So a predominantly white institution gets to determine who is what ethnicity, you do know you are using institutionalised racism to say somebody doesn't qualify as a race because of their skin colour....Well...seeing Hispanics were a part of that institution with all it's privileges waaaay far back, while Chinese and African Americans in the past were subject to being kept from voting, marrying, owning land, and many of the other things that they are still trying to gain equality about today...
I'm not quite so sure what to make of it. They are a RECOGNIZED MINORITY....
But they are a white minority.
You do realize that the reason white Hispanics and Latinos are considered white is that they have European backgrounds. They are from German, French, Spain, Portugal, and other European nations and have the same ethinicity as Whites everywhere else.
IF they are of color, as you would, such as being a European who actually married someone from the Americas (such as a Native American) which probably can be reflected in their skin tone, they can do that if they so wish. They can also select an African Ancestry.
Claiming that Latino makes you a PoC would be the same as claiming you are from Australia and that makes you a PoC as everyone in Australia is not white and there are no whites in Australia. (I know this isn't true, just stating a parallel of what this Correia is trying to claim).
Latin America has a LOT of diversity out there, which is probably why it's impossible to define someone's race simply because of what location their ancestry hails from. This is why they can further specify what they are...which apparently according to the census bureau, a majority select white. If they are not white, they can ALSO claim that in addition to the Hispanic minority status.
If he is a PoC, he should state why he is a PoC instead of using something that doesn't fall in the definition (or are we going to start saying everyone in Britain is Non-White now, or...
Saying that Hispanics enjoy "white privilege" is basically saying that you have no idea what you are talking about in the larger picture of Chicano/American history. Why don't you take a trip to Brownsville some time and just look around? Then blindfold yourself and ask 8 random people how long their families have been there and if they ever felt like law enforcement profiled them. I'll bet you $1,000 that 4 of them say "longer than it's been the United States," and "yes."
Then go visit Albuquerque, get something to eat with green chilies on it (because seriously, you are in Albuquerque), and then hop on I40 and go west out to the Laguna Pueblo reservation and ask those folks how they feel about being called "white." Actually, don't do that, because you would actually die. Instead ask them the same questions you asked the random people in Brownsville. Same $1,000 bet.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Telling somebody your skin is not dark or light enough to be X race is racial vilification - it doesn't matter about the persons politics.
I will say it once more denying somebody's cultural heritage based on skin tone is Racial Vilification.
Mecha poet, thejeff, GWL, and EnterisShadow, maybe you should have think about your approach to this as Scott has pointed out where you engaged in questionable arguments to prove your point. Tainting your arguments for everybody else.
I never said his skin wasn't dark enough to be X race. I did say that since he claims to only have found out he was legally considered Latino around 2009, I doubt it really played any role in his experiences. I doubt anyone discriminated against him because he was a person of color, when he didn't even know he could be classified as such. He is apparently the child of immigrants and that is it's own experience with it's own problems, but it's not the same the experience that many people of color face.
How is it that someone can benefit from racism without being aware of it, but someone couldn't suffer from it without being aware of it?
How is it that someone can benefit from racism without being aware of it, but someone couldn't suffer from it without being aware of it?Telling somebody your skin is not dark or light enough to be X race is racial vilification - it doesn't matter about the persons politics.
I will say it once more denying somebody's cultural heritage based on skin tone is Racial Vilification.
Mecha poet, thejeff, GWL, and EnterisShadow, maybe you should have think about your approach to this as Scott has pointed out where you engaged in questionable arguments to prove your point. Tainting your arguments for everybody else.
I never said his skin wasn't dark enough to be X race. I did say that since he claims to only have found out he was legally considered Latino around 2009, I doubt it really played any role in his experiences. I doubt anyone discriminated against him because he was a person of color, when he didn't even know he could be classified as such. He is apparently the child of immigrants and that is it's own experience with it's own problems, but it's not the same the experience that many people of color face.
I was not aware of what anglo really meant until i was in my 20's. i am not anglo at all.
Genetics - it depends if the gene that determines skin colour is recessive or not. For aboriginal Australians it is, that is why you have white blond blue eyed Aboriginals in Australia.
That is why you can't tell a person what race they are based on skin colour.
You can't, but neither can the bigots. If you're really African-American, but somehow you look like a Nordic white guy, you're not going to experience the same kind of discrimination that African-Americans who look black do.
Now in some extreme cases bigots who find out you're really African-American will hate you anyway, but you still won't get the casual everyday stuff.
Race, as it applies to racism/privilege/discrimination/prejudice/whatever you want to call it, is largely perceived race, not actual race.
Not that actual race really means much biologically. Race is a social construct, but it's a hell of a powerful social construct.
Which also means that some whites that tan deeply enough can face the same problems as someone of color. My aunt in law (is that a term?) can pass as fully native american even though she is almost all english
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
When I say that I don't see race, by that I mean that I honestly don't care what someone's skin color is, and I treat everyone equally well.When someone says that I see two possibilities.
1. They may be that incredibly rare ultra-empathic super-evolved Human that Roddenberry always claimed his characters to be.
2. They're in denial.
Yeah...neither of those is necessarily true. I'm gonna relate an anecdote from my own life:
When I was about 10 or 12, I saw a Saturday Night Live sketch from the early 90s. It featured some commercial creators showing the ad they'd made for toothpaste to the people who'd commissioned it. The ad was basically a husband leaving to go golf and then, when his wife came out to say goodbye, them kissing for, like, two minutes straight with a "Our toothpaste will let you kiss all day." The toothpaste company owners are aghast, and ask if the actors can be changed or the kiss eliminated. The commercial creators refuse, not understanding the problem, and note that they've already bought ad space during the Country Music Awards. They then leave, and one toothpaste executive says to the other "You know what we have to do." followed by the commercial creators' car blowing up to stop this ad from getting out there.
And I honestly and legitimately didn't get why it was funny, basically at all. So the next time it was on (coincidentally, that was within a few weeks...it was a repeat on Comedy Central to start with) I went and got my father and asked him to watch it and explain. So he did: The guy in the commercial was black, while the woman was white. Hence the humor.
So...if I claim that I legitimately don't 'get' racism, I've got a leg to stand on. Now, personally, I don't go around claiming to 'not see race', nor would I for a host of reasons including that I have eyes and can indeed tell what race someone is, but I quite legitimately don't actually give a damn. That doesn't make me 'superhuman' it means my parents raised me to not care about that s$~*.
I'm going to come out and say it. I'm a racist, I'm a sexist, I'm a creation of a given cullture, religion, and region at a certain time of our mutual history. When I look at someone I do see their color, their dress, the red dot on their foreheads, the pierced lips, the pink triangle on black button they may be wearing. And I do have reactions based on that. And so do every one of you.
Yeah...but my reaction to women is usually different from men primarily in that I'm potentially attracted to them, and I couldn't care less about most of that other stuff. I notice it, sure, but I don't care. I care about a lot of things, but honestly? What culture someone comes from is not actually that high on the list compared to what I think of them personally, never mind the rest of the stuff you mention.
I'm certainly a product of the culture in which I was raised, but that culture was mostly defined by my parents in several important ways, and not caring about stuff like this is one of them.
If you're not one of Roddenberry's Super-Evolved and are honest with yourself, you'll admit that you have those reactions as well, each and every one of us. We were raised in human societies, and every one of them is steeped in cultural and racist stereotypes taught to us by our families, our culture, and our nations. The only way to have avoided that would be to have been raised inside a box cut off from all human contact. And I don't even want to think of what kind of human that would have produced, or even if such a thing would be Human at all.
Not necessarily. I do have Aspergers, which may've helped, and my upbringing did have some unusual factors, but not quite that unusual.
The question is then do you acknowledge those reactions, these prejudices, and keep yourselves aware of them? Or do you sit in comfortable denial of both those reactions and the actions you make in turn? It's not a crime to have prejudice any more than it's a crime to be born with gender. It's whether you grow beyond them or like most, be content to be driven by them.
I have a lot of unfortunate reactions and impulses (just none tied to the stuff you list), and believe this is absolutely the correct way to deal with such things. But you're painting with too much in the way of broad strokes when it comes to everyone having that sort of baggage when it comes to race, sex, or culture. Most people certainly have some baggage in one of these areas, but the amount and the area its in is gonna vary drastically from person to person.
Now, I totally never noticed my white privilege (and yeah, I'm fine with admitting having white privilege, among other privileges) until it was pointed out to me on the internet...but that's not the same thing. That's not a personal attitude on my part, but one on other people's parts that I benefit from...which is somewhat easier to miss.
Which I don't think he actually said. Hispanic is a broad category. Check your census forms, you get to pick both Hispanic or not and a race. So if you're identified as Hispanic and white, you often get treated as white. This would, for example, be someone who's parents or grandparents came from Spain (or in some versions of the definition Portugal). Chicano is a more specific term, being essentially Mexican-American. They may self identify as white, but they don't get treated as white. Race and prejudice are complicated.So a predominantly white institution gets to determine who is what ethnicity, you do know you are using institutionalised racism to say somebody doesn't qualify as a race because of their skin colour....Well...seeing Hispanics were a part of that institution with all it's privileges waaaay far back, while Chinese and African Americans in the past were subject to being kept from voting, marrying, owning land, and many of the other things that they are still trying to gain equality about today...
I'm not quite so sure what to make of it. They are a RECOGNIZED MINORITY....
But they are a white minority.
You do realize that the reason white Hispanics and Latinos are considered white is that they have European backgrounds. They are from German, French, Spain, Portugal, and other European nations and have the same ethinicity as Whites everywhere else.
IF they are of color, as you would, such as being a European who actually married someone from the Americas (such as a Native American) which probably can be reflected in their skin tone, they can do that if they so wish. They can also select an African Ancestry.
Claiming that Latino makes you a PoC would be the same as claiming you are from Australia and that makes you a PoC as everyone in Australia is not white and there are no whites in Australia. (I know this isn't true, just stating a parallel of what this Correia is trying to claim).
Latin America has a LOT of diversity out there, which is probably why it's impossible to define someone's race simply because of what location their ancestry hails from. This is why they can further specify what they are...which apparently according to the census bureau, a majority select white. If they are not white, they can ALSO claim that in addition to the Hispanic minority status.
If he is a PoC, he should state why he is a PoC instead of using something that doesn't fall in the definition (or are we going
Bolded for your pleasure. Admittedly the Laguna Pueblos don't apply to his second point.
Edit: YOU should go talk to some people in Brownsville and ask them about being "Mexican-American." I can't describe to you the number of folks who have literally lived in that area for HUNDREDS of years. They aren't Mexican, their families aren't from Mexico. Their ties to that land predate the United States. Not the claim the US makes to the land, BUT THE UNITED STATES ITSELF! Their ties to the land predate Texas. Now, in 2014, people who have lived in that area for hundreds of years get stopped and asked to prove their citizenship. They are NOT Mexican-American. They identify as Chicano. They aren't white, they don't identify as white, they DO identify as Hispanic. They certainly don't benefit from "white privilege."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not quite so sure what to make of it. They are a RECOGNIZED MINORITY....But they are a white minority. Latin America has a LOT of diversity out there, which is probably why it's impossible to define someone's race simply because of what location their ancestry hails from.
I can understand that the question of racial definition is part of the problem when it comes to those of Hispanic or Latino descent. Correia points that out in the article, albeit in a sarcastic tone and tied to another article as well. He tries to point out, being a person who is culturally/lingually different in parts of the US creates it's own negative experience that is not impacted by your skin-tone.
Given that you have racial identification come up in things like Proposition 187 and it's legal and social implications. Given that there are articles questioning Hispanics' roles in movies or how Latinas are shown, there is a an element of racial bias that has be considered. You may argue that the definition is legally invalid, but there is still a social element that impacts perceptions.
And as a historical reference, being a white minority didn't exactly make being Irish in America an easy experience at one time either.
If you feel I have personally offended or accused, then my apologies. And I apologize if I have strayed away from the original intent of the thread.
Generally those aren't sold but yes when being used for those specific purposes sure.Selling nazi paraphernalia is not cool regardless of context. It's the same as bringing a real gun or shooting "fire". It makes people feel unsafe. You violate their right to have a good time because you're either supporting nazi ideology or are so tone deaf to human interaction that you shouldn't go to large gatherings.Two major exceptions. Props for theater/movies and actual historical artifacts. And it should be made clear what they are, and even then should not be sold in all venues
Your dealing with a place where thousands of people are dressed in costumes buying stuff for costumes. There is a TON of costuming material at Gencon. I've been to smaller, 5K person cons with dozens of costuming booths. Saying costuming material isn't sold at a venue that caters to people costuming is ridiculous.
How is it that someone can benefit from racism without being aware of it, but someone couldn't suffer from it without being aware of it?I never said his skin wasn't dark enough to be X race. I did say that since he claims to only have found out he was legally considered Latino around 2009, I doubt it really played any role in his experiences. I doubt anyone discriminated against him because he was a person of color, when he didn't even know he could be classified as such. He is apparently the child of immigrants and that is it's own experience with it's own problems, but it's not the same the experience that many people of color face.Telling somebody your skin is not dark or light enough to be X race is racial vilification - it doesn't matter about the persons politics.
I will say it once more denying somebody's cultural heritage based on skin tone is Racial Vilification.
Mecha poet, thejeff, GWL, and EnterisShadow, maybe you should have think about your approach to this as Scott has pointed out where you engaged in questionable arguments to prove your point. Tainting your arguments for everybody else.
In theory he could, but it would seem to require monumental levels of self-delusion. Generally white people benefit from racism without being aware of it because they see they live in a primarily white world and don't see the discrimination holding back other people because it doesn't happen to them. Not only is it more likely that you'll notice discrimination applied to you, it also means that other people can identify him on a glance as fitting a category he's never even noticed he belongs in.
Not at all. He could have been turned down for a job or a loan because his qualifications were on the edge, but the way his hair waved reminded the hiring manager/loan officer of a Portuguese guy that he didn't care for, so the guy didn't go to bat for him like he may have for a regular white guy.
That's just one off the top of my head. That's the point here, it's insidious. Even you are trying to deny it exists now that it doesn't line up with your narrative.
Genetics - it depends if the gene that determines skin colour is recessive or not. For aboriginal Australians it is, that is why you have white blond blue eyed Aboriginals in Australia.
That is why you can't tell a person what race they are based on skin colour.
You can't, but neither can the bigots. If you're really African-American, but somehow you look like a Nordic white guy, you're not going to experience the same kind of discrimination that African-Americans who look black do.
Now in some extreme cases bigots who find out you're really African-American will hate you anyway, but you still won't get the casual everyday stuff.
Race, as it applies to racism/privilege/discrimination/prejudice/whatever you want to call it, is largely perceived race, not actual race.
Not that actual race really means much biologically. Race is a social construct, but it's a hell of a powerful social construct.
But it's nothing like the systemic discrimination people of color face.
So he's just not "not white" enough. How much "not white" should he be before you accept his story? How much "not white" does someone have to be before they don't have "white privilege?" How much "not white" does someone have to be to fit your narrative of systemic discrimination as oppressed and not oppressor?
|
I'm not quite so sure what to make of it. They are a RECOGNIZED MINORITY....But they are a white minority. Latin America has a LOT of diversity out there, which is probably why it's impossible to define someone's race simply because of what location their ancestry hails from.I can understand that the question of racial definition is part of the problem when it comes to those of Hispanic or Latino descent. Correia points that out in the article, albeit in a sarcastic tone and tied to another article as well. He tries to point out, being a person who is culturally/lingually different in parts of the US creates it's own negative experience that is not impacted by your skin-tone.
Given that you have racial identification come up in things like Proposition 187 and it's legal and social implications. Given that there are articles questioning Hispanics' roles in movies or how Latinas are shown, there is a an element of racial bias that has be considered. You may argue that the definition is legally invalid, but there is still a social element that impacts perceptions.
And as a historical reference, being a white minority didn't exactly make being Irish in America an easy experience at one time either.
My problem with it, as I have perhaps badly said before, is that he seems to be using an racial classification that he doesn't actually qualify for* primarily as a rhetorical device. He's appropriating other people's heritage and experience of discrimination to help dismiss it.
*Assuming Portuguese actually qualifies as Latino, which still isn't at all clear to me, not all Latinos are People of Color. Those of European descent are white. He claims he's PoC because he's Latino.
Admittedly, the practical nature of whiteness in the US is more complicated than that, particularly historically. Irish and Italians are well known for not being considered white in the past, but now both are generally, and certainly officially, considered as such. 1st generation European immigrants are often also discriminated against, especially if they don't speak good English. Their children however find it much easier to assimilate.
I was going to respond to Alex Martin, but thejeff pretty much summed it up for me. I really, really don't care how light skinned he is. My point is that he's entirely of Western European descent - he's Caucasian. He wouldn't have even bothered saying he was Latino if he hadn't seen that the DOL technically counts Portugese. (A fact he conveniently leaves out when claiming to be a PoC.)
You can claim to be anything you want to be, but it's stupid to take every one of those claims seriously. I had a German (as in Germanic descent) Math teacher in 10th grade that liked to say he was black - just really, really deep down - because humanity ALL hails from Africa. Is it racist to point out that no, really, he actually isn't black?
Sorry, but I don't see right-wing a-holes at the border with their guns turned on refugee children because they have a problem with the Portugese. Take issue with me not being 'open-minded' enough or treating it like a big gotcha racist moment if you want, but Correia really isn't Latino. Using it to gain some sort of credibility is disingenuous, and that's being generous.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
The point is show that he IS wrong if you disagree instead of saying well he is a bad guy so he must be wrong. Disprove his point not attack his person.I don't know. Once you realize that the headline here is "Bigot attacks blog post on racism", there really isn't much more to say.None of this actually gets at the specific Tor Books blog post vs response post by Corriea, though. You don't like some of his other positions, statements, and associations... but what about the topic at hand?
Indeed. Correia's best buds with Theodore "Vox Day" Beale, who is a virulent racist, sexist, and homophobe (I'm fairly sure trans people Don't Exist in Beale's world). Your friends inform who you are, and Beale's a LOT of information. Even without Beale, there's plenty of sexist, homophobic and transphobic commentary from Correia out there.Correia's been dismissive a lot of women's science fiction, of LGBT science fiction, of science fiction of people of color, of non-American science fiction (lumping all of them together as "message fiction" - ignoring the fact that all fiction is supposed to send a message), so the pattern is pretty well-established showing him to be a pretty big flaming bigot regardless of any use or nonuse of slurs.
Yep.
Correia has a pattern of bigotry and of denying the impact of bigotry when reported by other people.
I'm amused by the fact that calling out a pattern of actual behavior by the man in question is being called "character assassination." "Character assassination" would be if the claimed pattern of behavior were false - it isn't.
Jim Hines on Correia's dismissive take on nonbinary gender in fiction (note that the post Jim Hines takes apart is entirely similar in nature to the one in question, ignoring the substantive criticism being offered).
If you look in...
I see no bigotry there, like you tell me I will find. I actually see a very consistent message of do whatever the f&!# you want, but the most important thing is to make your story fun. Because if you don't make your story fun then no one will bother reading it.
But the important thing there is STORY. Not the cause of the day. STORY.
Because readers buy STORIES they enjoy and when readers buy our stuff, authors GET PAID.
So if humans having 5 or 6 sexes in the future is part of your story, write it. If it isn’t part of the story, why would you waste words on it? Oh, that’s right, because MESSAGE.
ProTip: Focusing on message rather than story is a wonderful way for writers to continue working at Starbucks for the rest of their lives.
Not that you can’t get a cause into your story, as long as you do it with skill. But the minute you destroy the default just to destroy the default, congratulations, you just annoyed the s!$# out of the reader. You want to slip in a message and not annoy your customers, that takes skill, so until you have developed your skills, don’t beat people over the head with your personal hang ups.
He is antagonistic, but there is not evidence that that is towards people of different sexual orientations or genders but, instead, authors who give bad advice to would-be authors. The article that spawned it was bad advice, and your posted fisking is a terrible response.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Having been several times to GenCon, I'm going to have to say that A.A. George's article is right on the money. The number of nonwhite attendees is still vastly outnumbered by the nonwhite cleaning and service staff. And if you walk around with a shirt that say "Kill Whitey" you're not gong to get the assumptions usually afforded to someone walking around in full SS Nazi gear.
It's still a heavily white and importantly, heavily MALE hobby. And it shows.
No one is arguing that.
George's article argues that the reason for it is racism (that he fails to actually show) and that it is a problem, and then proposes fairly impotent potential solutions after first insulting everyone at the con multiple times. That is what people are arguing about.|
|
Having been several times to GenCon, I'm going to have to say that A.A. George's article is right on the money. The number of nonwhite attendees is still vastly outnumbered by the nonwhite cleaning and service staff. And if you walk around with a shirt that say "Kill Whitey" you're not gong to get the assumptions usually afforded to someone walking around in full SS Nazi gear.
It's still a heavily white and importantly, heavily MALE hobby. And it shows.
Uh...I don't think a single person here, and certainly not Larry Correia, would argue that Gencon isn't mostly white, or even mostly male. It's both. The argument is with the claim that this is because the Con and the hobby are racist.
EDIT: Ninja'd by Caineach.
|
|
It is... it can't help being racist, because the people that founded the hobby like most of us grew up in a racist culture with certain preconceptions for norms.
This depends on how you define 'racism'...which is a large part of Correia's point.
You can't really argue that it somehow is magically "race/culture neutral."
I...don't think people were? I think the argument was that the reasons for that GenCon is mostly white are more complicated than simple racism, and that it wasn't actively exclusionary in the way implied.
You can argue with that, but it's not the argument you were making in the post I responded to.
I will say that even though I'm nominally "white", I've always felt out of place at GenCon due to my North Jersey boy origins. The MidWest culture is unavoidably different. And I've found the locals to be comparatively intolerant, compared to what I'm used to.
That's possible. I've never personally been to GenCon. All the 'evidence' that A.A. George presents of this is utter b!!$*%#~, though.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It is... it can't help being racist, because the people that founded the hobby like most of us grew up in a racist culture with certain preconceptions for norms. You can't really argue that it somehow is magically "race/culture neutral." I will say that even though I'm nominally "white", I've always felt out of place at GenCon due to my North Jersey boy origins. The MidWest culture is unavoidably different. And I've found the locals to be comparatively intolerant, compared to what I'm used to.Having been several times to GenCon, I'm going to have to say that A.A. George's article is right on the money. The number of nonwhite attendees is still vastly outnumbered by the nonwhite cleaning and service staff. And if you walk around with a shirt that say "Kill Whitey" you're not gong to get the assumptions usually afforded to someone walking around in full SS Nazi gear.
It's still a heavily white and importantly, heavily MALE hobby. And it shows.
Uh...I don't think a single person here, and certainly not Larry Correia, would argue that Gencon isn't mostly white, or even mostly male. It's both. The argument is with the claim that this is because the Con and the hobby are racist.
EDIT: Ninja'd by Caineach.
Its comments like these that make liberal ideas die before they hit the masses.
He's been there, I've been there several times as both player and GM. You by your own admission haven't been there ever. Are you open to the possibility that the conclusion you've reached is at least partly due to the fact that it's what you WANT to believe?It is... it can't help being racist, because the people that founded the hobby like most of us grew up in a racist culture with certain preconceptions for norms.This depends on how you define 'racism'...which is a large part of Correia's point.
You can't really argue that it somehow is magically "race/culture neutral."I...don't think people were? I think the argument was that the reasons for that GenCon is mostly white are more complicated than simple racism, and that it wasn't actively exclusionary in the way implied.
You can argue with that, but it's not the argument you were making in the post I responded to.
I will say that even though I'm nominally "white", I've always felt out of place at GenCon due to my North Jersey boy origins. The MidWest culture is unavoidably different. And I've found the locals to be comparatively intolerant, compared to what I'm used to.That's possible. I've never personally been to GenCon. All the 'evidence' that A.A. George presents of this is utter b+!@&*#$, though.
How does the quality of the argument change if he has been there? The article is targeting people who are unfamiliar with the con.
It determines what input is going into his evaluation. At best he's judging from third or fourth hand data as opposed to first hand experience. I don't know about you, but I tend to give a bit more weight to first hand experience.How does the quality of the argument change if he has been there? The article is targeting people who are unfamiliar with the con.He's been there, I've been there several times as both player and GM. You by your own admission haven't been there ever. Are you open to the possibility that the conclusion you've reached is at least partly due to the fact that it's what you WANT to believe?It is... it can't help being racist, because the people that founded the hobby like most of us grew up in a racist culture with certain preconceptions for norms.This depends on how you define 'racism'...which is a large part of Correia's point.
You can't really argue that it somehow is magically "race/culture neutral."I...don't think people were? I think the argument was that the reasons for that GenCon is mostly white are more complicated than simple racism, and that it wasn't actively exclusionary in the way implied.
You can argue with that, but it's not the argument you were making in the post I responded to.
I will say that even though I'm nominally "white", I've always felt out of place at GenCon due to my North Jersey boy origins. The MidWest culture is unavoidably different. And I've found the locals to be comparatively intolerant, compared to what I'm used to.That's possible. I've never personally been to GenCon. All the 'evidence' that A.A. George presents of this is utter b+!@&*#$, though.
And I tend to give weight to the people who can make reasoned arguments. The Tor article fails at this.
And I have been to Gencon. I agree it is mostly white. I disagree that the cause is racism within the community.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
He's been there, I've been there several times as both player and GM. You by your own admission haven't been there ever. Are you open to the possibility that the conclusion you've reached is at least partly due to the fact that it's what you WANT to believe?
I've been going since 1983 and I'd have a hard time saying Gen Con was racist. The fact that the hobby is mostly white may be the legacy of a society divided by racism but that hardly makes Gen Con racist or the racial differences a problem that Gen Con must address. Large concentrations of mostly white people are not inherently racist experiences.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
He's been there, I've been there several times as both player and GM. You by your own admission haven't been there ever.
Larry Correia's been there. Several people in the comments on A.A. George's article have been there...and very few seem to feel as he does, with more feeling the other way. EDIT: And other posters here have been there and feel similarly! :)
Now, maybe a lot of those people are white, and thus less likely to notice...but even if so we're dealing with a vanishingly small number of people who say that this specifically is a problem, and at least one of them (the article writer) uses utterly worthless 'evidence' to back up his point, and suggests solutions that seem to indicate that he may be seriously oversensitive on this issue due to his own prior experience. So...there's basically no good evidence for GenCon being especially racist as compared to, well, society as a whole.
I tend to go with the whole 'innocent until proven guilty' thing. My evidentiary threshold is a lot lower than a Court's on something like this...but it requires some plausible evidence.
Are you open to the possibility that the conclusion you've reached is at least partly due to the fact that it's what you WANT to believe?
I would if that was something I want to believe. I don't particularly. I already believe in institutionalized racism as a serious problem in our society...a specific example of such showing up with some real evidence supporting it I'll believe in a heartbeat. There is no such evidence here.
I don't really have a dog in this fight beyond thinking people are being too harsh to Larry Correia, who even if wrong (which I have yet to see evidence of) is presenting a pretty reasonable argument (if in a perhaps overly harsh manner).
Your dealing with a place where thousands of people are dressed in costumes buying stuff for costumes. There is a TON of costuming material at Gencon. I've been to smaller, 5K person cons with dozens of costuming booths. Saying costuming material isn't sold at a venue that caters to people costuming is ridiculous.
If you're at a convention the understanding is that the costumes are for presenting at conventions. It is never appropriate to wear a nazi uniform as convention cosplay.
Your dealing with a place where thousands of people are dressed in costumes buying stuff for costumes. There is a TON of costuming material at Gencon. I've been to smaller, 5K person cons with dozens of costuming booths. Saying costuming material isn't sold at a venue that caters to people costuming is ridiculous.If you're at a convention the understanding is that the costumes are for presenting at conventions. It is never appropriate to wear a nazi uniform as convention cosplay.
Lots of wargaming is WWII themed. Should the people playing axis not be able to dress for their role as general? It is a really common thing in the wargaming community, and in fact some tournaments give out prizes for it.
Frequently people demoing games will dress to advertise their games. As above, there are a lot of WWII themed games. Last time I was at Gencon I demoed one that was Nazi Zombies vs the US.
Nazis are villians in a lot of anime and video games. Lost of people cosplay villians. Should people not be able to dress as their favorite characters?
LARPs have a whole bunch of settings, and people often dress their characters. Should people cast as nazis in larps set in the 1940s not be able to dress the part?
Those are just a few possible reasons I can think of for someone wanting to dress the role in the past 5 minutes. The fact of the matter is, you have no context for why he was dressed like that. Any blanket statement about it being inappropriate I think is entirely unfounded.
You have a guy who blogged a post similar to those posted by people part of racist organizations (most notably stormfront...though you could probably find similar items on Arian Nations, KKK, or other racist sites)It has some questionable elements, and people are rightly saying that they disagree with those elements.
and people all over this thread are posting their support for it.No, they aren't. At the most, they're saying that they understand some of Correia's points and that they disagree with George.
Then again, racist people almost never consider themselves racistWhich makes it okay for you to accuse anyone who doesn't meet your personal standards of zealotry of supporting racism, right?
In regards to racism this is basically, white=right and minority and anyone else are wrong.I don't see anyone, anywhere in this thread stating or even implying that.
This is a very interesting thing for people to note. There IS discriminatory posts in this thread that are derogatory towards some minorities.
I imagine this could be a good test. Most minorities probably can see it...and those who have experienced it could as well.
Those who deny it...perhaps there should be a re-examination of how you view the world.
On another subject.
Latino is an Ethnicity. There IS a difference. This is why you can be white, and still be a Latino. Without actually identifying a race...and when you appear to be white...and seeing a majority of Latinos/Hispanics consider themselves white...well.
Those who are Native American Hispanics...they CAN and SHOULD mark it as such.
If they are Phillipino, or an Islander, or African American Hispanic, they should mark it.
This is NOT rocket science.
Now, the ethnicity is considered a minority. It can also be discriminated against, but being discriminated against does not make you a PoC by any means (unless you are suddenly considering every LGBT individual as a PoC...which they are not). Some of the worst discrimination in the world has been with Ethnic cleansing.
However, ethnicity and race are two separate and different things in the US. You can be Hispanic as your ethnicity, as well as being a member of any race you are a member of also. The majority (just like the majority in the US) according to the Census right now, are White Hispanics.
They can mark anything else on the Census if they so desire, they can mark it on the job applications and the social dynamic surveys. They can self identify as any race they want. When they simply say they are Hispanic or Latino though...the default is basically white. If they were Hispanic African American, they'd probably mention they were African American (as well as it probably being rather obvious as well).
They can do that for any other race as well.
Ethnic discrimination can be equally bad as racial discrimination. I won't argue that at all...however the guy was discussing racial discrimination and dismissing it out of hand.
I have never been to GenCon, but I have been around Gamers long enough to know that there is discrimination among them. I've learned to accept it. I can see it from people in this thread.
I have seen them move tables, sit on different rows, go to different chairs. I have seen a friend, a lone African American sitting alone (until I sat next to him) at a meeting where every other row had a bunch of people sitting there, but every seat in his row was empty...with him basically isolated. I don't think that was on purpose...but they simply felt they couldn't relate to him and hence sat with those they could relate...that is actually a form of racism in my eyes.
With these indications, if that happens to Asian guys at Gencon, where they sit alone while everyone else gathers in their groups...I could see how one could perceive racism. I know that there are women out there that warn against going to GenCon (or any other Con for that matter) due to what they consider harassment (whether it is or not, I don't know, just that I've heard the warnings).
As I said earlier, CRPGs is a booming business and you have TONS of every type of person from every race in those. They are RPGs, even if we don't see them as such...and we can see that RPGs DO appeal to people of every race and gender and orientation.
CRPGs can be just as expensive as a PHB (sometimes more expensive, typical new CRPG is $60 USD), and MMORPGs can be even more than that.
Saying it's because it's a middle class thing and that's why TTRPGs are primarily white males is ALSO rather discriminating...it's NOT because it's a middle class thing any more than CRPGs are a middle class thing as far as money is concerned.
It may not be racism either, but something on the border (similar to what I mentioned above with my friend, but less obvious and less intentional).
A primary example I could state in a similar situation would be the church Correia is part of. It's the Mormons. Now they currently try to cater to minorities, and they are making inroads. However, for a long time, and even today, many minorities don't go to the LDS church. Despite the large amount of Hispanics (which ARE a different ethnic group AND a minority) in Utah and the rest of the West, the LDS church remains primarily a White church in that section of the US (they are not primarily a white church in some portions of the world however).
In the South, they have a larger membership of African Americans, but it is still a white church overall in their active membership. Many who go who are African American at times feel isolated, that they don't fit in. That there is a cultural divide.
I'm not certain if that counts as racism necessarily, but it does count as feeling apart, not fitting in.
From the parts Correia quoted, a large amount of it dealt with this issue of not fitting in among those who are not the same race. Correia tried to mock it...but in truth, this is a VERY serious thing...and something that I could completely see happening at Gen Con (never been there, don't know, but from what I've seen from gamers elsewhere, they tend to congregate with what they know and feel comfortable with, someone different, an LGBT or perhaps minorities...sometimes they won't feel like that).
That in and of itself may not be racism....trying to cover up and blame the minorities for it...that's crossing the line into racism (or prejudice and discrimination when against other minorities such as LGBT, or even with women who aren't quite a minority, but equally discriminated against at times).
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Having been several times to GenCon, I'm going to have to say that A.A. George's article is right on the money. The number of nonwhite attendees is still vastly outnumbered by the nonwhite cleaning and service staff.
The only possible argument you can make from this is, "It must be racist, because it's full of white people!"
It is... it can't help being racist, because the people that founded the hobby like most of us grew up in a racist culture with certain preconceptions for norms.
And, what, somehow the entire hobby was left in the dark ages? Hell (no disrespect to them), many of the people who "founded" the hobby aren't even alive anymore!
"It can't help being racist," is just an enormous cop-out. Both of the major players in the industry (Paizo and WotC) now take major pains to foster inclusiveness and diversity. Actual racist incidents are quickly identified, publicized, and condemned because this community loves to be outraged by things.
I have seen zero evidence that there is a widespread and debilitating racially prejudiced undercurrent in the tabletop RPG community. Is it possible that such evidence exists, and that I've just managed to miss it entirely? Absolutely. But it does mean that you have to actually produce that evidence.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
This is a very interesting thing for people to note. There IS discriminatory posts in this thread that are derogatory towards some minorities.
I imagine this could be a good test. Most minorities probably can see it...and those who have experienced it could as well.
Those who deny it...perhaps there should be a re-examination of how you view the world.
Or maybe - maybe - you could actually point out which posts you feel are discriminatory and defend your accusations of discrimination, instead of pulling this "If you have to ask why you're being called racist, it just proves that you're a racist," nonsense.
The only post I can even think of that you might latch onto is the "I don't see race" one, and even that was simply an issue of vocabulary, not any actual discrimination.
My problem with it, as I have perhaps badly said before, is that he seems to be using an racial classification that he doesn't actually qualify for* primarily as a rhetorical device. He's appropriating other people's heritage and experience of discrimination to help dismiss it.
And that argument is certainly more valid when people reference statistics and solid information to argue it. The problem has been that people have uttered baseless statements and attempted to defame the man when he argues that he also has a racial/cultural heritage as part of the critique of George's article. If the argument is that he shouldn't be able to claim that status legally that is one thing. But the implication that his argument doesn't hold weight (as some have stated) because somehow being Latino/Hispanic doesn't apply or doesn't have a history of racial prejudice is not acceptable if your very stance is that there is racism in Correia's argument.
And if you want to dismiss Correia as disingenuous to discuss the issue of diversity in gaming, that's understandable. But, again, there have been times that people have spoken in agreement with his points or at least disagreed with George's article. And its been implied on this thread that the person doesn't understand because of their racial background. And when that person has said, I do have an ethnic background (whether it's Serbian, Greek, Portuguese, Hispanic, etc.) and I do know what discrimination is, there's been a tendency to dismiss it or explain it away as if it does apply.
For clarification, I used your quote for reference because it was concise to the gist of the argument. I am not singling you out as an example or making an accusations of you personally.
You have a guy who blogged a post similar to those posted by people part of racist organizations (most notably stormfront...though you could probably find similar items on Arian Nations, KKK, or other racist sites)It has some questionable elements, and people are rightly saying that they disagree with those elements.
and people all over this thread are posting their support for it.No, they aren't. At the most, they're saying that they understand some of Correia's points and that they disagree with George.
Then again, racist people almost never consider themselves racistWhich makes it okay for you to accuse anyone who doesn't meet your personal standards of zealotry of supporting racism, right?
In regards to racism this is basically, white=right and minority and anyone else are wrong.I don't see anyone, anywhere in this thread stating or even implying that.This is a very interesting thing for people to note. There IS discriminatory posts in this thread that are derogatory towards some minorities.
I imagine this could be a good test. Most minorities probably can see it...and those who have experienced it could as well.
Oh there are racist things here. You can't see them, but they are there... Point them out or don't make the claim.
Those who deny it...perhaps there should be a re-examination of how you view the world.
I do. Constantly. I think your definition of racism is ridiculous, unworkable, and can be used to claim anything is racist.
On another subject.Latino is an Ethnicity. There IS a difference. This is why you can be white, and still be a Latino. Without actually identifying a race...and when you appear to be white...and seeing a majority of Latinos/Hispanics consider themselves white...well.
Now, the ethnicity is considered a minority. It can also be discriminated against, but being discriminated against does not make you a PoC by any means (unless you are suddenly considering every LGBT individual as a PoC...which they are not). Some of the worst discrimination in the world has been with Ethnic cleansing.
However, ethnicity and race are two separate and different things in the US. You can be Hispanic as your ethnicity, as well as being a member of any race you are a member of also. The majority (just like the majority in the US) according to the Census right now, are White Hispanics.
They can mark anything else on the Census if they so desire, they can mark it on the job applications and the social dynamic surveys. They can self identify as any race they want. When they simply say they are Hispanic or Latino though...the default is basically white. If they were Hispanic African American, they'd probably mention they were African American (as well as it probably being rather obvious as well).
They can do that for any other race as well.
Ethnic discrimination can be equally bad as racial discrimination. I won't argue that at all...however the guy was discussing racial discrimination and dismissing it out of hand.
Making the statement that Hispanics are PoC is not disingenuous. Sure, it may not be technically correct, but the vast majority of people I am willing to bet do not consider it to be. I know until your posts I have never heard of someone using the term to not include Hispanics or Latinos.
Also, every federal form I have seen treats Hispanics as a separate race. It is right there along with white (not Hispanic). I have yet to fill out a census form, but a lot of other documentation requires/asks for it it, like every job interview I have been on. I have never seen ethnicity asked.
I have never been to GenCon, but I have been around Gamers long enough to know that there is discrimination among them. I've learned to accept it. I can see it from people in this thread.
I have seen them move tables, sit on different rows, go to different chairs. I have seen a friend, a lone African American sitting alone (until I sat next to him) at a meeting where every other row had a bunch of people sitting there, but every seat in his row was empty...with him basically isolated. I don't think that was on purpose...but they simply felt they couldn't relate to him and hence sat with those they could relate...that is actually a form of racism in my eyes.
With these indications, if that happens to Asian guys at Gencon, where they sit alone while everyone else gathers in their groups...I could see how one could perceive racism. I know that there are women out there that warn against going to GenCon (or any other Con for that matter) due to what they consider harassment (whether it is or not, I don't know, just that I've heard the warnings).
Or it is because he didn't really know people there and most people come to events in groups that try to find a place by themselves. Have you ever actually watched a space like this fill? People don't like sitting near people they don't know. Skin color may have been a factor, but claiming racism from seeing the seating arrangements of a group of random people once is ridiculous without support.
As I said earlier, CRPGs is a booming business and you have TONS of every type of person from every race in those. They are RPGs, even if we don't see them as such...and we can see that RPGs DO appeal to people of every race and gender and orientation.
CRPGs can be just as expensive as a PHB (sometimes more expensive, typical new CRPG is $60 USD), and MMORPGs can be even more than that.
Saying it's because it's a middle class thing and that's why TTRPGs are primarily white males is ALSO rather discriminating...it's NOT because it's a middle class thing any more than CRPGs are a middle class thing as far as money is concerned.
Or it is because people get exposed to video games in different ways than they get exposed to TTRPGs. You can go into a video game store to buy Call of Duty and be exposed to Skyrim. Relatives go into video games stores and buy random stuff all the time. Video gaming is a well known hobby relatives will get as gifts. TTRPGs are sold in specialty stores you have to know about before waking in to, and unless a relative is also a gamer, they will have no idea to buy you it for Christmas. Not to mention a single video game can easily have the budget of the entire TTRPG anual market, so they can spend a lot more on advertising.
You don't need friends to enjoy a CRPG. You don't need to convince them to play with you. There are different social stigmas against spending your time alone on a video game than getting friends together to play a social game. Different communities in the US have different social stigmas, and those communities can have heavy racial bias. Those stigmas can prevent people from even asking their friends if they want to try a game with as much negative connotation as D&D has. I know in high school I didn't even want to admit to anyone outside my gaming group that I played D&D, and I was a textbook nerd. How hard can it be for someone who is black to bring it up with a group he feels may judge him for wanting to play something with a "white" stigma, I can only imagine. But I have read and talked too far too many black people whom have said the backlash they received for playing games was worse or at least on par in the black community than the lack of fitting in they felt in the gamer community, because of the huge stigma against "acting white".
From the parts Correia quoted, a large amount of it dealt with this issue of not fitting in among those who are not the same race. Correia tried to mock it...but in truth, this is a VERY serious thing...and something that I could completely see happening at Gen Con (never been there, don't know, but from what I've seen from gamers elsewhere, they tend to congregate with what they know and feel comfortable with, someone different, an LGBT or perhaps minorities...sometimes they won't feel like that).That in and of itself may not be racism....trying to cover up and blame the minorities for it...that's crossing the line into racism (or prejudice and discrimination when against other minorities such as LGBT, or even with women who aren't quite a minority, but equally discriminated against at times).
People feel uncomfortable outside of their culture all the time. I went to a Motley Crew concert the other night and was highly uncomfortable because I don't have a mullet, wasn't wearing a wifebeater, and turned down the guy offering me shrooms. It's not the fault of a new community if you don't feel like you fit in. Everyone doesn't fit in somewhere, no matter how welcoming the community thinks it is.
Additionally, Correia mocked him for bringing up his high school hangups and projecting them on the convention attendees, and for implying that somehow all of his teenage angst was related to racial discrimination. Every teen has angst. That entire section, in context, was quite mockable.
We should really leave the feds and the census out of this. Neither has any definitive bearing on how person/people of color is actually used.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Wouldn't it be funny if the guy dressed as a nazi was just cosplaying that anime series with Dracula? Or being a nazi zombie or something? I'm not making a serious point here, but it would be nice to actually know more than "NAZI UNIFORM EXISTED SOMEWHERE NEARBY GENCON".
I think the problem here is that one side is saying "tor.com sucks" and the second is saying "Correia sucks". Fellas, fellas! Can't we both be right?
;D
Helsing! That was the anime's name. Saw a couple clips from it. My favorite character was the "Tinker-tailor-soldier-sailor" lady, but she got eaten. Worst show 1/10 (10/10 IGN).
I actually did point out quite a number of the posts to Paizo...they did not take action.
That's to be expected, as there is a LOT of discrimination on these boards already.
Listing all the posts that are out and out discriminatory (most at the beginning) and those that are pretty borderline (nearer to the middle to the end) would be a LOT of work, I flagged the most disturbing ones however.
I used the Census, because these are the forms they use, and most documentation I've filled out in regards to the Feds has the same definitions.
I utilized the Census records because they are ONLINE, and EASY to find. People don't want to accept surveys and other information which may be more valid, but not easily accessible to the public. The Census Bureau information is easily accessible however...which is why I utilized it.
Federal law is VERY defining on how racism is perceived and utilized in the US law as it is how things will work in court, in discrimination lawsuits, and regarding hate crimes.
People say there is no racism, but I see a LOT of racism even in this thread. It's directed more at the same person the blogger responded to, and it's pretty ugly.
Why Paizo tolerates this amount of racism on it's boards, especially when they supposedly promote tolerance...is rather surprising to me to tell the truth.
In fact, some of what you are seeing in this thread really horrifies me...and really makes me wonder how blind many in the community are.
I see there are those here that ARE against racism and discrimination too, and I am cheered that there are a few that will fight against the evils of it in this thread also.
But if this thread can harbor such hatred and malice towards a poor Asian kid that had a racist blogger tear into them...and these are the same people that attend Gen Con, I don't even have to go to Gen Con to pretty much be guaranteed everything the kid probably said was correct.
Some of the stuff in this thread, borders on what I'd find when a member of Stormfront tries to crash Affirmative action boards and discussions, or Arian Nations tries to convince those around them that there is no white racism or superiority...or even when certain types try to justify discrimination against those of different sexual orientations by saying it's not discrimination and using every excuse you see here to justify it.
HOW about this...instead of trying to say there is no racism and trying to pretend such ugly things don't exist...instead of supporting a racist and trying to say a white guy is a PoC....why not look at how things could be changed.
This could be a learning experience, as I have pointed out. It is obvious there is a problem in the narrowness of the people playing TTRPGs from what we can see (without the scientific studies though, it's is only a posit as it's impossible to truly tell), the questions that should arise shouldn't be to support someone who is racist...but how to change to TTRPG community so that it accepts ALL those who want to play RPGs (there is even a divide in the CRPG community, but there are FAR more minorities, and PoC I imagine demographically that play then that are visible in the TTRPG community).
But many are so caught up in their racism, that instead of using this to discuss how to change this culture to one that minorities may feel more accepted, it's turned into one where they'll defend the racist and blame the minority.
It's not hard to find the racism in the thread, just look at the posts supporting the racist...
With such vitriol directed against those who are different, just in this thread...yeah...I'd be afraid to go to Gen Con too if this is a good representation...and PAIZO is supposed to be the place for people who are more tolerant.
If this is a representation of that...and other RPG places are worse...then yes...I would almost be able to say there is an active discrimination (and not just a ignorance or subtle one) going on in the RPG community against anyone who is not the status quo.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As one more item...
I finally went and read the original post on Tor.com.
AS a member of one of a set of minorities (though perhaps not the same as the author) I absolutely can relate to what that author is saying....and he nails it.
Correia took a LOT of what he countered out of context or mocked an experience that MANY REAL minorities have had as kids.
Especially the part where the kid talks about how he felt as a youth...
Many of those wonder why they can't be "normal" or be like everyone else.
To put down such a thing...after reading the original article and now seeing that blogpost in even more context...I am even MORE aghast at some of the comments in support of the guy.
Like REALLY aghast.
I was wrong...some of this stuff is exactly the type of stuff I'd find if I went to Stormfront itself probably.
The biggest part I think that was meaningful was this
There may be more efforts to include people of color in gaming artwork, but where are the real life people of color on the grand stage of gaming?
And especially this which you can see occasionally in this thread
Too many conversations on race and gaming die before they even start. I have seen more energy, debate, and engagement by gamers on the minutiae of rules and trivia than I have on the weighty topics of race and gaming. Gamers will spend endless days and millions of words fighting over the pros and cons of the Wacky Wand of Welding, but when a person of color brings up issues of race and diversity in the community, too many gamers roll their eyes and say, “Oh not again. Why do they have to be so politically correct? Can’t they just have fun?!”Despite the apathy and dismissal, I know that there are people who want to work with the minority community to change these realities. I know there are allies and advocates who want to make gaming a different place, one that’s open in new ways to minorities and their communities
Which is really part of his point. Correia apparently disagrees.
I know which side I actually would take...and that is to work to change realities...not put down minorities.
And that is what the real point of the article was...how to change it so that all people feel welcome at the Cons and not just a majority of White males.
PS: Article is found here Gaming's Race Problem
He is also connected (but apparently not in charge of) this site
With an excellent introduction by a minority in the same arena of Correia ironically but from a female aspect that has this to say...
Why are you involved? I myself am a Hispanic woman who loves gaming and wants to help the gaming community become healthier, happier, and more robust. Unfortunately, I’ve personally experienced discrimination and harassment because of my minority status, which to be frank, at times has almost turned me off to gaming entirely. I’ve talked to a lot of others who have experienced the same thing. I want to prevent this kind of alienation from happening to people who are only looking for a place at the table. There are a lot of great things about gaming, but the prevalence of discrimination isn’t one of them.There are no individuals to point fingers at (okay, maybe some). The issue is largely systemic. The othering of minorities is encoded into the art, the design of games themselves. It’s reinforced socially at the gaming table by majority members who are mostly unaware of the things they do to make minority members not feel welcome or like they don’t have a place in the community.
My work with Gaming as Other revolves around addressing these systemic issues, getting people to think about what we can do better when we make and play games so that this hobby can be more widely shared and appreciated, and nobody is left out in the cold. I do a lot of consulting work with designers and do some design work myself. I sit on panels, give talks, and participate in organized active events.
Some of you may actually know her.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I actually did point out quite a number of the posts to Paizo...they did not take action.
Clearly, you're not getting what Scott Betts was saying. He was, I think, prodding you to identify what posts or statements you thought were racist and defend them in this thread. And until you do, I don't think many of us are really going to understand what you think were racist statements.
Clearly, you're not getting what Scott Betts was saying. He was, I think, prodding you to identify what posts or statements you thought were racist and defend them in this thread. And until you do, I don't think many of us are really going to understand what you think were racist statements.I actually did point out quite a number of the posts to Paizo...they did not take action.
I pointed it out above, you can start counting them from the beginning. There are quite a number of them.
I'm not going to list half this thread for your pleasure, nor should I have to.
It should be obvious which ones are the more racist of the posts to tell the truth...but if you want to look at some...look at the first two pages, it's awful.
In addition, after reading the original TOR post, and from what I've seen here, I'm not so certain I'd ever want to go to Gen Con...I'm part of a minority, and if they are that racist against an Asian who merely pointed out demographics and asked for ways to get more minorities gaming...I can only imagine how horrendous they'd be towards me.
Then again, I have to assume people are like this and racist to this degree because of the internet and anonymity. The TOR writer also stated he was excited to go to Gen Con, so perhaps much of the racism is simply hidden racism that people would NEVER do or SAY in public (or we can hope).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I actually did point out quite a number of the posts to Paizo...they did not take action.
That's to be expected, as there is a LOT of discrimination on these boards already.
Accusing the Paizo moderators of discrimination against any demographics other than sling-wielders and monstrous races?
monstrous races
#triggerwarning
#notallkobolds| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I actually did point out quite a number of the posts to Paizo...they did not take action.
It's almost as if the incredibly inclusive people at Paizo do not necessarily share your (to be honest, rather extreme) perception of what qualifies as racism and racist support!
It should be obvious which ones are the more racist of the posts to tell the truth...
You're essentially pulling the activist version of "If you don't know why I'm mad I'm not going to tell you!" Do you think that's how a healthy dialogue works, GreyWolfLord?
but if you want to look at some...look at the first two pages, it's awful.
We should comb through literally 100 posts to try and figure what meets your personal standards of racism (that no one else appears to share)?
In addition, after reading the original TOR post, and from what I've seen here, I'm not so certain I'd ever want to go to Gen Con...I'm part of a minority, and if they are that racist against an Asian who merely pointed out demographics and asked for ways to get more minorities gaming...I can only imagine how horrendous they'd be towards me.
Oh my gosh I know they were just soooooooo horrible.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What's white? Go to a Klan meeting sometime, and you may be quite surprised to find out that you don't fit in their definition.I'm a Serb. Trust me I know something about discrimination. And yes, I'm white.
Well, I'm of Slavic descent from both sides of my family all the way back to the middle ages.
Blue eyes, fair skin, blonde/ginger/brown beard... I'd say that categorizes me as white.
EDIT: Scott I'll have to try 4th edition too, I find myself agreeing with you a lot on this thread.