5E Mearls' "Firing" tweet - Page 41
Page 41 of 102 FirstFirst ... 31323334353637383940414243444546474849505191 ... LastLast
Results 401 to 410 of 1013
  1. #401
    Member
    A 1e title so awesome it's not in the book (Lvl 21)



    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Oz
    Posts
    2,429
    Quote Originally Posted by jayoungr View Post
    I may regret getting into this thread, but there's something I always think about whenever the subject of "gatekeeping" against "fake geek girls" comes up. I'll try to put this as delicately and neutrally as possible.

    It is my experience that the impulse to "gatekeep" is not applied universally to every being with two X chromosomes.

    It is my impression, although this is anecdotal and I could be wrong, that the impulse is typically applied to those who have two X chromosomes and are physically attractive. Possibly because those who harbor the impulse to gatekeep feel threatened by such beings.

    Which kind of further suggests that not getting this treatment is its own sort of insult.

    I'd love to be wrong. If others have different explanations, I'm interested in hearing them.
    Nah, that’s pretty accurate. Some folks just can’t believe a woman would be both hot and into geeky things. So, they assume any attractive woman with such interests must be faking it. Based on that flawed assumption, they make inferences about said woman’s reason for the presupposed deception. And as many of these people have had negative experiences revolving around social experiences with attractive women, they assume malicious intent behind it.

  2. #402
    Member
    Grandfather of Assassins (Lvl 19)



    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    2,219
    Quote Originally Posted by Charlaquin View Post
    Nah, that’s pretty accurate. Some folks just can’t believe a woman would be both hot and into geeky things. So, they assume any attractive woman with such interests must be faking it. Based on that flawed assumption, they make inferences about said woman’s reason for the presupposed deception. And as many of these people have had negative experiences revolving around social experiences with attractive women, they assume malicious intent behind it.
    There is more to it I think.

    This is conjecture but based on many years of watching this sort of behaviour. Like many here I've spent a lot of time in hobby game stores, in gaming groups, at conventions etc. I also ran night life events which were friendly to marginalized peoples for quite a few years as well.

    These are people who are in their power zone. They are competent there and have social standing. In areas where they don't have that competence they are often bullied, accosted, humiliated, etc. Some of it is probably due to wanting to defend that stature, a preemptive strike. Some of it is that the odd person out becomes the symbol of everyone who has hurt them so they lash out. Some of it though I think is just their learned experience. This is how life is, only it's their turn now.

    I've been accosted for being too 'normal' looking or that I 'don't like look I belong/should be there' at my own events. Other offenses included mocking people for dress, dancing, etc. The people doing the mocking are ones who would be bullied out of most other clubs.

    So it's not unique to hobby game culture. This is just the form it often takes. The normies bully them so when the normies come to their territory it is their turn to be the bullies.
    XP jayoungr gave XP for this post

  3. #403
    Quote Originally Posted by Sacrosanct View Post
    You know what this reminds me of? The uproar when they starting making the artwork more diverse. Or included an NPC who was gay. Any representation that is not a straight white male sure seems to upset people. Which shows just how much more progress is needing to be made as a group.

    I think I've become conditioned over the past few years that any time I hear someone say, "Being shoved down my throat", I want to scream.
    In a way, this is why I'm glad I'm not the new hire because being Black, Jewish, female and gay has would have sorts of Unfortunate Implications written all over the responses I'd predictably get.
    XP nightwind1, doctorbadwolf gave XP for this post

  4. #404
    Member
    A 1e title so awesome it's not in the book (Lvl 21)



    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Oz
    Posts
    2,429
    Quote Originally Posted by ad_hoc View Post
    There is more to it I think.

    This is conjecture but based on many years of watching this sort of behaviour. Like many here I've spent a lot of time in hobby game stores, in gaming groups, at conventions etc. I also ran night life events which were friendly to marginalized peoples for quite a few years as well.

    These are people who are in their power zone. They are competent there and have social standing. In areas where they don't have that competence they are often bullied, accosted, humiliated, etc. Some of it is probably due to wanting to defend that stature, a preemptive strike. Some of it is that the odd person out becomes the symbol of everyone who has hurt them so they lash out. Some of it though I think is just their learned experience. This is how life is, only it's their turn now.

    I've been accosted for being too 'normal' looking or that I 'don't like look I belong/should be there' at my own events. Other offenses included mocking people for dress, dancing, etc. The people doing the mocking are ones who would be bullied out of most other clubs.

    So it's not unique to hobby game culture. This is just the form it often takes. The normies bully them so when the normies come to their territory it is their turn to be the bullies.
    That’s almost definitely part of it too. But the disbelief that an attractive woman would actually be interested in gaming is definitely a reason for it. I’ve been that guy before. It comes from a place of self-hate. If you view yourself as unlikable, and the hobby you take refuge in as “for unlikable people”, then someone you like being interested is a challenge to your worldview. They’re hot, therefore they must not be into gaming, therefore they must be trying to deceive you so as to humiliate you. That was how it was for me at one time, anyway.
    XP ad_hoc gave XP for this post

  5. #405
    Member
    A 1e title so awesome it's not in the book (Lvl 21)



    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    2,442
    Quote Originally Posted by epithet View Post
    I don't understand some of the more arcane aspects of quantum theory. I've never studied it, and I'm really only mildly interested in it. I can't see quantum stuff happening around me, but once in a while I read an article about it and generally accept the fact that those folks at CERN know more about it that I do, mostly because it's what they do all day.

    In a similar way, I don't understand the declaration that there have been a bunch of sexists who railed against hiring a D&D product designer because she's female. It seems preposterous. It makes no sense. I mean, who has an interest in keeping women out of the tabletop RPG hobby? But what I can see, and what is obvious to me, is that Mike was all pissed off about it. I'm willing to generally accept that he's got a better grasp of what's going on with D&D, its fans, and its presence in social media than I do, mostly because it's what he does all day.

    On the flip side, despite being disappointed with The Last Jedi on many levels and for many reasons, I actually like the character of Rey and I'm delighted for Daisy Ridley to be playing the new "chosen one." Nevertheless, I've faced the asinine assumption that if I don't like SWTLJ, it must be because I don't want a girl to be a jedi. Seriously, I got accused of that in an IO9 comment. So I'm open to the possibility that some of these accusations of -ism are bull crap. But... not all of them.

    The internet is not a happy place. I don't doubt for a moment that among the messages flung at and about Kate were some that were truly vile. Clearly some of those pushed Mike past the point of restraint. We'll almost certainly never know any significant data about all this wailing and gnashing of teeth, but really... do we need to? In response to her being hired, some people responded in an obnoxious way. Some of them were undoubtedly overtly misogynist. In the final calculation, Kate and Wizards caught a load of crap that they didn't deserve, and it doesn't much matter (to me) what the underlying motivations would look like on a pie chart.
    Just about the last Jedi, because I enjoyed it I've been told that I'm not a true Star Wars fan.

    Sent from my [device_name] using EN World mobile app
    Laugh Satyrn laughed with this post

  6. #406
    Quote Originally Posted by epithet View Post
    I thought I was fairly clear that those were implications of the terms you used, rather than actual quotes. Allow me to clarify.

    An assertion of "white male privilege" implies that the the person so labeled has, as a white male, been sheltered, insulated, or conditioned to the point that they are unable to perceive blatant injustice, unwilling to perceive that injustice, or have become supportive of and dependent on that injustice. It further implies that whatever authority that person might have in the context of the conversation at hand is unearned, and would not exist but for the ethnic circumstances of that person's birth. It is often paired with the implication that the person who is labeling the other as "privileged" has, if that person is also a white male, elevated himself above the stigma of white male privilege through his virtuous character.

    My point is that all of us should persuade each other or not based on the strength of our arguments and not be labeled in an effort to categorically dismiss our perspective. You have a lot (a lot) of points you can make and rhetorical devices at your disposal without resorting to, essentially, identity politics.
    I'm going against my better judgment here and responding to this because it's something that seems to trip a lot of people up whenever it gets brought up.

    As a person who is neither white, male nor straight, I've participated in the privilege conversation many times, and I've never seen it as an indictment of someone's character except for when that person has engaged in behavior that strikes multiple participants as willfully ignorant and lacking in empathy. Generally speaking, I've seen "Check your privilege!" used as a way to remind the person it's directed at to stop and think about what they're saying, who they're saying it to, and the potential impact of their words. At most, I've seen it said in a moment of frustration after calmly explaining things doesn't work, particularly in a situation where people who are already exhausted and dispirited have to once again "educate" people who claim to want to understand but act like they already know everything.

    While I've since stopped using tepid terminology like "white privilege" or "male privilege," they mean none of those things you are projecting onto them, which multiple resources explaining them have gone to great lengths to make clear. All the talk about privilege means is that you're more likely to have serious blinders about noticing the thousand little things that you benefit from without knowing about it and disadvantage others without you noticing. There are things you literally don't have to think about or account for on a day to day basis because of the way our society functions. That's all it means. Anything more than that is beyond the scope of what the terms means.

    It's a lot like the difference between someone who inherits a house that's paid for compared to someone who's homeless. The broader issue of a society that allows one person to have property passed to them while another doesn't have a home is another conversation, but on a societal level, it's still a significant benefit to inherit property with equity, and it's a significant disadvantage not to have a home at all. The homeless person makes decisions on a daily basis that a person who inherited a house doesn't even have to think about. When the home equity beneficiary runs into trouble is when they act like they know what it's like to be homeless because they went camping one time, or get bent out of shape when a homeless person says, "Being homeless affects every aspect of my daily life in ways most people who aren't homeless don't even see."

    To bring this to the original topic, it's my overall impression that most of the folks quibbling with Mearls' tweet are not people who have the experience of being a woman hired into a position of influence in a male-dominated industry. To me, the behavior he's talking about is parallel to the behavior I've observed or heard about in other industries, and the sexism or flat-out misogyny behind it flashes like big, neon signs that read, "NO GIRLS ALLOWED" and "YOU'RE NOT WELCOME HERE" or "THIS GAME BELONGS TO THE BOYS." One or a handful of instances like that is annoying. Dozens, hundreds or thousands of them would make me more than a little prickly, and I would be far less diplomatic than Mearls in my response to the people doing it and the people who got all up in their feelings and made it all about them.

    Sure, WotC is in the business of gaining and retaining customers, but some sorts of customers are liabilities to the open, inclusive game D&D aims to be.
    XP ad_hoc, Li Shenron, pemerton, Aldarc, DM Dave1 and 16 others gave XP for this post

  7. #407
    Member
    Spellbinder (Lvl 16)



    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Often in the garden.
    Posts
    743
    Quote Originally Posted by ad_hoc View Post
    This is a weird sentiment that gets repeated. It's similar to the free speech one.

    No one is pushing. No one is forcing. No one is infringing on their free speech.*

    They are being told that they are asshats. Their choice is to stop being an asshat or go away. People can choose who they associate with. Not associating with abusive and toxic people is not 'forcibly changing them'.

    It's not my responsibility to hang out with jerks. Just as it isn't Mearls' responsibility to listen to them or value their opinions.

    *Well not no one. These things happen to marginalized peoples all the time. People who face actual violence, coercion, and suspension of their rights.
    Just letting you know how, 'telling people they're asshats' isn't very effective in terms of promoting change in others. It's a failing strategy, one that promotes confrontation and polarizes opinions. If folks want a fight, ok, then its a great way to get one.

    If folks really want to promote change in others they need to step out of the ring, take a deep breath, and meet at the table.

    Sure, we can deem some folks not worth the time but then - who gets to decided which folks are worthy? Based on what list of merits? Which prejudices will determine who gets the effort?

    I believe the intent is great. Healthy. But the behaviour can often be at best, clumsy and confrontational. Ineffective.

    Again tho, this is if folks actually want to promote change in others. If they just want to 'be right' and win some moral victory, then hey. Tell tell away!
    Last edited by Gardens & Goblins; Thursday, 25th January, 2018 at 09:34 AM. Reason: a rogue' some' was detected.. and destroyed.
    XP Warpiglet, epithet, nswanson27, LordEntrails gave XP for this post

  8. #408
    Member
    Titan (Lvl 27)

    Dannyalcatraz's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Planet Alcatraz & D/FW
    Posts
    39,391
    Quote Originally Posted by epithet View Post
    I remember when I went to college in '89 there were charts that put you in a category based on your your GPA and SAT. There was nothing coy about it, the affirmative action program was up-front. Category A was eligible for automatic acceptance without any qualifier, category B was "discretionary" for white males but automatic for minorities, category C was discretionary for minorities but white males would not be accepted. This was at UT Austin, and it became exhibit A for the (in)famous lawsuit against UT for "reverse discrimination."

    It wasn't just UT, either. A number of my friends got accepted at northern state schools like Iowa with free tuition because these schools wanted a certain number of hispanic students. They didn't hide it at all, they came right out and told the recruits that they were wanted because of their ethnicity. In writing.
    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.

  9. #409
    Member
    Grandfather of Assassins (Lvl 19)



    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    2,219
    Quote Originally Posted by Gardens & Goblins View Post
    Just letting you know how, 'telling people they're asshats' isn't very effective in terms of promoting change in others.
    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.
    XP Afrodyte, Obryn gave XP for this post

  10. #410
    Member
    Time Agent (Lvl 24)



    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Victoria BC
    Posts
    10,430
    Right now the one thing I'm curious about is what @JacktheRabbit is really trying to say - I'm having trouble translating "aaa" into anything I can parse.

    Lan-"bbb"-efan
    Laugh Aldarc, robus, Iolo Morganwg laughed with this post

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 130
    Last Post: Monday, 25th June, 2018, 01:24 PM
  2. Jonathan Tweet talks "13th Age"
    By Morrus in forum *General Roleplaying Games Discussion
    Replies: 54
    Last Post: Tuesday, 12th June, 2012, 08:00 AM
  3. Do Ray Spells suffer -4 "Firing into Melee" penalty?
    By Skarppsey in forum *Pathfinder & Starfinder
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: Monday, 17th May, 2004, 03:36 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •