Concerns about "Fists of the Ruby Phoenix"

[James Jacobs]

Sensitivity readers are a good thing. And just because we did something before doesn't mean we know everything about it.

At the same time, there does seem to be a subset of folks out there who are eager to see us at Paizo fail.

They're certainly interesting times we find ourselves in, so let's try to remember that and focus on the positive rather than pushing the negative... from ANY stance.

[magnuskn]

James Jacobs wrote:

Sensitivity readers are a good thing. And just because we did something before doesn't mean we know everything about it.

I'm sure they are helpful to get a more accurate depiction of historical context and so that you avoid any unintentionally hurtful cultural mistakes.

But the view I've seen expressed here goes more in the direction that you shouldn't write the material at all, since you still could possibly offend someone, non-withstanding that there will always be someone who feels offended at something.

In my opinion, if you don't go farther than what mainstream Asian media portrays themselves as in their fantasy depictions, there should be no issue.

[CorvusMask]

You are being an alarmist there though. Like you keep saying that you could be right or wrong, but you aren't willing to present what makes you think you are right because they'd be too political for forum rules :p

So without being able to discuss this in detail, you just come across as "I believe I've seen this trend and thus I will present a slippery slope fallacy"

Plus honestly lot of what you say does sound like exaggeration. Because when people see three people saying one thing, suddenly its "everyone" or "really often". Human mind just works in that way.

Like yeah, it is true that you can't avoid offending everyone, but you seem to think that paizo is being scared of writing anything and thus will write nothing when there is really no evidence of paizo writers being that overly sensitive to illegitimate criticism?

[Grankless]

It's really less that tournament arcs are somehow racist in and of themselves than "multinational fighting tournament" tends to breed very stereotypical characters. Look at the majority of the Street Fighter cast, for instance.

[magnuskn]

Look at the Ruby Phoenix Tournament module to see how Paizo already handled it quite respectfully.

Also, colorful personalities are something Asian creators are giving their own creations all the time.

[CorvusMask]

magnuskn wrote:

Also, colorful personalities are something Asian creators are giving their own creations all the time.

Just to note that people usually offended by Asian portrayals in American media tend to be Asian-Americans.

I don't have very deep understanding of this subject, but its pretty much about minority feeling stereotyped or marginalized by the majority. It's different thing from when you are part of the majority and see foreigners stereotyping you, lot of people in that position just find it funny or amusing. (I can confirm, finnish stereotypes are funny :p UNLESS its done by Swedish in which case we resent portrayal as violent alcoholics ;P )

[magnuskn]

In this case it would be Paizo using archetypes (not stereotypes) of mythical asian-themed fighters in a tournament, probably heavily drawing on the Chinese, Korean and Japanese cultural background, since the martial arts of those three Asian nations are most represented in the modern perception of asian martial arts. Note that China, South Korea and Japan are all major industrial nations and certainly far from being "marginalized communities".

[thejeff]

magnuskn wrote:

In this case it would be Paizo using archetypes (not stereotypes) of mythical asian-themed fighters in a tournament, probably heavily drawing on the Chinese, Korean and Japanese cultural background, since the martial arts of those three Asian nations are most represented in the modern perception of asian martial arts. Note that China, South Korea and Japan are all major industrial nations and certainly far from being "marginalized communities".

But as CorvusMask said, it's Asian-Americans more likely to be offended by such portrayals in American media. How Chinese, Japanese or Korea nationals feel about it at home may be different than how people descended from those groups, but living as a historically marginalized community in the US feel.

That community is the one that has to deal directly with any prejudices found in the host country.

All that said, now that China especially is a huge movie market, companies definitely tailor their blockbuster movies for Chinese concerns. Unfortunately that's as likely to be for government nationalist reasons as any concern for the ethics of appropriation, representation or anything else.

[magnuskn]

First off, can anyone here show me quotes from actual Asian-Americans about how they have been offended by Paizo's past portrayal of Asian culture in The Ruby Phoenix Tournament or Jade Regent?

Not white dudes talking FOR Asian-Americans, mind you. Then I'd love to engage with what the actual Asian-Americans found bad about the portrayal of Asian culture in the actual released work from Paizo.

[CorvusMask]

*shrugs* As I said, I don't have deep knowledge of the subject. First time I heard about this was in context of D&D's Oriental Adventures book where someone on enworld was arguing with asian-american poster about how their asian friend(in asian country) wasn't offended by it and how thus clearly they shouldn't be offended by it either(to frustration of said asian-american person).

Whether Jade Regent and Ruby Phoenix Tournament handled their representation well, on that I have no idea.

[thejeff]

magnuskn wrote:

First off, can anyone here show me quotes from actual Asian-Americans about how they have been offended by Paizo's past portrayal of Asian culture in The Ruby Phoenix Tournament or Jade Regent?

Not white dudes talking FOR Asian-Americans, mind you. Then I'd love to engage with what the actual Asian-Americans found bad about the portrayal of Asian culture in the actual released work from Paizo.

I don't know. I was responding only to the idea that it wouldn't matter because Japan, China and (South) Korea are major industrial powers, not marginalized.

If Asian-Americans aren't bothered by it, then that's cool. Paizo did a good job.

[the nerve-eater of Zur-en-Aarh]

thejeff wrote:

I don't know. I was responding only to the idea that it wouldn't matter because Japan, China and (South) Korea are major industrial powers, not marginalized.

If Asian-Americans aren't bothered by it, then that's cool. Paizo did a good job.

Are you operating on the basis that "not being offensive to USAns descended from people from (X)" is significantly more important than "not being offensive to people who currently live in (X)" ?

[ekaczmarek]

the nerve-eater of Zur-en-Aarh wrote:

thejeff wrote:

I don't know. I was responding only to the idea that it wouldn't matter because Japan, China and (South) Korea are major industrial powers, not marginalized.

If Asian-Americans aren't bothered by it, then that's cool. Paizo did a good job.

Are you operating on the basis that "not being offensive to USAns descended from people from (X)" is significantly more important than "not being offensive to people who currently live in (X)" ?

While I don't have any hard data to back this up at the moment, I think Paizo's primary audience is America, followed by Canada and Western Europe. Which means for Paizo (and importantly their bottom line), not being offensive to people who live in America is more important than people who live in China and Japan.

[Gorbacz]

ekaczmarek wrote:

the nerve-eater of Zur-en-Aarh wrote:

thejeff wrote:

I don't know. I was responding only to the idea that it wouldn't matter because Japan, China and (South) Korea are major industrial powers, not marginalized.

If Asian-Americans aren't bothered by it, then that's cool. Paizo did a good job.

Are you operating on the basis that "not being offensive to USAns descended from people from (X)" is significantly more important than "not being offensive to people who currently live in (X)" ?

While I don't have any hard data to back this up at the moment, I think Paizo's primary audience is America, followed by Canada and Western Europe. Which means for Paizo (and importantly their bottom line), not being offensive to people who live in America is more important than people who live in China and Japan.

Correct, US+CAN is 80% of D&D/Pathfinder market.

[thejeff]

the nerve-eater of Zur-en-Aarh wrote:

thejeff wrote:

I don't know. I was responding only to the idea that it wouldn't matter because Japan, China and (South) Korea are major industrial powers, not marginalized.

If Asian-Americans aren't bothered by it, then that's cool. Paizo did a good job.

Are you operating on the basis that "not being offensive to USAns descended from people from (X)" is significantly more important than "not being offensive to people who currently live in (X)" ?

No. Follow the conversation, don't make up things based on one post.

For context:

CorvusMask wrote:

magnuskn wrote:

Also, colorful personalities are something Asian creators are giving their own creations all the time.

Just to note that people usually offended by Asian portrayals in American media tend to be Asian-Americans.

I don't have very deep understanding of this subject, but its pretty much about minority feeling stereotyped or marginalized by the majority. It's different thing from when you are part of the majority and see foreigners stereotyping you, lot of people in that position just find it funny or amusing.

Followed by:

thejeff wrote:

magnuskn wrote:

In this case it would be Paizo using archetypes (not stereotypes) of mythical asian-themed fighters in a tournament, probably heavily drawing on the Chinese, Korean and Japanese cultural background, since the martial arts of those three Asian nations are most represented in the modern perception of asian martial arts. Note that China, South Korea and Japan are all major industrial nations and certainly far from being "marginalized communities".

But as CorvusMask said, it's Asian-Americans more likely to be offended by such portrayals in American media. How Chinese, Japanese or Korea nationals feel about it at home may be different than how people descended from those groups, but living as a historically marginalized community in the US feel.

That community is the one that has to deal directly with any prejudices found in the host country.

And then:

thejeff wrote:

magnuskn wrote:

First off, can anyone here show me quotes from actual Asian-Americans about how they have been offended by Paizo's past portrayal of Asian culture in The Ruby Phoenix Tournament or Jade Regent?

Not white dudes talking FOR Asian-Americans, mind you. Then I'd love to engage with what the actual Asian-Americans found bad about the portrayal of Asian culture in the actual released work from Paizo.

I don't know. I was responding only to the idea that it wouldn't matter because Japan, China and (South) Korea are major industrial powers, not marginalized.

If Asian-Americans aren't bothered by it, then that's cool. Paizo did a good job.

In context, my last line was clearly about Asian-Americans instead of "white dudes talking FOR Asian-Americans", while the previous part simply clarified that I was talking theoretically about why there might be a difference in whether either group takes offence, not that I had first hand knowledge of one doing so.

That said, I do think that "major industrial power" vs "marginalized group" does make a difference, even if it's only in the likelihood a particular portrayal will lead to more direct harm. Taking potshots at an equal on the world stage is one thing, targeting a vulnerable population in your own country is something else entirely.

[PossibleCabbage]

Grankless wrote:

It's really less that tournament arcs are somehow racist in and of themselves than "multinational fighting tournament" tends to breed very stereotypical characters. Look at the majority of the Street Fighter cast, for instance.

It feels like the solution here is just "don't do that". Like Street Fighter is not going to spend a lot of time in India, for example, so everything about Dhalsim and his culture end up encoded in his stage and his animations (to very mixed results), but Pathfinder can just set an adventure somewhere if we want to explore what the people in a given place are like (or might have already done so in the previous 11 years.)

There's no reason to do "here is the fighter from Nidal, he or she shows you everything you need to know about Nidal" because there are whole books written about Nidal if you want to find out.

[The1Ryu]

CorvusMask wrote:

Just to note that people usually offended by Asian portrayals in American media tend to be Asian-Americans.

I don't have very deep understanding of this subject, but its pretty much about minority feeling stereotyped or marginalized by the majority. It's different thing from when you are part of the majority and see foreigners stereotyping you, lot of people in that position just find it funny or amusing. (I can confirm, finnish stereotypes are funny :p UNLESS its done by Swedish in which case we resent portrayal as violent alcoholics ;P )

I find this fascinating. So if I consider the depiction of an American in a piece of media to be offensive that doesn't matter because I live in the US. But if I move to Japan my opinions about the depiction suddenly become valid and I should be listened to because I'm now a minority?

[thejeff]

The1Ryu wrote:

CorvusMask wrote:

Just to note that people usually offended by Asian portrayals in American media tend to be Asian-Americans.

I don't have very deep understanding of this subject, but its pretty much about minority feeling stereotyped or marginalized by the majority. It's different thing from when you are part of the majority and see foreigners stereotyping you, lot of people in that position just find it funny or amusing. (I can confirm, finnish stereotypes are funny :p UNLESS its done by Swedish in which case we resent portrayal as violent alcoholics ;P )

I find this fascinating. So if I consider the depiction of an American in a piece of media to be offensive that doesn't matter because I live in the US. But if I move to Japan my opinions about the depiction suddenly become valid and I should be listened to because I'm now a minority?

I think the argument is more the other way around: People living in their own culture, especially when that culture is a world power, are more likely to laugh off other culture's bad takes of them. People from that culture living within the other culture, are less likely to do so.

In other words, we shouldn't let the fact that most Americans living in America are just amused by American depictions in Japanese media override the complaints of Americans living in Japan.

There is also a separate argument you might be thinking of that CorvusMask wasn't making, which is that power matters. Dominant groups should be especially careful about bad depictions of minority groups because when those holding the power spread harmful stereotypes of others it's far more likely to lead to harm than the other way around. The underprivileged group lacks as much power to act on those harmful stereotypes.

[AnimatedPaper]

The1Ryu wrote:

CorvusMask wrote:

Just to note that people usually offended by Asian portrayals in American media tend to be Asian-Americans.

I don't have very deep understanding of this subject, but its pretty much about minority feeling stereotyped or marginalized by the majority. It's different thing from when you are part of the majority and see foreigners stereotyping you, lot of people in that position just find it funny or amusing. (I can confirm, finnish stereotypes are funny :p UNLESS its done by Swedish in which case we resent portrayal as violent alcoholics ;P )

I find this fascinating. So if I consider the depiction of an American in a piece of media to be offensive that doesn't matter because I live in the US. But if I move to Japan my opinions about the depiction suddenly become valid and I should be listened to because I'm now a minority?

Much simpler. People that live as a minority inside of a different culture are no longer strictly of their home culture, and will react differently. This is especially true if that minority status lasts across generations; the diaspora starts to develop a new culture that reflects both.

So it’s not that your opinion is suddenly more important, but it might be different than someone back home in the lower 48. Whether your opinion has more weight when it comes to marketing depends on the product; consider the two adaptations of Mulan by Disney. Some of the changes from animated to live action were at least partly driven by how much more important the Chinese market has become, in some cases erasing the touchstones important to the diaspora in favor of story beats more favored by the mainland.

[CorvusMask]

thejeff wrote:

The1Ryu wrote:

CorvusMask wrote:

Just to note that people usually offended by Asian portrayals in American media tend to be Asian-Americans.

I don't have very deep understanding of this subject, but its pretty much about minority feeling stereotyped or marginalized by the majority. It's different thing from when you are part of the majority and see foreigners stereotyping you, lot of people in that position just find it funny or amusing. (I can confirm, finnish stereotypes are funny :p UNLESS its done by Swedish in which case we resent portrayal as violent alcoholics ;P )

I find this fascinating. So if I consider the depiction of an American in a piece of media to be offensive that doesn't matter because I live in the US. But if I move to Japan my opinions about the depiction suddenly become valid and I should be listened to because I'm now a minority?

I think the argument is more the other way around: People living in their own culture, especially when that culture is a world power, are more likely to laugh off other culture's bad takes of them. People from that culture living within the other culture, are less likely to do so.

In other words, we shouldn't let the fact that most Americans living in America are just amused by American depictions in Japanese media override the complaints of Americans living in Japan.

This and

AnimatedPaper wrote:

The1Ryu wrote:

CorvusMask wrote:

Just to note that people usually offended by Asian portrayals in American media tend to be Asian-Americans.

I don't have very deep understanding of this subject, but its pretty much about minority feeling stereotyped or marginalized by the majority. It's different thing from when you are part of the majority and see foreigners stereotyping you, lot of people in that position just find it funny or amusing. (I can confirm, finnish stereotypes are funny :p UNLESS its done by Swedish in which case we resent portrayal as violent alcoholics ;P )

I find this fascinating. So if I consider the depiction of an American in a piece of media to be offensive that doesn't matter because I live in the US. But if I move to Japan my opinions about the depiction suddenly become valid and I should be listened to because I'm now a minority?

Much simpler. People that live as a minority inside of a different culture are no longer strictly of their home culture, and will react differently. This is especially true if that minority status lasts across generations; the diaspora starts to develop a new culture that reflects both.

So it’s not that your opinion is suddenly more important, but it might be different than someone back home in the lower 48. Whether your opinion has more weight when it comes to marketing depends on the product; consider the two adaptations of Mulan by Disney. Some of the changes from animated to live action were at least partly driven by how much more important the Chinese market has become, in some cases erasing the touchstones important to the diaspora in favor of story beats more favored by the mainland.

This.

I can say that most Americans seem to find Metal Wolf Chaos absolutely hilarious :p

[The1Ryu]

thejeff wrote:

The1Ryu wrote:

CorvusMask wrote:

Just to note that people usually offended by Asian portrayals in American media tend to be Asian-Americans.

I don't have very deep understanding of this subject, but its pretty much about minority feeling stereotyped or marginalized by the majority. It's different thing from when you are part of the majority and see foreigners stereotyping you, lot of people in that position just find it funny or amusing. (I can confirm, finnish stereotypes are funny :p UNLESS its done by Swedish in which case we resent portrayal as violent alcoholics ;P )

I find this fascinating. So if I consider the depiction of an American in a piece of media to be offensive that doesn't matter because I live in the US. But if I move to Japan my opinions about the depiction suddenly become valid and I should be listened to because I'm now a minority?

I think the argument is more the other way around: People living in their own culture, especially when that culture is a world power, are more likely to laugh off other culture's bad takes of them. People from that culture living within the other culture, are less likely to do so.

In other words, we shouldn't let the fact that most Americans living in America are just amused by American depictions in Japanese media override the complaints of Americans living in Japan.

There is also a separate argument you might be thinking of that CorvusMask wasn't making, which is that power matters. Dominant groups should be especially careful about bad depictions of minority groups because when those holding the power spread harmful stereotypes of others it's far more likely to lead to harm than the other way around. The underprivileged group lacks as much power to act on those harmful stereotypes.

What constitutes a ‘bad depiction’ or a stereotype? What is the criteria that one uses to determine if something is one of these things and what way do a privileged group, in these examples Americans as a whole, act on harmful stereotypes. Isn’t the ability to demand one group be more considerate to another group which then is not equally call upon to be considerate to the first group a form of power that the ‘underprivileged’ over the ‘privileged’ group.

[Sara Marie]

There are a bunch of flags in here and I am just gonna close this up until tomorrow.