pooper when someone acts all offensively. If you want to call me names because of that, go right on ahead -- being straight, white, male, rich, first-world etc. I have very little of that sort of thing to deal with and might as well use that capacity for something constructive.

 

(Also, as a PS -- I hope this discussion won't stop us from talking games in a friendly manner, despite our disagreement on this topic.)

  • Like 1

I have a project. It's a tabletop RPG. It's free. It's a work in progress. Find it here: www.brikoleur.com

Posted

The need for every game to feature racism, sexism and bigotry after the Witcher did it (and did it only partly successfully) is becoming tiresome.

 

It doesn't add anything by itself to an imaginary world, a world that should not have to (hopefully?) conform to the political topics of 21st century United States (and other countries obviously).

 

If you need the disgusting aspects of your reality just look outside the window.

  • Like 1

И погибе Српски кнез Лазаре,
И његова сва изгибе војска, 
Седамдесет и седам иљада;
Све је свето и честито било
И миломе Богу приступачно.

 

Posted

Trashman and Aluminiumtrioxid, could you both stop your childish attacks on eachother and get back to actually arguing your points. Trashman, I'm no native speaker either, but I have a great ally, it's the Firefox English dictionary plug-in, turn it on in any field you can type text in, and voilá.

 

I do think you guys demonstrate well that you do not need cultural bias, racism, sexism, or bigotry to have conflict and be **** to another.

It works only in French for me :getlost:.

 

One interesting topic Obsidian could study one day is political correctness by the way. Where you go pretty far to be sure you won't annoy any minority or community, even if it's pretty much obvious there is a problem with them.

I'll need to be politically incorrect to explain myself here. Let's take gypsies for example. Here in Europe, nobody like them for various reasons. Whenever they go, they tend to steal everything they can, dirty the places where they settle, beg whenever they are naive people with money. Nobody want them near their homes and everyone are going to protest loudly to be sure the mayor/governor don't allow them around.

A lot of correct people think these men and women who don't like gypsies are racist or [insert any reference to WWII here]. "They should actually try to understand them". "The poverty they live in explains a lot". "If they feel rejected, they won't try to integrate themselves", even if it's actually their part of the job. Etc.

To fight against the problem, to, well, integrate them, lots of efforts were made by a lot of european countries: building homes, providing them goods and free education, that sort of things.

That's the correct way to go, right?

 

But it turned out it didn't work. Copper and other valuable metals were stolen inside those houses that weren't maintained by their new inhabitants who left them to rot until they became unsanitary. Then they came back to a life of thievery in a heartbeat. It's only one example but it's pretty much self-explanatory.

And now, you see more and more politicians, who are quick to stand against racism, actually acting actively against gypsies, destroying their caravans and chasing them instead of providing them welfare and services. And that's what the people want, no matter their skin color. Gypsies are seen as criminogenic. No matter how progressive you are, you can't prove the facts wrong. Even NGOs are becoming more and more silent on the matter. Gypsies are just that bad.

 

Sometimes, racism is understandable and that's what I want to see in a Obs game. Where something that is supposed to be fundamentally wrong is actually justified.

 

I realize I'm not going to make a lot of friends with that message but that's something I wanted to say, and I won't let political correctness stop me. Freedom of speech, hey.

Posted

You're not going to find much support around here, I reckon.

 

Gypsy situation in Europe is a pretty complex subject, sadly many people don't think about it much and simply stick to: "well, they're just this way, they've always been like that, they always will be.". It's a clash of very different cultures. Their culture is that of nomadic people who were forced to settle down, live among people with very different values. So they adapted. In gypsy culture stealing and fraud are the easiest and therefore the proper way of life, living off of welfare the stupid gadzo give them too. Those who work for a living are mocked, beaten and outlawed in the worst cases.

Integration is the desirable solution (imo the only one that works), but it's difficult, because the vast majority doesn't want to be integrated.

 

It's a pretty vicious cycle of racism on both sides, European Union only pouring fuel into the fire by weighing in on the "discussion" with ignorant statements and "evaluations of the situation".

 

As someone mentioned, racism and other types of prejudice are born out of experience. Sometimes it's experience we actually had, other times it's "what everyone knows". Racism against gypsies is deeply rooted in bitter experience, sure.

 

But to simply bundle up a whole ethnic group of people  (technically they're "white", so not a real "race" problem) in a bag labeled "BAD" is not justified at all.

  • Like 1

======================================
http://janpospisil.daportfolio.com/ - my portfolio
http://janpospisil.blogspot.cz/ - my blog

Posted (edited)

I can only agree with your statement on the European Union, made by technocratic people who never saw a gypsy in their lives and believe there is one true method to make them regular citizens of the State, not taking into account their history, their way of living, their mentality, their culture and how others react to them.

Several years ago, a confidential mail about a repatriation programme was published, with French officials, including the Ministry of Interior, talking about the gypsy problem. Then, a Luxemburg woman named Viviane Reding, the European Commissioner for Justice, Fundamental Rights and Citizenship said it was a disgrace, something nazis would actually tell and do, and France should do official excuses to the gypsy community. Well, nobody was quick to defend her and the French people actually backed up the Ministry. You should have seen the forums at this time.

If you're interested, check this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Roma_repatriation

 

The bundling is just to resume. I do realize you can't explain a problem in such a simplistic way. Still, there are reasons behind this label. No matter how you chalk this up, at the end, when you hear people around, their feelings can be resumed in one or two words.

Edited by Auxilius
Posted

 

And, back to the topic, this kind of summarizes my stance on this matter. We can have more than enough conflict without alienating any part of the audience. You can have a good story without bigotry, racism or sexism. There is nothing to be lost by not including these themes in the game. So, if it costs us nothing, why not make it more enjoyable to people who get enough crap in real life to be extremely annoyed if they see the same **** in their entertainment, too?

 

What about drug usage? Won't someone who has faced that problem in real life find it disturbing? How about rape? Slavery? Hunger?Child killing? If someone is close to child killing incidents in US may have negative emotions about this.

 

I disagree partly with your stance because if a creator sit and think what someone out there can find disturbing,, he will run out of options very fast. Mature themes based on real life from their nature can rub some people the wrong way. For me the creators should be free to put everything they want in their work. If their creative vision doesn't include sexism for example because in their setting it doesn't make sense to have it, then good. The highlighed part is the key. If their artistic vision is of a bleak world where nothing good happens and racism,sexism and whateverism are the norms, they should go for it.

 

There seems to be a misunderstanding. I don't endorse a "politically correct" (for a lack of better term) stance purely on ethical grounds. I don't really care if a statistically irrelevant (on general principle, <5%) minority of the potential buyers finds the game offensive - so I think hunger or drug use are almost certainly fine, slavery and child killing are probably okay. On the other hand, rape and racial issues should only be used with a good reason, because I'd prefer if there was no backlash of any kind, which could adversely affect sales. P:E is already a niche product. (Although, one could argue that this niche has not much overlap with those who would get offended by these themes, so they could be included anyway; a sentiment I can get behind, but keep in mind that those customers will also not boycott the product if it lacks the aforementioned themes - so why put them in?)

 

I couldn't agree more. If the developers feel that their artistic vision would be compromised by a lack of racism, bigotry and rape, they should include these themes. But there can be a million (logical!) ways to have a setting without these, and grimdark is already getting tired.

  • Like 1

"Lulz is not the highest aspiration of art and mankind, no matter what the Encyclopedia Dramatica says."

 

Posted

You're not going to find much support around here, I reckon.

 

Gypsy situation in Europe is a pretty complex subject, sadly many people don't think about it much and simply stick to: "well, they're just this way, they've always been like that, they always will be.". It's a clash of very different cultures. Their culture is that of nomadic people who were forced to settle down, live among people with very different values. So they adapted. In gypsy culture stealing and fraud are the easiest and therefore the proper way of life, living off of welfare the stupid gadzo give them too. Those who work for a living are mocked, beaten and outlawed in the worst cases.

Integration is the desirable solution (imo the only one that works), but it's difficult, because the vast majority doesn't want to be integrated.

 

It's a pretty vicious cycle of racism on both sides, European Union only pouring fuel into the fire by weighing in on the "discussion" with ignorant statements and "evaluations of the situation".

 

As someone mentioned, racism and other types of prejudice are born out of experience. Sometimes it's experience we actually had, other times it's "what everyone knows". Racism against gypsies is deeply rooted in bitter experience, sure.

 

But to simply bundle up a whole ethnic group of people  (technically they're "white", so not a real "race" problem) in a bag labeled "BAD" is not justified at all.

 

Well, we know how the Czech Republic went about this problem.

И погибе Српски кнез Лазаре,
И његова сва изгибе војска, 
Седамдесет и седам иљада;
Све је свето и честито било
И миломе Богу приступачно.

 

Posted

I'll need to be politically incorrect to explain myself here. Let's take gypsies for example.

(...)

Gypsies are just that bad.

 

Sometimes, racism is understandable and that's what I want to see in a Obs game. Where something that is supposed to be fundamentally wrong is actually justified.

 

 

 

I think it's important to point out that the gypsy problem isn't a racial, but a sociological one.

Also, you can't expect hundreds of years of tradition to just go away overnight. The "toss them free money" idea didn't work, and, in hindsight, it was a pretty retarded one. It doesn't mean that there are no other possible solutions short of "chase them away and let others deal with them".

And it most certainly doesn't make racism against gypsies justified.

"Lulz is not the highest aspiration of art and mankind, no matter what the Encyclopedia Dramatica says."

 

Posted

Yup, the Roma issue in Europe is a textbook example of structural, institutionalized racism. It goes deep and has roots that are centuries old. It will take a long time and a lot of determined effort to change that. It's not that long ago that Roma were hanged if caught inside city limits in many European cities.

 

I've no doubt many Roma are themselves pretty cynical about any such attempts, and act accordingly. That won't change quickly either. In the meantime, yeah, it is going to be a problem.

 

But in my opinion it's unreasonable to ask the Roma to behave like good little law-abiding citizens as long as these structures are in place. Dismantling them will take effort from all sides, but the ones with more power -- i.e., the majority -- bear commensurately more responsibility.

I have a project. It's a tabletop RPG. It's free. It's a work in progress. Find it here: www.brikoleur.com

Posted

 

I'll need to be politically incorrect to explain myself here. Let's take gypsies for example.

(...)

Gypsies are just that bad.

 

Sometimes, racism is understandable and that's what I want to see in a Obs game. Where something that is supposed to be fundamentally wrong is actually justified.

 

 

 

I think it's important to point out that the gypsy problem isn't a racial, but a sociological one.

 

Agreed. I was starting to explain myself but this one word did it for me. But while people are uncomfortable with the gypsy way of living, the only way we have to categorize their reactions is to call racist or not. It proves in a good way the problem. You can disagree about how people live but if you do so, you're sure to get yourself an etiquette that don't represent what you truly think and what is the real problem.

It's something you see in "progressive" thinking nowadays, where everyone conservative or even doubtful when it comes to other communities is suddenly a fascist.

 

...

 

I think I tackled this the wrong way, now that I have the possibility to debate. The political correctness actually prevents problems to be debated correctly. Because people are so afraid to speak up their minds and fears, they have to resort to extremism to find someone willing to listen to them. And extremist people are quick to use them for their own ends. How many times I've seen fed up people called fascists when they were just afraid?

It's very interesting. Sadly, that's a subject I can't really talk about in English, since it would require a better vocabulary and elocution.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...