A muggle like you would say that. That is why your people are inferior. That and not having magic.
Hogwarts Legacy Will Allow For Transgender Characters
- Thread starter thebobmaster
- Start date
- Status
I would say the same thing about colours having some sort of gendered meaning. That stuff is utter nonsense
That this notion seems to unironically course through the story with both the good guys and the bad guys is already kinda fucked.
Yeah, but wasn't the mom a wizard too though? I've only ever seen the movies, but there never seemed to be any sort of real overlap between the magic world and the normal world. And that's always bugged me for multiple reasons, both thematic and practical. There's the notion that one section of humanity can just apparently run everything and leave out everyone else, because 'eh, they're just a bunch of weak normies who can't contribute anything to our cool magic world'. Which would be an engaging hook if this was the bad guys' philosophy, or a societal injustice, but the good guys seemingly harbor the same sentiments.
And this then also makes this magic world come across as terribly outdated. I mean, there's areas that look like they're straight out of the middle-ages. Would you really just ignore all the modern conveniences ontop of having magic? And I don't think this ever gets adressed as an issue that maybe they need to move past. We're just supposed to go 'these are the magic people who live in magicland, and these are the normies who live in normieland, and never the two shall meet' as a rule for buying into this world, I guess.
And I suspect Rowling only set this universe up like that so that the magic world can feel extra special in comparison to the normal world. Because the only reason the normal world seems to ever get in involved in the Potterverse is when it shows characters going from that setting into the magical setting. As if to say 'yeah, fuck that world and all the people in it; THIS is where all the cool shit happens'. And I'm sure that to little kids this is extremely inticing. And while I liked the spirited away sort of stories even long into my twenties, the way Harry Potter did it always rubbed me the wrong way.
If you think that's bad, wait until you read Shaman King. The manga is even worse in this regard. The author seems to have a really big hate boner for humanity. Because they're "weak, impotent, lazy, cruel, selfish, and hate nature". What's worse is that the story tries to say that there are no evil shamans only good, well intentioned, or "misguided". Thankfully, the anime adaption does not suffer from this. Seriously, fuck the manga, its ending, and its sequel too.
Last edited:
Then what was with the whole Snape being in love with her, and them being best friends at Hogwarts? Unless I'm remembering that wrong. Also, didn't her sister super resent her for having magic and being allowed to go to Hogwarts, and that's why she treats Harry like shit and is aggresively against him using magic? I seem to remember the movies talking about that.
His mother was a witch, but she came from a non-magic family. He isn't particularly bullied because of that (though he is for various other reasons), just he doesn't know a lot of stuff that people born into magic families do, but the same is true of Hermione and others.
Yeah, second that.
You're not remembering that wrong, all that is correct.
I had a Game Gear back in the day. I remember playing Master System Sonic and Mortal Kombat 2 port.
Loved that it had built in light screen, and hated Nintendo for taking so long with the Gameboy when Sega has done it years ago.
(I know they've already done it before the SP, but for some baffling reason they never released it outside Japan)
Where does that happen though? Something that's reitrated multiple times throughout the books is that your bloodline doesn't define you. This is carried over all the way to the last book. By Cursed Child, Hermione's become minster of magic, despite being a Muggle-born for instance.
Isn't that kind of par for the course for Marvel in general though?
So, the movies don't go into this nearly as in-depth as the books, but there's a few things to keep in mind:
-In-universe, wizards have reason to be wary of Muggles, given the history of witch-burnings and whatnot (presumably this happened in other countries too, since the Wizarding World has their own UN-equivalent who decided years ago it was best to segregate themselves from Muggles).
-Wizards in general are prejudiced against Muggles, ranging from mild disdain ("oh those silly normies who are too silly to recognise magic") to outright loathing (as in, Nazi-esque loathing). However, the books don't see this as a good thing, since there's multiple times where characters are critical of the Wizarding World's segregation from, and ignorance of, Muggles. Off the top of my head, this includes book 4 (where Dumbledore bothering to read Muggle newspapers is an oddity, yet gives him insight into Voldemort's activities), and book 7 (where Kingsly Shacklebolt, when asked about the notion that Muggle lives are worth less, says (paraphrased) "if you want to go by that logic, then we might as well start putting pure-blood lives over half-bloods, half-bloods over Muggle-borns, and so on" (he puts it far more eloquently than that).
-Concerning the Wizarding World itself, it is flawed. That's kind of a plot point. This isn't just an observation from the reader, this is something that Dumbledore states in book 5 where (paraphrased), "we wizards have looked down on other creatures too long, and now we're paying the price for it."
Basically, if you depict a flawed world, and do so intentionally, I don't see that as a problem.
I think that's a reasonable take, but I don't think that's the full story.
What's irritated me is that Rowling's tried to apply 'retroactive wokeness' to the books,. "Why yes, Dumbledore WAS gay, even though that's never shown." "Why yes, lycanthropy IS a metaphor for AIDS, despite there being no real evidence for that." "Why yes, Hermione's skin colour WAS never specified (a lie), so of course her actress can be black" (which isn't a problem, as I've specified earlier - it's an unneeded solution for a non-existent problem). "Why yes, there ARE Jewish students at Hogwarts, even though I've never shown any." (which left me wondering why people were even asking - how does religion even factor in, especially since Abrahamic religions aren't exactly charitable towards witchcraft).
Thing is, I disagree with a lot of fan interpretations (that the house elves are slaves, that the goblins are anti-semitic, etc.), but Rowling bugs me more here. The Harry Potter books were written in the 90s to 2000s, and take place almost entirely in the former of those decades. There's nothing wrong with them not being as 'woke' as current material, but FFS Rowling, stop claiming that stuff was there that wasn't. People aren't stupid. They can smell bullshit from a mile away, and retroactively claiming brownie points isn't fooling anyone.
Actually, no, in the beginning of one book (I think the third) it's said that witchburnings didn't get real witches as protection from fire is a really easy spell apparently. And that at least one witch allowed themselves to be burned multiple times under different names because they were kinky, which given she's talking about horrific murder, doesn't come across as funny.
Well, there's the issue that this isn't really addressed. Kill Voldemort, go back to the status quo
Yes and no.
Yes we know the differences are only visible in adults.
No as the whole documentary is exploring we don't know if it is nature or nurture and we may never know because to find out would require some seriously unethical experiments on children. What we can say is at present adults do show neurological differences in the brain between men and women (worth pointing out that present research into trans individuals based on Dr Verma's research shows their brains to be more in line with their gender identity than birth sex). The other thing pointed out in the documentary is seemingly the differences exist regardless of lets say professional acumen. As was shown the woman scientist in the program had one of the same reactions to other women to one of the experiments (the Swivel chair thing)
Her results technically agree with him in so far as "Well adults are like this so this is the reality we have to work with for now unless we can prove somehow we can modify peoples brains somehow to form into something other than one or the other main overall structure.
I strongly disagree.
E.G. I have Coeliac (Genetic gluten / wheat intolerance). There's actually a character in the Arrowverse who says he's gluten intolerant at one point. I thought cool so finally people will understand a bit better and I won't have to deal with feeling bad having to create possible extra work for people due to it. Nope next episode he's drinking a beer, the same beer as everyone else. if it were good representation he wouldn't be able to because while there is Gluten free beer out there it's not that widely available and it's far easier to just have something else instead. If it's about people learning about things then that's bad representation of a condition I have because now people will think I can just crack open a beer with everyone else no problem and if I say otherwise I'm just being awkward because their perception of it if they don't know me but do remember the character on TV would be that it would be fine for me to have the beer.
Thing is said titles kinda work by doing it right away rather than trying to balance the two. Like you get 1 Mission as Snake in MGS 2 then the whole rest of the game is Raiden. You don't spend about half the game as Snake then suddenly it's Raiden time.
I have a feeling that the game will be largely relegated to history in 10 years like a number of Oscar Winners that the public mostly disagreed with the critics on. Ultimately The Last of US Part II's theme and story is basically done in the show Hell on Wheels but done far better. Hell on Wheels achieves what The Last of Us Part II was seemingly trying to do with it's narrative by really building up the desire to watch a character get revenge by having the character be a real villain but a somewhat sympathetic one as you learn how he came to be how he is and why he acts as he does basically having his faith in humanity destroyed and taking it out on some-one else. It then does a 2 or 3 episode sequence which goes from somewhat cliche western gunfight round a farmstead to a prorogued slugfest in a desert like I'm talking a near 30 minute long fist fight where each is worn down more and more only barely able to stand and fight just out of anger at the other. Then a whole episode about the guy villain being hung which isn't framed as a great success or triumph but a failure that it's had to come to this and that the villain is so twisted by what he went through that there is no other option really.
I mostly point the video out because of the commentary on yet another "cancelling".
Which you seem to agree with in your very next paragraph. And I think you and I both know what I think of most games journalists considering previous threads, the fact that he doesn't have any links to the industry directly is a good thing imo.
Not to mention you don't need to be have any direct contact with the industry to have opinions on it, otherwise this entire forum would be pointless as it is a bunch of gamers who are just talking about what they see going on within the industry from an outside perspective.
Neither am I but I still managed something good enough that Jason Schreier of all people sourced something I wrote as part of what lead to one of his pieces. Yahtzee started off where his whole background in the industry was making point and click adventures distributed freely them made some reviews and was picked up because he was doing interesting stuff.
Michael Jones of Rooster Teeth was an electrician who made videos getting angry and bad / hard video games now he's a pretty well known name and at least adjacent to the games industry.
Don't fall into the trap of thinking the industry core bubble is all there is. I remember not that long ago on twitter you yourself were on about how certain people in the games journalism sphere were getting mad at you and The Escapist site for not acting a certain way. Yet I'd hope The site isn't failing and this is one of the few sites I think is still pretty respectable and trying to do good work because unlike many other site you are covering indie games and title I've not heard of sometimes and not merely the AAA SEO optimised algorithmically determined optimal thing. You're leading the way not following some expected trend.
Is UEG a great source of info? Who knows. But I will say he's echoing similar sentiments to what you've expressed on twitter before about how some people really had axes to grind against the Escapist and wanted you to go a certain way with it and you chose not to which got them mad.
I will say based on my knowledge of UEG he actually started off as a streamer who specialised in Streaming "The Division" and did likely have some contact with Ubisoft devs etc when he used to stream and cover that title. As for developer interaction I used to have 350 twitter followers and got some interaction with devs (often small indie devs) and I think with how twitter is going some devs likely have gone back to email exchanges etc. So while I doubt you are don't fall into the trap of thinking twitter is all there is.
1 of 2
- Status