| | | | | You are not authorized to post a reply. |
| | Author | Messages | |
The Defenestrator
AesophDarkfable
Warlord
5628 Posts
    
 | | 04/19/2006 1:06 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Bijan Ajamlou
I think that Dungeon and dragons already is to political correct, more realism would make the women fell less "specialy threted" as it is now D&D shuffels the middele ages women oppration under the carpet. If there is a rollplay in a sertain age then there should be rollplay and women have to act as they are oppreses all the time and that is actually not that hard since they most often could relate to it since they are oppresed in real life! We often comment in our play group whit "wommen know your place!" and we dont lett them join in important towns councills and they get -2str and +2con(all the hard labour they make to make the life of men more comfortable). Women in our playing group that don´t play shy or oppressed risk being shunned down and hunted in the same way wizards are so it is most often fitting to play caster or priest for a women. And women whit high cha risk being raped or could enter concubin like prestigclasses (we use classes from book of vile darkness since they are fitting)...[:o)]
I pray that clown face means its a joke. Otherwise thank you for proving the point. | |
Im out- find me on Hordelings if you want to chat. | |
| The Defenestrator
AesophDarkfable
Warlord
5628 Posts
| | 04/19/2006 1:22 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by IanB
The big problem with your stance, as I see it, is that the existence of the rich/poor problem does not preclude the existence of the white/nonwhite problem or the male/female problem.
I don't understand why you think that these can't exist side by side.
Bingo! Thats the big thing they exist side by side, and in alot of ways they help each other along.
Here is an example going back to an earlier discussion: you had issue with my term rape culture. Well this was stated by Michael Savage a radio host with a million listners daily:
quote:
Now, we got the Durham dirt-bag case. The Durham dirt-bag case disgusts me to my core. Here, you have a drunken slut stripping whore accusing men of raping her when there is absolutely no evidence of such a rape other than what comes out of that filthy mouth of hers. And what really gets to me, here, is not only the piling on by the vermin in the media -- the spineless eunuchs in the media who are taking the side of an unknown accuser without ever having to ask her one question. What kind of system do we have that anyone can scream rape and not have to show her face, not answer to the public. And, yet, those she accuses are suddenly guilty until they're proven innocent. This is all the product of the out-of-control lesbian feminist movement.
Now Jim I feel that you see that and you say "he is an idiot" (if thats not your take then I am sorry). I see that and say wow thats very telling of what a good part of the culture feels, and his words have alot of power to those million listeners. I see structure in there, I see how it ties together the race issue (she was black) and the sex issue (a woman) and the class issue (a stripper).
Interconnected lattices of oppression.
Jim you are from a very economically challenged background. Appalachaian US is very poor, I've done some reading on the area myself as I have good friends from the mountains of WV whose father and grandfather were trappers for a living along with a great example of some Appaclachian schools found in Kozols "Savage Inequalities" where he lays out that they are as bad if not worse as any inner-city school in the US. So you are a white man from that background, of course the oppression that you most see is that which effected you, that of the wealthy on the non-wealthy. But that does not mean that other oppressions don't exist.
As you know I don't feel your privilege list was nonsense, some of those issues of being male need to be more well studied, but you (again this is just a seeming, do not want to put words in your mouth) but you throw them out there to counterpoint the original privilege list and downplay them so of course they are going to be looked at suspectly. Much like reverse-discrimination happens, there are disadvantages to being a male (or even a white male) in society. But they are far outnumbered by the advantages of being a male (or a white male).
RPGs are made for straight white males. They are not made for black males, they are not made for white women, they are not made for homosexuals. The problem is that in their targetting of the white male audience they often exclude others. Their targetting is just one of the problems though. It isn't a cut and dry issue that if the RPG companies stopped printing art it would go away. Other things have to be done too (mens attitude in RPGs, silly thinks like that one guy stated in here). In your attempt to live in the real world as you say, I think you are making things way to cut and dry, they aren't. They are quite sloppy and messy in alot of ways.
My 3.50.
| |
Im out- find me on Hordelings if you want to chat. | |
|
kyrin
Commander
3137 Posts
| | 04/19/2006 1:31 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by IanB
The big problem with your stance, as I see it, is that the existence of the rich/poor problem does not preclude the existence of the white/nonwhite problem or the male/female problem.
I don't understand why you think that these can't exist side by side.
It is in many ways the difference between symptoms and causes. Treating the symptoms is foolish when you can cure the disease. It's a distraction that prevents any useful work from being done, and some people prefer it that way. I believe that working to erode class oppression will naturally eliminate many if not most of other forms of "oppression." And I say this because the oppression of the rich by poor transcends boundaries of race, gender, etc. In addition to the situation in Appalachia, one could also point to the fact that SAT scores are MUCH more tightly correlated to income than race. A host of other data exist, but the strong correlations with income disparities are downplayed by "social activists" in favor of differences in race and gender. They're much "sexier," will get you more press, and really, who in their right mind would try to tear down the class system when there's so much money to be made? Get that book out! Collect that appearance fee!
Deal with class oppression, and most if not all of the other forms of oppression will die on the vine of malnutrition. But as I said, a dozen palliatives are more profitable than one cure...
In sum: I AM concerned with the "white/black problem," and the "male/female problem," as you put it. By choosing to teach at an urban community college rather than an Ivy League school, I am working in my own small way to deal with them. But I feel that working on the "rich/poor problem" is the only way we are going to accomplish more than merely increasing the amount of bitterness, hate, and guilt in the world -- and making a small group of people famous, powerful, and wealthy as a result.
JIM
aka kyrin | |
My Have/Want List <-|-|->My Trades and References 1 <-|-|->My Trades and References 2
Pronounce "Drow" like "crow"! Viva la Revolution! We Shall Overcome!
Vindicated Champion of the Stirge! Vindicated Champion of the Githyanki Knight on Red Dragon!!
Vindicated Champion of the Androsphinx! | |
|
kyrin
Commander
3137 Posts
| | 04/19/2006 1:50 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by AesophDarkfable
Now Jim I feel that you see that and you say "he is an idiot" (if thats not your take then I am sorry).
Savage is not an idiot -- he knows exactly what he is doing. He likely doesn't believe half of what he is saying, but he knows it will earn him ridiculous amounts of money. So he's not an idiot. He's a Right-wing scum-sucking capitalist demagogue, and other things I can't say here. And in that respect, he is no different from a horde of Leftist scum-sucking capitalist demagogues, with expense accounts that could feed many of the people they claim to be "championing," many of whom have been bloviating similar hateful words about the members of the Duke lacrosse team. Sometimes it drives me NUTS! Can't you see they are THE SAME ANIMAL, just with different stripes?
quote:
Interconnected lattices of oppression.
All resting on the firm foundation of the Almighty Dollar.
quote:
But they are far outnumbered by the advantages of being a male (or a white male).
Can't you see that a big part of the problem is that we *are* "numbering" them, like it's some obscene game of counting coup? And there are people more than happy to sell you chalk and slate so you can tally them up? And while you're busy counting advantages and disadvantages, they're counting their money, and laughing at you?
How can educated people be so blind?
Damn, it's like Looking-Glass Land, or something.
JIM
aka kyrin | |
My Have/Want List <-|-|->My Trades and References 1 <-|-|->My Trades and References 2
Pronounce "Drow" like "crow"! Viva la Revolution! We Shall Overcome!
Vindicated Champion of the Stirge! Vindicated Champion of the Githyanki Knight on Red Dragon!!
Vindicated Champion of the Androsphinx! | |
| The Defenestrator
AesophDarkfable
Warlord
5628 Posts
| | 04/19/2006 2:16 PM |
| This is my last post on the subject.
People are counting money yes. They are counting on the backs of several people. There are blow hards on the left as well as the right, you are correct. I am not blind to that.
As for the "Leftist scum-sucking capitalist demagogues, with expense accounts that could feed many of the people they claim to be 'championing'" Sure there are at the upper end (and most of those aren't real leftists if you ask me. But from where I sit, and the activists that I know and work with, and the people that put in 60+ volunteer hour at the rape crisis centers, food banks, education and after-school programs, they aren't driving lexus's. they are driving sensible cars and living within their means (which generally isnt much). There are crappy people on both sides of anything. There are psuedo-activists who view it as a business. There are also alot of hard working people out there trying to make the world better one piece at a time. Please don't belittle them. You've spoken to me about the hurtfulness of words, alot of what your saying can be viewed in the same light. I take what you say here as I am an idiot because I don't see what you see. I don't see class as being the biggest and only worry. I see structures where you don't. So I am laughed at, blind, and through the looking glass? Fine. But as you said same animal different stripes.
Outro. | |
Im out- find me on Hordelings if you want to chat. | |
|
Sjofn
Sneak
141 Posts
| | 04/19/2006 3:58 PM |
| The reason I said your bluster was nonsense was because it was mostly an attempt, however unconcious, to turn the thread from Women in Gaming to Things That Make Kyrin Sad. Not because I feel they're illegitimate concerns. Indeed, I feel some of those are a product of the extremely sexist culture we live in (not trusting men around children, the cultural pressure to hide one's emotions, etc). But since that was not what this thread was about, it was merely drifting off into stamping little feeties and wailing, "What about ME?"
This happens a lot in discussions about an excluded group where the included group is participating. It's nonsense. In a discussion about how your group could make my group feel more welcome, how your group gets the shaft in other areas of life has nothing to do with anything. | |
God Save the Horn Players | |
|
kyrin
Commander
3137 Posts
| | 04/19/2006 3:58 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by AesophDarkfable
There are also alot of hard working people out there trying to make the world better one piece at a time. Please don't belittle them.
I wasn't trying to. Never was. And you know that.
quote:
I take what you say here as I am an idiot because I don't see what you see.
Not even close. Not everyone who is blind to certain things is an idiot. Many are people of good will being exploited by expert predators. Does being exploited mean you you are an idiot? Well, when you say someone is being oppressed or exploited, are *you* calling *them* an idiot? Then don't expect *me* to be doing the same. Many social activists claim that people who are being expolited are blind to the exploitation. Are those activists saying those people are idiots, or just blind?
quote:
I don't see class as being the biggest and only worry. I see structures where you don't. So I am laughed at, blind, and through the looking glass? Fine. But as you said same animal different stripes.
I say you see structures which aren't necessary, but have been erected by people with an agenda to distract you. Those structures are what are blinding you. I wish you could see past them. If you think that I am implying that *you* are inferior because you can't see these structures, what does it say about the real attitudes of progressives who claim that ceratin groups are blind to the structures that exploit *them*? Is there veiled contempt there? I do wonder at times...
JIM
aka kyrin | |
My Have/Want List <-|-|->My Trades and References 1 <-|-|->My Trades and References 2
Pronounce "Drow" like "crow"! Viva la Revolution! We Shall Overcome!
Vindicated Champion of the Stirge! Vindicated Champion of the Githyanki Knight on Red Dragon!!
Vindicated Champion of the Androsphinx! | |
|
Sjofn
Sneak
141 Posts
| | 04/19/2006 4:11 PM |
| | And to go off something Feathers said, I absolutely agree that it is far worse in the video game world rather than table top. I don't really know why this is. I'm glad to hear art guys and whatnot DO hear and some of them think "Crap, I totally did not mean to do that." I can even understand the defensiveness. No one likes to hear, "Hey, you're being sexist/racist/classist/homosexist/agist/andsoonist." | |
God Save the Horn Players | |
|
Sjofn
Sneak
141 Posts
| | 04/19/2006 4:20 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by kyrin
I say you see structures which aren't necessary, but have been erected by people with an agenda to distract you. Those structures are what are blinding you. I wish you could see past them. If you think that I am implying that *you* are inferior because you can't see these structures, what does it say about the real attitudes of progressives who claim that ceratin groups are blind to the structures that exploit *them*? Is there veiled contempt there? I do wonder at times...
OK, THIS is the part that is infuriating. I am not disciminated against because of my class! Stop acting like all the sexism I encounter is just in my pretty little head and I only see it because some rich guy with an agenda pointed it out. It's incredibly insulting.
My class had nothing to do with guys at work sending me up a scaffold to "test" me and acting disappointed I wasn't scared of heights. My class had nothing to do with men at work deciding to play the "let's slap Laura's ass" game. My class has nothing to do with having to prove myself EVERY TIME I walk into an all-male enviroment. My class has nothing to do with people calling me weird because I scored higher on the math part of the SAT, because I play video games, because I play tabletop games, because I don't like wearing dresses or heels, because I didn't change my last name when I got married, because I didn't use my wedding as a way to turn me into a fairy princess for a day, because and so on.
Class conflicts are, indeed, very real and need to be dealt with. But dismissing everything else as fluff is ridiculous. | |
God Save the Horn Players | |
|
Count Dooku
Commander
4636 Posts
New York
| | 04/19/2006 4:42 PM |
| Yes its worse in video games.
Even D&D Online...Grab a copy of Stormreach and look at the cover. Elven Sorceress with big chest and not much clothes. | |
Champion of the Skulk
Vindicated Champion of the Twig Blight | |
|
reezel
Sergeant
555 Posts
| | 04/19/2006 4:52 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Sjofn
My class had nothing to do with guys at work sending me up a scaffold to "test" me and acting disappointed I wasn't scared of heights. My class had nothing to do with men at work deciding to play the "let's slap Laura's ass" game. My class has nothing to do with having to prove myself EVERY TIME I walk into an all-male enviroment.
Okay, I know this isn't going to make me any friends here, but your perception of these events come off a bit wrong to me. Minus the slapping (and I know circles you don't have to remove that) this is EXACTLY what guys do to each other. If you want to fit in with guys, then you DON'T freak out because of these things. This is how we test every single person who comes into our groups. I've heard many times complaints over acts like these that were just misinterpreted. Now, don't get me wrong, it's not always the case (I've seen sexual harassment done to women and I do not condone it).
I do agree with many things Kyrin has put up here, but not all. As far as the male/female thing goes, I don't believe it is a circumstance of privelege so much as difference. There IS a huge difference between men and women and how we think. It has a lot more to do with just what's between our legs. I don't know if it's nature or nurture but I think many times if people simply accepted the differences instead of trying to point a finger, we might get along better. | |
Champion of the Beholder and Beholderkin
The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence. | |
|
Sjofn
Sneak
141 Posts
| | 04/19/2006 5:02 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Count Dooku
Yes its worse in video games.
Even D&D Online...Grab a copy of Stormreach and look at the cover. Elven Sorceress with big chest and not much clothes.
What's totally bizarre is none of that is actually in the Real Game. All the women are fully clothed, wearing the same stuff the men do. That elven sorceress annoys me every time I see her, because she's EXTRA out of place. | |
God Save the Horn Players | |
|
Sjofn
Sneak
141 Posts
| | 04/19/2006 5:06 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by reezel
[brOkay, I know this isn't going to make me any friends here, but your perception of these events come off a bit wrong to me. Minus the slapping (and I know circles you don't have to remove that) this is EXACTLY what guys do to each other. If you want to fit in with guys, then you DON'T freak out because of these things. This is how we test every single person who comes into our groups. I've heard many times complaints over acts like these that were just misinterpreted. Now, don't get me wrong, it's not always the case (I've seen sexual harassment done to women and I do not condone it).
I didn't freak out, except for the ass-slapping game, and that freak out wasn't at work. I went home absolutely furious that day. Do you not think that was sexual harrassment? Anyway, there was no "freaking out," just extreme annoyance that here it comes again, another dumb ass who thinks he has to make me jump through hoops to prove I am not there to be the "pretty girl."
And no, that was NOT how guys at work treated new guys. Oh, there was the cautious strength testing (which I totally understood), but no, "Let's make him climb up the rickety scaffold and then act surprised when he does it and does it well." And definitely no ass slapping. | |
God Save the Horn Players | |
|
kyrin
Commander
3137 Posts
| | 04/19/2006 5:30 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Sjofn
The reason I said your bluster was nonsense was because it was mostly an attempt, however unconcious, to turn the thread from Women in Gaming to Things That Make Kyrin Sad. Not because I feel they're illegitimate concerns. Indeed, I feel some of those are a product of the extremely sexist culture we live in (not trusting men around children, the cultural pressure to hide one's emotions, etc). But since that was not what this thread was about, it was merely drifting off into stamping little feeties and wailing, "What about ME?"
This happens a lot in discussions about an excluded group where the included group is participating. It's nonsense. In a discussion about how your group could make my group feel more welcome, how your group gets the shaft in other areas of life has nothing to do with anything.
If you will go back and actually READ THE CONTEXT, you will see that ADF asked a question about what I thought about the discussion of privilege in the second article. I'm sorry that my answering a direct question put to me in a public forum inconvenienced you so dang much. I'll just ignore direct questions put to me in the future, if I think they will cause you such grief.
It may be irrelevant (and that is VERY debatable) but it is not "nonsense." Again, thanks for marginalizing me. Feel free to reflect on that in the future when people marginalize you. Or don't. Whatever.
JIM
aka kyrin | |
My Have/Want List <-|-|->My Trades and References 1 <-|-|->My Trades and References 2
Pronounce "Drow" like "crow"! Viva la Revolution! We Shall Overcome!
Vindicated Champion of the Stirge! Vindicated Champion of the Githyanki Knight on Red Dragon!!
Vindicated Champion of the Androsphinx! | |
|
kyrin
Commander
3137 Posts
| | 04/19/2006 5:34 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Sjofn
And to go off something Feathers said, I absolutely agree that it is far worse in the video game world rather than table top. I don't really know why this is. I'm glad to hear art guys and whatnot DO hear and some of them think "Crap, I totally did not mean to do that." I can even understand the defensiveness. No one likes to hear, "Hey, you're being sexist/racist/classist/homosexist/agist/andsoonist."
Just like people don't like to hear that they're being duped and their good intentions expolited by people who have a vested financial interest in preserving the conflict between the sexes/races/whathaveyou. Apparently. I can also understand the defensiveness, though.
JIM
aka kyrin | |
My Have/Want List <-|-|->My Trades and References 1 <-|-|->My Trades and References 2
Pronounce "Drow" like "crow"! Viva la Revolution! We Shall Overcome!
Vindicated Champion of the Stirge! Vindicated Champion of the Githyanki Knight on Red Dragon!!
Vindicated Champion of the Androsphinx! | |
|
IanB
Commander
3112 Posts
| | 04/19/2006 6:32 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Count Dooku
Yes its worse in video games.
Even D&D Online...Grab a copy of Stormreach and look at the cover. Elven Sorceress with big chest and not much clothes.
Thankfully in DDO the only incidence of that is in that one weird picture on the cover/load screen. I have a feeling that was added after the fact by the publisher or something, because none of the art in the game reflects that take on things.
Of course it ends up on the cover, which is probably the place it can do the most damage. Figures. | |
Anson on WotC boards | |
|
IanB
Commander
3112 Posts
| | 04/19/2006 6:40 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by kyrin
quote:
Originally posted by Sjofn
And to go off something Feathers said, I absolutely agree that it is far worse in the video game world rather than table top. I don't really know why this is. I'm glad to hear art guys and whatnot DO hear and some of them think "Crap, I totally did not mean to do that." I can even understand the defensiveness. No one likes to hear, "Hey, you're being sexist/racist/classist/homosexist/agist/andsoonist."
Just like people don't like to hear that they're being duped and their good intentions expolited by people who have a vested financial interest in preserving the conflict between the sexes/races/whathaveyou. Apparently. I can also understand the defensiveness, though.
JIM
aka kyrin
So, just so I understand your position - it is your contention that, for example, Al Gore, Jesse Jackson, etc., are keeping us distracted with their particular issues in order to keep us distracted from class issues, thus keeping them in nice suits? Deliberately?
This seems to me like maybe a little beyond the degree of conspiracy theory I'm willing to accept.
It seems to *me* like what you're telling women in this thread is that discrimination against them is rooted in some sort of class issue.
While I think you can make a case that poor women get more crap from poor men than rich women do from rich men, there is still a noticable difference in how people are treated even when you get to the pinnacle of wealth.
In other words, even adjusting for any part of it that could be caused by class issues, you're still left with a remainder that can only be explained by other issues, in this case sexism, the patriarchy, whatever you want to call it.
And let's remember that our topic here is, if not class-independent, pretty class-specific. There's an assumption that has to be made here that the people generally affected by this problem are all making enough money to have disposable income to blow on stuff like minis and roleplaying games. Class is hardly the root cause of the 'magic missile at the darkness' stereotype. | |
Anson on WotC boards | |
|
IanB
Commander
3112 Posts
| | 04/19/2006 8:18 PM |
| And here's the best reason of all for figuring this stuff out once and for all:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2006/04/19/national/a094139D74.DTL
"When mama's not happy, nobody's happy." | |
Anson on WotC boards | |
|
kyrin
Commander
3137 Posts
| | 04/19/2006 8:18 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by IanB
[quote]Originally posted by kyrin
So, just so I understand your position - it is your contention that, for example, Al Gore, Jesse Jackson, etc., are keeping us distracted with their particular issues in order to keep us distracted from class issues, thus keeping them in nice suits? Deliberately?
This seems to me like maybe a little beyond the degree of conspiracy theory I'm willing to accept.
Nothing so elaborate as a conspiracy theory. Just good old fashioned greed. The Social Justice Industry is no more of a conspiracy than the gaming industry is one. EGG and friends put out D&D, and others realized it's profitable, and joined in with their games. People realize on their own that "social activism" is very profitable, and join in. No conspiracy required.
After all, it's easy for some people to believe that presidents get their countries into wars to distract the people, earn votes, and earn profit for themselves and their friends. Is it so dang hard to believe that other people (or even the same people) would foment a social conflict for the same goals?
Or are you just uncomfortable with ascribing to the people you think you share goals with the same motives you eagerly apply to people you despise? Are you so eager to take sides and have allies that you forget that people are, unfortuantely, people?
Realizing that you've been scammed is a rugged thing. But it does get better, after awhile. People trusted Lenin, after all, so don't feel bad.
JIM
aka kyrin | |
My Have/Want List <-|-|->My Trades and References 1 <-|-|->My Trades and References 2
Pronounce "Drow" like "crow"! Viva la Revolution! We Shall Overcome!
Vindicated Champion of the Stirge! Vindicated Champion of the Githyanki Knight on Red Dragon!!
Vindicated Champion of the Androsphinx! | |
|
IanB
Commander
3112 Posts
| | 04/19/2006 8:29 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by kyrin
quote:
Originally posted by IanB
[quote]Originally posted by kyrin
So, just so I understand your position - it is your contention that, for example, Al Gore, Jesse Jackson, etc., are keeping us distracted with their particular issues in order to keep us distracted from class issues, thus keeping them in nice suits? Deliberately?
This seems to me like maybe a little beyond the degree of conspiracy theory I'm willing to accept.
Nothing so elaborate as a conspiracy theory. Just good old fashioned greed. The Social Justice Industry is no more of a conspiracy than the gaming industry is one. EGG and friends put out D&D, and others realized it's profitable, and joined in with their games. People realize on their own that "social activism" is very profitable, and join in. No conspiracy required.
After all, it's easy for some people to believe that presidents get their countries into wars to distract the people, earn votes, and earn profit for themselves and their friends. Is it so dang hard to believe that other people (or even the same people) would foment a social conflict for the same goals?
Or are you just uncomfortable with ascribing to the people you think you share goals with the same motives you eagerly apply to people you despise? Are you so eager to take sides and have allies that you forget that people are, unfortuantely, people?
Realizing that you've been scammed is a rugged thing. But it does get better, after awhile. People trusted Lenin, after all, so don't feel bad.
JIM
aka kyrin
In the end, I think, the problem with Lenin wasn't so much with trusting him, but with the folks he himself trusted.
Wandering awfully far afield, though. What about the 2nd part of my post? | |
Anson on WotC boards | |
| 
jgsugden
Commander
4320 Posts
Walnut Creek, CA
| | 04/19/2006 9:32 PM |
| It is worthwhile to read the comments that have recently been added at the end of the second article.
I found the article to be pretty manipulative. I'm not a fan of articles that attack opposing positions without fair exploration of those positions. I'm especially leery when these tactics are used in conjunction with 'moral' arguments. I wish the author had taken the time to fully explore the counter arguments instead of dismissing them so simply as white male prejudice. In my experience, gender (and race) issues are rarely that simple. When I take the time to think about these issues, I can see good arguments for all sides of the discussion that should be considered when seeking a solution.
In addition, I find the sentiment behind the aricle to be noble, but I think it manages to wrangle the focus into too small of an area, at least with regards to how people should act as gamers (as opposed to product design considerations). I don't think the idea of creating an accomodating environment should be limited to gender related issues. I think it should apply to all situations in which there is discomfort due to game content (or behavior) in a group setting. I think the proper approach is to figure out what makes people uncomfortable and do what you can to reduce the discomfort without making other people uncomfortable. | |
Champion of Meepo _*_ Myztek on the Wizards Boards. _*_ (2206 DDM on 03/06/06)
Please note: The use of the  indicates an attempt at humor ... often a bad attempt.
BAD EBAY SELLERS LIST (CLICK HERE): AVOID AT ALL COSTS
| |
|
IanB
Commander
3112 Posts
| | 04/19/2006 9:42 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by jgsugden
I don't think the idea of creating an accomodating environment should be limited to gender related issues. I think it should apply to all situations in which there is discomfort due to game content (or behavior) in a group setting. I think the proper approach is to figure out what makes people uncomfortable and do what you can to reduce the discomfort without making other people uncomfortable.
That genericizes the discussion to a point where nothing useful can come out of it, though. Problems are not solved by making them so general that you can't come up with a coherent response. | |
Anson on WotC boards | |
|
IanB
Commander
3112 Posts
| | 04/19/2006 9:57 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by jgsugdenI found the article to be pretty manipulative. I'm not a fan of articles that attack opposing positions without fair exploration of those positions.
Also, frankly, this makes no sense. The article did not attack opposing positions; the only opposing position there can be to the proposition "we should make gaming a friendlier environment for women" is "no we shouldn't."
What the article did do was preemptively make the counterpoints to the usual tired objections that are always raised to women's issues with regard to equality, one of which is to try and make the argument about something else entirely, like what has basically happened to this thread.
The "vote with your wallet" argument, in particular is clearly insufficient. Women are already effectively doing this by not participating. The RPG industry is apparently fine with this for the most part, so anyone who wants a more inclusive environment is going to have to do a lot more than just not play. | |
Anson on WotC boards | |
|
kyrin
Commander
3137 Posts
| | 04/19/2006 11:44 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by IanB
Wandering awfully far afield, though. What about the 2nd part of my post?
Sorry, I don't answer direct questions put to me anymore. One time it led to someone calling my concerns "nonsense," and another was a trap by somebody wanting to get the thread locked. No more.
I notice, as well, that you dodged my question, so I'll return the favor.
JIM
aka kyrin | |
My Have/Want List <-|-|->My Trades and References 1 <-|-|->My Trades and References 2
Pronounce "Drow" like "crow"! Viva la Revolution! We Shall Overcome!
Vindicated Champion of the Stirge! Vindicated Champion of the Githyanki Knight on Red Dragon!!
Vindicated Champion of the Androsphinx! | |
|
jgsugden
Commander
4320 Posts
Walnut Creek, CA
| | 04/19/2006 11:59 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by IanB
That genericizes the discussion to a point where nothing useful can come out of it, though. Problems are not solved by making them so general that you can't come up with a coherent response..
We'll have to agree to disagree. I think that problems are often compounded by focusing on facets of the problem that, in an ideal world, would be irrelevant. I firmly believe that it is possible to handle the problems raised in this discussion without focusing on gender. In fact, I don't think we can have true equality and balance if gender is used as a criteria to force change. Just as separate is not equal, basing criteria of equality by gender breakdowns can't be equal, either.
quote:
Originally posted by IanB
Also, frankly, this makes no sense. The article did not attack opposing positions; the only opposing position there can be to the proposition "we should make gaming a friendlier environment for women" is "no we shouldn't.".
The article did attack the opposing positions. It attacked the 7 counter arguments which could be used to oppose the view of the author. You note it yourself, below. However, you do bring up a good point - the articler does simply this complex issue into black and white, which is woefully inadequate to handle the complexities of gender issues. As I said previously, these things are far too complex to be handled by such simple dismissals as the author uses to brush off these 7 arguments.
quote:
Originally posted by IanB
What the article did do was preemptively make the counterpoints to the usual tired objections that are always raised to women's issues with regard to equality, one of which is to try and make the argument about something else entirely, like what has basically happened to this thread.
And it did so in 7 short paragraphs with no discussion of the merits of those positions. There are a lot of people that would raise those arguments. Dismissing them so quickly is a mistake if you want to effect change.
Ask yourself: Why do these 'tired' objections get raised so often? Is it as simple as the author makes it out to be? White privileged inertia? If you were one of the people that would raise one or more of those 7 positions, do you think you'd feel that your position was fairly argued in that article? Or do you think you'd resent seeing your view dismissed out-of-hand? Is there more to the arguments that the author indicates? Is it possible for someone to be justified raising one of these arguments?
You mention that specific issue of 'making the argument about something else entirely'. Is it possible to have gender issues cross over into other arenas? Or is there something about gender (and race) issues that prevents them from interacting with other issues? Can a gender or race issue be compared in a cost benefit sense to other issues? Personally, I think that the designation of what goes into an RPG book (or how a campaign world should be designed) involve more than just gender issues. Personally, I think that this is only one aspect of a large picture.
As a final question: Can you imagine other perspectives that would disagree with the author's stance, without relying upon any of the opposing arguments 'discussed' by the author? They are out there ... and they shouldn't be ignored.
As I said, I think this subject is a mine field. There is no way to discuss the merits of opposing arguments without someone accusing you (either directly or indirectly) of trying to keep women out of gaming. However, there is plenty of room to disagree with aspects of the article without being against women. And with that, I'm stepping back out of the mine field. | |
Champion of Meepo _*_ Myztek on the Wizards Boards. _*_ (2206 DDM on 03/06/06)
Please note: The use of the indicates an attempt at humor ... often a bad attempt.
BAD EBAY SELLERS LIST (CLICK HERE): AVOID AT ALL COSTS
| |
|
kyrin
Commander
3137 Posts
| | 04/20/2006 12:11 AM |
| quote:
Originally posted by IanB
quote:
Originally posted by jgsugdenI found the article to be pretty manipulative. I'm not a fan of articles that attack opposing positions without fair exploration of those positions.
Also, frankly, this makes no sense. The article did not attack opposing positions; the only opposing position there can be to the proposition "we should make gaming a friendlier environment for women" is "no we shouldn't."
Not at all. MY particular opposing viewpoint is, "Gaming IS a friendly environment for women, if they find a good group. So find one. Or (*gasp*) make one! Take control rather than expecting others (many of whom you probably wouldn't want to game with anyway) to change to suit you."
To me, the statement, "We should make gaming a friendlier environment for women" is mind-bogglingly condecending and insulting.
quote:
What the article did do was preemptively make the counterpoints to the usual tired objections that are always raised to women's issues with regard to equality, one of which is to try and make the argument about something else entirely, like what has basically happened to this thread.
And it is VERY interesting to go back over this thread and find out just how many of those counterpoints (Minimalizing, Denial, Blame the Victim, et al) have been used by those who allegedly deplore their use.
quote:
The "vote with your wallet" argument, in particular is clearly insufficient. Women are already effectively doing this by not participating. The RPG industry is apparently fine with this for the most part, so anyone who wants a more inclusive environment is going to have to do a lot more than just not play.
Well, then, I guess some men, or maybe howsabout just some human beings, need to step up to the plate and make an economic impact as well. Or maybe they just don't care that much, hm?
However, "voting with your wallet" is NOT just "not participating." An all-too-common fallacy, easily dispelled by counter-example. When somebody hates Howard Stern or Grand Theft Auto or one of "them lib'ral college prefessers" they don't just turn off the radio, not buy the game, or drop the class. They let the right people know, VERY LOUDLY, that they are not participating because they DO NOT APPROVE. They also spell out the conditions that will insure their future participation. No flowery language or "consciousness raising" or sociology dissertations required. Just "you ain't getting my money, and this is why, and this is how you can get my money in the future." It is stunningly effective. I think a few thousand letters to WoTC explaining in very simple language why the February issue is unacceptable and how future purchases will be dependent on how well they comply would make QUITE an impact.
Don't just shrug your shoulders and give up. Gather some likeminded friends and do some writing. Don't send it to some worthless blog or meaningless message board; preaching to the choir is probably the most pathetic form of surrender there is. Get it into Hasbro's boardroom where it will do some good! Conservatives use it all | |
My Have/Want List <-|-|->My Trades and References 1 <-|-|->My Trades and References 2
Pronounce "Drow" like "crow"! Viva la Revolution! We Shall Overcome!
Vindicated Champion of the Stirge! Vindicated Champion of the Githyanki Knight on Red Dragon!!
Vindicated Champion of the Androsphinx! | |
| Knight of Argenis
Corim Danex
Warlord
6561 Posts
West Valley City, Utah
| | 04/20/2006 1:02 AM |
| quote:
Originally posted by kyrin
Don't just shrug your shoulders and give up. Gather some likeminded friends and do some writing. Don't send it to some worthless blog or meaningless message board; preaching to the choir is probably the most pathetic form of surrender there is. Get it into Hasbro's boardroom where it will do some good! Conservatives use it all the time, to significant effect. Why are liberals so afraid to use it?
Odd. I didn't realize that caring about how women feel was a liberal thing. I have heard lots of times on this thread some condescension towards conservatives. I am conservative. I care a lot about how women feel. There are three female players in my gaming group, one of which is my wife.
I am considering putting together a letter asking them to cut back on art depicting women with very little clothing on, and expressing hope that when the dryad, nymph, and similar miniatures are made that they are modest. | |
"Look to God and live." Alma 37:47
Ha 80/80---De 60/60---Ar 60/60---GoL 72/72---Ab 60/60---Dk 60/60---Af 60/60---Ud 60/60---WD 60/60---WDQ 60/60---BW 60/60---UH 60/60---NB 60/60---DDe 60/60---SSB 59/60 (Does anyone want to buy my SSB collection?)
Champion of Something, I imagine I will think of something
Vindicated Champ of Hippogriff (Arcadian Hippogriff) and Uncommon Horse | |
|
IanB
Commander
3112 Posts
| | 04/20/2006 3:10 AM |
| quote:
Originally posted by kyrin
Don't just shrug your shoulders and give up. Gather some likeminded friends and do some writing. Don't send it to some worthless blog or meaningless message board; preaching to the choir is probably the most pathetic form of surrender there is. Get it into Hasbro's boardroom where it will do some good! Conservatives use it all the time, to significant effect. Why are liberals so afraid to use it?
Geez, I am SO feeling like Captain Obvious here.
JIM
aka kyrin
Who is shrugging their shoulders and giving up? I really don't understand your position. Out of one side of your mouth you say you disagree with the original article, and out of the other you're encouraging people to do exactly what he is suggesting, which is work on publishers to get them to change their ways. Which is it?
Incidentally, this is hardly a meaningless message board. We know that WotC designers read this board. Proudft is a published game designer, Feathers has an important industry position, and Benimoto has already posted about how it make him rethink some things in the RPGA adventure he was writing.
People who actually matter in this process are reading this thead. I don't understand your insistence on discouraging the discussion of the issue. What do you have to lose? | |
Anson on WotC boards | |
|
Sjofn
Sneak
141 Posts
| | 04/20/2006 3:15 AM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Corim Danex
Odd. I didn't realize that caring about how women feel was a liberal thing. I have heard lots of times on this thread some condescension towards conservatives. I am conservative. I care a lot about how women feel. There are three female players in my gaming group, one of which is my wife.
I am considering putting together a letter asking them to cut back on art depicting women with very little clothing on, and expressing hope that when the dryad, nymph, and similar miniatures are made that they are modest.
Unfortunately, a lot of the people most vocal in pushing back against the Evil Strawfeminists identify themselves as "conservatives." I am well aware of "liberals" who cheerfully dismiss women's issues as "too narrow" and "fringe" and "unimportant," but they don't get called on it nearly as often, probably because instead of pushing us back, they merely want us to stand still.
I'm a liberal myself, but my father sure as hell isn't, and he is way, WAY more feminist than anyone would ever believe. | |
God Save the Horn Players | |
|
IanB
Commander
3112 Posts
| | 04/20/2006 3:26 AM |
| quote:
Originally posted by jgsugden
In fact, I don't think we can have true equality and balance if gender is used as a criteria to force change. Just as separate is not equal, basing criteria of equality by gender breakdowns can't be equal, either.
I'm sorry but this is incredibly unrealistic. Basically you're saying there can never *be* equality, so why try? This sort of thinking would never have brought down segregation, or apartheid.
quote:
The article did attack the opposing positions. It attacked the 7 counter arguments which could be used to oppose the view of the author. You note it yourself, below. However, you do bring up a good point - the articler does simply this complex issue into black and white, which is woefully inadequate to handle the complexities of gender issues. As I said previously, these things are far too complex to be handled by such simple dismissals as the author uses to brush off these 7 arguments.
Most of those 7 arguments aren't taking up a contrary position, they're simply attempts to frame the discussion in other terms. They do nothing to support the "no, we shouldn't care if the environment is friendly to women" position, because essentially that position is indefensible.
quote:
And it did so in 7 short paragraphs with no discussion of the merits of those positions. There are a lot of people that would raise those arguments. Dismissing them so quickly is a mistake if you want to effect change.
The Declaration of Independence was only a few hundred words long. Do you think padding it out a bit would have made the case better? Those 7 paragraphs are sufficient to show the fallacies of those counter arguments, in my opinion. Going on at length would have just distracted from the message of the piece. We're not talking about an academic paper here, we're talking about a blog. Perpective?
quote:
Ask yourself: Why do these 'tired' objections get raised so often?
I'll tell you exactly why. Because of the centuries of cultural programming that teaches us that women have their place and they shouldn't get uppity and try to leave it. Because decades of sexist fantasy literature has taught us that the woman's only proper role is to be the slutty tavern girl, the princess who needs rescuing, or the scantily-clad evil sorceress. For every Marion Zimmer Bradley, there are 15 Robert Jordans*.
quote:
You mention that specific issue of 'making the argument about something else entirely'. Is it possible to have gender issues cross over into other arenas? Or is there something about gender (and race) issues that prevents them from interacting with other issues? Can a gender or race issue be compared in a cost benefit sense to other issues? Personally, I think that the designation of what goes into an RPG book (or how a campaign world should be designed) involve more than just gender issues. Personally, I think that this is only one aspect of a large picture.
Race and gender are not issues that must always be addressed hand in hand, no. Is there a problem with racial issues in the gaming world? Probably. Does it have any impact on this particular issue? Not especially.
quote:
As a final question: Can you imagine other perspectives that would disagree with the author's stance, without relying upon any of the opposing arguments 'discussed' by the author? They are out there ... and they shouldn't be ignored.
As soon as someone posts one, I'll give it due consideration.
* Mind you, Jordan's men are if anything more stereotypical and awful than his women. | |
Anson on WotC boards | |
|
IanB
Commander
3112 Posts
| | 04/20/2006 3:28 AM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Corim Danex
quote:
Originally posted by kyrin
Don't just shrug your shoulders and give up. Gather some likeminded friends and do some writing. Don't send it to some worthless blog or meaningless message board; preaching to the choir is probably the most pathetic form of surrender there is. Get it into Hasbro's boardroom where it will do some good! Conservatives use it all the time, to significant effect. Why are liberals so afraid to use it?
Odd. I didn't realize that caring about how women feel was a liberal thing. I have heard lots of times on this thread some condescension towards conservatives. I am conservative. I care a lot about how women feel. There are three female players in my gaming group, one of which is my wife.
I am considering putting together a letter asking them to cut back on art depicting women with very little clothing on, and expressing hope that when the dryad, nymph, and similar miniatures are made that they are modest.
You can thank the Rush Limbaughs, Michael Savages, and Anne Coulters of the world for making you look bad. The word "conservative" frankly conjures up a lot of anti-woman images these days.
Coulter baffles me the most, quite frankly, as I believe she's on the record as supporting taking the vote back from women. | |
Anson on WotC boards | |
|
Feathers
Underboss
1140 Posts
| | 04/20/2006 3:52 AM |
| quote:
Originally posted by IanB
Coulter baffles me the most, quite frankly, as I believe she's on the record as supporting taking the vote back from women.
That's just ludicrous. That sounds so incomprehensible, are you sure she's on record for that?
| |
Champion of Neogi
Completed Trades/Transactions: sttmxn, Krush, jgsugden, Ayrychx2, Venport, Tysac
| |
|
Sjofn
Sneak
141 Posts
| | 04/20/2006 6:01 AM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Feathers
quote:
Originally posted by IanB
Coulter baffles me the most, quite frankly, as I believe she's on the record as supporting taking the vote back from women.
That's just ludicrous. That sounds so incomprehensible, are you sure she's on record for that?
Yep. This does not stop her, of course, from being registered to vote herself. I'm sure it was mostly "See guys, I'm one of the GOOD women" posturing for the ever-charming sexists, and it's usually coupled with a "because they vote for liberals," but still.
Here's a link to ONE of the times she's said it: http://www.guardian.co.uk/weekend/story/0,3605,956452,00.html#article_continue
Money shot, since the article is (I think) long and depressing:
Why does she think the franchise is too big already? Who exactly has the vote who shouldn't have? "Women," she says, laughing. "It's true. It would be a much better country if women did not vote. That is simply a fact. In fact, in every presidential election since 1950 - except Goldwater in '64 - the Republican would have won, if only the men had voted."
I could probably find more links, but it would involve reading way more of her depressing loathing of women that I think I could really handle.
If nothing else, she does serve as an excellent reminder that you don't have to be a man to be a misogynist. | |
God Save the Horn Players | |
|
reezel
Sergeant
555 Posts
|
|
|
|
|