WHITE GUY DEFENSE FORCE GO!

[Schadrach]

The edit is poking fun about the way most of those people only seem to think that the race doesn't matter for /white/ characters, for minority characters it's suddenly very important.

That's always irked me. I've been firmly on the "don't break canon when working with established characters without a damned good reason, and no 'diversity' for it's own sake isn't one" side. I was on the "racist" side regarding Heimdallr and Johnny Storm, but miraculously switched to the side of virtue fighting against racism when we started talking about Akira.

 

[SidheKnight]

I love facts and statistics and i do happen to be a white male(through no fault of my own, i assure you). This combination of properties i possess clearly puts me in the comic creators definition of the WMDF. I take no pride in this but i also find it difficult to feel too much shame about it which is generally how i feel about race as well despite clearly being pegged as a racist here. I've never understood the concept of racial pride. How can i take credit for accomplishments i have had no hand in?

I do not expect other people to answer for things they have not themselves done or expressed but it seems obvious that as a white male, i cannot be expected to receive the same treatment from others. By virtue of my skin tone/gender i am expected to not protest when i am treated poorly or mischaracterized or else i am shamed by those around me because somewhere someone has been mistreated worse than me and for possibly worse reasons. I do not deny the reality that yes, others have been treated worse than me. A trip to a graveyard will confirm that. And by such an extreme metric, no one has a right to complain as long as they still live.

Have we grown so lacking in empathy that we have to ration it out only to certain groups and not to others? And if so shouldn't the metric be based on suffering or injustice rather than demographic?

The notion of privilege gets thrown around a lot and if it's advocates are to be believed, i am exceedingly well endowed with it. Yet somehow through no irresponsibility of my own, i have been homeless, i have been without employment/income(never been fired), i have been raped/drugged(how i lost my virginity), i have been shot at(drive by), I have had my home destroyed by gang members, my father died last year of a drug overdose, i've been betrayed by numerous supposed best friends and girlfriends, i've been locked up(violated a weapons law while homeless for carrying something i didn't know was illegal to protect myself with), and i have been disowned by all sides of my family because they all think i'm some kind of satanist(spoiler: I'm not).

I don't bring any of that up for the sake of a pity party. My suffering isn't special. But it does exist. To be informed that i have no right to my grief because of aspects of myself i had no choice in, Also denies me my right to empathise with others who have also experienced suffering and grief whether they share my gender/skin tone or not. And this is the objection i have with the subtext that this comic promotes.

/STANDING OVATION

You've just said something I've been wanting to put into words all this time. Thanks!

WARNING: LONG POST INCOMING

BTW, to those of you who say that "If you're offended by this comic, YOU are the problem":

I'll explain why I find this comic in very poor taste.

First of all, I'll say that I totally agree with the point you guys are trying to get across: That there's an awful disproportion of representation of demographics in gaming, in other words, it's pure straight white males as far as the eye can see, and yes, it IS a problem if your goal is inclusion (mine is).

I also agree that, if from the get go, you can easily make a protagonist female/black/gay/etc.. DO IT. You'll be making gaming (and minority gamers) a great service. Hell, even I get tired of playing as white dudes all the time.

So why, then, do I feel.. hmm no, offended is a strong word.. umm.. put off by this comic?

Well, guys, some of the stereotypes you used are hurtful.

Let's analyse who make up the White Guy Defense Force:

This three individuals are very likely nerds and/or gamers, since this issue is mainly a gaming thing.

The first one is a "beta" overweight male brony with a victim complex. From what I understand, beta means socially awkward loser who doesn't have friends or get girls, and probably resents society ("thanks Obama") because of that.

The second, from what I get (I may be wrong) is a stereotypical XBox Live angry alpha "bro" douchebag that can't go five seconds without throwing a racist/homophobic/misogynist slut. Regrettably gamers now understand this to be 99% of the "modern shooter" fanbase, when actually I think it's just a very vocal minority.

The third is the now (in)famous "Fedora Atheist", which is the stereotype of an obnoxious, arrogant, socially awkward (again), physically unattractive (not always), religiously intolerant, militant atheist with a pseudo-intellectual superiority complex.

Many of those caricatures hit very close to home for me.

I am a white male. I am a little overweight. I am a nerd. I am a gamer. I am socially awkward, which means my IRL friends list is very very short, and I have only had one girlfriend in my entire life, and it didn't last long. I wear glasses (like most Fedora Atheists for some reason). Speaking of which, I am an atheist. I've never worn a fedora, though.

I am NOT religiously intolerant (I'm OK with people believing in ghosts, as long as they don't force their BS into the rest of society through politics, education, the legal system or bullying/intimidation). I don't have a victim complex or a superiority complex (that I know of). Nobody has ever told me that I'm obnoxious or arrogant (quite the contrary). I never use racist/sexist/homophobic slurs (except in jokes in which I make fun of the people that use them). I don't resent society for my condition (It's nobody's fault that I am what I am. People who blame society just want to avoid taking responsability for their own lives).

My point is, I've been bullied since elementary school all the way 'till graduation. Bullied for having these traits that this comics make fun of. I don't want to add "racist/misogynist/homophobic" to the list of prejudices against me just because I share some physical and demographical traits with the WGDF douchebags.

No, I'm not comparing my being bullied in school to the actual sh!t minorities had (and sometimes still have) to go through in their lives. I'm just saying that your problems being greater than mine doesn't make my problems non-existant (fallacy of relative privation).

My point is, authors of Critical Miss, don't piss off your allies.

Oh, and I almost forgot the probably biggest offender: ZIMMERMAN.

I'll admit I don't know much about the Zimmerman case, not being American myself. But if the man was found not-guilty by a jury of his peers in a fair trial, you should respect that veredict, whether you agree with it or not. The justice system of most democracies is based on the principle of "innocent until proven guilty". Using the media to perpetuate the notion that the man is guilty (and tarnishing his reputation in the process) is nothing less than libel.

OK, I'm done.

I just wanted to say that, boy it was a long post. I wish the authors of this comic read this post, even if they don't respond. But I'm afraid it'll be ignored. Please tell me what you think about it. Maybe I'm taking this too personal, I don't know, I just posted what I felt, without filters..

Now you can all go back to argue about Zimmerman vs Trayvon.

 

[Hover Hand Mode]

I understand that these gamer stereotypes exist already and the best thing we can do is not give people fuel to "prove" such stereotypes.
And in that regard, this thread is a massive failure.

 

[furai47]

Then why call 911, if you're just going to ignore them anyway?

To inform emergency services. That's why civil dispatchers exist. When you call them and they suggest you do X, you're perfectly within your rights to completely ignore them.

It was by the police when they refused to arrest Zimmerman for the forty-something days between the shooting and his arrest.

Oh, so you were talking about prior to the trial then? Sure.

The eyewitness accounts conflict on that, and I think Martin would probably have a different story to tell if he had been left capable of telling it.

Which eyewitness account was that exactly? The only one I'm familiar with that did that was Good's; he said he didn't see Zimmerman's head being slammed into the ground while he did see punches or as he called it 'downward movement'. The back of Zimmerman's head speaks for itself, as do Martin's bruised knuckles.

And you have the evidence of this, yes?

Indeed, the trial which you're so familiar with. IIRC, he told the dispatcher he lost Martin.

 

[Zombie_Moogle]

So much about this that I love, but the biggest part is the sheer metric volume of balls it takes to publish this

I salute you

 

[RoonMian]

Actually, I think the ones responsible are the guy who came up with the whole "stand your ground"-law idea, the guy who came up with the idea of neighborhood watches and taking the monopoly on violence away from the police and general gun culture.

Let's also blame the guy who invented guns, gunpowder, and metal. I'm sorry but no, the one responsible for the assault is the one who committed said assault, no one else. We can talk about who or what lead to and slowly escalated towards the conflict; ultimately it's the guy who throws the first punch/kick/bullet.

That paragraph was in context to a bigger post. This is where your nit-picking goes wrong.

 

[ZiggyE]

I'M SORRY I'M WHITE
I'M SORRY I'M MALE

 

[Malty Milk Whistle]

Oh grey, you've just cemented my love for you, you devious devil.
I honestly don't understand all the anger coming your way, unless a usually intelligent bunch of people have suddenly lost the (most important ability) to be able to laugh at themselves.
I hope not.

The fedora and Zimmerman joke were icing on cake, yet I can't help feeling you might have offended some redditors with this somehow.
Luv u guiz <3

 

[Specter Von Baren]

I wasn't aware we were fighting about it.

I was using "you" in the generic sense. I thought that was obvious from the context, since neither you nor I have mentioned any specific character of any race.

I know. I was continuing to respond as if we were the two people talking about having whatever character be black.

 

[SidheKnight]

I'M SORRY I'M WHITE
I'M SORRY I'M MALE

You mean this:

Spoiler

 

[Darmani]

Checking your privilege is a good idea, in that everyone suffers from perspective limitations. Remembering that and not dismissing something your disagree with, especially when its uncomfortable or challenging to your or your identity. That someone's personal experiences can contradict your own and be just as valid or moreso.

SAYING "check your privilege" in your discussion is a foul way not to induce this self- reflection but try to claim ownership of discussion by way of claiming anything anyone says disagreeing with you is wrong, does not enable or open discussion but closes it and predicates on an assumption, however well recognized in general, and applying it in the specific in a way that is blanket prejudgement. It does the opposite of what you want it to and comes off as selfish and vain. (Scottsboro anyone)

If you see to dismiss who you say that to and feel superior, fine. If you claim to be furthering social justice and or some cause by discussion. Not so much. The exception is a mod and that's something else because this is open private forum with requests to not violate the peace as defined by our host and the mod enforces that authority.

I get the same way with the word sexist. That's not mere word. That's modern moral CONDEMNATION! Understandably people will object to it, and moreover disdain those who claim absolute authority of its use and exclusive of you by means of some "not fit to make reasoned judgements" Men don't like it more than women do (attributing ANY outcry to hormones or their gender or comparison to your ex)

 

[Aramis Night]

As an add on to my previous post, I would like to address the argument that some people believe that this attempt at racial humor is somehow ironic rather than hateful and that the fact that people are commenting negatively towards it proves some truth to it. I will be the first to admit that I actually enjoy a lot of racial humor. I'm a fan of Dave Chapelle and find his use of race and humor really well done and funny. Most racial stereotypes used for humor tend to be focused on a perception of some shortcoming that can easily be disproved on an individual basis when challenged, or based on some superficial quirk or are so overblown so as to be not taken seriously.

In this case however the very act of trying to disprove it is alleged to reinforce the notion, while saying nothing does nothing to challenge it. The charge seems to be that we lack introspection and empathy. Compared to a belief that we are bad drivers(Asian), That we like fried chicken(Black), That we are stingy with money(Jewish), That we are all illegal border jumpers(Hispanic), That we are sexually mercenary(Women). I would rather have all of those stereotypes applied to me than to be told that I'm defined by a sense of hatred/contempt vs. everyone else. It's just a transparent attempt to point out that white=evil. Of course people are going to attempt to defend themselves from that.

 

[furai47]

That paragraph was in context to a bigger post.

Which to a large extent I agree with, hence I didn't see the need to include it in my post. What I did object to was the first paragraph (and the last, but that's just me).

-the guy who came up with the whole "stand your ground"-law idea

This would have to extend so far back in time you probably wouldn't be able to blame the ashes of the person who dreamt it up.

-the guy who came up with the idea of neighborhood watches and taking the monopoly on violence away from the police

Sometimes, you just can't rely on the police to respond to your troubles or if they do, to do it fast enough. That is why neighborhood watches exist. Similarly, you have people organising groups to help border patrol because sometimes they just can't control a large enough area.
The monopoly of violence was taken away from the police back when the first 10 amendments were added e.g. pretty much when the US was established.

-general gun culture

I could see this being blamed for Zimmerman having a gun but for Martin to assault someone.

But anyway, if I'm still missing something, please point it out to me, I'm genuinely scratching my head.

 

[Sexual Harassment Panda]

Check your privilege is a good idea, in that everyone suffers from perspective limitations. Remembering that and not dismissing something your disagree with, especially when its uncomfortable or challenging to your or your identity. That someone's personal experiences can contradict your own and be just as valid or moreso.

SAYING check your privilege in your discussion is foul way not to induce this self reflection but upsurp privilege by way of claiming anything anyone says disagreeing with you is wrong, does not enable or open discussion but closes it and predicates on an assumption, however well recognized in general, and applying it in the specifc in a way that is blanket and pre-judgemental. It does the opposite of what many want it to and comes off as self-aggrandizing.

If you see to dismiss who you say that to and feel superior, fine. If you claim to be furthering social justice and or some cause by discussion. Not so much. The exception is a mod and that's something else because this is open private forum with requests to not violate the peace as defined by our host and the mod enforces that authority.

Beautifully put.

Made all the funnier by how the same people who harp it claim that deconstructing their arguments is akin to "shouting them down", or "trying to silence" them. The hypocrisy is so thick you could use it to hammer nails.

Off-point: It's scummy to accuse people of "screaming" or "shouting" over the internet. The composure of the person you're dealing with is actually a mystery to you, it's dishonest as fuck to claim that they're "screaming". I don't like to tell people what to do, but... Stop that!! It's utter shite that's obviously designed to paint yourself in the best possible light whilst painting who you're talking to in the worst possible light. It's like when people make analogies using the Nazis when it makes absolutely zero sense to. They've made a terrible analogy, but they've also put the other poster and Naziism under the same spotlight... Which was the aim, if we're being honest. More dishonest bullshit.

The edit is poking fun about the way most of those people only seem to think that the race doesn't matter for /white/ characters, for minority characters it's suddenly very important.

That's always irked me. I've been firmly on the "don't break canon when working with established characters without a damned good reason, and no 'diversity' for it's own sake isn't one" side. I was on the "racist" side regarding Heimdallr and Johnny Storm, but miraculously switched to the side of virtue fighting against racism when we started talking about Akira.

You think it's about making sense? It's not. It's about politics and self-loving. The kind of sweet sweet self-loving that can only be achieved by feeling like you're better than everyone else. There's no pornography in your logic, Shadrach... Does it even arouse yourself?

 

[Gorrath]

I see a lot of people saying that the comic is fine, that it isn't against white people, just against white people who have a specific set of actions or beliefs. And I agree, this is the intent of the comic. And yet I can't help thinking that a similar comic mocking feminists who think all males are rapists would be quickly dismissed as a straw-man and the creator accused of being anti-equality.

I imagine a comic that had a minority dressed up in stereotypical clothing and saying really ignorant things would be called offensive. This comic is fine because it obviously only applies to people who do the specific things mentioned, but a comic like the one I describe would be considered racist because, people would say, it stereotypes all members of that race.

A comic about a bunch of ignorant white nerds is okay, because using stereotypes and caricatures is fine. It only mocks the specific white people it applies to.

A comic about a bunch of ignorant minority gangbangers is not okay, because using stereotypes and caricatures is wrong. It mocks the whole race by pretending that the whole race is made up of negative stereotypes.

So, why does this dissonance exist? Well, some may argue that there is no historical context of racism for the former and that means it's fair game. I would contest that notion on the grounds that historical context, however important, does not give carte blanche to act unjustly towards people now, regardless of their race. We should not allow historical context to justify an act that would otherwise be vilified, or else we'll be in danger of repeating the same mistakes that led to that historical context in the first place.

Another argument one may make is that white people, today, do not suffer significant racism, and thus the former comic is fine. But, since minorities do suffer significant racism, then the latter is not okay. Again, I see an issue with this logic. Whether using stereotypes and racial caricatures is okay or not is a question that needs answered for everyone, not justified in one hand and vilified in another; not set up as a way to create double standards based on race.

I took a few days to think about the comic, as I didn't want to have a knee-jerk reaction. In the end, I think it is fine, even if I didn't really find it all that amusing. I happen to be a white nerd who likes hats, including fedoras, and is rather fond of MLP:FiM because it is a very well constructed show, so the comic seems to suggest at first that if you like those things you are also an ignorant jackass. I got over myself though and just accepted that some people who like the things I like are also jackasses. My concern is that we would be very quick to damn and demonize any other use of this sort of stereotyping, which seems to me to be a rather racist/sexist act in and of itself.

As for the Zimmerman reference though, I find it to be in extraordinarily bad taste as it really does go too far by suggesting that if you hold an ignorant opinion about the issues mentioned, you also believe that murdering someone with a different viewpoint is also okay. Additionally, regardless of whether you think Zimmerman was justified or not, he didn't shoot Martin just because he had an opinion about an issue. This whole reference is just awful and is on par with Fox News level of commentary.

 

[Edl01]

I understand that these gamer stereotypes exist already and the best thing we can do is not give people fuel to "prove" such stereotypes.
And in that regard, this thread is a massive failure.

I found it funny. Even if I do suspect that a lot of the people flipping out on the thread are the same ones flipping out over the GTA 5 review.

 

[RoonMian]

-the guy who came up with the whole "stand your ground"-law idea

This would have to extend so far back in time you probably wouldn't be able to blame the ashes of the person who dreamt it up.

That was not meant literally, the same as with the next guy I mention. Which I thought would be obvious, sorry for being unclear there.

-the guy who came up with the idea of neighborhood watches and taking the monopoly on violence away from the police

Sometimes, you just can't rely on the police to respond to your troubles or if they do, to do it fast enough. That is why neighborhood watches exist. Similarly, you have people organising groups to help border patrol because sometimes they just can't control a large enough area.
The monopoly of violence was taken away from the police back when the first 10 amendments were added e.g. pretty much when the US was established.

The police having the monopoly on violence is a big marker for every western country with rule of law and that we call "civilised" except for the USA. Not trusting the police with that is in my opinion a huge societal problem in your country that reflects in gun culture, in crime, in the xenophobia of self-organised border patrols and so many other issues the USA have in my opinion. When someone doesn't trust the police with the monopoly on violence and takes it in his own hands, which you described as being one of the establishing factors of the USA, he doesn't trust a person /just as himself/ who gets (ideally) trained and prepared for that and instead arms himself. This kind of cognitive dissonance is pretty much unique to the USA and leaves pretty much the entire world baffled.

That is what I wanted to express with my first post, blaming those two "guys" and the culture which are actually three sides of the same completely interwoven clusterfuck. I don't know how to solve those problems that's just how I see them.

-general gun culture

I could see this being blamed for Zimmerman having a gun but for Martin to assault someone.

As I speculated in my first post I think Martin assaulted Zimmerman because he felt threatened by him, being followed around his own neighborhood, at least that is what I heard from the case. That is one of the oldest things in the world. Besides, by attacking Zimmerman who followed him around Martin too stood his ground, just that he didn't have a gun. I'm sure Martin had a cellphone too but he didn't trust the police enough to check out that guy following him around either and assaulted him himself.

 

[RoonMian]

-snip-

Did you accidentally quote my post when you meant someone else? There is nothing that links your post to what I wrote.

 

[Gorrath]

I rather think the difference is that here on this site people tend to be familiar with the particular sort of person being made fun of. They've seen them around, know what's actually the target. You try and make it out to be a white stereotype, but its not. Unsurprisingly the people who 'defend' white guys unnecessarily tend to be white. Does not mean it is a stereotype of white people anymore than the KKK is.

People also tend to be rather familiar with the person being made fun of when you're talking about gang bangers. Gang banging is not necessarily a stereotype of black people, and yet if you made a comic with a black gang banger acting ignorant, I have my doubts as to whether people would think it was acceptable. There are a bunch of different stereotypes at work here, some dealing with race and some with sex, but the idea that a white person will murder a minority with the slightest provocation rather is a white stereotype, and a vicious one at that.

 

[Plunkies]

As I speculated in my first post I think Martin assaulted Zimmerman because he felt threatened by him, being followed around his own neighborhood, at least that is what I heard from the case. That is one of the oldest things in the world. Besides, by attacking Zimmerman who followed him around Martin too stood his ground, just that he didn't have a gun. I'm sure Martin had a cellphone too but he didn't trust the police enough to check out that guy following him around either and assaulted him himself.

Again, someone doesn't understand the case and also doesn't understand the law, despite the fact that both were explained only a few posts ago.

Stand your ground doesn't allow you to attack people who are near you and doing nothing wrong. The law is there so that victims of violent crime can defend themselves without the need to first determine whether they can escape the situation or not. It also has nothing to do with the Zimmerman case because Zimmerman was being beaten into concrete with someone sitting on top of him, which rather hinders your ability to get up and run away.

And once again, Zimmerman did not follow Martin to a confrontation. Zimmerman lost Martin for 4 whole minutes while Martin was within 100 yards of his home. Instead Martin double backed and attacked Zimmerman at the T intersection near his truck.

And for the other people suggesting he was an innocent little boy, he simply wasn't...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ebu6Yvzs4Ls