Funny Events of the "Woke" world

[CriticalGaming]

Are you going in there and discussing how it needs to be better written representation for males?

No that's never been my argument. The whole point I've tried to make is that a character being LBGT can't be their only defining trait. Which has been a lot of the problem with existing shows. The same way the character can't just be a woman which was also the problem with shows like Dr. Who.

They can't just be a minority, or LBGT, or whatever. They also have to be fully fleshed out characters too, otherwise it's pointless because there is no depth to make the character interesting. Being a girl, being LBGT simply isn't interesting by itself, and that's where good writting must be in place around them in order to make the story entertaining.

 

[Thaluikhain]

I'm at least 90% that people wanting more diverse characters weren't interested in characters who were diverse and nothing else. Now, accepting the crumbs thrown by lazy writers and PR, that's another issue altogether.

 

[CriticalGaming]

I'm at least 90% that people wanting more diverse characters weren't interested in characters who were diverse and nothing else. Now, accepting the crumbs thrown by lazy writers and PR, that's another issue altogether.

Then we've reached a common agreement i think.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

They can't just be a minority, or LBGT, or whatever. They also have to be fully fleshed out characters too, otherwise it's pointless because there is no depth to make the character interesting. Being a girl, being LBGT simply isn't interesting by itself, and that's where good writting must be in place around them in order to make the story entertaining.

I mean, most action blockbusters are starred by Gruff Straight White Guy and there's no "but they have to be better written or including them is useless" argument.

Why're they the default and anybody else needs a reason?

 

[CriticalGaming]

I mean, most action blockbusters are starred by Gruff Straight White Guy and there's no "but they have to be better written or including them is useless" argument.

Why're they the default and anybody else needs a reason?

I feel like a lot of those blockbusters get shitty reviews and even flop because they are trash ass movies. So I don't really see how your standment makes sense.

 

[CriticalGaming]

On a different topic.
This is the kind of shit that yield terrible results. When you hire people based on gender and sexual preference, you are not hiring people right for the job. Pushing for diversity in the workforce makes no sense. People should be hired based on being qualified to do the job and nothing else matters (except a background check Elon).

Basically this lady got hired for a fake job that is designed strictly for PR reasons and nothing else.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

I feel like a lot of those blockbusters get shitty reviews and even flop because they are trash ass movies. So I don't really see how your standment makes sense.

Because you're saying, and I quote:

They can't just be a minority, or LBGT, or whatever. They also have to be fully fleshed out characters too, otherwise it's pointless because there is no depth to make the character interesting. Being a girl, being LBGT simply isn't interesting by itself, and that's where good writting must be in place around them in order to make the story entertaining.

Why's the straight white guy get a pass?
John Rambo gets a pass, Janice Rambo doesn't...because?

 

[CriticalGaming]

Why's the straight white guy get a pass?
John Rambo gets a pass, Janice Rambo doesn't...because?

The white dude doesn't automatically get a pass, they also have to be characters too. There is no exception.I merely use Rambo as an "action hero" example, not nessescarily as a perfect example.

There are shit loads of boring, bland, and lame white guy heroes. Like James Bond. James Bond fucking sucks. Interestingly enough Rambo isn't bad as his sense of duty and determination really helps his character there, he could be better but he isn't a bad example either imo.

 

[Buyetyen]

This is the kind of shit that yield terrible results. When you hire people based on gender and sexual preference, you are not hiring people right for the job. Pushing for diversity in the workforce makes no sense. People should be hired based on being qualified to do the job and nothing else matters (except a background check Elon).

Basically this lady got hired for a fake job that is designed strictly for PR reasons and nothing else.

This assumes that there aren't qualified POC and queer people.

 

[CriticalGaming]

This assumes that there aren't qualified POC and queer people.

If they are qualified then their minority status is irrelevant. The problem with these diversity hire pushes is that the companies often have to lower their job requirements in order to make people "qualified".

You know what they should do instead of trying to hire people that check random boxes?

Set up a scholarship program for women and LBGT people. Help fund these people into school course that would teach them the skills they need to become valuable game developers. This would encourage more diverse people getting into tech and programming educations and thus diversifying the job market.

 

[Buyetyen]

If they are qualified then their minority status is irrelevant. The problem with these diversity hire pushes is that the companies often have to lower their job requirements in order to make people "qualified".

Citation needed. Still assuming that queer folks and POC aren't qualified. A lot of them are. They just don't get employed because even though white people are insistent otherwise, hiring bias is a thing.

Set up a scholarship program for women and LBGT people. Help fund these people into school course that would teach them the skills they need to become valuable game developers. This would encourage more diverse people getting into tech and programming educations and thus diversifying the job market.

How is that not just corporate indenture?

 

[Thaluikhain]

If they are qualified then their minority status is irrelevant.

In theory, yes. In practice, no. For example, very so often, people do something like make up identical resumes and send them to a bunch of companies, once with a white sounding name and once with a not-white sounding name, and get much better responses for the ones with the white sounding names, and this comes as no surprise to anyone.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

Reminds me when orchestras swore up and down that they were only hiring the best, then they actually started doing blind auditions and guess what happened.

 

[CriticalGaming]

In theory, yes. In practice, no. For example, very so often, people do something like make up identical resumes and send them to a bunch of companies, once with a white sounding name and once with a not-white sounding name, and get much better responses for the ones with the white sounding names, and this comes as no surprise to anyone.

Are there LBGT sounding names? That example only works in one way and it only works as a social expirament and doesn't equate how real people look for jobs.

 

[thebobmaster]

Are there LBGT sounding names? That example only works in one way and it only works as a social expirament and doesn't equate how real people look for jobs.

Real people don't look for jobs by sending in resumes? Because that's literally all the experiment is: writing identical resumes, save for the names, sending them in, and seeing which ones get responses. Most recent study I could find was done in 2004. I'll link the full study if you want to peruse it, but the abstract, I'll quote directly.

" We study race in the labor market by sending fictitious resumes to help-wanted ads in Boston and Chicago newspapers. To manipulate perceived race, resumes are randomly assigned African-American- or White-sounding names. White names receive 50 percent more callbacks for interviews. Callbacks are also more responsive to resume quality for White names than for African-American ones. The racial gap is uniform across occupation, industry, and employer size. We also find little evidence that employers are inferring social class from the names. Differential treatment by race still appears to still be prominent in the U. S. labor market."

Are Emily and Greg More Employable Than Lakisha and Jamal? A Field Experiment on Labor Market Discrimination - American Economic Association

Are Emily and Greg More Employable Than Lakisha and Jamal? A Field Experiment on Labor Market Discrimination by Marianne Bertrand and Sendhil Mullainathan. Published in volume 94, issue 4, pages 991-1013 of American Economic Review, September 2004, Abstract: We study race in the labor market by...

www.aeaweb.org

ETA: Also, while there are not necessarily LGBT names as such, most if not all jobs require you to list any names you have used in an official capacity in order to do a background check...which would be a dead (sorry) giveaway for anyone who is transgender, as it's pretty clear when a former identity of John Smith is Jane Doe, or vice versa.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

The white dude doesn't automatically get a pass, they also have to be characters too. There is no exception.I merely use Rambo as an "action hero" example, not nessescarily as a perfect example.

There are shit loads of boring, bland, and lame white guy heroes. Like James Bond. James Bond fucking sucks. Interestingly enough Rambo isn't bad as his sense of duty and determination really helps his character there, he could be better but he isn't a bad example either imo.

Yeah, but you aren't objecting to those on principle

 

[CriticalGaming]

Yeah, but you aren't objecting to those on principle

They aren't the topic. I object to those garbage characters all the time.

 

[CriticalGaming]

Real people don't look for jobs by sending in resumes? Because that's literally all the experiment is: writing identical resumes, save for the names, sending them in, and seeing which ones get responses. Most recent study I could find was done in 2004. I'll link the full study if you want to peruse it, but the abstract, I'll quote directly.

I still think this is an abstract expirement because real people don't send in resumes under false names. And typically when job hunting you are supposedly showered your resume over jobs you desire and are qualified for.

That website you linked requires be to have some sort of account to look at the full report. I would like to see how many overall jobs called back each person, and if there was any overlap. Additionally they say that the resumes are identical, does that mean they sent in resumes to the same job that were exactly the same? Because if I saw a resume that had the exact same work experience and education as another resume I would instantly throw them out because I would assume it was a bot or something. Then you also have to consider that the hiring manager is going through resumes and called the first ten or so people from resumes that look good enough to interview, which possible means that some of the resumes sent in by this expirament wouldn't even be seen in te first place. There are a lot of real world variables that make any evidence gained from this study fishy from the beginning.

You have to draw a lot of conclusions about how these resumes got processed. And it seems that this study is being done in bad faith because it really sounds like that they already decided the job market is racist before they even began and then just did whatever logic jumps they needed in order to make racism the conclusion. That's why I said it was a social expirament more than it can be definitive.

 

[Buyetyen]

You have to draw a lot of conclusions about how these resumes got processed. And it seems that this study is being done in bad faith because it really sounds like that they already decided the job market is racist before they even began and then just did whatever logic jumps they needed in order to make racism the conclusion. That's why I said it was a social expirament more than it can be definitive.

Translation: fuck methodology, it's telling you something you don't want to hear.

And you're still assuming that these POC and queer people seeking jobs in the gaming space are not qualified, and that's why no one's hiring them. It's a circular argument.

 

[Silvanus]

Not to mention you can't have the gay person doing anything unfavorable. Like there is a big complaint that trans people are often villains to a degree in movies and games.

Catherine Full Bodied got ratio'ed by trans people on twitter because the trans character "tricks" the main character into sleeping with them in the game. Thus making it a comedic thing at the expense of the trans character because they had to exist as a villian to trick the main character. This happens in 40-year-old-virgin as well as many other comedy films in which a character has an unexpected encounter with a trans person and it's played off as a, "Hahaha surprised that girl has a dick" joke.

The question for the representation crowd, is could there be a truly dispicable villain in a movie or game that was LBGT and it be okay? Would that be acceptable inclusive to make the character something people love to hate. Or would it be blasted as an excuse to show violence against a LBGT person?

For all the talk about representation, and inclusion, there are some aspects of that representation that the community doesn't want to have any part in.

You can twist anything into a negative, and the internet is well verse on this, so how far should media take the inclusion and representation before the communtiy would back off on it?

Of course there could be villains that're gay and its fine. Its only become an issue because of how frequently homosexuality is associated with villainy. Its utilised as a trait to further demonise.

The idea of a trans character lying and tricking a straight person into sleeping with them is an issue for a very specific reason: that's a real-world stereotype with a long history, which has been used as a justification to abuse and even murder trans people in the past.