Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="transmission89" data-source="post: 8326712" data-attributes="member: 6688441">So this a point of order, rather than attempt to continue the debate as I think both sides are established. An attempt to cross or at least define the divide here.This encapsulates the “arrogance” I was talking about. Not the opinion itself but in the way it’s worded here. You and yours on “your side of the debate” associate this and equate it with  the just struggle for proper equality. The struggle for equality, equity and general love is absolutely a cause I support and stand for as part of a minority myself (lgbt- I appreciate it’s not racially specific but I hope I am making my firm belief in The message and the cause clear).what I find distasteful is this almost inbuilt assumption in the argument that this is purely factual and correct, the patronising (whether intentioned or not “ you’re not incapable of of change, you seem to realise..” etc).The divide here for myself and many others others (though of course, I don’t speak for all) on “my side” of the argument is that we don’t see fictional races as part of the struggle. In fact, it’s certainly my perception that it is counter productive and to be honest, down right offensive to equate fictional monsters with real world ethnicities. And that is what I find asinine.for example:<a href="http://dmsworkshop.com/2021/04/03/evil-orcs/" target="_blank">Orcs Aren’t People: Denouncing Racism in the D&D Community</a><a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/checkpoints/202004/no-orcs-arent-racist" target="_blank">No, Orcs Aren't Racist</a>And in particulate to those who use literature to build a case to critique, there’s a great book called how to read with a few poignant passage"... one must not only be a responsive_but also a __responsible_ listener. You are responsive to the extent that you follow what has been said and note the intention that prompts it. But you also have the responsibility of taking a position. When you take it, it is yours, not the author's. To regard anyone except yourself as responsible for your judgement is to be a slave, not a free man. It is from the fact that the liberal arts acquire their name.""You must make your own assumptions explicit. You must know what your prejudices---that is, your prejudgments---are. Otherwise you are not likely to admit that your opponent may be equally entitled to different assumptions. Good controversy should not be a quarrel about assumptions. If an author, for example, explicitly asks you to take something for granted, the fact that the opposite can also be taken for granted should not prevent you from honouring his request. If your prejudices lie on the opposite side, and if you do not acknowledge them to be prejudices, you cannot give the author's case a fair hearing."I hope that to you, I have at least made my objections clear, and made the divide clearer, whether or not you choose to agree with the position.I actually feel that on many things, our opinions differ very littleAs I said, I’m not interested in continuing the debate, just an attempt to actually clarify it. As an aside, I did find a really interesting article from all this, especially building on notions of memetic legacy:<a href="https://treeofwoe.substack.com/p/when-orcs-were-real" target="_blank">When Orcs were Real</a></blockquote>

Verification