What do people actually want male gamers to be like?

[Glen Compton]

I just would like to point out that a conversation about privilege in general, is a racist conversation.

It may be a well intended, and candy coated to sound empathetic, but at its core it is a conversation focused on differences and categorizing people by something they have no control over. Identity is a combination of a myriad of variables, gender/race/sex are only a small fraction.

Inclusivity should be a conversation about similarities, and how we are not all that different, since we are human beings after all.

 

[angryscotsman93]

-snip

/salute

Yea, I'd like to see some of these people actually put in some time in the service. They want to talk about privilege? how about the privilege where they're the fucking 99% who's never had to spent a single day in a uniform in service of something else other than their armchair philosophy pursuit.

Times like this is when I wish we still have the draft, I'd like to see these people spend a year in the shitholes of Afghanistan and then try to talk about the fucking male privilege.

Nothing about male privilege, I just wanted to say that I highly disagree with drafting. I would rather people be in the military because they want to be there, not because they are forced to be there.

To the contrary, lately I've actually been fairly interested in the idea of a conscription policy. It'd provide a larger recruiting base for the professional military in times of war, would help keep people fit (although I'll admit to being a hypocrite on this one, derp), would help train people in firearm safety, and would also, in my opinion, imbue people with a greater sense of civic duty and responsibility. Hell, perhaps instead of only allowing military service, we could reinstate certain programs such as the Civilian Conservation Corps, who would help maintain forests and parks, as well as aid in environmental protection, and also start some sort of civilian engineering corps, who would work with the Army Corps of Engineers to maintain and improve the damaged infrastructure of the USA.

To my knowledge, conscription systems are fairly common in Europe, where they've always had a history of conscription in wartime; however, if there are any other who've had experience dealing with a conscription-based military, I'd be interested in hearing their perspectives.

 

[QuietlyListening]

I just would like to point out that a conversation about privilege in general, is a racist conversation.

It may be a well intended, and candy coated to sound empathetic, but at its core it is a conversation focused on differences and categorizing people by something they have no control over. Identity is a combination of a myriad of variables, gender/race/sex are only a small fraction.

Inclusivity should be a conversation about similarities, and how we are not all that different, since we are human beings after all.

Well there are a lot of racist/sexist/otherwise bigoted things in society. Discussions of privilege address these elements, especially since many of them are invisible to those not directly experiencing them.

It's not talking about how people are different. It's talking about how society treats people differently for unfair reasons.

 

[Glen Compton]

I just would like to point out that a conversation about privilege in general, is a racist conversation.

It may be a well intended, and candy coated to sound empathetic, but at its core it is a conversation focused on differences and categorizing people by something they have no control over. Identity is a combination of a myriad of variables, gender/race/sex are only a small fraction.

Inclusivity should be a conversation about similarities, and how we are not all that different, since we are human beings after all.

Well there are a lot of racist/sexist/otherwise bigoted things in society. Discussions of privilege address these elements, especially since many of them are invisible to those not directly experiencing them.

It's not talking about how people are different. It's talking about how society treats people differently for unfair reasons.

I am sorry, but it still shaming people for their diversity. Talking about that IS racism.

I warned you that it would appear to be well intended, but equality is about bringing people to the same level, not knocking people down for their "privilege."

 

[Erttheking]

Not a right, a desire. But we DO have the right to ask for those desires to be fulfilled.

"The path to mediocrity is to follow the audience."

*Looks around at the quality of the average video game* I guess game companies already follow the audience then.

 

[SAMAS]

Not a right, a desire. But we DO have the right to ask for those desires to be fulfilled.

No. You're mistaken.

No I'm not mistaken. Who's gonna stop us, you? Can you point out the line in the EULA that says I can't ask for more diversity, more variety, in my video game protagonists?

So I'm gonna keep asking. And I'm gonna keep mocking them every time I get yet another 30-ish white guy with brown hair, most likely closely cropped, and a five-o-clock shadow. And if you don't like it... Well, I suppose you can type angry words at me over the internet, if that makes you feel better.

You buy their products. You hold no shares in their company, you aren't a CEO and I'm not either. You are a customer and the relation ends there. Just because you buy something doesn't mean you have the rights to control what is in it. Gamers (sorry for sounding harsh here. not my intentions but I want to be straight forward here) need to get off their high horses and realize they aren't as important to the process of making games as they think they are. Just because you go to a movie doesn't mean you get a say in what is in it. Nor because you read a book do you get to decide who lives or dies in it. The audience itself doesn't even really know what it wants. And when the audience gets what it wants, it's not happy or satisfied.

"The path to mediocrity is to follow the audience."

We're not trying to tell them how to write their gorram stories, we just want them to put a little more thought into their protagonists, and the people whom you want to get into their shoes.

Seriously, calm the hell down. We are asking for only one thing. There is no slippery slope here. Why does this mess always happen when a minority decides it doesn't like being marginalized? You get a bunch of Chicken Littles running around saying it's the End of Western Civilization. I think the fact that it's usually not the same guys every time that keeps them from realizing how stupid it is.

 

[Glen Compton]

Can you point out the line in the EULA that says I can't ask for more diversity, more variety, in my video game protagonists?

So I'm gonna keep asking. And I'm gonna keep mocking them every time I get yet another 30-ish white guy with brown hair, most likely closely cropped, and a five-o-clock shadow.

I guess I would have to ask what your obsession with race or gender is? It sort of feels like a porn fetish to me.

I have never been off put that the protagonist for most JRPGs are Asian dudes or women. I just immerse myself into the plot and become the character I am playing.

If I needed to relate to the main character, I would probably hate most movies, tv shows, and books I read as well. I am nothing like most of my favorite characters, but I love them for what they are, not what I see of myself in them.

 

[runic knight]

Not a right, a desire. But we DO have the right to ask for those desires to be fulfilled.

"The path to mediocrity is to follow the audience."

*Looks around at the quality of the average video game* I guess game companies already follow the audience then.

Define "average" for me, as even looking through just steam itself revealed the widest variety and amount of depth in the library of games available the world has ever known in the history of gaming.

Or perhaps, you merely mean the triple A part of the industry, to which your remark comes off as saying

*Looks around at the quality of the average movie* I guess movie companies already follow the audience then.

When talking about only hollywood blockbusters

yeah the biggest sellers are gonna repeat themselves but that is like trying to argue that popcorn action flix following the audience is representative of how all movies are.

 

[Ramzal]

Not a right, a desire. But we DO have the right to ask for those desires to be fulfilled.

No. You're mistaken.

No I'm not mistaken. Who's gonna stop us, you? Can you point out the line in the EULA that says I can't ask for more diversity, more variety, in my video game protagonists?

So I'm gonna keep asking. And I'm gonna keep mocking them every time I get yet another 30-ish white guy with brown hair, most likely closely cropped, and a five-o-clock shadow. And if you don't like it... Well, I suppose you can type angry words at me over the internet, if that makes you feel better.

You buy their products. You hold no shares in their company, you aren't a CEO and I'm not either. You are a customer and the relation ends there. Just because you buy something doesn't mean you have the rights to control what is in it. Gamers (sorry for sounding harsh here. not my intentions but I want to be straight forward here) need to get off their high horses and realize they aren't as important to the process of making games as they think they are. Just because you go to a movie doesn't mean you get a say in what is in it. Nor because you read a book do you get to decide who lives or dies in it. The audience itself doesn't even really know what it wants. And when the audience gets what it wants, it's not happy or satisfied.

"The path to mediocrity is to follow the audience."

We're not trying to tell them how to write their gorram stories, we just want them to put a little more thought into their protagonists, and the people whom you want to get into their shoes.

Seriously, calm the hell down. We are asking for only one thing. There is no slippery slope here. Why does this mess always happen when a minority decides it doesn't like being marginalized? You get a bunch of Chicken Littles running around saying it's the End of Western Civilization. I think the fact that it's usually not the same guys every time that keeps them from realizing how stupid it is.

For one you have the ability to request a change. Not the right. If you feel you have a right to demand a change, they have the right to ignore you (As they should) because you seem to want diversity in superficial sense. Just because a character's pigmentation is slightly darker doesn't make your experience any richer. You want diversity, I do too. I'm black/african american and I'd love to play as a Caucasian character---actually no I don't. I just like to have fun with games regardless of what avatar's gender/ethnicity. From personal experience I can promise you that your life/gaming experience wouldn't be enriched if Nathan Drake was black. It's also a tad bit offensive that you think things will somehow be different if the ethnicity is different.

Want to know how my day is any different from a Caucasian male's day? I usually have to wait a few more days to shave because my facial hair is kikiwi in comparison. Hairs curl more often which leads to razor bumps, which can lead to small infections minor infections. So I can't shave every other day. I'm all for more thought behind protagonists but it is honestly idiotic if anyone thinks a sudden race swap will change things in a character at all. The biggest strife I tend to deal with is informing people who don't live where the majority is Black that not all blacks fit the stereotype--but a lot of them do. Ask for deeper characters that have actual emotion, loss, joy, sorrow, triumph and personal conflict with their own actions.

Edge Maverick from Star Ocean: The Last hope fit all of that. But I guess that doesn't count because his skin didn't match my complexion. Keep going the way other people have been going and all you are going to get is race swaps with no character definition. Congrats to you, you get to play as a black guy and feel like a black guy in a digital sense. Too bad it would come at the cost of actual character development and depth just to take you out of your own race and gender for about 2 hours a day.

Just to be on point with you, Edge Maverick caused the destruction of an alternate reality of earth completely. Not scorch the earth destruction but rather "It blew the hell up" destruction. After the party got back to their own timeline everyone tried to tell him it wasn't his fault that 7 billion people died due to him handing over technology that the people of the time didn't understand. He (reasonably) told them to stop trying to make him feel better about it, and that if it weren't for his actions every man, woman, child, animal, plant, or any living organism wouldn't have had to die. For a good portion of the game there was zero after-battle celebrations from Edge. He'd just stand there after you won a fight and not say a word.

He'd also encourage the part to NOT make rash decisions that could affect people who didn't have the knowledge or technology that they had. He made a mistake, doubted himself and through it happened to become more responsible. But I guess because he wasn't the right ethnicity or gender that doesn't count at all. These characters exist already. You're just looking at the bigger, louder games that everyone knows there is poor character development and expression in and claiming it is a major problem with MOST games.

I'd promise you that for every one stale, cookie cutter character you can think up I can name at least 3 well developed characters that you've missed due to narrowing your search/listening to popular voices tell you what is good and what is bad.

 

[aegix drakan_v1legacy]

Speaking as a stereotypical white nerd gamer, I just want male gamers to be decent human beings. That's basically it.

fortunately, most male gamers are already decent human beings. It's the very loud minority that's the problem.

 

[QuietlyListening]

I am sorry, but it still shaming people for their diversity. Talking about that IS racism.

I warned you that it would appear to be well intended, but equality is about bringing people to the same level, not knocking people down for their "privilege."

Talking about privilege =/= shaming people for their diversity. It's about acknowledging how people might see the world differently than you in light of specific challenges they've faced due to race/gender/sex/etc. No one is saying that "You are white and male, therefore bad." It's saying, "You're white and male and you should recognize that many of the structures in society favor you over people who are not white males."

Now, if you start actively defending those structures, or claiming that they don't exist because you in particular have experienced X hardship, then you're moving dangerously close to being an asshole.

Furthermore, privilege isn't a binary thing. You don't either "have privilege" or "don't have privilege." You can have certain types of privileges and face disadvantages in other areas. If you're a white male but you're not cis-gendered, you're still going to derive benefits from those former qualities, but they don't negate the challenges of the latter. And vice-versa. Being disadvantaged in one area doesn't mean you have no privileges at all. You just have fewer. Moreover, even having a privilege doesn't mean that everything is awesome all the time. There are lots of structures that are unfair to men as well. While they tend to occur in more specific and extreme circumstances (e.g. war, crime, etc), no one's saying that they aren't problems. They may just not be the problems that are under the topic of discussion at the moment.

It may be uncomfortable, but addressing how privileges work and what structures support them is the very first step into tearing down those structures and building an equal society. Equality doesn't mean ignoring the differences between people. It's about accepting those differences without prejudice. The really hard fact to accept about privilege, though, is that they're relative, and in order to build that equality, many of them will have to be lost. For instance, everyone should have the privilege to not be treated as an enemy by the police. However, getting rid of privilege in hiring practices means that as a white male, I will, as a matter of course, have to face stiffer competition in the job market. And yeah, I suppose that sucks for me. But to talk the talk you gotta walk the walk.

 

[Glen Compton]

I am sorry, but it still shaming people for their diversity. Talking about that IS racism.

I warned you that it would appear to be well intended, but equality is about bringing people to the same level, not knocking people down for their "privilege."

Talking about privilege =/= shaming people for their diversity. It's about acknowledging how people might see the world differently than you in light of specific challenges they've faced due to race/gender/sex/etc. No one is saying that "You are white and male, therefore bad." It's saying, "You're white and male and you should recognize that many of the structures in society favor you over people who are not white males."

Now, if you start actively defending those structures, or claiming that they don't exist because you in particular have experienced X hardship, then you're moving dangerously close to being an asshole.

Furthermore, privilege isn't a binary thing. You don't either "have privilege" or "don't have privilege." You can have certain types of privileges and face disadvantages in other areas. If you're a white male but you're not cis-gendered, you're still going to derive benefits from those former qualities, but they don't negate the challenges of the latter. And vice-versa. Being disadvantaged in one area doesn't mean you have no privileges at all. You just have fewer. Moreover, even having a privilege doesn't mean that everything is awesome all the time. There are lots of structures that are unfair to men as well. While they tend to occur in more specific and extreme circumstances (e.g. war, crime, etc), no one's saying that they aren't problems. They may just not be the problems that are under the topic of discussion at the moment.

It may be uncomfortable, but addressing how privileges work and what structures support them is the very first step into tearing down those structures and building an equal society. Equality doesn't mean ignoring the differences between people. It's about accepting those differences without prejudice. The really hard fact to accept about privilege, though, is that they're relative, and in order to build that equality, many of them will have to be lost. For instance, everyone should have the privilege to not be treated as an enemy by the police. However, getting rid of privilege in hiring practices means that as a white male, I will, as a matter of course, have to face stiffer competition in the job market. And yeah, I suppose that sucks for me. But to talk the talk you gotta walk the walk.

I see you are trying to make is sound better, but at its core you are still shaming people for aspects of themselves they have no control over.

when you say "You're white and male and you should recognize that many of the structures in society favor you over people who are not white males." That is both a racist and a sexist statement! It IS, no matter how you want to frame it as well intended...

You are making sweeping statements about someones experiences based on their sex and race. Couple that with all the hate and prejudice that is directed at white males for the actions of the 1% that is the ruling class, and you are perpetuating racism.

One last thing you really do not understand about equality, it isn't about tearing people and structures down to build an equal society. It is about making the CURRENT society equal by treating PEOPLE as equals. Outing people for being different is not the right path, and will only cause resistance. Everyone needs to be brought UP to the same level, not tearing down people that are perceived to have privilege.

By your idea, since attractive people have the most privilege (and they absolutely do, regardless of race), they should be made ugly, instead of treat everyone like they are beautiful.

 

[Thaluikhain]

when you say "You're white and male and you should recognize that many of the structures in society favor you over people who are not white males." That is both a racist and a sexist statement! It IS, no matter how you want to frame it as well intended...

It is not racist or sexist to say that racism and sexism happens to exist, and that it affects some groups more than others. Quietly ignoring the problem doesn't make it go away, unless the problem is defined as people discussing inequality.

 

[Glen Compton]

It is not racist or sexist to say that racism and sexism happens to exist, and that it affects some groups more than others.

Only if you say like you did in that quote.
But when you start outing people for their race/sex/gender and making generalizations about who they are and what their experiences in life are, you are perpetuating stereotypes and only further separating people. When the goal is to bring people together, it is best to not start by putting people into groups...

You only know your own experience in life, to make assumptions about anyone else is an act of hubris.

 

[Thaluikhain]

But when you start outing people for their race/sex/gender and making generalizations about who they are and what their experiences in life are, you are perpetuating stereotypes and only further separating people. When the goal is to bring people together, it is best to not start by putting people into groups...

People are being put in groups by our society already. That's the problem. Acknowledging that society does this is not the problem.

 

[Glen Compton]

People are being put in groups by our society already. That's the problem. Acknowledging that society does this is not the problem.

But doing it yourself would make you part of the problem.

 

[Thaluikhain]

People are being put in groups by our society already. That's the problem. Acknowledging that society does this is not the problem.

But doing it yourself would make you part of the problem.

It would, which is probably why you don't tend to hear people advocating that.

Again, acknowledging that society does this is not the same as doing this.

 

[Glen Compton]

It would, which is probably why you don't tend to hear people advocating that.

On the contrary I see people using it constantly as a weapon to invalidate others opposing opinions.

I also disagree that it adds anything useful to the conversation. It is just a targeted attack on specific demographics based on what is perceived as advantageous to an outsider.

Think about my example from earlier about attractive privileged vs unattractive prejudice. Focusing on the privileged of the attractive just seems like a petty attack, as opposed to focusing on the valid injustices faced by unattractive people.

To an outsider things that appear to be a privilege could very well be a burden to the person who has to carry them. Unless you are the person yourself, then you do not really understand what it is like.

You only know your own experience in life, to make assumptions about anyone else is an act of hubris.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Focusing on the privileged of the attractive just seems like a petty attack, as opposed to focusing on the valid injustices faced by unattractive people.

The two are inseparable. Society cannot deem one group to be lesser without deeming others to be greater, or vice versa.

Unless you are the person yourself, then you do not really understand what it is like.

Yes. That being the point.

 

[The Lunatic]

Treating people differently based on race, is usually considered racist, regardless of if the person is white, black, green or purple.