Paizo Update from Jeff Alvarez

... what does that even mean. You call me intolerant but you hate diversity.

What is the "issue" then, since issues in America apparently don't count.

That's a lot of words to say that you think all lives matter.

When a house is on fire you don't douse the house 4 streets over to make sure it doesn't catch fire and ignore not only the burning house but every house inbetween.

Nothing in life is equal, and everything strives for equality. Shouting down someone who is speaking up and shining a light in an area that needs to be talked about says more about you than the people speaking up.

Exclusive focus isn't bad, because humans inherently only focus on what is right in front of them. If someone isn't talking about their specific issue that would never touch my circle of influence there is a very high chance I would never know it exists.

This is one of those times when people should listen and observe and reserve judgement on either side of the coin. It is fine to have an opinion but if your opinion actively causes harm to.... anyone? keep it to yourself and save everyone a lot of grief.

thejeff wrote:

I don't think that's what they're saying, though maybe I'm reading too generously.

Rysky has the extra context of this person debating with her about this in a different thread today (which you may or may not have seen), this person has been largely taking an "all lives matter"/"why isn't there a white history month?" approach (though without explicitly saying those exact phrases, just all of the usual rhetoric that falls under those umbrellas) in the extended conversation between the two threads.

Perhaps I am reading too generously, as I said.

I'll dig into that other thread later. :(

Edit after reading other thread: Yeah, I was definitely reading too generously.

Will also say that with the curtains pulled back a bit it pains me to think that the approved inclusiveness in blogs is marketing focused, or performative.

I don't think that it is the heart of the authors that are performative. I don't think that the people pushing to include the blogs are performative. But I fear that at this time the approved blogs are only approved when it benefits the company and not the marginalized people.

Some of the stories corroborated by employees past and present talked about how some of the information about inclusiveness that was shot down repeatedly and then published without permission gained ground. Then the company that did not want to have it out there in the first place took credit for it once it was seen in a positive light?

It makes my initial view on stances from a company is performative from an executive decision making level. And that makes me sad because before this entire situation with Sara Marie exploded I wouldn't have thought about that. I wouldn't have known about it. I would have contributed to it by telling people how inclusive the company is.

I would continue to tell my trans kid that this a company he can trust.

Now that is tainted and I hope that will be something that I can work through and move past. But it isn't me that needs to do the work to heal that relationship right now.

Paizo, do better. Continue to be inclusive even if people like me see it as performative. It is important that you do the work, and continue to do the work. Just because I have a hard time seeing the good right now doesn't mean the good isn't happening.

Recognize the Paizo Union.

Hold your Executives accountable for past harms.

Clearly state what your plans are moving forward to keep checks and balances on those Executives that failed your employees and customers.

Listen to your marginalized staff and customers.

Do better.

When a house is on fire you don't douse the house 4 streets over to make sure it doesn't catch fire and ignore not only the burning house but every house inbetween.

Nothing in life is equal, and everything strives for equality. Shouting down someone who is speaking up and shining a light in an area that needs to be talked about says more about you than the people speaking up.

Exclusive focus isn't bad, because humans inherently only focus on what is right in front of them. If someone isn't talking about their specific issue that would never touch my circle of influence there is a very high chance I would never know it exists.

This is one of those times when people should listen and observe and reserve judgement on either side of the coin. It is fine to have an opinion but if your opinion actively causes harm to.... anyone? keep it to yourself and save everyone a lot of grief.

Yeah probably good advice. But I admit I underestimated the toxicity and lack of room for nuance. Anyway clearly these forums are too toxic for me these days, hopefully it cleans up some day. But for now it is clearly no longer for me.

A way for me to see a blog as not performative is to get a few in rotation around the year during months where it isn't a focus of 'that month'

Black History isn't just a month and done situation. Trans Rights isn't just a focus for Trans people one day a year. Indigenous people, Migrants, Women aren't all catch phrase issues to spot a highlight on when it suits the time.

People with Disabilities for example got a HUGE highlight in Guns and Gears that I personally did not see coming. Love that type inclusion because any time someone can be represented for who they are and shown that who they are is seen.

I also acknowledge that over time we have definitely seen spot lights for marginalized communities outside of the 'window of opportunity' from time to time.

For me, that is just one aspect of the visible work that shows me that work is being done. Just a tip for someone to put down in their spreadsheet of 'Hey this isn't a bad idea, lets revisit that'

A way for me to see a blog as not performative is to get a few in rotation around the year during months where it isn't a focus of 'that month'

Black History isn't just a month and done situation. Trans Rights isn't just a focus for Trans people one day a year. Indigenous people, Migrants, Women aren't all catch phrase issues to spot a highlight on when it suits the time.

People with Disabilities for example got a HUGE highlight in Guns and Gears that I personally did not see coming. Love that type inclusion because any time someone can be represented for who they are and shown that who they are is seen.

I also acknowledge that over time we have definitely seen spot lights for marginalized communities outside of the 'window of opportunity' from time to time.

For me, that is just one aspect of the visible work that shows me that work is being done. Just a tip for someone to put down in their spreadsheet of 'Hey this isn't a bad idea, lets revisit that'

Thanks for this type of posts (and all of yours for that matter). You are what makes these forums worth it.

With respect to "real" diversity versus "corporate" diversity, it's kind of a matter of feeling to me. For example:

I would consider Star Trek: Deep Space Nine "real" diversity. It goes out of its way to deal with in-universe racist stereotypes and to disprove them (e.g. the most prominent member of the "greedy and cowardly" species is a stone-cold badass who despite having the combat ability of a turnip walks up to an armed Klingon in public and says "go ahead and kill me, I DARE YOU", and who gets accused of criminal philanthropy for selling goods to desperate refugees at (slightly above, he insists) cost. The Klingon character is a space paladin whose insistence on doing the right thing infuriates his species' feudal society. The Captain is a black single dad who, unlike the stereotypes of the time the show was made in, is a kind, supportive, loving, all-around good father (and a great cook, a stone-cold badass leader, and arguably the best Captain in Trek history). Another member of the "greedy and cowardly" species rejects the stereotype entirely to join Starfleet. The science officer is pansexual and sort-of genderfluid and this is just accepted by the entire cast. (in fact, they swap genders several times on screen, the audience meets their male personalities, and they have a lesbian kiss with their currently-female ex that, because that episode is filmed by Avery Brooks, is handled sensitively)). All that feels like somebody said "hey, there's this problematic stereotype" (either IRL or in the show) and then said "let's play with it and refute it".

"Corporate" diversity would be Star Trek: Discovery, which expects me (a proudly hard-left American) to sympathize with a violent, racist (of the "I'm not a racist it's just that these savages have an inferior violent culture" variety) war criminal and to buy into a storyline that validates her bigotry with a disturbingly imperialistic worldview (the foreign culture in question are portrayed as universally psychopathically violent, even cannibalistic, physically grotesque, gruntingly incoherent savages until they are put under the control of a puppet dictator who rules thanks to nukes pointed at their capital by the protagonist), just because she's a dark-skinned woman. That feels focus-grouped to Hell and fundamentally "fake".

I would consider the movie "Black Panther" to be "real" diversity. There you have a pretty nuanced exploration of its fantasy concept, political debates with real substance, and the movie reinforces that the protagonist has to be a good person (and call out his ancestors for their harmful policy) for us to sympathize with him. (also the "big scary ape people" leader is a total bro, a political ace, and trolls the stupid American something fierce, which collectively won him a place alongside Captain America, Kamala Khan, and two other characters (from a TV show and a book series) as my top 5 favorite characters of all time)

I would consider Marvel Comics's last attempt at the New Warriors to be "fake" or "corporate" diversity. Like, I am not against "trendy" "young" characters. I love Kamala Khan with all my heart. She's a nerdy sweetheart who has to deal with the same kind of crap I do. She writes fanfic and has normal conflicts with her family and is sweet and kind and likes things that she knows are not totally PC (TBF if I had her powers I would totally wear the Not PC '60s Ms. Marvel costume, too), I identify strongly with that even though I'm a white American born in Seattle who's never once left the country and spent most of my life thinking I was a straight white dude and "just a good ally". But when Marvel tried to reboot the New Warriors--well, two of the characters they announced were called "Safespace" and "Snowflake".

Yeah.

(Also the costume designs for that announced run were ****ing terrible)

At the end of the day I think it comes down to intent and execution. If you're just slapping labels on a character because a focus group said that those boxes are popular with The Youth, you're gonna fail. If you're writing a character because you think they have a story to be told, as long as you do your research and don't completely **** the bed like Star Trek: Voyager did when they had the Native American (based on stereotypes grafted together from dozens of disparate cultures by a known fraudster) character be told that his people were backwards languageless cavemen before white men from outer space taught them to be people (I'm NOT joking, that is the literal plot of the episode "Tattoo"), you'll probably be OK.

A way for me to see a blog as not performative is to get a few in rotation around the year during months where it isn't a focus of 'that month'

Black History isn't just a month and done situation. Trans Rights isn't just a focus for Trans people one day a year. Indigenous people, Migrants, Women aren't all catch phrase issues to spot a highlight on when it suits the time.

People with Disabilities for example got a HUGE highlight in Guns and Gears that I personally did not see coming. Love that type inclusion because any time someone can be represented for who they are and shown that who they are is seen.

I also acknowledge that over time we have definitely seen spot lights for marginalized communities outside of the 'window of opportunity' from time to time.

For me, that is just one aspect of the visible work that shows me that work is being done. Just a tip for someone to put down in their spreadsheet of 'Hey this isn't a bad idea, lets revisit that'

This is well said. I can't tell you how annoyed I get when various corporations pinkwash themselves for Pride month, then quickly take the rainbow flags down when it's time to sell to China or Russia.

WRT. disabilities in particular--I loved the old "traits" and "flaws" system from D&D 3e Unearthed Arcana, it was something I could easily adapt to "missing limb" or "paraplegic" or "neurological disorder" or whatever. For example my ADHD could be modeled as a bonus to certain skills that require focus (i.e. what I can hyperfocus on) and a penalty to all others (i.e. what I can't). My Tourette's could be modeled as a penalty to stealth checks and a percentile chance of losing an action or cast spell to my physical tics, which can be quite severe, but with a counterbalancing bonus feat. Somebody with a missing limb could take a penalty to certain skill checks or lose an item slot/have to invest in prosthetics in exchange for a bonus feat. Somebody missing a sense could get a bonus feat or perception bonuses to other senses, etc.

For claiming to be diverse as a company, Paizo seems to pick and chose what diversity they will highlight. Late on Hispanic Heritage month acknowledgment, nothing for Native American Heritage...

So how did you want this to go?

Are they supposed to feel bad for being in an industry that skews whiter than the driven snow or the long list of social ills that lead to under representation in many fields? I can't see trying to highlight diversity you may not have coming across as anything but shallow corporate tokenism that's getting such a rough reception here.

Terevalis Unctio of House Mysti wrote:

For claiming to be diverse as a company, Paizo seems to pick and chose what diversity they will highlight. Late on Hispanic Heritage month acknowledgment, nothing for Native American Heritage...

So how did you want this to go?

Are they supposed to feel bad for being in an industry that skews whiter than the driven snow or the long list of social ills that lead to under representation in many fields? I can't see trying to highlight diversity you may not have coming across as anything but shallow corporate tokenism that's getting such a rough reception here.

You are are probably on something there, which I may not have appreciated. While it is the (larger) minorities getting the limelight, indeed celebrating without actually having representation in your company also reeks of tokenism. Thanks for that insight.

Terevalis Unctio of House Mysti wrote:

For claiming to be diverse as a company, Paizo seems to pick and chose what diversity they will highlight. Late on Hispanic Heritage month acknowledgment, nothing for Native American Heritage...

So how did you want this to go?

Are they supposed to feel bad for being in an industry that skews whiter than the driven snow or the long list of social ills that lead to under representation in many fields? I can't see trying to highlight diversity you may not have coming across as anything but shallow corporate tokenism that's getting such a rough reception here.

You know, there are actual months that highlight various groups, maybe actually having the blog during the month and not an after thought. At that point why bother?

Is there a reason we're arguing about Paizo's celebration of Hispanic Heritage Month here, when there's a whole other thread that seems to be dedicated to talking about it? I can't see how it really relates to the treatment of Paizo's employees except very indirectly. Jessica Price did mention a reluctance from management to acknowledge Juneteenth when they were focused on branding around supporting Pride Month, but that's about as close as I can find to a direct connection.

I just don't see the point in the discussion. "Paizo posted a blog post late", "corporate diversity is often tacky", "big minorities with deep histories of hard-fought activism have an easier time being noticed than small minorities or minorities that don't have the same history of activism like Iranian-Icelandic-Americans"... like, the article Anorak linked earlier explicitly eludes to real people being turned into token figureheads by Paizo management, so why are we going down these weird rabbit holes that don't seem related?

Of course corporate diversity is often tacky. Of course large organized groups get more recognition than small non-organized groups. Nobody can possibly disagree with these stances, so... what's the point? It feels frustratingly indirect.

It is about corporate diversity and paizo claiming diversity, but indeed it less direct. I got carried away with my irritations about the American focus of Paizo, this forum and (even more) other things, but that didn’t help anyone. My apologies for that.

A big part of the reason there's an American focus is that American issues are the ones we (and Paizo) actually have the most power to act upon. It can be exhausting to fight every fight, especially when we have almost no meaningful ability to do anything about what's happening in England or China or Mexico. That doesn't make it any less understandably alienating for you, though.

If I give my friend a slice of pizza I am not discriminating against everyone else who doesn’t get a slice of pizza.

No, but if you give your friend the job because they have the "right" skin tone, gender, religious interest, age, orientation, or simply because they are your friend and not the most qualified applicant then yes, you are discriminating against other people. Discrimination is not restricted to cis white middle-aged hetero men.

If you already gave all your other friends pizza last week but forgot her, it's not discrimination, it's correcting a previous error. Not that I buy this whole zero-sum framework at all.

Rysky wrote:

If I give my friend a slice of pizza I am not discriminating against everyone else who doesn’t get a slice of pizza.

No, but if you give your friend the job because they have the "right" skin tone, gender, religious interest, age, orientation, or simply because they are your friend and not the most qualified applicant then yes, you are discriminating against other people. Discrimination is not restricted to cis white middle-aged hetero men.

Well if it is because they are your friend it is nepotism. But indeed discrimination is widely spread across many groups. Hopefully we can sometime reduce the “us vs. them” mentality that comes so naturally to humans (or make the “us” wide enough that it does not matter).

Well if it is because they are your friend it is nepotism

Nepotism is a form of discrimination. Its just not illegal in the US.

A big part of the reason there's an American focus is that American issues are the ones we (and Paizo) actually have the most power to act upon. It can be exhausting to fight every fight, especially when we have almost no meaningful ability to do anything about what's happening in England or China or Mexico. That doesn't make it any less understandably alienating for you, though.

Having followed the exchanges in this section of the forum for the past couple of weeks, I frequently found them baffling and/or depressing. Like Berhagen, I have a non-US perspective, and that surely doesn't help in that regard. I refrained from participating in the conversation because of that. So let me just say, KC, that I have the utmost respect and admiration for the patience and empathy you've displayed in this post and others.

A way for me to see a blog as not performative is to get a few in rotation around the year during months where it isn't a focus of 'that month'

Black History isn't just a month and done situation. Trans Rights isn't just a focus for Trans people one day a year. Indigenous people, Migrants, Women aren't all catch phrase issues to spot a highlight on when it suits the time.

People with Disabilities for example got a HUGE highlight in Guns and Gears that I personally did not see coming. Love that type inclusion because any time someone can be represented for who they are and shown that who they are is seen.

I also acknowledge that over time we have definitely seen spot lights for marginalized communities outside of the 'window of opportunity' from time to time.

For me, that is just one aspect of the visible work that shows me that work is being done. Just a tip for someone to put down in their spreadsheet of 'Hey this isn't a bad idea, lets revisit that'

The whole reason I’m so mad at Paizo’s misconduct is /because/ of how good their books have largely been (in the last 3~ years) on queer representation, and on other issues; I think the Mwangi Expanse book is one of the most important releases in the d20 space for how right it does by African fantasy, and I’m fired up for Arcadia because of how scant indigenous and latinx fantasy is.

To see a company really doing well with inclusivity and diversity in their products drop the ball with real people? It aches.

Yoshua wrote:

A way for me to see a blog as not performative is to get a few in rotation around the year during months where it isn't a focus of 'that month'

Black History isn't just a month and done situation. Trans Rights isn't just a focus for Trans people one day a year. Indigenous people, Migrants, Women aren't all catch phrase issues to spot a highlight on when it suits the time.

People with Disabilities for example got a HUGE highlight in Guns and Gears that I personally did not see coming. Love that type inclusion because any time someone can be represented for who they are and shown that who they are is seen.

I also acknowledge that over time we have definitely seen spot lights for marginalized communities outside of the 'window of opportunity' from time to time.

For me, that is just one aspect of the visible work that shows me that work is being done. Just a tip for someone to put down in their spreadsheet of 'Hey this isn't a bad idea, lets revisit that'

The whole reason I’m so mad at Paizo’s misconduct is /because/ of how good their books have largely been (in the last 3~ years) on queer representation, and on other issues; I think the Mwangi Expanse book is one of the most important releases in the d20 space for how right it does by African fantasy, and I’m fired up for Arcadia because of how scant indigenous and latinx fantasy is.

To see a company really doing well with inclusivity and diversity in their products drop the ball with real people? It aches.

Get Pathfinder: Wrath of the Righteous! That money goes only to Owlcat Games iirc (though I could be wrong, I don't know how the licensing deal works). Black best-bro paladin, gay half-orc paladin and her equally gay trans wife (but you only find out she's trans if she trusts you implicitly and your Persuasion score is stratospheric, which is super realistic and I like it) which is handled really well and also they're super in love and it's ADORABLE, the gay black cleric of niceness, Regill the gnome Hellknight who is kind to exactly one person in the entire universe and that's a sweet little elf girl with PTSD from being burned at the stake by a paranoid inquisitor, three gloriously bisexual disasters (ex-succubus with obvious undiagnosed OCD to go with her PTSD, snarky cynical guy with a really neat mess of a backstory who also is kind solely to the sweet little elf girl (and vitriolic best buds with the mongrelman communist), and a lady who just wants to get in good with the biggest badass around), etc. Lots of great fun characters to hang out with, I only really dislike the one and she's kind of supposed to be completely unlikable.

Super fun game. Makes the mythic system actually worth playing. And Angel is comically overpowered. I just walk into a room, offer bad guys a chance to surrender, and when they laugh malevolently and refuse I unleash heavenly fire and vaporize them. The angel of mercy has her limits lol.

Anyway, the Owlcat team seem super cool, I backed Wrath on Kickstarter and I was beyond satisfied.

Owlcat’s official Discord server was a hateful pit of transphobia supported by their mods. No thanks.

Owlcat’s official Discord server was a hateful pit of transphobia supported by their mods. No thanks.

My experience has been the exact opposite. The one anti-trans poster I saw was quickly slapped down by the mods and had their rude posts deleted.

Yoshua wrote:

A way for me to see a blog as not performative is to get a few in rotation around the year during months where it isn't a focus of 'that month'

Black History isn't just a month and done situation. Trans Rights isn't just a focus for Trans people one day a year. Indigenous people, Migrants, Women aren't all catch phrase issues to spot a highlight on when it suits the time.

People with Disabilities for example got a HUGE highlight in Guns and Gears that I personally did not see coming. Love that type inclusion because any time someone can be represented for who they are and shown that who they are is seen.

I also acknowledge that over time we have definitely seen spot lights for marginalized communities outside of the 'window of opportunity' from time to time.

For me, that is just one aspect of the visible work that shows me that work is being done. Just a tip for someone to put down in their spreadsheet of 'Hey this isn't a bad idea, lets revisit that'

The whole reason I’m so mad at Paizo’s misconduct is /because/ of how good their books have largely been (in the last 3~ years) on queer representation, and on other issues; I think the Mwangi Expanse book is one of the most important releases in the d20 space for how right it does by African fantasy, and I’m fired up for Arcadia because of how scant indigenous and latinx fantasy is.

To see a company really doing well with inclusivity and diversity in their products drop the ball with real people? It aches.

Yup.

keftiu wrote:

Owlcat’s official Discord server was a hateful pit of transphobia supported by their mods. No thanks.

My experience has been the exact opposite. The one anti-trans poster I saw was quickly slapped down by the mods and had their rude posts deleted.

Maybe don't imply to trans folx that their experiences of transphobia are wrong? Even if you experience is different and intentions good, the way you have phrased this questions and dismisses what keftiu witnessed.

keftiu wrote:

Owlcat’s official Discord server was a hateful pit of transphobia supported by their mods. No thanks.

My experience has been the exact opposite. The one anti-trans poster I saw was quickly slapped down by the mods and had their rude posts deleted.

I had multiple people shouting transphobia at me and when I pinged the mods, their response was telling me and them both to drop it - “no politics.”

I’m glad you had a good experience! Mine was enough to sour on them significantly.

Normal? Whatever that means

Normal? Whatever that means

IKR? The Discord troll's whole post is obvious flamebait. And not even original flamebait either.

Berhagen wrote:

Yeah their diversity seems quite marketing focused. Plenty of heritages to get attention but not really equal attention given….. but then I guess it is corporate diversity, not real diversity which is where it appears a large of the current disconnect comes from….. talking the talk, but not walking the walk…

What is “real diversity”?

Diversity of opinion and perspectives. I hardly could care less about the plumbing preferences, family tree or melanine levels of a person. Theree could be more diversity at a table with 6 white cis-males from different backgrounds or political affiliations, than in another with [insert 6 different permutations of minorities and/or women] that happen to agree in 99% of things.

Humbly,
Yawar

keftiu wrote:

Berhagen wrote:

Yeah their diversity seems quite marketing focused. Plenty of heritages to get attention but not really equal attention given….. but then I guess it is corporate diversity, not real diversity which is where it appears a large of the current disconnect comes from….. talking the talk, but not walking the walk…

What is “real diversity”?

Diversity of opinion and perspectives. I hardly could care less about the plumbing preferences, family tree or melanine levels of a person. Theree could be more diversity at a table with 6 white cis-males from different backgrounds or political affiliations, than in another with [insert 6 different permutations of minorities and/or women] that happen to agree in 99% of things.

Humbly,
Yawar

I'm tired of those 6 white cis men thinking the opinions and perspectives of everyone else don't deserve a seat at the table... or thinking that my existence is a difference of opinion.

Yoshua wrote:

A way for me to see a blog as not performative is to get a few in rotation around the year during months where it isn't a focus of 'that month'

Black History isn't just a month and done situation. Trans Rights isn't just a focus for Trans people one day a year. Indigenous people, Migrants, Women aren't all catch phrase issues to spot a highlight on when it suits the time.

People with Disabilities for example got a HUGE highlight in Guns and Gears that I personally did not see coming. Love that type inclusion because any time someone can be represented for who they are and shown that who they are is seen.

I also acknowledge that over time we have definitely seen spot lights for marginalized communities outside of the 'window of opportunity' from time to time.

For me, that is just one aspect of the visible work that shows me that work is being done. Just a tip for someone to put down in their spreadsheet of 'Hey this isn't a bad idea, lets revisit that'

The whole reason I’m so mad at Paizo’s misconduct is /because/ of how good their books have largely been (in the last 3~ years) on queer representation, and on other issues; I think the Mwangi Expanse book is one of the most important releases in the d20 space for how right it does by African fantasy, and I’m fired up for Arcadia because of how scant indigenous and latinx fantasy is.

To see a company really doing well with inclusivity and diversity in their products drop the ball with real people? It aches.

Please, don't use imposed, top-down derogatory terms to describe latin-american people.

Humbly,
Yawar

keftiu wrote:

Yoshua wrote:

A way for me to see a blog as not performative is to get a few in rotation around the year during months where it isn't a focus of 'that month'

Black History isn't just a month and done situation. Trans Rights isn't just a focus for Trans people one day a year. Indigenous people, Migrants, Women aren't all catch phrase issues to spot a highlight on when it suits the time.

People with Disabilities for example got a HUGE highlight in Guns and Gears that I personally did not see coming. Love that type inclusion because any time someone can be represented for who they are and shown that who they are is seen.

I also acknowledge that over time we have definitely seen spot lights for marginalized communities outside of the 'window of opportunity' from time to time.

For me, that is just one aspect of the visible work that shows me that work is being done. Just a tip for someone to put down in their spreadsheet of 'Hey this isn't a bad idea, lets revisit that'

The whole reason I’m so mad at Paizo’s misconduct is /because/ of how good their books have largely been (in the last 3~ years) on queer representation, and on other issues; I think the Mwangi Expanse book is one of the most important releases in the d20 space for how right it does by African fantasy, and I’m fired up for Arcadia because of how scant indigenous and latinx fantasy is.

To see a company really doing well with inclusivity and diversity in their products drop the ball with real people? It aches.

Please, don't use imposed, top-down derogatory terms to describe latin-american people.

Humbly,
Yawar

I was introduced to the term by the Mexican father of my best friend, who is a professor of Latin American cultural studies at the local university and has several published books on the subject. Is he incorrect?

I'm tired of those 6 white cis men thinking the opinions and perspectives of everyone else don't deserve a seat at the table... or thinking that my existence is a difference of opinion.

Who said that you were excluded at that table, rather than the table being formed organically? If anything, you or me, as a latino, might excluded from the second table for only agreeing on 97% of things.

Humbly,
Yawar

YawarFiesta wrote:

keftiu wrote:

Yoshua wrote:

A way for me to see a blog as not performative is to get a few in rotation around the year during months where it isn't a focus of 'that month'

Black History isn't just a month and done situation. Trans Rights isn't just a focus for Trans people one day a year. Indigenous people, Migrants, Women aren't all catch phrase issues to spot a highlight on when it suits the time.

People with Disabilities for example got a HUGE highlight in Guns and Gears that I personally did not see coming. Love that type inclusion because any time someone can be represented for who they are and shown that who they are is seen.

I also acknowledge that over time we have definitely seen spot lights for marginalized communities outside of the 'window of opportunity' from time to time.

For me, that is just one aspect of the visible work that shows me that work is being done. Just a tip for someone to put down in their spreadsheet of 'Hey this isn't a bad idea, lets revisit that'

The whole reason I’m so mad at Paizo’s misconduct is /because/ of how good their books have largely been (in the last 3~ years) on queer representation, and on other issues; I think the Mwangi Expanse book is one of the most important releases in the d20 space for how right it does by African fantasy, and I’m fired up for Arcadia because of how scant indigenous and latinx fantasy is.

To see a company really doing well with inclusivity and diversity in their products drop the ball with real people? It aches.

Please, don't use imposed, top-down derogatory terms to describe latin-american people.

Humbly,
Yawar

I was introduced to the term by the Mexican father of my best friend, who is a professor of Latin American cultural studies at the local university and has several published books on the subject. Is he incorrect?

Given that around only 1% of latinos appreciate that term, yes.

Humbly,
Yawar

Given that around only 1% of latinos appreciate that term

Care to produce any evidence of that statistic? I found some indicating awareness and usage, but little about preference or appreciation, and even that was not inline with your claim.

Get Pathfinder: Wrath of the Righteous! That money goes only to Owlcat Games iirc (though I could be wrong, I don't know how the licensing deal works). {. . .}

Shouldn't the stuff after that be spoilered?

YawarFiesta wrote:

Given that around only 1% of latinos appreciate that term

Care to produce any evidence of that statistic? I found some indicating awareness and usage, but little about preference or appreciation, and even that was not inline with your claim.

Sure. Oops, it was around 3%, I stand corrected.

Humbly,
Yawar

TwilightKnight wrote:

YawarFiesta wrote:

Given that around only 1% of latinos appreciate that term

Care to produce any evidence of that statistic? I found some indicating awareness and usage, but little about preference or appreciation, and even that was not inline with your claim.

Sure. Oops, it was around 3%, I stand corrected.

Humbly,
Yawar

The title of this article literally says "One-third who have heard of the term Latinx say it should be used to describe the U.S. Hispanic or Latino population," which is why I (an American) am using it to describe creatives in America employed by an American company.

YawarFiesta wrote:

Given that around only 1% of latinos appreciate that term

Care to produce any evidence of that statistic? I found some indicating awareness and usage, but little about preference or appreciation, and even that was not inline with your claim.

Gallup poll result here: Poll results

This is I believe only in the US though. Latin American politics and history is a deeply complicated subject that varies by country and differs SIGNIFICANTLY from US politics on a number of levels. It's also rooted in roughly 250 years of state-sponsored racist caste system and propaganda propped up by the Spanish government (some of the less oligarchic post-Spanish regimes reacted by trying to go the other way--look up 1930s Mexican racist "hybrid vigor" propaganda sometime, it's a TRIP), plus a bit over a century of overt US meddling with the cooperation of local, corrupt elites. Wealthy, mostly criollo-descended people from Chile are as a bloc VERY politically different on basically every level from Quechua-speaking native-identifying lower-class people in Peru, or mostly African-descended fisherpeople from Brazil, or a middle-class mestizo family in Mexico City. Lumping those people and the descendants of their family members who emigrated to the US all into one bloc is frankly pretty silly.

YawarFiesta wrote:

TwilightKnight wrote:

YawarFiesta wrote:

Given that around only 1% of latinos appreciate that term

Care to produce any evidence of that statistic? I found some indicating awareness and usage, but little about preference or appreciation, and even that was not inline with your claim.

Sure. Oops, it was around 3%, I stand corrected.

Humbly,
Yawar

The title of this article literally says "One-third who have heard of the term Latinx say it should be used to describe the U.S. Hispanic or Latino population," which is why I (an American) am using it to describe creatives in America employed by an American company.

One third of the fourth that had heard the term say the term should be used, two thirds of the fourth that has heard the term think it should not be used. Only around 3% of the total prefer the term. I hope you understand the term is divisive and consider offensive by some.

Humbly,
Yawar

When asked in an open-ended question what Latinx means in their own words, 42% of those who have heard the term describe it as a gender-neutral one. As one 21-year-old woman said, “Latinx is a more inclusive term to use for those who do not choose to identify with a certain gender. The terms Latino and Latina are very limiting for certain people.”

Other responses from the open-ended question offer other descriptions of Latinx and reactions to it. For example, 12% of respondents who had heard of Latinx express disagreement or dislike of the term. Some described the term as an “anglicism” of the Spanish language, while others say the term is “not representative of the larger Latino community.”

Among other responses, 12% say Latinx is a term about being Hispanic or Latino, while 9% of those aware of Latinx say it is an LGBTQ community inclusive term. And 6% of respondents who have heard of Latinx say it is a new, alternative or replacement term for Latino.

So to me, and I say this as a white person so overstepping most likely, it sounds a lot like people who think "straight" or "cis" is an insult.

I've seen some push to using Latine as a gender neutral construction instead of Latinx. I have no data or knowledge on the thoughts of the relevant communities on its use though. Regardless latinx certainly isn't a slur, but language is an evolving process and finding the word that handles what latinx is supposed to handle is ongoing. Certainly noone here is trying to be derogatory.

It is more that almost everything is gendered, in latin languages and in Spanish the male plural form is, usually, also gender neutral so trying to force gender neutrality on it is not only sounds alien, but also silly. You might need to be native Spanish or Latin language speaker to understand how awful "latinx" sounds.

Humbly,
Yawar

PD: this is also why it is a pain to translate non-binary characters to Spanish, there is no equvalent for gender neutral pronouns or conjugations. (Blue Finley is a ghost/ Finley, el azul, es un fantasma/ Finley, la azul, es una fantasma)

Gender neutral characters exist, and gender neutral (non binary etc) people exist. And as society becomes both more aware of that fact and more tolerant, languages need to evolve to reflect that. The purpose of language is communication, and if a rule of a language hinders communication it usually gets changed by the weight of society ignoring it. Its not an overwriting of culture, just an evolution of it.

"male is the deafult" and "male is the norm" is a rather obvious issue across many cultures and societies.

Also saying it's a pain to write about non-binary people in Spanish is a rather glaring failure in the language, as Elegos elegantly puts it. Non-binary people exist.

Oops, it was around 3%, I stand corrected

That is a gross misrepresentation of what the article is saying.

...it sounds a lot like people who think "straight" or "cis" is an insult.

To be fair, there is a non-zero number in the LGBTQ+ community that do use those terms as an insult as I can attest to first hand. Personally, I am happy with my cis/straight status so it doesn't bother me one bit. Just saying that terms can evolve from good to bad or vice versa over time.