Not with that attitude, it won't. If people accept "Oh, that's just how it is," then... no, it won't.Uber Waddles said:Overall, I like your points. There are certainly some points I dont see eye to eye on, mostly because realistically they won't change or aren't something that bad in the first place For example: you will not stop people from saying 'you got raped' in games. It sucks that it wont happen, but its just like people saying 'thats gay' for something stupid. And, for both cases, I dont see it as a swipe against rape victims or homosexuals, its just a word that has a stigma attached to it (which is unfortunate for 'gay', but not everyone is tolerant) thats used in conjunction with something not so pleasant. Is it bad? Yes. Does it tear us down as a culture? Yes. Will it change? Unfortunately, no.
There's a line from comedian, Nick Swardson, that I always think about when something like this comes up. (I'm paraphrasing here)lordwindowlicker said:I still refer to things as "gay" in a negative sense, but only because it has become the colloquial norm. I would never speak ill of gay people, or try to argue against what is clearly someone's natural, sexual tendencies.
Introducing: The Game Estra-Thinker...The Game Lady-Thinker...That's all I've got but it could be coming. Can't wait to see more Necro-Thinker.RoseArch said:Then why hasn't there been a FemBob yet in your TGO series?
using the word rape to mean lose doesn't equate to sexismflying_whimsy said:This is probably the most pissed off I've ever heard movie bob sound; I don't blame him, either, as I've said the exact same thing on more than one occasion over the last few years. I remember calling some friends out on throwing the word rape around more casually than I was comfortable with and they looked at me like I grew a second head.
Seriously, nerd culture based sexism is something I would seriously like to see go away. Forever.
My thoughts exactly, a person should have the right to express unpopular opinions in a private setting.Callate said:But where I get nervous is where Bob seems to be saying that there is no private place for attitudes or ideas that the general public finds offensive, only the public sphere where it comes right out of the gate to get immediately pelted with fruit for its intrinsic wrongness.
That idea disturbs me. I know we're increasingly living in a culture where privacy is a thing of the past. And certainly if you're doing something like a show or a podcast, you take the good of creating something for public consumption with the bad. Likewise, for example, if you're an employer, you better pay attention to laws about discrimination. The availability of fair workplaces where people don't feel threatened or harassed is an issue that effects us all, and I think as a society we're better for strong laws that protect us that way.
But I don't see the harm of Mac users quietly echoing to each other the superiority of users of their chosen platform, or "furries" sharing fantasies with one another, to give two examples (neither of which include me), despite the fact that expression of those ideas in the public sphere might get those who express them treated with derision and disgust.
Shorthand to be later misinterpreted: I see the problem with expressing a bad attitude in public as though the public should accept and mainstream that attitude. I'm concerned with that form of indignation, however righteous, being carried over into areas where people who may recognize their attitudes and ideas are "niche" want to share them with each other.
Why should people have to censor themselves when their playing things like Xbox live? Last I checked, you can mute peoplePunch You said:It isn't okay to enjoy your hobby while degrading women and making other members of your hobby look like dicks who you assume share your messed-up view of the world.
A lot of the attitudes that we now consider sexist or racist or homophobic were pretty close to the mainstream not all that long ago. To be clear, I'm not sorry to see those attitudes go. But I'm less than confident that "Thinking this makes you a terrible person, get back in the closet", so to speak, is an attitude that is effective in producing change. It may eventually. But in the meantime, it seems as likely to create a chain reaction of backlash after backlash between two groups who think differently, giving each plenty of opportunity to beat their chests and describe themselves as oppressed martyrs or rebels against tyranny. Nor am I entirely confident that the majority always refines emotionally charged ideas into moral gold.lordwindowlicker said:Well, he clearly stated that free speech allows you to say what you want. However, you must be ready for the consequences. If you say something overtly racist, you will be called on it. If you say something homophobic (looking at you Santorum) then you'll be challenged. You CAN say what you want but if it is stupid or hurtful, you are going to see a backlash.
Beyond that, I can't think of a single reason to hold onto outdated attitudes that would cause such hateful things to be spewed. I still refer to things as "gay" in a negative sense, but only because it has become the colloquial norm. I would never speak ill of gay people, or try to argue against what is clearly someone's natural, sexual tendencies.
Can anyone give me a good reason why racist, sexist, or homophobic ideas or attitudes should be given a safe haven?
As for your tangent about furries and Mac users, that seems wholly unrelated to the issue at hand.
I really don't think that's what bob was saying, though. Like he stated, you have the right to say what you want. You also have to be aware of what comes next.Callate said:A lot of the attitudes that we now consider sexist or racist or homophobic were pretty close to the mainstream not all that long ago. To be clear, I'm not sorry to see those attitudes go. But I'm less than confident that "Thinking this makes you a terrible person, get back in the closet", so to speak, is an attitude that is effective in producing change. It may eventually. But in the meantime, it seems as likely to create a chain reaction of backlash after backlash between two groups who think differently, giving each plenty of opportunity to beat their chests and describe themselves as oppressed martyrs or rebels against tyranny. Nor am I entirely confident that the majority always refines emotionally charged ideas into moral gold.
There may come a time when an idea simply has to be destroyed. When we recognize it has no place in the society we visualize, it's too dangerous, too poisonous. But I cannot stress enough that I don't think that should ever be our first option.
I believe in many cases we're more likely to make those we oppose recognize our underlying humanity and desire to change themselves by explaining how what they believe touches upon where we come from. We lose so much when we give up both the attempt to understand someone else's perspective and trying to make them understand our own. That cannot begin with "Your ideas are repellent and morally hideous, go on, I'm listening."
I suspect almost everyone who writes in these forums is part of at least one group whose point of view someone loud at some point passionately wished would just go away because they're so icky, even if that group was only gamers themselves. How badly do we want to build a weapon that's entirely likely to come back and hit us in the face sooner or later? Just because we're on one side of the weapon now?