On Geek Privilege
- Thread starter MovieBob
- Start date
Recommended Videos
No he didn't. He compared someone who is on a crusade to make video games illegal vs. two people are who looking at problems within the video game community and offering possible solutions.Robert Marrs said:
Congratulations on taking things out of contest. In fact, you ignored what YOU said previously.Vegosiux said:
Let's try this again.
'All that it takes for evil to thrive is for good people to do nothing.'
If there is a problem, and clearly there is one, and you do nothing, then you are part of the problem.
I'm not asking you to start a campaign. I'm not asking you to spend 200 hours a day fighting against it. (Remember that 200 hours part? You said it.) Just call it out when you see it. That's the least you can do. That may very well be literally the least you can do. If you say, "I'm not doing that, but I'm doing this." Okay, good. But I'd ask why you don't do the easy thing as well. Maybe there's a good reason for that.
ON THE OTHER HAND, there are more than a few people here who are not only doing nothing, they are actively attacking those who are point out the problem. They play the victim card as an excuse not to do anything, which is exactly what MovieBob was talking about.
He made a comparison to both people having the same motives of trying to change something to support their personal views. There is a difference between trying to make something illegal and trying to shame/convince people to agree with you. There is not a difference with trying to change something people enjoy to fit your own personal views. That is the comparison and it is an accurate one.C.S.Strowbridge said:
*slow clap*ultreos2 said:
*clapping intensifies*
/thread. We can all go home now; I'm not even joking. This cuts through a lot of the irrelevant crap that has been clogging up the true issue, which is that you don't get people on your side for social change with heavy-handed accusations and belligerent guilt trips.
*thunderous applause* <- At least I should hope so.
Firstly, that's like saying a dictator and the democratically elected government is the same thing, because they both has the same goal, governing.Robert Marrs said:
Secondly, I can actually point out psychological studies that support both MovieBob and Anita Sarkeesian. Jack Thompson is an idiot who was disbarred for, among other things, using intimidation tactics on those who disagreed with him. Hell, Jack Thompson has a lot more in common with those opposed to Anita Sarkeesian than Anita Sarkeesian herself.
Gorrath said:
Ahhhahahaah no.
The Bechdel test is a bad joke it fails on even trivial examination applied to specific works (lesbian porn passes, really that's *all* you need to know, and it denigrates works for simple historical accuracy when talking about say, combat troops in the US military before 2013, or for that matter if somebody made a movie about the first women to enter into those combat and 'combat' positions, the first women serving on submarines right now might be slightly short of female companionship). more recently you also have works deliberately trying to pass, which leads to hamfisted stuff like D plots where smurfette goes off and had a conversation with a friend in a way totally unrelated to the plot. Regardless its completely unnecessary to have such a superficial test, you can in fact, actually examine a work in a non superficial way rather than a three item checklist taken from a comic strip.
It also, and this is a bit more subtle, can't be applied to compare groups of works. Movies for example have far less dialogue and characters than TV shows, so TV shows are more likely to pass through sheer chance, and individual TV episodes in turn have less than movies. Works that focus on a specific character will tend to automatically fail if the protagonist is male (because he is present for every conversation) and automatically pass if the protagonist is female (unless, as mentioned, she's deliberately put in a male-dominated space). Genres can't be compared as well, its pretty much expected for example that romance and romantic comedy conversations not between the couple will focus on the relationship (though of course, there on non straight offshoots of the genres, expect lesbian ones to pass and gay ones to fail).
Again, you can make more in depth examinations, with case specific criteria (IE, the sparsity of female characters in science fiction as a whole is a standalone problem, war movies have a different built in expectation).
It reminds me of all of the people of my generation, who were bullied in school for being nerdy/geeky and enjoying nerdy/geeky things, who now cry foul at the idea of individuals who were never before interested in games, comics, and sci-fi now taking up said hobbies as they become more prominent in today's media. The argument I hear is similar to the 'fake gamer girls' argument, that you can't simply take up our hobbies because we were bullied for them about 15 years ago - as if we only allow people into the 'club' once they've been properly hazed. Alpha Geeks will generally do their best to not only shun these people, but also shame them due to an internalized hatred they developed through being forced to suffer just because of the things that they love.
The trouble here is that suffering should not only NOT be passed on to others, it should not be glorified either. To say things like "I was bullied because I liked these things, you have no idea what I went through" is not only a pathetic statement, it also perpetuates the idea that suffering should be glorified, and that only by suffering for something should someone have the right to enjoy it.
OT: Great article, Bob! Absolutely worth reading and reflecting on as the 'Geek chic' culture becomes a driving force behind our popular culture.
The trouble here is that suffering should not only NOT be passed on to others, it should not be glorified either. To say things like "I was bullied because I liked these things, you have no idea what I went through" is not only a pathetic statement, it also perpetuates the idea that suffering should be glorified, and that only by suffering for something should someone have the right to enjoy it.
OT: Great article, Bob! Absolutely worth reading and reflecting on as the 'Geek chic' culture becomes a driving force behind our popular culture.
Yes and no, dose everything need to become a negative, dose everything have to taken to its absolute worst narrative. I think people are more and more becoming intolerant of others who think differently than them. That combined with shallow trend mongering you wind up with things mindlessly blown out of proportion because its popular to not question the trend. People really need to grow some thick skin and get over themselves and that's coming from a fat mentally disabled white male whose far far far from the perfection that's displayed in media or what goes for normal these days.
Yes we can improve things but going after every little thing turns you into "we know better than you" censor nazi which partly invalidates that side of the argument.
PS:Wow the ban nazis are out and about over working hard these days..... this is why I do not post much anymore you never know when or where they will strike....
Yes we can improve things but going after every little thing turns you into "we know better than you" censor nazi which partly invalidates that side of the argument.
PS:Wow the ban nazis are out and about over working hard these days..... this is why I do not post much anymore you never know when or where they will strike....
So, it's not okay for gay men to at like assholes, even though they were oppressed, but it's totally okay for women to do the same thing for the same reasons?
I'm sure I'll be labelled a misogynist for what I just said, but that;s not the case, I'm just annoyed by hypocrisy.
I'm sure I'll be labelled a misogynist for what I just said, but that;s not the case, I'm just annoyed by hypocrisy.