|
Liquid Communism posted:Safe, sane, consensual. That is the standard for differentiating between 'your kink is not my kink but your kink is okay' and 'call the police'. Most reasonable humans have a strong aversion to sexualizing children. I'm not sure why you feel a need to enlighten me as to the boundaries of kink, especially since you're still SSC rather than RACK.
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 10:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 11:48 |
|
|
Loomer posted:SSC rather than RACK. NO! For the love of all that is good and holy, you are not having that discussion here. Please. Please.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 10:28
|
|
|
Yeah, this is definitely off-topic for this particular Trad Games thread 
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 14:17
|
|
|
JBP posted:I mean the imperial extremists thing seems sound. The 'joke' is that the Astra Militarium is the Imperium. So 'Imperial Extremists' is meant to be an oxymoron in that context and point them purging 'loyal' members, because right-wing extremists consider themselves the best nationalists. That's my read anyways.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 15:47
|
|
|
It's a development of a slightly older thing called "orcposting", where you draw an intentional parallel between LotR orcs and [insert minority here] in an attempt to ridicule the non-white-supremacist position that we shouldn't judge all [insert minority here] by the actions of individuals, that white people can life peacefully alongside [insert minority here], etc. I tried to look for concrete examples, but they're all so incredibly vile I frankly don't want to. It certainly brings the uncomfortable racial subtext in the Lord of the Rings films into a stark, unflattering light. Which I think is worth keeping in mind when engaging with Tolkienesque literature and the traditions of fantasy roleplaying games: the idea of ugly, monstrous, compulsively evil, warlike "races", especially when pitted against a white monoculture, becomes a tool of and is fuel for outright white supremacy. To the degree that I think we have an outright moral duty to not portray in games anything that can be construed as a "race" as monolithically monstrous, evil, and existentially threatening. Sometimes white supremacists invent convoluted arguments for why a children's TV show about friendship and talking ponies is actually an argument for the ethnostate and that's on them, not us - and sometimes they can sow their seeds in ground that we already plowed and fertilized for them, and that's on us.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 16:11
|
|
|
LatwPIAT posted:To the degree that I think we have an outright moral duty to not portray in games anything that can be construed as a "race" as monolithically monstrous, evil, and existentially threatening. quote:Sometimes white supremacists invent convoluted arguments for why a children's TV show about friendship and talking ponies is actually an argument for the ethnostate and that's on them, not us
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 16:46
|
|
|
There were always the old grogs.txt days of stormfronters arguing back and forth whether or not Drow were "black". The amount of pretzels one can twist into to justify one's tastes are amazing- see previous discussions re: 40k. That's not to say you can't enjoy problematic things, that's fine. It just helps a lot to be aware with the issues thereof and understand how they can cause discomfort. Speaking of which- LatwPIAT posted:It certainly brings the uncomfortable racial subtext in the Lord of the Rings films into a stark, unflattering light. Which I think is worth keeping in mind when engaging with Tolkienesque literature and the traditions of fantasy roleplaying games: the idea of ugly, monstrous, compulsively evil, warlike "races", especially when pitted against a white monoculture, becomes a tool of and is fuel for outright white supremacy. I've been playing Shadow of War and you want to see that issue writ large for about sixty hours, well. Well.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 17:38
|
|
|
dwarf74 posted:Well-said. I mean, it's set in a utopian absolute monarchy run by immortal god-queens where everyone is born into distinct and stable sub-races. Given that, I can kind of see how the right type of swivel-eyed nerd might twist it the wrong way.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 18:41
|
|
|
LatwPIAT posted:It certainly brings the uncomfortable racial subtext in the Lord of the Rings films into a stark, unflattering light. Which I think is worth keeping in mind when engaging with Tolkienesque literature and the traditions of fantasy roleplaying games: the idea of ugly, monstrous, compulsively evil, warlike "races", especially when pitted against a white monoculture, becomes a tool of and is fuel for outright white supremacy. That is a big ask. The evil, warlike "other" is incredibly widespread in pop culture. For that matter, the risk that white supremacists might use something as a tool is a lousy reason to avoid expression because White Supremacists will project their ideas onto utterly banal media and adopt it as their own. Nothing is safe. Take this picture:  Is that two white supremacists flashing a noted white supremacist hand gesture? No, it's former Toronto mayor Mel Lastman and his son. Lastman, the son of Jewish immigrants who left Poland in the 1930s, adopted the "okay symbol" as a signature for his chain of "Bad Boy's" furniture stores in the 1950s. The stores still use the symbol today, notwithstanding that 4chan convinced White Supremacists to adopt it, because screw those guys. I'm not going to go flashing the okay symbol myself. It would probably not be understood as "retaking" the symbol, unless I was posing for a picture with Lastman. But the idea of preemptively surrendering culture touchstones to White Supremacists stinks.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 18:47
|
|
|
Maneck posted:That is a big ask. The evil, warlike "other" is incredibly widespread in pop culture. For that matter, the risk that white supremacists might use something as a tool is a lousy reason to avoid expression because White Supremacists will project their ideas onto utterly banal media and adopt it as their own. Nothing is safe. Take this picture: I mean, the Evil Other being widespread doesn't actually make it good, or something to be accepted. Indeed, I have trouble thinking of a time when it's not racialized, except I guess when the Other is the Communist Hivemind. e: like, if you think this is a cultural touchstone to preserve, fuckin' prove it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 18:56
|
|
|
Mors Rattus posted:I mean, the Evil Other being widespread doesn't actually make it good, or something to be accepted. Indeed, I have trouble thinking of a time when it's not racialized, except I guess when the Other is the Communist Hivemind. Your eloquent cursing is convincing. Lets burn all books derived from Beowulf.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 19:29
|
|
|
you know that "we humanized and examined the motivations of Grendel, made him relatable and so on" was, like, a critically acclaimed book, right? you also seem to have no idea what The Other actually means, except possibly "a monster that goes raaaar" typically, in literature, The Evil Other is a literal stand-in for a racialized cultural fear, which is why for example Tolkien's orcs draw on a lot of Mongol imagery and the entire "savage Mongol hordes of the East" thing is a longlasting cultural thing. you get the same thing with black people often! hivemind alien monsters are often used as stand-ins for communism instead because SURELY THE ONLY WAY ANYONE COULD BE COMMUNIST IS A HIVEMIND is a common take, especially in sci fi and none of this good? like at all? it's bad takes that perpetuate bad racial stereotypes?
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 19:35
|
|
|
I've explained to chuds who believe they have successfully "taken" things like the OK sign, milk, clowns, etc. from normal people that it is not the thing that we are calling racist, it's them for explicitly saying "I'm gonna do a racism with this thing" They have fooled themselves into believing they have "made things racist" so we can't use them again or else we'll do a racism - they can't wrap their head around the fact that we're not bothered by these things in a normal context, and most of us are pretty good at judging that context. This all came to a head for them recently where a doctored pic of SE Cupp on CNN next to a headline about how they had successfully made hashtags the next hate symbol fooled themselves into thinking they had fooled normies with their twelfth dimensional chess game. Never, ever acknowledge that the thing they're putting forward as a symbol o hate is a symbol of hate - just call them racist because turning innocuous things into hate symbols is a project of theirs.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 19:38
|
|
|
Deified Data posted:I've explained to chuds who believe they have successfully "taken" things like the OK sign, milk, clowns, etc. from normal people that it is not the thing that we are calling racist, it's them for explicitly saying "I'm gonna do a racism with this thing" It depends on a case by case basic. For example, swastika can't be seperated in the west from being a nazi symbol ; or, to give a more modern example, Pepe the frog being associated with the alt right. But things like milk, or clowns (never heard of that specific one before)? You need to put the googles on to see that as a symbol. The MO is "if I spit on this food now it's my food". And, as you say - don't let 'em. (remember when they tried to make Gritty into a fash symbol?) Mors Rattus posted:you know that "we humanized and examined the motivations of Grendel, made him relatable and so on" was, like, a critically acclaimed book, right? This one?
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 20:02
|
|
|
That’d be the one, yeah. It doesn’t make Grendel a very nice person, but way more than just The Other.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 20:04
|
|
|
If you want to read more about orcs as a racial stand-in, I found this article accessible and enlightening.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 20:21
|
|
|
Mors Rattus posted:you know that "we humanized and examined the motivations of Grendel, made him relatable and so on" was, like, a critically acclaimed book, right? The other is an allegorical tool for conveying fear of the unknown. Sometimes a story is about how the protagonists respond to a situation; the other is used because its motivations are not the point of that story. The martial race of conquerors is a common implementation. Complex villains can make for good story telling too. Only an idiot would argue otherwise. No one itt suggested anything like that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 21:01
|
|
|
Maneck posted:The other is an allegorical tool for conveying fear of the unknown. Sometimes a story is about how the protagonists respond to a situation; the other is used because its motivations are not the point of that story. The martial race of conquerors is a common implementation. Maneck posted:The martial race of conquerors is a common implementation. Maneck posted:The martial race of conquerors Maneck posted:The martial race gee I wonder where anyone might get the idea that this entire construct is built on racist xenophobia
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 21:07
|
|
|
There was actually a cool twist in AT-43 where the murderous faction bent on destruction turns out to be post-singularity humans. The regular humans do not know this, IIRC. Wargames tend to invoke monoculture societies because at the end of the day space elves only exist to battle the space orks and the space humans. Which probably explains their appeal to chuds, since once you make the "Ah ha, these aliens are actually based on China" you can publicly racist your heart out under a veneer of deniability.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 21:39
|
|
|
Crossquoting from CSPAM cause this is a good primer on the kind of tactics fash use, and where a lot of people fall down when engaging it: BIG MEATY SHITS fucked around with this message at 22:54 on Jun 4, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 22:47
|
|
|
moths posted:There was actually a cool twist in AT-43 where the murderous faction bent on destruction turns out to be post-singularity humans. The regular humans do not know this, IIRC. There's several '50s era scifi short stories that boil down to "the superintelligent computer/god/alien decided or was programmed to create a race of unstoppable ruthless bloodthirsty killers oh god oh no oh it was us what hath science/god/man's hubris/the inexorable march of technology wrouuuuuuuuught?" E: in contrast to a recent take I've seen on this idea, it was always presented as a terrifying revelation, and the reader was clearly not expected to be all "wow, badass!" about it. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 23:18 on Jun 4, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 22:54
|
|
|
Mors Rattus posted:gee I wonder where anyone might get the idea that this entire construct is built on racist xenophobia The xenophobia connection makes sense. The inherently racist bit seems like a stretch. I think you already agreed to a few non-race based examples?
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 01:32
|
|
|
BIG MEATY SHITS posted:Crossquoting from CSPAM cause this is a good primer on the kind of tactics fash use, and where a lot of people fall down when engaging it: Since we're sharing BreadTube resources, I suppose it'd be a good idea to weigh in with my own: The Classical Liberal's Descent into Fascism describes how a lot of "max freedom" laissez-faire types end up going down the fascist drain due to a shared hatred of leftism/SJWism/etc. I find it quite poignant as quite a few big-time YouTubers like Stefan Molyneux and Sargon of Akkad started out as some variety of anarcho-capitalist or extreme individualist but gave up those principals for increased authoritarianism. Also a Daily Beast article on the subject.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 01:41
|
|
|
Maneck posted:
I mean literally all that paragraph is asking people to do is keep in mind that it becomes as tool of white supremacy. Which I don't think is a big ask! My real call to action is in the next paragraph, where I outline a specific circumstance ('races' portrayed as monolithic, existentially threatening, monstrous evils, especially when contrasted against heroic white people) as a moral duty to avoid, and then acknowledge that this doesn't apply to everything white supremacists appropriate. I wasn't outlining a moral duty to avoid everything white supremacy has tried to get its grubby paws on, I was outlining a moral duty to avoid things that in themselves become fertile ground for the most vile expressions of white supremacy. The OK sign is not in itself fertile ground. It's doesn't lend itself to become an argument for white supremacy: it's just an abstract gesture. The portrayal of the race of white Men fighting against the race of Orcs (and their allies, the knock-off middle easterners  ), meanwhile, does lend itself all too easily to become a truly vile argument for white supremacy.And that's what I think there is a moral duty to avoid. (But if you absolutely have to have the orcs, you'd go a long way by not portraying the good protagonist peoples as white, heteronormative monocultures. Because white supremacists are going to have a much harder time explaining how LotR actually says white and non-white people cannot live in peace, if LotR had showed white and non-white people living in peace. The strength of their propaganda is significantly diminished if they have to make long arguments. Who, after all, is going to read the ten-page essay you need to justify why a film where diverse peoples live together in harmony is actually an argument for why diverse peoples cannot live together in harmony? The succinct visual shorthand of LotR's white-men-against-black-monsters is very useful to them, here.) ((Still, maybe don't use the orcs. The idea that a people can be monolithically evil, monstrous, and existentially threatening is still a pretty nasty idea.))
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 02:06
|
|
|
Maneck posted:The xenophobia connection makes sense. The inherently racist bit seems like a stretch. The modern conception of 'martial races' is rooted in industrial era colonialism, especially the British colonization of Africa and India. The British would move into some place and observe an existing power structure, often involving an educated elite and a less powerful group lacking the means and social capital of the elite. The British would then declare that obviously the less powerful group was a "martial race", who, unencumbered by things like living in civilized society and education, were expert warriors, and recruit them into their armies. The less powerful group did, of course, not actually make better soldiers. What they did make was soldiers that lacked loyalty to the local elite. I think it's very difficult to disentangle the idea of a "martial race" from its inherently colonial roots, where colonizing empires would go in and exacerbate ethnic divisions by reducing entire peoples into "natural soldiers", in order to further the subjugation of non-Europeans. I think it's going to be difficult to argue that this is anything but inherently racist.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 02:20
|
|
|
BoneMonkey posted:Ok, now I'm not a fan of this poo poo, and am all up for stamping poo poo like this out. But would that be kink shaming? It ceases to be kinkshaming when kids are involved
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 02:22
|
|
|
Maneck posted:The xenophobia connection makes sense. The inherently racist bit seems like a stretch. I think you already agreed to a few non-race based examples? You cannot possibly be this stupid, gently caress off with this stupid jaqoff bullshit and literal defense of the idea of evil savage races
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 02:59
|
|
|
LatwPIAT posted:The modern conception of 'martial races' is rooted in industrial era colonialism, especially the British colonization of Africa and India. The British would move into some place and observe an existing power structure, often involving an educated elite and a less powerful group lacking the means and social capital of the elite. The British would then declare that obviously the less powerful group was a "martial race", who, unencumbered by things like living in civilized society and education, were expert warriors, and recruit them into their armies. Great points about the historical abusive use of the idea. But most people would identify "Klingons" as the modern conception of a martial race. Pop culture is replete with derivative versions of them (see the Skorne from Warmachine for a ttg example). The modern version is distinct from the British Empire racist version in that a) no one is trying to apply a fictional concept to real people, and b) it's a fully fledged civilization (it usually has to be or it wouldn't work as a foil for the protagonist). The British Empire used racist ideas to justify monstrosities. That doesn't mean there needs to be a taboo on this idea such that it can't be used in fiction for purposes that are otherwise not racist. Mors Rattus posted:You cannot possibly be this stupid, gently caress off with this stupid jaqoff bullshit and literal defense of the idea of evil savage races According to SA search, not only is your post the first time "savage races" has been brought up in the thread, it's the first time for the entire Traditional Games sub forum. I do not and never will defend that concept. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 04:23
|
|
|
If you're having a normal one over fear that you somehow "can't" have a militaristic culture or source of recurring humanoid foes for your adventurers, don't be. Just make it clear these are the imperial soldiers or bandits or something rather than Ye Orcs, Who Are Tainted by the Touch of Sin and Bear the Skin of Ham.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 04:25
|
|
|
Maneck posted:Great points about the historical abusive use of the idea. But most people would identify "Klingons" as the modern conception of a martial race. Pop culture is replete with derivative versions of them (see the Skorne from Warmachine for a ttg example). The modern version is distinct from the British Empire racist version in that a) no one is trying to apply a fictional concept to real people, and b) it's a fully fledged civilization (it usually has to be or it wouldn't work as a foil for the protagonist). I'm going to go out on a limb and say that portraying the reduction of an entire people to a stereotype as OK is, in fact, kinda racist and should probably be avoided. Especially when it feeds directly into real-world racism like the justifications for British colonialism - justifications that are still bandied about today. When you say in fiction that the humans with weird foreheads can sometimes be a "martial race", then that normalizes the idea that humans without weird foreheads also can be martial races - which legitimizes the racist stereotyping of real peoples.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 04:36
|
|
|
Consider that the most 'martial' culture in the era was the British Empire. They went around conquering people, and had children's rhymes about the Maxim gun! Yet, nobody would call the Brits 'a martial race' because that designation doesn't get used to mean 'militaristic empires the back end of which looks like an actual society, with individuals' but instead 'cartoonishly simplified people who exist to be fought by the protagonists.' Plus, saying 'race' there is just creepy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 04:51
|
|
|
There were some martial races in Ranma 1/2, like the one with the food delivery race.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 05:02
|
|
|
LatwPIAT posted:I'm going to go out on a limb and say that portraying the reduction of an entire people to a stereotype as OK is, in fact, kinda racist and should probably be avoided. Especially when it feeds directly into real-world racism like the justifications for British colonialism - justifications that are still bandied about today. When you say in fiction that the humans with weird foreheads can sometimes be a "martial race", then that normalizes the idea that humans without weird foreheads also can be martial races - which legitimizes the racist stereotyping of real peoples. Good for you for being willing to go out on a limb, but that actually seems like a rational, sensible argument. I don't agree because I'm ignorant of any continuing use of the British Colonial interpretation of a martial society to oppress. If that is actually happening and the presence of Klingons and their ilk are making it worse, how Klingons are depicted must be changed. Joe Slowboat posted:Consider that the most 'martial' culture in the era was the British Empire. They went around conquering people, and had children's rhymes about the Maxim gun! Yet, nobody would call the Brits 'a martial race' because that designation doesn't get used to mean 'militaristic empires the back end of which looks like an actual society, with individuals' but instead 'cartoonishly simplified people who exist to be fought by the protagonists.' Plus, saying 'race' there is just creepy. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 05:12
|
|
|
Maneck posted:Good for you for being willing to go out on a limb, but that actually seems like a rational, sensible argument. I don't agree because I'm ignorant of any continuing use of the British Colonial interpretation of a martial society to oppress. If that is actually happening and the presence of Klingons and their ilk are making it worse, how Klingons are depicted must be changed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 05:20
|
|
|
The Once Were Gardeners lecture was literally a decade ago go look it up.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 05:25
|
|
|
To be clear I was taking sides against the use of 'martial races' as antagonist factions, racial essentialism is bad, even if it's an unfortunately easy writing crutch. British Imperial stereotypes about 'warlike natives', while no longer precisely dedicated to depicting colonized peoples as naturally fit military auxiliaries, absolutely feed into modern racist stereotypes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 05:34
|
|
|
Nessus posted:If you're having a normal one over fear that you somehow "can't" have a militaristic culture or source of recurring humanoid foes for your adventurers, don't be. Just make it clear these are the imperial soldiers or bandits or something rather than Ye Orcs, Who Are Tainted by the Touch of Sin and Bear the Skin of Ham. What I do is dismissing the notion of "monstruous races." Everyone gets the same treatment as elves, dwarfs, etc. in that they have fully functional societies and most folks just want to get by. You can still set them up as antagonists just by having factions with conflicting agendas with the party. There isn't really a need for "evil races."
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 06:15
|
|
|
Joe Slowboat posted:To be clear I was taking sides against the use of 'martial races' as antagonist factions, racial essentialism is bad, even if it's an unfortunately easy writing crutch. British Imperial stereotypes about 'warlike natives', while no longer precisely dedicated to depicting colonized peoples as naturally fit military auxiliaries, absolutely feed into modern racist stereotypes. It's interesting to note how much this stuff colors our historical perspectives. Especially given the reverence for Rome, and how much of Western thought comes from it; when you consider that Roman depictions of other cultures were heavily colored by how their wars with them went. If Rome won, they played up how noble, cultured, and civilized their opponents were. If Rome lost, then they were clearly fighting barbarian savages who knew only warfare.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 06:39
|
|
|
Pacho posted:What I do is dismissing the notion of "monstruous races." Everyone gets the same treatment as elves, dwarfs, etc. in that they have fully functional societies and most folks just want to get by. You can still set them up as antagonists just by having factions with conflicting agendas with the party. There isn't really a need for "evil races." Simply having them be an antagonist in regards to resources is enough, really. There's actually a surprising lack of real friction between humans/elves/dwarves for example along those lines too. A lot more drama to be had if your enemy isn't your enemy for being "bad", but because if you don't win your people suffer. Of course not everyone is down for that, especially in D&D which doesn't really have much foundation for anything beyond dungeon delving. But the party becoming the folks actually keeping peace between many different peoples through a whole lot of effort would be an interesting kind of game to play and/or run. Arthil fucked around with this message at 06:43 on Jun 5, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 06:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 11:48 |
|
|
Pacho posted:What I do is dismissing the notion of "monstruous races." Everyone gets the same treatment as elves, dwarfs, etc. in that they have fully functional societies and most folks just want to get by. You can still set them up as antagonists just by having factions with conflicting agendas with the party. There isn't really a need for "evil races." That's a graceful way to do address the need for different levels of aggression.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 06:46
|
|