WHITE GUY DEFENSE FORCE GO!

[generals3]

And this is exactly what this comic did with "White Guy". Those characteristics are emphasized way too much: in the name of the "group", in the name of the characters and the fact there were multiple characters from diverse backgrounds but all are white men. The "White Men" part simply stands out way too much and unnecessarily at that.

It occurs to me suddenly that that particular parallel might very well be part of the parody. That by mimicking a technique used to insinuate that bad things done by people of a certain race are an indicator that the entire race is suspect, the author is pointing out the underlying hypocrisy of the WGDF attitude.

Well if that was part of the parody then off course my concern is moot. Though that would seem unlikely because the attitudes criticized usually don't come in pair with those methods.

 

[kklawm]

I'm a physical sciences grad student. You don't seem to understand what I'm saying. The statistics, gathered within the parameters of the specified study, while backed by an institution or independent viewer, with cited sources, is a fact. A statistict. It cannot be falsified. The falsification only occurs in its interpretation by the individual.

Next time you should probably address my link and sources instead of throwing a shitfit because you have no legitimate negative response. And perhaps you should link my whole quote instead of just the part that you want to criticize.

Your ignorance is showing.

Uh huh, well done physical sciences grad student. My 'shit fit' was to the statement 'statistics don't lie', lying being making a false statement. Statistics can be made to back up an invalid argument like 'breakfast is the most important meal of the day' using studies on attention/concentration and nutrition without going into important sociological implications of WHY certain people don't eat breakfast. Or studies on broad topics with a tiny pool of individual polls. Or opinion polls even, especially on things people may not have a formalised opinion on. Statistics on physics chemistry etc. tend to be much more reliable because they are usually repeating highly specific testing over a significant amount of tests. But sources can be cited and the statistics 'factual' but saying 22% of people hate oatmeal will always be utter bullshit if you asked 500 people in America. And saying EA is 'struggling' because their stock took a sharp drop in the last week without taking into account for how long or what point their stock is typically at is still a bullshit assumption whilst being factual.

Not to mention the common misconception that if something is 'suggestive' or has 'correlation' with another thing doesn't necessarily mean they are linked (like collecting how many people with cancer had tinea) and by natural or random coincidence can seem to be correlated. Unless you're looking for a very specific response in a very restricted frame of reference (the sort of things done in a lab or a Hadron collider) then yes, statistics can lie.

 

[SidheKnight]

I feel offended by this comic.

I'm a white, atheist, socially awkward, overweight nerd male who likes to sport a long stubble and a fedora from time to time. I also believe that men (especially black men) are sometimes the victims of sexism in the western world (especially in Canada).

According to this comic, I'm a reactionary racist, sexist, homophobic arrogant with a superiority complex (see "fedora atheist" or "reddit atheist" aka "white guy omega") who wants to keep gaming culture from becoming more inclusive at all costs, and also apparently have a victim complex that makes me feel threatened by "Comrade Obama" (If I was American, I'd vote for him) and his "political correctness" agenda. Oh and apparently I'm also a brony according to this comic (never watched an episode of MLP:FIM, nor do I have anything against the show).

So I'm getting mixed signals here.

Am I a WGDF? Should I be offended by this comic? Or am I "taking it too personaly"?

One thing I'm sure, is that I feel I'm being stereotyped. And I bet I'm not the only one.

I already have to deal with the consequences of being socially awkward and chubby in real life, I don't to add to that the prejudice of being considered a "reactionary anti-social bigot" to that list.

 

[Jamz]

Well. I suppose the mass immigration of Turks into Germany after WWII has led to a lot of problems in modern Germany, but I'm not sure exactly to what degree.
I see what you're promoting and I agree with you in many ways, but I'm not sure if this method of execution is actually a reasonable way to go about it. Your first and second points I totally agree with. That being said, I believe that immigrant competition for employment is actually a good thing for the nation as a whole. I believe that healthy businesses need to compete for workers with the ability to get things done. Not every native is entitled to a job, especially when there are those who are willing to do a better job for the same wage. It's the same reason why I'm torn on affirmative action, but that's a separate conversation.

I agree that there's too much unskilled immigration, but I'm not sure how the problem can be remedied in a decent way. On the one hand, I don't really see an effective way to limit this unless there were tighter immigration restrictions put in place to prevent this, but I'm pretty sure that those regulations are pretty tight as is (I may be mistaken though. would like a 2nd opinion).

The language is another thing I'm torn on. On the one hand, it states that there will be no national language in the United States. But I don't speak Spanish and I'm not sure if I like its proliferation. That being said, I don't know if it's "right" for us to limit that. At the very least, I believe that it should not be helped along. But what exactly is "helping it along"? There must be some middle ground, but I don't know what/where that is.

Also, what the shit is up with all the censorship in these forums?

I don't believe that any foreign national has a right to emigrate anywhere, it's a privilege, especially for people who come from 3rd world countries, for them it changes not only their lives but the lives of all future generations of their family.
I believe immigration should be treated more as a privilege and something to be valued and appreciated more than something to be abused. It is after all, a form of charity for unskilled workers, and a great opportunity for the skilled.
I don't demand that all immigrants be a rocket scientist or a doctor, but that they make an effort to adopt the local culture and the local values.

As a good example I'd like to cite Britain.

Nobody has any problem with Indian Hindu and Sikh immigrants, they integrate, they join local communities, they work hard, they contribute massively to the local culture and economy. I'd even go as far as to say I respect and appreciate Indians in Britain, I consider them British. But then Pakistani Muslims are loathed, they're violent, hostile, aggressive, where they live crime rates inflate and the community loses all trust and social cohesion.
The only difference between an Indian Hindu and a Pakistani Muslim is their culture and their willingness to integrate.

To put it frankly, people who show no willingness to integrate, are openly hostile to the local culture, do not embody it's values and contribute nothing should be deported forcibly. They have no reason to be there, no right to be there.

America is a strange example when it comes to language and culture, is there an 'American culture'? I believe so, however the country and it's race and culture, are a patchwork of everything imaginable, from Polish Jews to African slaves. However there is one thing that defines America, and that is American values, the constitution, personal freedom and self-determination, when I visited America I was shocked at how many people, black or white, embodied these values and held them to be right. America is a patchwork of races and cultures and so it must be unified through it's values, they're the paste that fills the cracks between communities.
I believe if, for example, a Mexican immigrant, has no desire to embody these values and holds American culture in contempt, he should not be granted residence.

Illegal immigration surprises me too, that there is a debate at all shocks me, as these 'undocumented immigrants' have already shown a complete disregard for American law and values.

Censorship seems ok here actually, I've seen worse, as you can probably guess I'm used to being censored, lol.

I actually have to run here in a second, but I'll try to pound out a response real quick.

It seems like a lot of the immigrants here (granted, I'm not from a border state, so this is based purely off of conversations with others, the few interactions I've had with latinos, and *gag* news coverage) are relegated to subpar work despite having the wrong idea that they'll be able to come to the United States to make tons of money for themselves. Granted, I'm not defending this logic, but it seems that the United States is giving mixed signals and that's the gridlock that causes the problems. It at once tempts illegal aliens to the US by means of wages and a pretty easy loophole system, coupled with other benefits (I'm not sure if social programs target aliens, but I would imagine they would.) but they are not allowed to work in a way that would lead them out of exploitation by their employers. In this way, I think that they're stuck in a constant state of poverty and unwelcomeness which does little to want them to take American culture in the first place.

But maybe that's just after they get here. I do agree that keeping people who don't want to integrate out is a good thing, but the Latino culture is already so established that there's no longer a drive to integrate with the greater United States whenever you can just get by using your own cultural ties. Although I'm not sure, I've heard people from the deep south say that they can go to many places where if you cannot speak Spanish then you'll have trouble speaking.

To sum it up, I think it's almost too late because it's take hold instead of being prevented at the onset. But then again, with the border in the state that it is, perhaps it was an inevitability.

A big problem with the whole illegal immigrant thing also seems to be the expense incurred to deport them and keep them out, but then they can just cross again. It seems as if they don't really have anything to lose. They'll just get deported again.

I'm dating a Lithuanian girl. Where you from?

Also it's been a pleasure talking/debating with you.

 

[Carnagath]

This thread is like a graveyard of banned and warned people, and most of them did not even seem to say anything that offensive, they just disliked the comic and/or thought it was flamebait. Was this comic really necessary? Is having 50 new bans that amazing for the Escapist? I don't get it to be honest. And no, I'm not going to engage in this discussion, it's a tired topic that never produced any quality discussions in the past either, it's just a massive black hole of wasted time discussing something like that on the internet with strangers, especially following such a [sarcasm]calm, collected, meaningful and oh so very funny[/sarcasm] comic strip.

 

[Overquoted]

I'm a physical sciences grad student. You don't seem to understand what I'm saying. The statistics, gathered within the parameters of the specified study, while backed by an institution or independent viewer, with cited sources, is a fact. A statistict. It cannot be falsified. The falsification only occurs in its interpretation by the individual.

Next time you should probably address my link and sources instead of throwing a shitfit because you have no legitimate negative response. And perhaps you should link my whole quote instead of just the part that you want to criticize.

Your ignorance is showing.

I think his point was that the New Century Foundation is not in any way a neutral viewer, and so both their collection of data and their intepretation are likely to be severely biased by their political agenda. And falsifying data and statistics is quite doable, just not as easy as twisting the interpretation beyond reason.

By the way, comic-related:

Your ignorance is showing.

I think he caught on that I'm a chick. After all, he did end his post with "Now kindly shut your mouth and let the big boys talk." *smirks* Like I've never heard that one before. ^_^

But yeah, you're correct, Johkmil. I didn't feel like wading through a study by a severely biased group just to figure out whether or not his point was valid. But I did enjoy how utterly angry he got on being called out for having a terrible source. Gotta enjoy overreaction.

And I did rather appreciate the tie-in to the comic there. Bravo.

(Edit for grammar.)

 

[Jamz]

Stuff

I agree with you to the point that facts can be twisted. That being said, you cannot discount information gleaned from legitimate sources (DOJ/FBI) just because they appear somewhere you don't want them to. I didn't realize that the examiner was a white supremacist group, but it doesn't change the fact that the studies that were conducted and sourced by an outside organization DISTINCTLY show what I claimed they did.

Bottom line: I provided several legitimate sources for my assertions.

 

[Shadowstar38]

I completely agree. However, neither was Zimmerman doing anything illegal when he saw Martin, grew suspicious, got out of his car and followed after him.

Which he was told not to do by people actually qualified to handle such a thing. Not illegal, but really freaking stupid.

First, simply saying this could have been prevented by Zimmerman is ignoring the vast, complex chain of events that lead to that event that night. There are several people that could have prevented this.

Complex chain of events? All he had to do was not follow him. End of conflict.

disrupting normal on-topic discussion

People were already going off on a tangent about a one panel joke. It was off topic way before I got here. That or, it's still on topic sense it's part of the strip. However it works.

EDIT: 9 more fucking pages since this morning? You serious guys? I'm not reading all this shit!

*Reads anyway for lack of anything better to do*

 

[Overquoted]

You should work for Extreme Right wing parties. The Vlaams Belang and Front National could use someone like you... Because those are the defences they always use when they spread their borderline racist propaganda and are called on it (i'm not saying this comic was borderline racist propaganda, just making a parallel with the arguments used). What you have to realize is that people are not 100% rational. They tend to take more from a message than what it says. Technically speaking showing muslims blow themselves up on the news merely says "these muslims blew themselves up...". Yet some people take from that "Muslims are all terrorists". And while you can never totally avoid such misinterpretations you should avoid sending a message which is purposely very easily misinterpreted (which is what Extreme Right wingers do. They'll never say "All Muslims are bad" but they'll always put a lot of emphasis on the "Muslim" characteristics when painting a bad picture of certain behaviors and events).

And this is exactly what this comic did with "White Guy". Those characteristics are emphasized way too much: in the name of the "group", in the name of the characters and the fact there were multiple characters from diverse backgrounds but all are white men. The "White Men" part simply stands out way too much and unnecessarily at that. While it may very well not the be the intention of the creator to create a bad image of "white men" the comic does follow the 101 "How to create a bad image of a group without being too obvious about it" lesson.

*sighs* Again, the WGDF force is not applicable to all white men. The only people who think that, literally the only people, are themselves members of the WGDF. And were before the comic came out.

But yes, they are all white guys. Why the hell would the WGDF be comprised of anyone else? Are you seriously demanding that the WGDF in the comic be comprised of non-white men and women when 99.9999999999999% of the WGDF in reality are white men (and the handful that aren't tend to be white women)? Are you serious? No, really, are you serious?

I'm sorry, do you also object to history books portraying the KKK and Confederate soldiers as white guys? Cuz, uh...*whispers* Almost all of them were.

 

[kklawm]

Stuff

I agree with you to the point that facts can be twisted. That being said, you cannot discount information gleaned from legitimate sources (DOJ/FBI) just because they appear somewhere you don't want them to. I didn't realize that the examiner was a white supremacist group, but it doesn't change the fact that the studies that were conducted and sourced by an outside organization DISTINCTLY show what I claimed they did.

Bottom line: I provided several legitimate sources for my assertions.

Got nothing against the studies, got nothing against the sources, my point was not targeted specifically, it was just against the statement 'statistics don't lie'. Statistics can, when there's people involved, they will. By their nature, there is some factor of incorrectness of any statistic because a statistic is a collected measurement of something. But some statistics are generally correct of course.

99.9999999999999% of the WGDF in reality are white men

I can just see that... Like there's one WGDF or KKK member who's secretly a woman or is just painted white. 'No seriously, I'm white' or 'Let's kill all the blacks, except Barry, he's okay'.

 

[Carnagath]

umm, okay. If you guys are really this determined to get yourselves banned, might I suggest simply PMing a mod and asking for a banhammer straight to the face?

It's quicker and less painful than what's happening here.

Haven't read all 29 pages, but the first 5-6 are full of: 1) mods declaring how awesome it's gonna be when they get to ban some people 2) people saying how awesome it's gonna be when people start shitting on each other 3) people getting warned/banned for saying that the comic is flamebait/misrepresentation/strawman (really?). Like, I honestly have no idea what you guys are doing and what's going on in the Escapist anymore. Been here for half a decade and this is the most depressing state I've ever seen those forums in.

 

[TheMadTypist]

I can get what you're trying to say and the comic is even kind of funny, but you've kinda been resorting to this sort of thing a lot lately. The satirizing stick might be a reliable tool for webcomic-ry, but there's only so many times you can clone hitler and beat him to a broken pulp on national television before the crowd gets bored, no matter how much they hated him initially, or how righteous it may make you feel.

Critical Miss is just starting to feel, well, stale. Yes, stupid people are stupid. We get that. Opinions like being able to "make people straight" (even with the clever reversal with the chiropractor angle), or "Radical feminists are always extremists" are very mock-able, and most will agree that arguments about videogames on the internet generally are lacking certain elements of quality, and some white people are a little too eager to play the victim. But there are more methods of criticism than mockery.

 

[Jamz]

Got nothing against the studies, got nothing against the sources, my point was not targeted specifically, it was just against the statement 'statistics don't lie'. Statistics can, when there's people involved, they will. By their nature, there is some factor of incorrectness of any statistic because a statistic is a collected measurement of something. But some statistics are generally correct of course.

Fair enough. Sorry for the snarkiness.

 

[kklawm]

I'm reminded of that scene in Blazing Saddles.

"I told you to wash your hands after them cross-burnin's"

Wow, that's funny as hell, thanks, I'll link it to keep this thank you post informative!

 

[Dansrage]

Well. I suppose the mass immigration of Turks into Germany after WWII has led to a lot of problems in modern Germany, but I'm not sure exactly to what degree.
I see what you're promoting and I agree with you in many ways, but I'm not sure if this method of execution is actually a reasonable way to go about it. Your first and second points I totally agree with. That being said, I believe that immigrant competition for employment is actually a good thing for the nation as a whole. I believe that healthy businesses need to compete for workers with the ability to get things done. Not every native is entitled to a job, especially when there are those who are willing to do a better job for the same wage. It's the same reason why I'm torn on affirmative action, but that's a separate conversation.

I agree that there's too much unskilled immigration, but I'm not sure how the problem can be remedied in a decent way. On the one hand, I don't really see an effective way to limit this unless there were tighter immigration restrictions put in place to prevent this, but I'm pretty sure that those regulations are pretty tight as is (I may be mistaken though. would like a 2nd opinion).

The language is another thing I'm torn on. On the one hand, it states that there will be no national language in the United States. But I don't speak Spanish and I'm not sure if I like its proliferation. That being said, I don't know if it's "right" for us to limit that. At the very least, I believe that it should not be helped along. But what exactly is "helping it along"? There must be some middle ground, but I don't know what/where that is.

Also, what the shit is up with all the censorship in these forums?

I don't believe that any foreign national has a right to emigrate anywhere, it's a privilege, especially for people who come from 3rd world countries, for them it changes not only their lives but the lives of all future generations of their family.
I believe immigration should be treated more as a privilege and something to be valued and appreciated more than something to be abused. It is after all, a form of charity for unskilled workers, and a great opportunity for the skilled.
I don't demand that all immigrants be a rocket scientist or a doctor, but that they make an effort to adopt the local culture and the local values.

As a good example I'd like to cite Britain.

Nobody has any problem with Indian Hindu and Sikh immigrants, they integrate, they join local communities, they work hard, they contribute massively to the local culture and economy. I'd even go as far as to say I respect and appreciate Indians in Britain, I consider them British. But then Pakistani Muslims are loathed, they're violent, hostile, aggressive, where they live crime rates inflate and the community loses all trust and social cohesion.
The only difference between an Indian Hindu and a Pakistani Muslim is their culture and their willingness to integrate.

To put it frankly, people who show no willingness to integrate, are openly hostile to the local culture, do not embody it's values and contribute nothing should be deported forcibly. They have no reason to be there, no right to be there.

America is a strange example when it comes to language and culture, is there an 'American culture'? I believe so, however the country and it's race and culture, are a patchwork of everything imaginable, from Polish Jews to African slaves. However there is one thing that defines America, and that is American values, the constitution, personal freedom and self-determination, when I visited America I was shocked at how many people, black or white, embodied these values and held them to be right. America is a patchwork of races and cultures and so it must be unified through it's values, they're the paste that fills the cracks between communities.
I believe if, for example, a Mexican immigrant, has no desire to embody these values and holds American culture in contempt, he should not be granted residence.

Illegal immigration surprises me too, that there is a debate at all shocks me, as these 'undocumented immigrants' have already shown a complete disregard for American law and values.

Censorship seems ok here actually, I've seen worse, as you can probably guess I'm used to being censored, lol.

I actually have to run here in a second, but I'll try to pound out a response real quick.

It seems like a lot of the immigrants here (granted, I'm not from a border state, so this is based purely off of conversations with others, the few interactions I've had with latinos, and *gag* news coverage) are relegated to subpar work despite having the wrong idea that they'll be able to come to the United States to make tons of money for themselves. Granted, I'm not defending this logic, but it seems that the United States is giving mixed signals and that's the gridlock that causes the problems. It at once tempts illegal aliens to the US by means of wages and a pretty easy loophole system, coupled with other benefits (I'm not sure if social programs target aliens, but I would imagine they would.) but they are not allowed to work in a way that would lead them out of exploitation by their employers. In this way, I think that they're stuck in a constant state of poverty and unwelcomeness which does little to want them to take American culture in the first place.

But maybe that's just after they get here. I do agree that keeping people who don't want to integrate out is a good thing, but the Latino culture is already so established that there's no longer a drive to integrate with the greater United States whenever you can just get by using your own cultural ties. Although I'm not sure, I've heard people from the deep south say that they can go to many places where if you cannot speak Spanish then you'll have trouble speaking.

To sum it up, I think it's almost too late because it's take hold instead of being prevented at the onset. But then again, with the border in the state that it is, perhaps it was an inevitability.

A big problem with the whole illegal immigrant thing also seems to be the expense incurred to deport them and keep them out, but then they can just cross again. It seems as if they don't really have anything to lose. They'll just get deported again.

I'm dating a Lithuanian girl. Where you from?

Also it's been a pleasure talking/debating with you.

Yes, likewise, I also have to go, and it's nice to have a civil discussion.

You make some good points, too.

I'm originally from Britain, but I live in France right now and I'm dating an American. I actually had to go through the immigration process I advocate, France is pretty good for that.

 

[Moth_Monk]

Wait.....


...Doesn't Yahtzee wear a fedora?

:O

Spoiler: Mod edit: Please add spoilers for images!

 

[Overquoted]

So do the two of you have any intention of addressing the initial comment involving my additional citations or are you going to cry about my copy/paste snafu?

Copy/paste snafu? The one where your only source to back up your claim turned out to be a study by an extremely racists group? That's not a snafu, that's you either failing to find any decent proof or just not caring enough to look into who did the study. I usually try to question where my source comes from before I embarrass myself. Learned that the hard way.

The fact of the matter is I supplied several independent sources and you're not acknowledging them. You're smug and you're unable to humble yourselves enough to realize that my sources were legitimate. Instead you're burying your heads in the sand and acting holier-than-thou. You are the worst examples of humanity; making blind assertions and then quickly retreating whenever the evidence is not in your favor.

Started to, but can't quote from a post that got a warning. But if you'd like, here:

-DOJ link didn't specify that it was black-on-white crime. White people getting assaulted more doesn't necessarily mean it's because of black perpetrators.

-BET link was one preacher saying black people were denying black-on-white crime. Probably true, but a matter of opinion. And irrelevant to the point. That black-on-white crime exists is a given. That some of it is horrific and racially motivated is a given. That racially motivated crime by blacks is systematic and widespread? Yet to prove it.

-FBI link had no point. It's statistics of arrests for various crimes. Says nothing of victims. Or hate crimes.

For a science student, you are really bad at research. I'm almost tempted to find something to make your point for you, but I'd rather order dinner.

But here's a tip: find a legit study or a news report linking to a legit study which examines race-motivated crime. Try prison interviews as a source. Particularly helpful if it then compares these crimes with general murder/assault/etc crimes. As in, is it a major cause for murder? Or are other factors more common? Even more helpful, how do these black-on-white crimes compare to rates and severity of white-on-black crimes?

For the record, I didn't see that you were female. I thought you were a child with the way you carried yourself.

With that I drift off to bantown. Farewell all.

Thanks. I'd much rather be called young and stupid than be talked down to for being a chick. (No sarcasm. It's refreshing.)

 

[SidheKnight]

Opinions like being able to "make people straight" (even with the clever reversal with the chiropractor angle), or "Radical feminists are always extremists" are very mock-able

Radical Feminists ARE always extremist.

I can't find the source right now, but one of the principles of Radical Feminism is that "Women and Men cannot live together" and that men are "inherently sexist" unless re-educated.

That kind of thought is extremist, and doesn't allow for peaceful coexistance and cooperation.

If we lived in the world of the X-Men, and women were mutants, then "Radical Feminism" would be Magneto's Brotherhood (sisterhood?) of Evil Mutants, and Xavier's X-Men would be regular, moderate feminists.

 

[Shadowstar38]

Why is Beta a brony? That shit still confounds me.

 

[Overquoted]

99.9999999999999% of the WGDF in reality are white men

I can just see that... Like there's one WGDF or KKK member who's secretly a woman or is just painted white. 'No seriously, I'm white' or 'Let's kill all the blacks, except Barry, he's okay'.

*snickers* Or the member who is secretly a woman objects to a WGDF argument. "But...rape is fairly common." "Shut up, Dave, the numbers are all made up by feminists!"

Edit:
Tbf, that's more a "men's rights" argument. But there's a bit of crossover between groups.