D&D 5E Mearls' "Firing" tweet

[billd91]

I don't know what the big deal is, she has elf ears people - she is overqualified.

Too many people pick on cosplayers as being not-real fans for that to be the case, sadly. There was quite a to-do about it with respect to ComicCon - and it was coming from vendors, no less.

 

[Sacrosanct]

The cyber bullying encouraged by this site through the use of the ignore button is strange given that the staff here often posts about not allowing that sort of thing to go on. Forcing you to block them against your will is not much different than a schoolyard bully forcing you to give up your lunch money.

I don't think we're talking about the same thing. I have no issues with the ignore button. I do find it more than a little bit eye rolley for someone to quote another person and then immediately put them on ignore so they can't see what you just said. That seems both childish and a display of lack of integrity to me. Getting a last shot in while not having the wherewithal to stand behind what you said to them directly as it were.

 

[epithet]

According to one of my UT Law school profs- Sam Issacharoff- who actually represented the school in court on most of those cases, that is a gross mischaracterization and oversimplification of UT’s AA system. Otherwise, he’d have lost. Which he didn’t.

Put differently, that was the plaintiff’s allegation, and the court did not agree.

In fairness, I didn't apply to UT Law School, because the UH Law Center gave me a full tuition scholarship (thanks U of H!) I do remember the chart from my undergraduate application, though. It was in the application packet, and it was as I described it. Maybe the law school had a more elegantly implemented program.

Also, you might be thinking of a different UT "reverse discrimination" case. There have been several, and the one from the early 90s (Hopwood) didn't go the University's way.

 

[Sacrosanct]

This came up on my FB memories feed today (it happened exactly last year). When people talk about privilage, 99% of the time it's not in the context of insulting someone who is white, or male. It's about things like this. Things that people who don't belong to an affected demographic even realize or pay a second glance to. But it does have an impact to people who are part of that group. In the other thread I mentioned how it's things like picking up a newspaper and being assured that the person on the cover looks like you. Or going to school and almost everyone there is just like you. Or how the powers that be decades ago made sure that your white neighborhood had bus lines, and stores nearby, and a DMV close, while black neighborhoods were ensured to have none of these for them, and even though the policies were set decades ago, they are still in place now. Or no one ever saying you're a credit to your race or gender whenever you accomplish something.

And it's little things like this. That "woman taking a selfie" is fellow Senator Amy Klobuchar. But whoever make that caption just put "a woman', assuming that if a woman is there, she must just be a regular person and most likely wasn't a senator herself. It's that kind of assumption that happens every day that displays what privilege is.

And in the context of Kate Welch, I see much of the same behavior. I see the objections to her hiring, and people questioning her hire, when they didn't do the same thing when all the men where hired. That's a double standard. One with roots in sexism and a display of privilege (if you're a man, you're privileged to not have people question your credentials in the same manner)

I've noticed no one took me up on my challenge, and was able to provide me examples of them having similar arguments when a man was hired, despite the AA disclaimer having been on their job postings for years and years.

 

[epithet]

It's funny how so many of the people who are attacking Mearls now were also very active in the Kate Welch thread, that had to be closed. Or the thread about Green Ronin only hiring female authors for one of their novels, that had to be closed. Or the thread about the gay couple/ diversity in D&D, that had to be closed. Or even the thread reviewing the new Ghostbuster movie.
...

You can't lump Ghostbusters in with the others, man... that movie was just bad. Even Kate McKinnon (currently my favorite comic in the world) couldn't save that one. It was just a series of barely related slapstick skits that never...

Sorry, sorry, didn't mean to derail.

Carry on.

 

[Charlaquin]

Doesn't that sort of imply, then, that if a woman is not getting this kind of harrassment, it must be because these guys think she's not attractive?

I mean, the most positive spin I can put on it is "She looks like an outcast, so she must 'get it,'" but that still kind of carries with it the implication of ugly.

That is exactly what it implies, yes. Which means there’s no winning for gaming in that culture. They’re either viewed as posers or as unattractive.

 

[billd91]

I've noticed no one took me up on my challenge, and was able to provide me examples of them having similar arguments when a man was hired, despite the AA disclaimer having been on their job postings for years and years.

There was a lot of argument about Monte Cook being back on the WotC payroll in the run-up to 5e - but I don't think much of it involved qualifications regarding lore or rule complexity (barring a few snits from 4e fans bemoaning what they felt was his lack of understanding of 4e). Arguments were mostly about specific design trends and issues and styles of game based on his track record with D&D and other areas of the industry... something I think is substantially different than what we've seen with Kate Welch.

 

[Gardens & Goblins]

You're missing the point.

It's not my responsibility to change others.

It's certainly not the victim's responsibility to change the behaviour of their abusers.

Mearls isn't looking to change others. He's putting them on notice that the behaviour will not be endorsed or tolerated. The correct thing to do is not tolerate abuse within a group and communicate clearly and loudly so that people feel safe. The goal isn't to change abusers. That's a lot of work. The goal is to keep them from harming ourselves and others.

Not saying its your responsibility to do... anything.. really. You do/be you!

Simply pointing out that.. pointing things out is easy. And not likely to change anything. Worse, it can actually make constructive, healthy change potentially that much harder. Specifically with how some folks such catch phrases such as, 'check your privilege!' - again, great intent, but sadly a more than I'd like to see, often executed as crummy behavior.

Actively engaging with change - making a real difference - takes effort which amounts to more than catchy Twerps and social confrontations. The hardest part being, for many, learning how to engage with 'the opposition' in a respectful, compassionate manner.

With regards to Mearls: Big deal. I'm sure those he is targeting are quaking in their booties. But hey, at least we kinda know where he stands and if that was his intent, fair play to him.

 

[Sacrosanct]

There was a lot of argument about Monte Cook being back on the WotC payroll in the run-up to 5e - but I don't think much of it involved qualifications regarding lore or rule complexity (barring a few snits from 4e fans bemoaning what they felt was his lack of understanding of 4e). Arguments were mostly about specific design trends and issues and styles of game based on his track record with D&D and other areas of the industry... something I think is substantially different than what we've seen with Kate Welch.

Agreed. What we didn't see were arguments like "Well, there's an AA clause in the job posting, so how can we know for sure that Mearls was hired for being qualified or not?"

Now, I didn't expect those people who made those arguments to be able to show where they've done the same with men. I think we all knew that. And I think we all see through the transparency. I mean, we even have gyor admitting that even after he was shown that the AA was not part of the physical requirements, he still sent a tweet to Mearls making the same debunked argument. That's the sort of behavior we're talking about here. There is no way any reasonable person can look at that and not think that it's either motivated outright by sexism, or is behavior that illustrates what MP is (the double standard).

 

[Jester David]

You can't lump Ghostbusters in with the others, man... that movie was just bad. Even Kate McKinnon (currently my favorite comic in the world) couldn't save that one. It was just a series of barely related slapstick skits that never...

Sorry, sorry, didn't mean to derail.

Carry on.

Ghostbusters was a great example. Because it wasn't a bad movie. It just wasn't a good one. Solid B- Below average. But hardly the worst movie even released that month.
But you look at the reviews online (and here) and you'd think it was as bad as the G.I. Joe or Bayformers movies for “killing childhoods”.