*Bangs head against wall*
This thread has proven that, once again, you people who constantly complain about SJWs and people on Tumblr are completely ignorant of what those people actually
want. As someone who spends quite a bit of time on Tumblr and willingly runs into social justice fairly frequently (and I suppose you could count me as one too, if you want to pigeon hole people), this sounds like exactly the kind of examination of feminism they'd
like. Let's break it down:
(Oh, first,
BIG disclaimer, this is based on what I've read in this article and watching the trailer (which is 100% gameplay by the way. I don't have any super secret knowledge, I'm just interpreting this based on what they've said and my knowledge of SJW... Stuff.)
---
1. Saying the setting is post-feminism, especially with the comparison to the Soviet Union, is very interesting. You see, one of the things that gets commonly criticised by "SJWs" is the notion of post racial, post gender, post whatever-form-of-discrimination society; or rather, not that those things are
bad but that we are nowhere near achieving them and that claiming that we have only causes people to turn a blind eye to any inequality that still exists. So in this case, based on the Soviet Union comparison, the idea seems to be that it's not feminism that is inherently destructive (so I assume since they say they're neutral towards feminism as a whole), it's patting each other on the back and declaring "Mission Accomplished!" when you still live in a world full of problems. Basically, the description of this post-feminism setting makes me think of this:
2. The subject of transgender rights, and trans women in particular, gets argued over a lot. Those described as trans-exclusionary radical feminists are, well, against seeing trans women as women, in particular coming up with ideas that trans men are 'deserters' and trans women are 'men trying to infiltrate... Stuff'. Loosely speaking, anyway. If you've ever actually been on Tumblr for long, you know they get quite a lot of well-earned shit for being arseholes like that. So basically if the rulers, the villains of the piece, are trans-exclusionary feminists then I'm betting you that 90% of SJWs are going to be entirely in agreement that they should be brought down.
3.
HURR DURR HAVING A PLAYER CHARACTER WHO'S PART OF TWO MINORITIES IS POLITICAL CORRECTNESS GONE MAD, HURR DURR. I swear to fucking God seeing this always pisses me off, because it's such blatant bullshit. Being part of a minority is not like assigning character points, okay? Some people are racial minorities. A certain percentage of
that minority will also be parts of
other minorities. This is basic maths guys. Bulgarian Turks, or any other racial group, are not somehow incapable of being transgender in this case, or gay, or disabled, or whatever else. It seems weird to me that people don't
get this. Oh, and another thing. The city of Plovdiv is
IN Bulgaria. You're bitching about a character being a Bulgarian Turk in Bulgaria. "What? Other countries have racial minorities too?! Mind fucking blown, man!"
"Hey, we want to change things up from the classic straight-white-male character. But only a bit at a time, okay? Like a white woman, or a black man. Change too many bits at once and that's going too far, alright?"
---
Those are my thoughts on the subject, or at least those I could get down. I'm just going to say, I consider myself a feminist, and this looks interesting to me. I'm going to play it if I can. Probably not going to back it on Kickstarter but that's because I've never backed anything on Kickstarter.
Grumman said:
The Lunatic said:
Keep in mind, the target of satire in this is "Feminists" who don't believe that transgendered women are worth of the title "Woman", rather than you know, actual feminists.
The target is me, in other words. It's got nothing to do with worth, by the way. I am a man because I am male, I was born with an X any a Y chromosome and I have a penis. I disagree with transsexuals and their advocates because they read more into it than that, and I find it offensive that believing an physically male person should
ever need to "turn in their man card" has become a symbol of progressive orthodoxy instead of being reviled for advocating conformity to gender stereotypes.
When you say "turn in the man card", do you mean undergo surgery? If you find that's the problem, then you'll be glad to know that there are large numbers of trans-inclusive feminists (I haven't done a survey, I'm just going off my anecdotal experience here) who feel that someone's gender is entirely down to how they identify. If they want to undertake surgery or other medical procedures, that's entirely their business but makes no difference to whether or not they are a man/woman.
If on the other hand you find that genetics and genitalia are the sole defining feature of someone's gender, well then we're going to have to either agree to disagree or spend a lot of time arguing.
Oh well. I'll keep an eye out for this when it's done.
