TheRPGSite

Hello everyone!

I recently discussed with a fellow German player the current state of the RPG industry and we both think that RPG companies are overwhelmingly woke?

Usually I don't care as long as the product is good and they didn't mess it up with gender speech (you might complain about pronouns and "they/them" but you should see what they do to the German language. They use * and : nowadays. Clockwork did that in their German translation of Lex Arcana).

Now my questions are:
a) Is this impression wrong or maybe only limited to the USA?
b) If yes, why is that so?

No, I don't believe so. I am on the left side of the spectrum socially and economically and what have you, but what some companies might be is woke, for the sake of the woke dollars. They are the nazi's of the left side. That's what I think.

Well, dollars, euros, pounds, what have you.

I forgot that I won't be banned or facing a shitstorm by writing woke. I am correcting that. Thanks

It's a direct result of ESG efforts.  ESG started in the banking sector after the 2008 collapse.  The banks control more than just mortgages.  If banks cut you off then your business dies.  A lot of companies under threats from banks have brought social equity experts to change how they do business for a better ESG score.

Quote from: Coffeecup on October 23, 2023, 01:01:25 PM
I forgot that I won't be banned or facing a shitstorm by writing woke. I am correcting that. Thanks

Now my post looks like nonsense. I'm triggered.

I think most of the reason for the impression is that the two biggest companies (WotC and Paizo) are decidedly leftwing, as are many of the second and third tier--Green Ronin, Evil Hat, etc. If you were to count up numbers, you might find a balance, but in terms of the market share, the industry lists heavily to port.

WoTC and Paizo have been the 2 biggest kids on the block for the US audience and they're based in the Seattle area. It's probably pretty hard to live/work on the west coast and not be woke/go along with woke company politics. It's sort of a cult.

Games Workshop is also huge and doesn't feel woke. Neither does Fantasy Flight Games. So maybe it depends a lot on where you're located.

Quote from: Dracones on October 23, 2023, 01:54:01 PM
WoTC and Paizo have been the 2 biggest kids on the block for the US audience and they're based in the Seattle area. It's probably pretty hard to live/work on the west coast and not be woke/go along with woke company politics. It's sort of a cult.

Games Workshop is also huge and doesn't feel woke. Neither does Fantasy Flight Games. So maybe it depends a lot on where you're located.

Let's not forget we have a whole list of them :D

Quote from: Dracones on October 23, 2023, 01:54:01 PM
Games Workshop is also huge and doesn't feel woke. Neither does Fantasy Flight Games. So maybe it depends a lot on where you're located.

  Fantasy Flight Games is based in a hardpoint of progressivism surrounded by a more conservative region, so maybe that's why they come off as balance. OTOH, GW and FFG are also mostly out of the RPG hobby nowadays ...

I took a glance at THE LIST (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RlX78Yw9lbUMk2QwAZdpwNRGAd4Xe69eFgnFymWz6M0/edit#heading=h.jaoh4ohrikt8 (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RlX78Yw9lbUMk2QwAZdpwNRGAd4Xe69eFgnFymWz6M0/edit#heading=h.jaoh4ohrikt8)) and saw 2 pages of green companies, 5 pages of yellow, and 7 pages of red.  So yeah, you're probably right

Quote from: Coffeecup on October 23, 2023, 12:51:02 PM
Hello everyone!

I recently discussed with a fellow German player the current state of the RPG industry and we both think that RPG companies are overwhelmingly woke?

Usually I don't care as long as the product is good and they didn't mess it up with gender speech (you might complain about pronouns and "they/them" but you should see what they do to the German language. They use * and : nowadays. Clockwork did that in their German translation of Lex Arcana).

Now my questions are:
a) Is this impression wrong or maybe only limited to the USA?
b) If yes, why is that so?

Most of the OSR avoids anything woke.  Old School Essentials is definitive OUT of politics.  Meaning the write content for people to like, not get politically indoctrinated.

Quote from: Coffeecup on October 23, 2023, 12:51:02 PM

Usually I don't care as long as the product is good and they didn't mess it up with gender speech (you might complain about pronouns and "they/them" but you should see what they do to the German language. They use * and : nowadays. Clockwork did that in their German translation of Lex Arcana).

They did what ? There's absolutely nothing in the original Italian edition that would require something like that. Even the (obviously abundant) Latin terms are correctly gendered according to Latin grammar, there's absolutely no reason to butcher the text like that.

The RPG industry is very, VERY woke with a few counter-cultural exceptions. This is mostly because the major companies (WotC and Paizo especially) are all woke, and all the major platforms you can reasonably publish from have large Woke-brigades. I would be amazed if this hasn't infected the international markets, but I don't know that one way or the other.

I expect a lot of this is drive-by vandalism from people who do not actually play the game, as evidenced by the complete lack of adoption of Sigmata, which was practically a game made of woke virtue signals. One of the things I've learned from listening to the RPG Design Panelcast is that about a third of the speakers blow woke political-speech as a smoke screen to cover for a lack of comprehension*, and another third blow political woke-speech as a "please don't shoot me" virtue-signal, so the politics serves other purposes besides actually being political.

* I am not disappointed the panelists don't know things. I would have respected, "I don't know," even if I would prefer, "I don't know off the top of my head; give me a sec to Google that." However, changing the subject to politics to pretend you do know when you obviously don't is never the intellectually honest thing to do.

Quote from: honeydipperdavid on October 23, 2023, 03:37:23 PMMost of the OSR avoids anything woke.  Old School Essentials is definitive OUT of politics.  Meaning the write content for people to like, not get politically indoctrinated.

Which is the ONLY smart path.

I don't want nor need a MAGA RPG. I won't buy woke crap (even good stuff with a whiff of woke), so all I want/need is great RPGs without any woketardia and those companies ONLY will get my dollars.

First of all it is so unbelievable refreshing to read the posts here.
I posted the same topic in a German forum and there the usual wokies try to tiptoe around the topic.
One was the exception. His explanation boils down to "roleplaying gamers are better educated and more intelligent".

Quote from: NotFromAroundHere on October 23, 2023, 04:26:09 PM
They did what ? There's absolutely nothing in the original Italian edition that would require something like that. Even the (obviously abundant) Latin terms are correctly gendered according to Latin grammar, there's absolutely no reason to butcher the text like that.

I know. I know.
Here is one excerpt from the German quickstart:

QuoteIn der Cohors Arcana gibt es fünf sogenannte Officia (deutsch: Ämter, Singular: Officium), die davon abhängen, welchem Ausbildungspfad der*die jeweilige Custos gefolgt ist: Diplomat*in, Gelehrte*r, Krieger*in, Kundschafter*in oder Seher*in.

And the English quickstart:

QuoteThere are five offices in the Cohors Arcana, based on the training course the Custos was selected for upon recruitment: augur, diplomat, fighter, scholar, and explorer.

Just so I'm sure what it means here, what is the definition of "woke"? Please don't dog pile on me or anything, but the term has been subverted so many times that I'm not sure what it means anymore.

Quote from: Spinachcat on October 23, 2023, 05:10:22 PM

Quote from: honeydipperdavid on October 23, 2023, 03:37:23 PMMost of the OSR avoids anything woke.  Old School Essentials is definitive OUT of politics.  Meaning the write content for people to like, not get politically indoctrinated.

Which is the ONLY smart path.

I don't want nor need a MAGA RPG. I won't buy woke crap (even good stuff with a whiff of woke), so all I want/need is great RPGs without any woketardia and those companies ONLY will get my dollars.

I mean who would want to play an orange troll who became king of the kingdom through hard work beating the evil witch only to be overthrown by an evil wizard of tabulation and lies, yet comes back to fight for the people to protect them from the coming soul harvest for the evil wizard of tabulation adenocrhome ghouls?  I mean, it has possibilities.

Ignore this post. I should have waited for the definite of woke so I can figure out what "anti-woke" is here.

Quote from: Kage2020 on October 23, 2023, 06:01:48 PM
Just so I'm sure what it means here, what is the definition of "woke"? Please don't dog pile on me or anything, but the term has been subverted so many times that I'm not sure what it means anymore.

Here's my one-the-spot definition.

Woke: the usurpation of the struggles of others by the management class for their own gain.

Quote from: rytrasmi on October 23, 2023, 06:24:51 PM
Here's my one-the-spot definition.

Woke: the usurpation of the struggles of others by the management class for their own gain.

So, and as it was mentioned above, pronouns are being usurped by the "management class" (not sure quite what this is) for their own gain?

Quote from: Kage2020 on October 23, 2023, 06:34:55 PM

Quote from: rytrasmi on October 23, 2023, 06:24:51 PM
Here's my one-the-spot definition.

Woke: the usurpation of the struggles of others by the management class for their own gain.

So, and as it was mentioned above, pronouns are being usurped by the "management class" (not sure quite what this is) for their own gain?

Here let's help you out, its and ideological bent changed by the will of social media.  There is little to no logic based on woke thought, its whatever the social media tells them to believe, they will parrot it back to stay in the in group.

It's sad and pathetic, but you could call them the sheep faction of people.  When you look at a guy who says its gay not to suck the female cock, hmm... What's wrong with that, well first a female doesn't have a cock, next its gay for a male to suck a cock, but to a woke weak leftard male its perfectly sane.  Why?  Social media algo told them it was.

Right now its a fun time because we are watching with social media which algo will win and which side the leftards will pick, pro-Hamas or pro-Israel, the woketards don't know what is safe to pick right now.  They have to be in the in group or they get exiled and then hated by the same leftards they were part of.  Look at feminists who disagreed that women have cocks, congrats they are now the outgroup and called terfs, social media algo pushed that fucked up narrative.

Best, stay the fuck off social media, join clubs in your community, school your children at home, go to your place of worship and stay the fuck away from the woke.  They will suck the joy out of everything joyful.

Quote from: Kage2020 on October 23, 2023, 06:34:55 PM

Quote from: rytrasmi on October 23, 2023, 06:24:51 PM
Here's my one-the-spot definition.

Woke: the usurpation of the struggles of others by the management class for their own gain.

So, and as it was mentioned above, pronouns are being usurped by the "management class" (not sure quite what this is) for their own gain?

If a trans person wants to be called a certain pronoun, they can ask their friends who will probably agree. Pronoun policies is the management class meddling for their own gain.

https://www.city-journal.org/article/wokeness-the-highest-stage-of-managerialism

Woke managers (for lack of a better word) are trying to become the new priest class. You must pay them. You must listen to them. If you don't, you will be excommunicated.

Quote from: Kage2020 on October 23, 2023, 06:01:48 PM
Just so I'm sure what it means here, what is the definition of "woke"? Please don't dog pile on me or anything, but the term has been subverted so many times that I'm not sure what it means anymore.

My personal take is that "woke" is a combination of left-wing thought, intolerance of disagreement, and coercion to conform to aforesaid thought.  Dunno if there's a more accepted definition floating around.

Quote from: Kage2020 on October 23, 2023, 06:22:06 PM
Ignore this post.

Gah, Pink Elephant Paradox!

Quote from: honeydipperdavid on October 23, 2023, 06:18:46 PM
I don't want nor need a MAGA RPG.

What would a MAGA RPG even look like? Random tweets that make people lose their mind combined with Leaving everyone alone unless they mess with you? Spend too much tax money, but still half of what the other guy spends? It would probably be a pretty dull game compared to the liberal game which is basically Paranoia.

Okay, my takeaway from the (flawed) City Journal article and commentary herein, along with a preference for the original definition of "woke" as opposed to how it is (mis)used now, suggests that I should stay the f*ck away from political discussion on this forum as much as I do from them on RPG.net and for similar reasons.

At least I learned it early on so that I can focus on the gaming stuff sans politics.

Quote from: Kage2020 on October 23, 2023, 09:23:50 PM
Okay, my takeaway from the (flawed) City Journal article and commentary herein, along with a preference for the original definition of "woke" as opposed to how it is (mis)used now, suggests that I should stay the f*ck away from political discussion on this forum as much as I do from them on RPG.net and for similar reasons.

At least I learned it early on.

Your choice, your opinion. But you won't be banned for expressing it here.

I never said my definition was definitive. I said the opposite. That's only one article among many.

Nobody has prepackaged answers for you.

PS: You can swear here. "Fuck." See? Welcome to our little slice of paradise!

Quote from: Coffeecup on October 23, 2023, 05:28:36 PM
Here is one excerpt from the German quickstart:

QuoteIn der Cohors Arcana gibt es fünf sogenannte Officia (deutsch: Ämter, Singular: Officium), die davon abhängen, welchem Ausbildungspfad der*die jeweilige Custos gefolgt ist: Diplomat*in, Gelehrte*r, Krieger*in, Kundschafter*in oder Seher*in.

Hey now. Male/female nouns are offensive to 0.1% of the population. Clearly the German language needs to be made unreadable to get around that. Or you should all just learn English which doesn't have oppressively gendered nouns.

Quote from: Kage2020 on October 23, 2023, 09:23:50 PM
Okay, my takeaway from the (flawed) City Journal article and commentary herein, along with a preference for the original definition of "woke" as opposed to how it is (mis)used now, suggests that I should stay the f*ck away from political discussion on this forum as much as I do from them on RPG.net and for similar reasons.

At least I learned it early on so that I can focus on the gaming stuff sans politics.

We frequently talk about politics in the realm of RPG games and industry.  Frequently we disagree.  Honest discussion is encouraged.  If the topic wanders too far from RPGs then the thread will probably be shut down but We are warned before drastic action is taken.

Quote from: rytrasmi on October 23, 2023, 09:30:05 PM
Your choice, your opinion. But you won't be banned for expressing it here.

I never said my definition was definitive. I said the opposite. That's only one article among many.

Nobody has prepackaged answers for you.

And that's fair enough, and apologies. There was just so much packed into that in terms of anti-education, blue collar vs. white collar shenanigans, etc. that it was harder to separate what was "woke" other than a scare word.

My understanding of the term "woke" was that it was created pre-Civil Rights era to address those that understood the specific plights of the disenfranchised/minorities. That it might be applied to groups that might consider themselves to be disenfranchised would make sense.

I'm not quite sure how that gels with the definitions being offered herein, nor with why pronouns have come such a prominent feature of the game industry. (I'm remembering Unisystems's habit of switching from "he" to "she" every other chapter..)

Maybe it all comes down to being a European-born individual educated in Europe, now an American working in American higher education on programs related to Homeland Security. Suffice to say, confusion abounds. And I live in Virginia, which means that it gets even more confusing. O.o

Quote from: rytrasmi on October 23, 2023, 09:30:05 PM
PS: You can swear here. "Fuck." See? Welcome to our little slice of paradise!

If I say it here I'm sure that I'm going to drop it in front of my <10 year-old son.

Not that he hasn't heard it. The ribald humour on the school bus is ever writ large.

Quote from: Kage2020 on October 23, 2023, 10:33:11 PM

Quote from: rytrasmi on October 23, 2023, 09:30:05 PM
Your choice, your opinion. But you won't be banned for expressing it here.

I never said my definition was definitive. I said the opposite. That's only one article among many.

Nobody has prepackaged answers for you.

And that's fair enough, and apologies. There was just so much packed into that in terms of anti-education, blue collar vs. white collar shenanigans, etc. that it was harder to separate what was "woke" other than a scare word.

My understanding of the term "woke" was that it was created pre-Civil Rights era to address those that understood the specific plights of the disenfranchised/minorities. That it might be applied to groups that might consider themselves to be disenfranchised would make sense.

I'm not quite sure how that gels with the definitions being offered herein, nor with why pronouns have come such a prominent feature of the game industry. (I'm remembering Unisystems's habit of switching from "he" to "she" every other chapter..)

Maybe it all comes down to being a European-born individual educated in Europe, now an American working in American higher education on programs related to Homeland Security. Suffice to say, confusion abounds. And I live in Virginia, which means that it gets even more confusing. O.o

Quote from: rytrasmi on October 23, 2023, 09:30:05 PM
PS: You can swear here. "Fuck." See? Welcome to our little slice of paradise!

If I say it here I'm sure that I'm going to drop it in front of my <10 year-old son.

Not that he hasn't heard it. The ribald humour on the school bus is ever writ large.

Woke is a term that came about almost 20 years ago now.  The idea was that most people are "asleep" when it can to how the world works and you're "woke" if you're in tune with all the social and political ideologies that shape modern life.  "He's woke to white privileged and understands how it harms POC."  This was from a leftist perspective and it's a term they came up with.  It's become a pejorative term now being used by people of a more right leaning position when they discovered it and used it in a mocking tone. 

Quote from: BadApple on October 23, 2023, 11:48:28 PMWoke is a term that came about almost 20 years ago now.  The idea was that most people are "asleep" when it can to how the world works and you're "woke" if you're in tune with all the social and political ideologies that shape modern life.  "He's woke to white privileged and understands how it harms POC."  This was from a leftist perspective and it's a term they came up with.  It's become a pejorative term now being used by people of a more right leaning position when they discovered it and used it in a mocking tone.

Again, the origins go back to the 40s where it was used by African Americans in the US. It's in the pre-Civil Rights US that it became politically charged.

I'm less convinced that the adoption by the political right has anything to do with "mocking", but hey-ho.

What are the issues that are supposedly "woke" in RPGs?

(And I'm definitely interested in issues as they contrast from the US to Europe or elsewhere. The US's seems to be particularly caught up in culture war hijinks?)

Quote from: Kage2020 on October 24, 2023, 12:00:58 AM

Quote from: BadApple on October 23, 2023, 11:48:28 PMWoke is a term that came about almost 20 years ago now.  The idea was that most people are "asleep" when it can to how the world works and you're "woke" if you're in tune with all the social and political ideologies that shape modern life.  "He's woke to white privileged and understands how it harms POC."  This was from a leftist perspective and it's a term they came up with.  It's become a pejorative term now being used by people of a more right leaning position when they discovered it and used it in a mocking tone.

Again, the origins go back to the 40s where it was used by African Americans in the US. It's in the pre-Civil Rights US that it became politically charged.

I'm less convinced that the adoption by the political right has anything to do with "mocking", but hey-ho.

What are the issues that are supposedly "woke" in RPGs?

(And I'm definitely interested in issues as they contrast from the US to Europe or elsewhere. The US's seems to be particularly caught up in culture war hijinks?)

Let me give you an example, albeit from ComicCon rather than gaming:
My wife and I found that BLM had a strong presence at San Diego ComicCon, I believe this was in 2017 or 18. They were milling around in the hallways, asking people to look out for "microaggressions". This is typical woke behavior today. It made the whole arrangement noticeably uncomfortable for many, and when we got home we realized they had pounced on someone, screaming and shouting about racism. This was posted on YouTube. Turns out that this someone was a Whoopi Goldberg fan who didn't get the memo that blackface is a no-no in America these days. Who did all this hoopla help? Absolutely nobody.

Do you have the YouTube link?

I find it hard to assess this otherwise, perhaps due to where I live (VA) and how facts have been, ah, manipulated to misrepresent how things actually are.

Don't get me wrong. I can totally see how political agendas and activists could be agents of discomfort.

Quote from: Dracones on October 23, 2023, 01:54:01 PM
Games Workshop is also huge and doesn't feel woke. Neither does Fantasy Flight Games. So maybe it depends a lot on where you're located.

GW treats everyone like dirt. They dont have time to be woke when they are tossing more of the cattle, into the grinder.

FFG is very woke. They have done diversity hires, have woke content in their board games, and thats just the little I know of after quitting doing business with them. Their new Arkham Horror game had ample examples. One of the new investigators is a lesbian with "a taste for girls" who is married to another woman, an have an adopted girl because of course. In the 1920s. Another investigator left their parents and joined a cult because and I quote. "Their parents misgendered them". In the 1920s.

Quote from: Coffeecup on October 23, 2023, 05:28:36 PM
First of all it is so unbelievable refreshing to read the posts here.
I posted the same topic in a German forum and there the usual wokies try to tiptoe around the topic.
One was the exception. His explanation boils down to "roleplaying gamers are better educated and more intelligent".

Quote from: NotFromAroundHere on October 23, 2023, 04:26:09 PM
They did what ? There's absolutely nothing in the original Italian edition that would require something like that. Even the (obviously abundant) Latin terms are correctly gendered according to Latin grammar, there's absolutely no reason to butcher the text like that.

I know. I know.
Here is one excerpt from the German quickstart:

QuoteIn der Cohors Arcana gibt es fünf sogenannte Officia (deutsch: Ämter, Singular: Officium), die davon abhängen, welchem Ausbildungspfad der*die jeweilige Custos gefolgt ist: Diplomat*in, Gelehrte*r, Krieger*in, Kundschafter*in oder Seher*in.

And the English quickstart:

QuoteThere are five offices in the Cohors Arcana, based on the training course the Custos was selected for upon recruitment: augur, diplomat, fighter, scholar, and explorer.

"Tradurre è un po' tradire" (translate is a bit like betrayal, more or less) is an Italian expression that applies in this case, the general idea being that the original language of a text conveys not only literal meaning but also other, less literal messages that can be hard (if not impossible) to properly render in another language through translation.
In this case, the original Italian Lex Arcana rulebook is written in an impersonal, neutral style very much similar to that used in school textbooks and divulgative history books.... and that's not by accident, since actual archeologists and Roman history experts collaborated with the authors so that the feeling of an "authentic" late Roman world could be communicated effectively and impartially (because yes, old Romans were, by modern standards, pretty much imperialistic assholes and not very nice people, but the role of historic research is to communicate, not judge).
So, literally translating the text to German but adding the gender indeterminate/neutral/total/whatever version of words that were not present in the original betrays the intention of the authors of having a corebook sounding like an history textbook.

TL;DR: it's a shit translation job, more on the "betray" side than the "translate" side.

Just to be clear what I understand a woke company does:
In the external communication it emphasizes (important word. I don't mind queer people and am also opposed to discrimination due to sex, race, etc.. But I don't feel the need to voice that opinion over and over again and also point out when attempts to fight discrimination go too far).
-diversity
-queer topics
-anticapitalistic

Part of the external communication is the product design but of course advertisements, newsletters, etc. as well.

Quote from: Kage2020 on October 24, 2023, 12:00:58 AM

What are the issues that are supposedly "woke" in RPGs?

There are basically three issues of "woke" in gaming.  The first is that some of the gaming material itself has become propaganda for far left ideology.  The second is that companies are financing organization that are openly hostile to large portions of the gaming community or push far left agenda in politics and RL communities at large.  The third is that gaming companies and third party organizations are trying to force gamers to submit or pay tribute to far left causes.

Propaganda as games: 

For games like Thirsty Sword Lesbians, Shield Maidens, or Gaming with Pride, you can see what it is and decide for yourself if you are interested.  I, and many other can simply say "no thank you" and move on. No harm no foul.  However, there are games being marketed as mainstream but hide the ideology in it.  I recently did a counter-review of the game Dark Stars that was touted a Cyberpunk in space.  Nope, it was actually Antifa propaganda.  Through the Radiant Citadel by WOTC for D&D 5e was like this.  They actively hid from consumers that it was both highly feminist, communist, and leftist "multicultural."  (I've been around the world and what leftist call "multicultural" isn't actually embracing different cultures.) 

There are games where they are changing the material to be more "socially acceptable," usually by removing large parts of a setting because it offended someone that saw parallels between the fictional setting and some IRL thing that offend them.  Chaosium has been doing this a lot lately but other games have been doing this.  Companies that do this usually start with the pronoun thing and the devolve into digital book burning.  All this while lying to us and gaslighting us.

Financing leftist causes

Several companies have been donating to organizations that are either revolutionary in nature or directly supporting political candidates that push far left policies.  BLM has openly stated that they are a revolutionary Marxist organization with the stated goal of ending the nuclear family, ending "capitalism" in America, and taking all white people out of positions of power and yet has received money from several gaming companies.  Recently, SJG has been the topic for this but several companies have statement sthe show support for them.

One of the biggest issues in the USA right now is the queer sex education in schools today.  There are several elements to it but the two biggest that those that are not leftist have an issue with is the exposure of children to explicit sexual content and the "transitioning" of children without the knowledge or consent of the parents.  It doesn't help at all that gay pride marches have been featuring the chant "we're here, we're queer, and we're coming for your children."  With this in mind, it's easy to see how gaming companies making rainbow versions of their corporate logos in the middle of this might be a problem for many consumers. 

The demand for gaming communities to submit

If anyone needs me to spell this one out then they just haven't been paying attention.  WOTC, Paizo, and GW, who have the biggest influence on gaming physical spaces, have been pushing policies that align with leftist activist groups.  The most egregious was when WOTC prevented background checks being done on judges and moderators for MTG organized play.  (Much of MTG is underage people.)  Parents want to know that their kids are safe from known predators at events but WOTC said that it needed to preserve the dignity of it's volunteers by not violating their privacy.  This was after two different people that had previous convictions associated with pedophilia were identified running events.

Kyle Brink said live on a podcast that white males can't get out of the hobby fast enough.  Coyote and Crow has a section in the book specifically telling white people that they can only use the game within specific guidelines they spell out.  Many articles have been published by gaming journalist and gaming companies calling average gamers racist and sexist and then telling us how we are supposed to behave.   The X card and the consent in gaming contract were being pushed a couple of years ago and we were told we were sexist NAZIs if we didn't want to use them.  (If any reader disagrees with my interpretation that they were being pushed like this, keep it to yourself.   They damn well were but I'm not going to bother dredging up the mountain of articles written about it.)  Both the X card and the consent in gaming were explicitly to allow "marginalized people" to take control of a game if they felt it was headed in a direction that would trigger past trauma.

For me the part that really gets under my skin is that when there was a little push back gamers would be gaslit and demonized. 

I hope this clarifies for you what's been going.  Also, there's no "supposedly" about it, it really is an issue.

Quote from: Kage2020 on October 24, 2023, 01:51:57 AM
Do you have the YouTube link?

I find it hard to assess this otherwise, perhaps due to where I live (VA) and how facts have been, ah, manipulated to misrepresent how things actually are.

Don't get me wrong. I can totally see how political agendas and activists could be agents of discomfort.

Sadly I haven't been able to find that video for years. Maybe whoever posted it took it down. It was just a lot of screaming and shouting though.

EDIT: here's at least one video from that whole situation
https://m.twitch.tv/clip/HelpfulGlamorousWebDerp

Quote from: Kage2020 on October 23, 2023, 10:33:11 PM

And that's fair enough, and apologies. There was just so much packed into that in terms of anti-education, blue collar vs. white collar shenanigans, etc. that it was harder to separate what was "woke" other than a scare word.

My understanding of the term "woke" was that it was created pre-Civil Rights era to address those that understood the specific plights of the disenfranchised/minorities. That it might be applied to groups that might consider themselves to be disenfranchised would make sense.

I'm not quite sure how that gels with the definitions being offered herein, nor with why pronouns have come such a prominent feature of the game industry. (I'm remembering Unisystems's habit of switching from "he" to "she" every other chapter..)

Maybe it all comes down to being a European-born individual educated in Europe, now an American working in American higher education on programs related to Homeland Security. Suffice to say, confusion abounds. And I live in Virginia, which means that it gets even more confusing. O.o

No worries.

The pronoun issue is freedom of conscience/speech vs freedom to not be offended. The issue is pushed by activists for their own power and gratification. There is a large segment of alphabet people who are against it because a) its importance is exaggerated and b) it alienates regular people who don't like being told how to think and what to do.

Quote from: BadApplePropaganda as games

Life imitates art, or vice versa depending on how much you may or may not be influenced by Oscar Wilde, surely?

That is, as a form of art, authors are allowed to express their opinions in a medium that is meaningful to them, right? This seems to be a core sentiment here--at least from what I see. A "say what you want but I don't have to listen" vibe, which is entirely reasonable though not without limit (at least in America according to the Supreme Court).

I mean, look at the amount of propaganda and indoctrination that abounds with respect to Christian Mythology (etc.), which includes TTRPGs, films (Left Behind, anyone), books etc. Heck, even daycare in the US can indoctrinate pre-K children, forcing upon them a theist education and making them bow before the cross. Admittedly, in my experience, not surprising when you select a daycare in a church. (Heck, even the Taekwondo was Christian. Wonderful people, though.)

Going back further, you've got other examples of propaganda being disseminated without being called out. Textbooks in the American "South," for example, were rife with it (and are arguably going to become more so). Ovid's Metamorphoses etc.

I guess what I'm seeing is a sea change that is being reflected in "art" and it's totally fine that not everyone is going to be onboard with those changes. I know that there are things that I'm uncomfortable with in modern America--something that is exacerbated that I was originally European (UK).

Anecdotally, I just had to remind myself of the origins and meaning of "gaslighting". For some reason that darn word won't stick in my mind.

Quote from: BadAppleFinancing leftist causes

To be fair, you're going to be able to find examples of companies--counted as individuals for some reason--financing right wing (and even so-called "alt" right wing) organisations. Whether that's Hobby Lobby, Chick-fil-A, the Church, or the average American citizen that is forced to support them through state taxes.

Quote from: BadAppleBLM has openly stated that they are a revolutionary Marxist organization with the stated goal of ending the nuclear family, ending "capitalism" in America, and taking all white people out of positions of power and yet has received money from several gaming companies.

FWIW, one of them expressed this publicly as part of their background, another had it as part of their publishing profile, and the third? Nothing about them and Marxism.

With that said, I admit that I had to Google this because I was given to understand that it's really hard to pin down a specific ideology for BLM given its fragmentary practices (which do, indeed, sometimes involve violence).

Your final point I didn't do any research on, though I can imagine it to be true insofar as they might demand some form of equitable outcome such as was seen, for example, in the Civil Rights Movement. (I might be totally wrong.)

The "nuclear family" thing is definitely a thing, which sucks of you're a family person and doesn't if you had a sh*t family. (I'm fall into the latter category until I came over to the States.) With that said, they back it up with the notion of "It Takes a Village to Raise a Child" which, while it was coined by Hillary Clinton, it doesn't take too much Googling to find that Christianity has tried to adopt it as it represents a strength of the Church, i.e. community.

Quote from: BadAppleOne of the biggest issues in the USA right now is the queer sex education in schools today.  There are several elements to it but the two biggest that those that are not leftist have an issue with is the exposure of children to explicit sexual content and the "transitioning" of children without the knowledge or consent of the parents.

I'm... having trouble with what amounts to the second and third of the three points in these two sentences. I just don't believe them.

As to the first point? I imagine that you're speaking to education that deals with same sex acts?

Quote from: BadAppleIt doesn't help at all that gay pride marches have been featuring the chant "we're here, we're queer, and we're coming for your children." 

So much euwww with this. While it's easy to massage this into a more positive message vis-a-vis educating children against installed prejudices, this is not the way that you do it. So, so much euwwww.

Whomever thought that slogan up needs to take some classes in messaging and crisis communications.

Quote from: BadApplePropaganda as games

The demand for gaming communities to submit[/quote]
This I have more problem with, especially the bit about not requiring background checks to work with children. That's a big no for me and it's not rocket science.

With the rest of this section, I guess I'm circling around to the first section and response, above.

Quote from: BadApplePropaganda as games

For me the part that really gets under my skin is that when there was a little push back gamers would be gaslit and demonized.
[/quote]
On my own behalf, I like to see both sides of the debate. At least the US would be a weaker place without the conversation between progressives and conservatives. Preferably without the Religious Right, but that's just me.

Quote from: rytrasmi...it alienates regular people who don't like being told how to think and what to do.

It's not what you meant, but this is very much the reason that I did not join the military despite a family history of service.

If, as quoted, this is the only problem "In der Cohors Arcana gibt es fünf sogenannte Officia (deutsch: Ämter, Singular: Officium), die davon abhängen, welchem Ausbildungspfad der*die jeweilige Custos gefolgt ist: Diplomat*in, Gelehrte*r, Krieger*in, Kundschafter*in oder Seher*in." I think it's much ado about nothing and not actually all that leftist or woke.

My native language is Dutch, which one can see as the discount language of German (but the most beautiful language in the world after West-Flemish) and I kind of *get* why they do that. In Dutch as well as German, you have separate nouns for the two genders, which in English you don't have (of course if you replace -man with -woman, then you do).

In my view, I think it is much more to do with the readability of the text rather than anything else. To be entirely clear, allow me to demonstrate:

A seer in English can be both male or female (yes, you can "add" -ess to words but it is much more common to use male as the standard).

In Dutch (and German), however, you need to use the right word: Seher for male, Seherin for female. Ziener (in Dutch) and zieneres.

If, for the sake of inclusivity, you want to emphasise both genders are to be represented in the text, you should therefore, say this:

"In der Cohors Arcana gibt es fünf sogenannte Officia (deutsch: Ämter, Singular: Officium), die davon abhängen, welchem Ausbildungspfad der oder die jeweilige Custos gefolgt ist: der Diplomat / die Diplomatin, der Gelehrte / die Gelehrter,  der Krieger / die Kriegerin, der Kundschafter / die Kundshafterin oder der Seher /die Seherin."

I think you see the problem with this. Much more (obsolete) words, including articles which can easily be substituted as they did on the beginning of the sentence. Keep in mind, German has four articles: Der for masculine, Die for feminine, Das for neuter, Die for plural. And that's only in nominative! Then, to make things interesting, you have accusative, dative and genitive, each with mostly their proper own articles.

I think that the choice here is made for readability of the text other than anything else, however, I may be wrong, so if so, I stand corrected.

So, there's no "generic" case/gender in German/Dutch ?
Because one thing that a lot of (italian speaking) people tend to forget nowadays is that in Italian, the masculine grammatical gender is also the "indeterminate" or "catch all" gender: if you're not sure about what grammatical gender to use or if you're talking about a group that contains elements of both genders, you use the masculine. If German has some grammatical feature that works like that, it's what should have been used in this case; if not, then the * or whatever symbol they used is the best possible approximation (rember, "to translate is a bit like betrayal").

Definitely. The hobby is overwhelmingly male social outcasts, who want nothing more than some female contact. Their only social contact is with other gamers, so they see the only way for them to get female social contact is for women to start playing the hobby. For years, before anything really happened to the hobby, they were constantly asking what they could do to get more women into the hobby.

When early SJWs and the type caught wind of this, they gave their answers, and these men starved of female attention bent over backwards to give the SJWs everything they wanted. After all, the gamers were literally asking for it.

It's absolutely no surprise that of all hobbies and subcultures, ttRPGs were among the first to get completely steamrolled and whipped by SJWs.

Quote from: migo on October 25, 2023, 08:39:26 AM
Definitely. The hobby is overwhelmingly male social outcasts, who want nothing more than some female contact. Their only social contact is with other gamers, so they see the only way for them to get female social contact is for women to start playing the hobby. For years, before anything really happened to the hobby, they were constantly asking what they could do to get more women into the hobby.

When early SJWs and the type caught wind of this, they gave their answers, and these men starved of female attention bent over backwards to give the SJWs everything they wanted. After all, the gamers were literally asking for it.

It's absolutely no surprise that of all hobbies and subcultures, ttRPGs were among the first to get completely steamrolled and whipped by SJWs.

In the USA, maybe. Friendly reminder that there's a whole world outside of your borders and (surprising, I know) it doesn't conform to american social standards and expectations.

I'll try to clarify as well as I can, as I am neither a linguist nor a teacher.

1) articles

The reason they put der * die is as follows. English has but one definitive article, being "the", and one indefinite article, being "a". The man, the woman, the child, the houses. A man, a woman, a child. They need to specify, in that text, in German, that der AND die are applicable. In German you have der Mann, die Frau, das Kind, die Häuser. Ein Mann, eine Frau, ein Kind. You cannot just say der Mann / Frau, because der in front of a feminine substantive signifies possession. Same as in Dutch, mind, as far as genitive cases go. Der Frau means "of the woman" (as in Italian della is de + la). In Dutch, there are still two definitive articles: De man, de vrouw, het kind, de huizen (masculine and feminine are identical in Dutch as far as articles go). Een man, een vrouw, een kind. Dutch only has one indefinite article. Look at Afrikaans, which grew from Dutch, there everything is "Die". So, they must say der Mann / die Frau in German.

2) substantives

This I will illustrate using a simple sentence, between English and Dutch (rules in Dutch are the same as in German for the most part).

"The writer writes a book." Here you cannot tell if the writer is a man or a woman. A writer is a writer. There is to my knowledge not a word like "writeress" or something.
In Dutch, however:
"De schrijver schrijft een boek." -> masculine, though it is true that it is used as "generic" in a way, but if possible, that is to be avoided in that use, because when we hear "schrijver", we think of a man, when we hear "schrijfster" we think of a woman.
"De schrijfster schrijft een boek." -> feminine

Let's now suppose we organise a writing contest, but we want to emphasise everybody is allowed to enter:
"The competition is open to all writers aged eighteen and up." (for example) Once again, writer is, well, writer. You can't say if it is male or female writers so it's a catch-all for both genders.
In Dutch you could also say: "Schrijvers van achttien jaar en ouder kunnen deelnemen aan de wedstrijd." Where "schrijvers" (writers) is a catch-all for both genders.
However, you could also say, and no-one will lift a brow if you do: "Schrijvers / schrijfsters van achttien jaar en ouder kunnen deelnemen aan de wedstrijd." Where you specify both genders can participate.

I know for someone who has but one word for most professions, this may come about as strange or pandering, but I really think, see my other comment, that this is a choice made for readability.

I'm not American, and have spent less than 24 hours in my entire life inside American borders.

It's the same shit outside America too.

The tabletop game market is very niche and very monopolistic. This means it is very easy for the market leaders to be subverted by outside interests, leaving nothing else to replace them. You see a similar problem in Hollywood due to its monopolistic structure.

D&D, Star Trek, Star Wars, Marvel, etc have all been driven into the ground and there's really no other options to replace them.

I suppose there's no shortage of other fantasy ttrpgs, but none of them have comparable communities. I guess there's a generic fantasy genre community, but good luck trying to get them to agree what should replace D&D.

I've been trying to write some replacement settings myself (e.g. space opera, cyberpunk, alternate history urban fantasy...) and releasing them into public domain so nobody owns them, but for whatever reason it's very hard to get people interested. I probably need to hire artists or something to make cool-looking cover art. If anyone knows any artists who have open commission slots, then let me know.

Quote from: migo on October 25, 2023, 08:55:05 AM

It's the same shit outside America too.

No.

Quote from: Kerstmanneke82 on October 25, 2023, 08:53:19 AM
I know for someone who has but one word for most professions, this may come about as strange or pandering, but I really think, see my other comment, that this is a choice made for readability.

Gotcha. I was perplexed by the choice because in Italy there's been some rather ham-fisted attempts to "fix" inexistent linguistic problems by using a similar strategy (* and other symbols added to words to indicate "inclusiveness"), and not knowing German I assumed it was the same.

I have learned Italian a year in night school (NOT a good idea if you already have a basic knowledge of Spanish) and am interested if you would give me some examples?

Well, for example things like "tutti" and "tutte" have started to be written tutt*. Now, apart from the obvious pronunciation problem (how the fuck do I pronounce * ?), this is also grammatically moronic in the extreme. For non speakers: "Tutti" means "everyone", but it's in masculine form; it could either mean "every male" or "every member of a mixed group" (as I said, the masculine grammatical gender in Italian is also the "catch all" gender, the one you use when you can't or don't need to be specific), while "tutte" is the feminine form (meaning "every member of an all female group" or "every female of a mixed group"). Writing Tutt* to indicate "everyone, but really everyone in a mixed group" is useless: that's what "tutti" means.

And of course the same thing is applied to pretty much every possible word (like German, Italian usually has gendered forms for generic terms like professions), needlessly complicating a "problem" that's already been fixed since...pretty much Italian has been adopted as a common language.

Ah, I see what you mean. The * is a replacement for a gender suffix of a word, am I right? Sort of like they are trying to do Latinx instead of Latino / Latina?

In the example text, the * was only used to substitute the part of the word that is the same anyway.

Exactly.
I'm everything but opposed to equality battles, but this specific strategy when applied to the Italian (as in "Italian state") situation is so stupid and pointless to be nearly unbelievable.

Over here it's the same. My vision is: let everybody be what or who they want to be. But accept that change does not go over smoothly. For example, the whole gender-neutral pronouns. It feels... odd. I don't mean the phenomenon of gender neutrality in and of itself - they do whatever they want to do, it's no skin off my nose - but the urge to change the language grinds my gears. E.g. personal pronouns.

English: He, Him masculine / She, Her feminine / It, its neuter / apparently a singular they next to a plural they.
Dutch: Hij, Hem masculine (did I tell you already the two are related?) / Zij, haar feminine / Het (no possessive singular neuter in Dutch) / Zij, hun (plural, only one gender in plural in Dutch)

In short, our "they" can only refer to a plural, never to one person. With the advent of gender neutrality (non-binary and such) they think of "inventing" a word to describe that. So Dutch has, according to them, a singular they (which it in fact does not).

Dutch is directed by an organisation much like any other language which says this or that is official language. Singular they is not official (as of yet). And still, at work I have been given the remark that I must apply it even if it is not approved yet. The person saying so, not coincidentally non-binary himself or herself said to me that the ANS (organisation for the Dutch language) is not the accurate form to follow, even though it is the OFFICIAL organisation (that is, as official as it goes), because safe spaces and so on. That is something I don't want to do. I don't want to butcher my beloved language.

Quote from: Kerstmanneke82 on October 25, 2023, 08:53:19 AM
I'll try to clarify as well as I can, as I am neither a linguist nor a teacher.

1) articles
...

I guess there seems to be a significant difference between Dutch and German.
Many things you write are correct.

Nevertheless there are certain ways to include both male and the female form. Usually we still use the generic masculin.
The most obvious is to name both. The classic is "Ladies and gentlemen".
Then there are neutral terms which can be used. Some sound good and some sound silly.

Using the * or : is something different. That is very political. Especially * is often used to include all genders and it is often claimed that using it was proposed by the queer community.
The : has the same function.

Both are unofficial and not part of the official German language and grammar rules.

Quote from: Coffeecup on October 25, 2023, 10:45:45 AM

Quote from: Kerstmanneke82 on October 25, 2023, 08:53:19 AM
I'll try to clarify as well as I can, as I am neither a linguist nor a teacher.

1) articles
...

Using the * or : is something different. That is very political. Especially * is often used to include all genders and it is often claimed that using it was proposed by the queer community.
The : has the same function.

Both are unofficial and not part of the official German language and grammar rules.

I really think that the * is just used to make it readable. Of course they could use just the standard (masculine) word, but I *get* why they do it. Not saying I approve, per se, but I get it.

As for differences between Dutch and German... German is much more complicated (West-Flemish, an old dialect of Dutch, actually still has different articles for different genders, like German: der Mann, Die Frau, Das Kind in German, De man, De vrouw, Het kind in Dutch, but in West-Flemish it still is: Den vint, De vrouwe, Et kind).

Genitive cases are still used in Dutch but not that much anymore. Genitives in Dutch, when used, are EXACTLY the same as in German: des, der, des, der. Bv "the man of the house" is translated in modern Dutch as "de heer des huizes".

Fascinating topic, this is, but I'm afraid that in the end it all will change, if by then we don't all speak English. Without exaggerating, I believe my generation (40 somethings) is the last to actually still speak West-Flemish and then it goes the way of the dodo.

EDIT

For clarification, I am not in favour of using things which, as you say, are not official grammar (see above ;) ). I still believe it is just to make the text readable and not to pander to this or that community. Same discussion in Dutch. In German, I believe, there is Er, Sie, Es (He, she, it) but no singular gender neutral pronoun for non-binary people. Same as in Dutch: Hij, zij, het. The real "fight" if you will is to stop them butchering our language to jam another pronoun in.

never mind, computer acts strange

Genderspecial ideology has an easier time infiltrating some languages over others. E.g. Hungarian doesn't have distinct pronouns for men and women. Of course, genderspecials have turned this around to say Hungarian is the most "progressive" (https://www.francisberger.com/blog/when-it-comes-to-gender-pronouns-hungary-is-the-most-progressive-country-in-the-world). As if language development was a linear process going from worse to better, rather than a wholly arbitrary symbol system compensating for our lack of telepathy.

The idea is to use the * to include everyone. It is not about making the text more readable. Regarding Lex Arcana I even heard that it was used on purpose so that readers are annoyed by it so that they get aware of the topic.

In fact the * is doing quite the opposite and more than 2/3rds of German (including far more than half of young people) don't use it or want to use it.

Quote from: migo on October 25, 2023, 08:55:05 AM
I'm not American, and have spent less than 24 hours in my entire life inside American borders.

It's the same shit outside America too.

Can confirm from Northern Europe and Canada. Sweden is possibly worst since they fell hard for feminism and self flagellation a long time ago, though I haven't spent that much time in Sweden specifically

Quote from: Trond on October 25, 2023, 11:25:50 AM

Quote from: migo on October 25, 2023, 08:55:05 AM
I'm not American, and have spent less than 24 hours in my entire life inside American borders.

It's the same shit outside America too.

Can confirm from Northern Europe and Canada. Sweden is possibly worst since they fell hard for feminism and self flagellation a long time ago, though I haven't spent that much time in Sweden specifically

I would expect that in Sweden ttRPGs don't stand out compared to other hobbies and sub-cultures as having been so thoroughly SJW-infested, not because they're not thoroughly infested, but because others are just as bad.

I'm going to give you the long end of the stick, as said, I'm by no means an expert, just throwing my two cents for all it's worth.

Quote from: Kage2020 on October 24, 2023, 10:01:36 PM
blah, blah blah... you're wrong blah, blah, blah... you're lying  blah, blah, blah... you are small brained

You asked so I provided an honest, albeit low resolution answer to your earlier inquiry.  If you had been inquisitive rather than dismissive, I could have given you a solid list of links and articles for you to dig through. As it is, you're just one more leftist that is pushing an agenda by gaslighting.  I have receipts for everything I've said.  I don't see the need to spend anymore energy as it is now.

Quote from: BadApple on October 25, 2023, 11:38:21 AM

Quote from: Kage2020 on October 24, 2023, 10:01:36 PM
blah, blah blah... you're wrong blah, blah, blah... you're lying  blah, blah, blah... you are small brained

You asked so I provided an honest, albeit low resolution answer to your earlier inquiry.  If you had been inquisitive rather than dismissive, I could have given you a solid list of links and articles for you to dig through. As it is, you're just one more leftist that is pushing an agenda by gaslighting.  I have receipts for everything I've said.  I don't see the need to spend anymore energy as it is now.

Centrist, actually.

The "low resolution" post garnered a "low resolution" response. Absolutely nothing in there is not demonstrable with a little bit of DuckDuckGo'ing outside of right-wing idealogues and news media.

I was grateful for the response, but the arguments presented were a-factual where noted.

I guess it depends on what you mean by "overwhelming" and "woke." Do the majority of game writers prefer not to insult their customer case and prefer not to propagate reactionary viewpoints, including ones that in many cases would oppress themselves? Yeah. OTOH, the idea that the game industry is "woke" is a joke, it still overwhelmingly caters to a white cishet male viewpoint, a mainstream viewpoint that mirrors everything out in the real world. Leftists *wish* game companies were real leftists. But as it is, we've reached the level of "reasonably polite." Which some people hate.

Quote from: BadApple on October 25, 2023, 11:38:21 AM

Quote from: Kage2020 on October 24, 2023, 10:01:36 PM
blah, blah blah... you're wrong blah, blah, blah... you're lying  blah, blah, blah... you are small brained

You asked so I provided an honest, albeit low resolution answer to your earlier inquiry.  If you had been inquisitive rather than dismissive, I could have given you a solid list of links and articles for you to dig through. As it is, you're just one more leftist that is pushing an agenda by gaslighting.  I have receipts for everything I've said.  I don't see the need to spend anymore energy as it is now.

Leftist pretending to be a moderate while trashing Christianity. Same old song and dance.

Quote from: pawsplay on November 26, 2023, 12:17:15 AM
I guess it depends on what you mean by "overwhelming" and "woke." Do the majority of game writers prefer not to insult their customer case and prefer not to propagate reactionary viewpoints, including ones that in many cases would oppress themselves? Yeah. OTOH, the idea that the game industry is "woke" is a joke, it still overwhelmingly caters to a white cishet male viewpoint, a mainstream viewpoint that mirrors everything out in the real world. Leftists *wish* game companies were real leftists. But as it is, we've reached the level of "reasonably polite." Which some people hate.

So having a guy from the biggest RPG company say that white men like him can't leave the hobby soon enough is catering "to a white cishet male viewpoint", is it? And it's a 'level of "reasonably polite"'? Got it.

Quote from: Krazz on November 26, 2023, 10:37:33 AM
So having a guy from the biggest RPG company say that white men like him can't leave the hobby soon enough is catering "to a white cishet male viewpoint", is it? And it's a 'level of "reasonably polite"'? Got it.

I'm not a spokesman for whiners.

Quote from: pawsplay on November 26, 2023, 12:21:04 PM

Quote from: Krazz on November 26, 2023, 10:37:33 AM
So having a guy from the biggest RPG company say that white men like him can't leave the hobby soon enough is catering "to a white cishet male viewpoint", is it? And it's a 'level of "reasonably polite"'? Got it.

I'm not a spokesman for whiners.

Let me explain in more detail. You said some things, without providing any evidence. I then showed that the very biggest company in the RPG world was taking action that went directly contrary to what you said, putting all you claim in considerable doubt. Reasonable options for you at that point were:

1) Admit that you were wrong
2) Provide plentiful examples of the opposite, to show that your original opinion was based on fact rather than pulled out of your corpulent behind
3) Call everyone Nazis and claim that you're on the right side of history

But you didn't take one of those options. You made a cryptic comment about just being a whiner rather than a spokeman for whiners. Now pick one of the options. And there's a slight trick;;only two of the options were actually reasonable. Reasonable people can tell the difference, but people who use words such as "reactionary" and "cishet" struggle on that one.

Quote from: pawsplay....the idea that the game industry is "woke" is a joke, it still overwhelmingly caters to a white cishet male viewpoint...

Quote from: pawsplay on November 26, 2023, 12:21:04 PM

I'm not a spokesman for whiners.

That's odd because you really sound like one.

Quote from: Krazz on November 26, 2023, 12:50:03 PM

Quote from: pawsplay on November 26, 2023, 12:21:04 PM

Quote from: Krazz on November 26, 2023, 10:37:33 AM
So having a guy from the biggest RPG company say that white men like him can't leave the hobby soon enough is catering "to a white cishet male viewpoint", is it? And it's a 'level of "reasonably polite"'? Got it.

I'm not a spokesman for whiners.

Let me explain in more detail. You said some things, without providing any evidence. I then showed that the very biggest company in the RPG world was taking action that went directly contrary to what you said, putting all you claim in considerable doubt. Reasonable options for you at that point were:

1) Admit that you were wrong
2) Provide plentiful examples of the opposite, to show that your original opinion was based on fact rather than pulled out of your corpulent behind
3) Call everyone Nazis and claim that you're on the right side of history

But you didn't take one of those options. You made a cryptic comment about just being a whiner rather than a spokeman for whiners. Now pick one of the options. And there's a slight trick;;only two of the options were actually reasonable. Reasonable people can tell the difference, but people who use words such as "reactionary" and "cishet" struggle on that one.

You were the one who put forward a thesis, that the hobby is in trouble because one white dude says it is. So feel free to defend that viewpoint.

Quote from: pawsplay on November 26, 2023, 02:18:40 PM

Quote from: Krazz on November 26, 2023, 12:50:03 PM

Quote from: pawsplay on November 26, 2023, 12:21:04 PM

Quote from: Krazz on November 26, 2023, 10:37:33 AM
So having a guy from the biggest RPG company say that white men like him can't leave the hobby soon enough is catering "to a white cishet male viewpoint", is it? And it's a 'level of "reasonably polite"'? Got it.

I'm not a spokesman for whiners.

Let me explain in more detail. You said some things, without providing any evidence. I then showed that the very biggest company in the RPG world was taking action that went directly contrary to what you said, putting all you claim in considerable doubt. Reasonable options for you at that point were:

1) Admit that you were wrong
2) Provide plentiful examples of the opposite, to show that your original opinion was based on fact rather than pulled out of your corpulent behind
3) Call everyone Nazis and claim that you're on the right side of history

But you didn't take one of those options. You made a cryptic comment about just being a whiner rather than a spokeman for whiners. Now pick one of the options. And there's a slight trick;;only two of the options were actually reasonable. Reasonable people can tell the difference, but people who use words such as "reactionary" and "cishet" struggle on that one.

You were the one who put forward a thesis, that the hobby is in trouble because one white dude says it is. So feel free to defend that viewpoint.

No, that's a bare-faced lie. You were the one who put forward a "thesis":

Quote from: pawsplay on November 26, 2023, 12:17:15 AM
the idea that the game industry is "woke" is a joke, it still overwhelmingly caters to a white cishet male viewpoint

I attacked that, and you've been unable to defend it. The burden of proof lies with you, because you made the original claim. And neither I, nor the person I quoted, claimed that "the hobby is in trouble". I suggest working on your reading comprehension. But since you want more evidence, why don't you peruse the amber and especially red lists here:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RlX78Yw9lbUMk2QwAZdpwNRGAd4Xe69eFgnFymWz6M0/edit#heading=h.s9uvg7c5ig4j

So now you have to come back with even more evidence to back up your claim. And so far, you've failed to produce any evidence at all. All you've done is whine.

Quote from: Krazz on November 26, 2023, 02:27:34 PM
So now you have to come back with even more evidence to back up your claim. And so far, you've failed to produce any evidence at all. All you've done is whine.

Ah, the classic rubber-glue maneuver.

Quote from: pawsplay on November 26, 2023, 03:37:47 PM

Quote from: Krazz on November 26, 2023, 02:27:34 PM
So now you have to come back with even more evidence to back up your claim. And so far, you've failed to produce any evidence at all. All you've done is whine.

Ah, the classic rubber-glue maneuver.

As I thought: you can't back up your claim with even a single piece of evidence. Thanks for playing. Next time, come prepared. Or better yet, choose a position based on fact rather than your feelings.

Most of the Leftist members of this board can't be expected to operate in good faith discussions, so it's simpler to block them so you don't drag yourself and everyone else down into pointless bickering.

Quote from: Zelen on November 26, 2023, 04:17:28 PM
Most of the Leftist members of this board can't be expected to operate in good faith discussions, so it's simpler to block them so you don't drag yourself and everyone else down into pointless bickering.

That's good advice - life is too short to waste on bad-faith discussions. I've blocked Pawsplay.

Quote from: Brad on November 26, 2023, 09:49:41 AMLeftist pretending to be a moderate while trashing Christianity. Same old song and dance.

Alternate hypothesis: I at least prefer to think of myself as centrist, but what is being presented as the perspective of the right is so far to the right that even centrists look like leftists? (That's a common argument I see being made, but probably by those on the Left. I am no Libertarian, however, and wish them all the best of fun on their next island.)

And I do try to be equitable in trashing all religions, though importantly not Faith--just organised religion. It's pretty hard to have a problem with people that live their lives by the (Christian) Word and are good, wholesome people that practice their faith. You'll find many of them living in the Bible Belt (as I do). Same with people of other faiths.

You'll also find people that leverage religion for political gain, which is where I would take a bit of umbrage. I'm very much a fan of Jefferson's Wall of Separation (even if he is one of my least-favourite presidents) and kudos to him for arguing with Madison on the enumeration of the Bill of Rights. (It's hard enough seeing how SCOTUS has handled the Bill of Rights in general over the past forty years, let alone before one gets into the farce of textual originalism.)

Still, I struggle with the concept of faith myself. I'm not atheist or agnostic--just searching for something that resonates. Heck, even within Christianity the closest sect that resonated with me was, IIRC, put to the torture/flame/general maimy-death in the 16th century for going against the (Catholic) Church.

But we're veering (even more) OffT, so apologies for that. I just sometimes wish that perspectives were not so fragile.

Ah well.

Quote from: Kage2020 on November 26, 2023, 05:08:34 PM

Quote from: Brad on November 26, 2023, 09:49:41 AMLeftist pretending to be a moderate while trashing Christianity. Same old song and dance.

Alternate hypothesis: I at least prefer to think of myself as centrist, but what is being presented as the perspective of the right is so far to the right that even centrists look like leftists? (That's a common argument I see being made, but probably by those on the Left. I am no Libertarian, however, and wish them all the best of fun on their next island.)

And I do try to be equitable in trashing all religions, though importantly not Faith--just organised religion. It's pretty hard to have a problem with people that live their lives by the (Christian) Word and are good, wholesome people that practice their faith. You'll find many of them living in the Bible Belt (as I do). Same with people of other faiths.

You'll also find people that leverage religion for political gain, which is where I would take a bit of umbrage. I'm very much a fan of Jefferson's Wall of Separation (even if he is one of my least-favourite presidents) and kudos to him for arguing with Madison on the enumeration of the Bill of Rights. (It's hard enough seeing how SCOTUS has handled the Bill of Rights in general over the past forty years, let alone before one gets into the farce of textual originalism.)

Still, I struggle with the concept of faith myself. I'm not atheist or agnostic--just searching for something that resonates. Heck, even within Christianity the closest sect that resonated with me was, IIRC, put to the torture/flame/general maimy-death in the 16th century for going against the (Catholic) Church.

But we're veering (even more) OffT, so apologies for that. I just sometimes wish that perspectives were not so fragile.

Ah well.

You know, you could have left his statement unanswered, since you spent a couple of hundred words basically saying exactly what he stated.

Quote from: Krazz on November 26, 2023, 04:26:03 PM

Quote from: Zelen on November 26, 2023, 04:17:28 PM
Most of the Leftist members of this board can't be expected to operate in good faith discussions, so it's simpler to block them so you don't drag yourself and everyone else down into pointless bickering.

That's good advice - life is too short to waste on bad-faith discussions. I've blocked Pawsplay.

Why would you expect people who can't even fathom basic biology to follow a logical chain of thought...?  You've chosen the correct option...

The RPG industry is currently made up of two groups; those who are hardcore leftists, and those who shut up about politics because they know they might get deplatformed. The biggest studios are overwhelmingly in the first category, so by volume RPG companies are overwhelmingly woke, but by studio it's more center-left because right-leaning opinions self-censor.

You have to speak fluent Leftist Gobbledygook to network at conventions.

RPG Pundit is something of an exception in this regard, and there are probably a few others I don't know. But at the same time Pundit is enough if a pariah that most publishers see what he is and choose not to risk their public lives engaging in politics. The problem isn't exactly that companies are overwhelmingly woke, but that right-leaning opinions self-censor to protect their careers over their politics.

Quote from: pawsplay on November 26, 2023, 12:17:15 AM
...caters to a white cishet male viewpoint, a mainstream viewpoint that mirrors everything out in the real world.

If a viewpoint mirrors everything in the real world, why do you need to impose an adjective on it other than "real"? And an imaginary adjective at that.

Let's not forget that most of the trade-shows and conventions are woke-as-fuck too. Years ago, participation in these events were pretty necessary on some level to make money beyond being a small team success.

A lot of independent studios developers are not politically left (in the modern sense) at all. But they do some bare whiff of acknowledgement to the madness stay of the mob's radar.

That said - find your tolerance level and vote with your dollars accordingly.

Greetings!

"White Cishet male worldview"? WTF?

What a fucking clown. Clearly, he is a brainwashed, Leftist moron.

Normal white cultural standards are dominant--OH NOES! We live in a country that is majority WHITE, and the majority are NORMAL.

Don't like it? REEEE some more, and go pound sand.

Fuck the degenerate, Leftist retards.

The gaming hobby, and society as a whole, is far better without these degenerate Leftist morons. They should be sent to special asylums with rubber rooms, where they are pumped full of animal medicines.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: SHARK on November 27, 2023, 01:26:51 PM
Greetings!

"White Cishet male worldview"? WTF?

What a fucking clown. Clearly, he is a brainwashed, Leftist moron.

Normal white cultural standards are dominant--OH NOES! We live in a country that is majority WHITE, and the majority are NORMAL.

Don't like it? REEEE some more, and go pound sand.

Fuck the degenerate, Leftist retards.

The gaming hobby, and society as a whole, is far better without these degenerate Leftist morons. They should be sent to special asylums with rubber rooms, where they are pumped full of animal medicines.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

LOL! Since that is unlikely to happen, we should concentrate on spaying and neutering them early so they don't reproduce.

Well right now, Gen X has the highest exposable income.  Millennials have some of the worse indicators for any generation in US history, from economics to politics.  Millennials are not working and are a large demographic.  Gen Z is smaller, but are much more closer to the norm for American values and they have jobs and money to spend.

The smarter companies would be putting out content aimed at Gen X and Gen Z and bypass the Millennials as a demographic with no spend and fucked up values.

The more a company goes work and puts in weird leftist ideology over game play and fun, the worse the game will actually do.  Look at Hasbro, in 5 years they have lost 50% of their stock value and its not going any better for them because they are building products for the most cynical and authoritarian generation - Millennials.

Quote from: Krazz on November 26, 2023, 04:16:56 PM
As I thought: you can't back up your claim with even a single piece of evidence. Thanks for playing. Next time, come prepared. Or better yet, choose a position based on fact rather than your feelings.

What are you basing your argument on? One guy? I literally am a writer in the RPG industry, and I know tons of people in the RPG industry. And blessedly few are right-wing reactionaries. Yeah, there's always a lot of work to be done educating mainstream people about how they've been tainted by white supremacist and misogynist ideology, but at least, in principle, most people are reasonably educated and are committed to a civil society. What do you expect me to do, cite someone's peer-reviewed study? I actually live in reality and I'm just not moved by, "Well, hey, this one white guy peed in his own pants crying about how woke everything is" and it's that guy I'm worried about, not the industry.

I wish the RPG industry were progressive, or even consistently a mainstream ally. If you don't see it that way, you're just lucky not to be affected by random dickery. In fact, you are likely part of the problem, but I'm offering you the benefit of the doubt, as well as making this argument in case anyone is actually listening.

Quote from: Fheredin on November 27, 2023, 09:41:22 AM
The RPG industry is currently made up of two groups; those who are hardcore leftists, and those who shut up about politics because they know they might get deplatformed.

Who are those people? Sure as fuck not people on this board. Some people will openly acknowledge all sorts of stuff people in civil society wouldn't be caught saying.  In fact, the right-wing shit baboons have never felt more free to comment whatever they feel like saying. The RPG industry is plagued by people who think their opinions are worth sharing. Nobody shuts up.

I know very few "hardcore leftists." I know a few, but they're nice people. Most people are not hardcore, really not even leftists. Just people who acknowledge modern governance and justice, and believe people have rights and value. Most are fine with mainstream Democratic politics, plenty would be happy to even vote for Romney. They are just regular, everyday people, who write RPG books.

Also btw I am Gen X, and Gen X is really driving social progress in gaming. They are older, more employed, and tired of boomer shit. If you think "millennials" are ruining gaming, sorry, you overslept your nap, grandpa.

In general, I find it strange when some people seem to doubt how far out of hand it has gotten in society and in geek culture specifically. Just as one example; last time I went to Comic-Con a few years ago BLM had a strong presence there, milling around the corridors warning about "microaggressions", claiming a Whoopi Goldberg fan was wearing blackface (not sure if true, and don't care) and ruined the mood for a lot of people. Of course there were also all sorts of woke panels and discussions, and keep in mind this is one of the largest "geek events" anywhere.

Quote from: Trond on November 27, 2023, 05:24:48 PM
In general, I find it strange when some people seem to doubt how far out of hand it has gotten in society and in geek culture specifically. Just as one example; last time I went to Comic-Con a few years ago BLM had a strong presence there, milling around the corridors warning about "microaggressions", claiming a Whoopi Goldberg fan was wearing blackface (not sure if true, and don't care) and ruined the mood for a lot of people. Of course there were also all sorts of woke panels and discussions, and keep in mind this is one of the largest "geek events" anywhere.

They are there to exert political power, think of the brown shirts doing a march in town to try to intimidate the citizenry.  Give them the respect they deserve, nothing and deride them personally is the best course of action.  Authoritarians of a feather flock together.

Quote from: Eirikrautha on November 26, 2023, 09:43:11 PM
You know, you could have left his statement unanswered, since you spent a couple of hundred words basically saying exactly what he stated.

They get paid by the word, so I have read.

Quote from: Exploderwizard on November 27, 2023, 01:55:47 PM

Quote from: SHARK on November 27, 2023, 01:26:51 PM
Greetings!

"White Cishet male worldview"? WTF?

What a fucking clown. Clearly, he is a brainwashed, Leftist moron.

Normal white cultural standards are dominant--OH NOES! We live in a country that is majority WHITE, and the majority are NORMAL.

Don't like it? REEEE some more, and go pound sand.

Fuck the degenerate, Leftist retards.

The gaming hobby, and society as a whole, is far better without these degenerate Leftist morons. They should be sent to special asylums with rubber rooms, where they are pumped full of animal medicines.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

LOL! Since that is unlikely to happen, we should concentrate on spaying and neutering them early so they don't reproduce.

Greetings!

Oh yes, my friend! That would definitely be needed! The Leftists are like filthy, diseased rats. Always whispering, giggling, scheming to spread their hateful ideology. Just look at how insidious they are with their attempts to change language and words within our hobby? It is disgusting.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Greetings!

Oh yes. The American public, the gaming hobby public, so full of fucking "white supremacist and misogynism"!!! They need to be properly re-educated, right Comrade?

The smugness, the self-righteous elitism these Leftist morons have, it is mind-boggling.

Our hobby needs to drive these morons out of the hobby, ruthlessly. Laugh at them. Mock them relentlessly. Challenge them and their evil ideology, whenever they open their degenerate mouths. Never let them rest. Hound them ferociously and without mercy.

Trond, you make excellent arguments and testimony as to why the Leftist idiots need to be relentlessly opposed, everywhere, at all times. Look how your convention-going has been utterly ruined and corrupted by these troglodytes! Sad, my friend. So sad!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: pawsplay on November 27, 2023, 05:23:24 PM

Quote from: Krazz on November 26, 2023, 04:16:56 PM
As I thought: you can't back up your claim with even a single piece of evidence. Thanks for playing. Next time, come prepared. Or better yet, choose a position based on fact rather than your feelings.

What are you basing your argument on? One guy? I literally am a writer in the RPG industry, and I know tons of people in the RPG industry. And blessedly few are right-wing reactionaries. Yeah, there's always a lot of work to be done educating mainstream people about how they've been tainted by white supremacist and misogynist ideology, but at least, in principle, most people are reasonably educated and are committed to a civil society. What do you expect me to do, cite someone's peer-reviewed study? I actually live in reality and I'm just not moved by, "Well, hey, this one white guy peed in his own pants crying about how woke everything is" and it's that guy I'm worried about, not the industry.

I wish the RPG industry were progressive, or even consistently a mainstream ally. If you don't see it that way, you're just lucky not to be affected by random dickery. In fact, you are likely part of the problem, but I'm offering you the benefit of the doubt, as well as making this argument in case anyone is actually listening.

Quote from: Fheredin on November 27, 2023, 09:41:22 AM
The RPG industry is currently made up of two groups; those who are hardcore leftists, and those who shut up about politics because they know they might get deplatformed.

Who are those people? Sure as fuck not people on this board. Some people will openly acknowledge all sorts of stuff people in civil society wouldn't be caught saying.  In fact, the right-wing shit baboons have never felt more free to comment whatever they feel like saying. The RPG industry is plagued by people who think their opinions are worth sharing. Nobody shuts up.

I know very few "hardcore leftists." I know a few, but they're nice people. Most people are not hardcore, really not even leftists. Just people who acknowledge modern governance and justice, and believe people have rights and value. Most are fine with mainstream Democratic politics, plenty would be happy to even vote for Romney. They are just regular, everyday people, who write RPG books.

Also btw I am Gen X, and Gen X is really driving social progress in gaming. They are older, more employed, and tired of boomer shit. If you think "millennials" are ruining gaming, sorry, you overslept your nap, grandpa.

Rando on Internet claims to be "insider"!  News at 11!

Lots of the folks on this board are also writers, designers or industry vets, and are pretty open about what they have worked on.  So, I'm gonna need some receipts...

Quote from: pawsplay on November 26, 2023, 12:17:15 AM
I guess it depends on what you mean by "overwhelming" and "woke." Do the majority of game writers prefer not to insult their customer case and prefer not to propagate reactionary viewpoints, including ones that in many cases would oppress themselves? Yeah. OTOH, the idea that the game industry is "woke" is a joke, it still overwhelmingly caters to a white cishet male viewpoint, a mainstream viewpoint that mirrors everything out in the real world. Leftists *wish* game companies were real leftists. But as it is, we've reached the level of "reasonably polite." Which some people hate.

So they cater to the correct viewpoint. Also nobody's oppressing you and it's good to be reactionary.

Quote from: pawsplay on November 27, 2023, 05:23:24 PM

Quote from: Krazz on November 26, 2023, 04:16:56 PM
As I thought: you can't back up your claim with even a single piece of evidence. Thanks for playing. Next time, come prepared. Or better yet, choose a position based on fact rather than your feelings.

What are you basing your argument on? One guy? I literally am a writer in the RPG industry, and I know tons of people in the RPG industry. And blessedly few are right-wing reactionaries. Yeah, there's always a lot of work to be done educating mainstream people about how they've been tainted by white supremacist and misogynist ideology, but at least, in principle, most people are reasonably educated and are committed to a civil society. What do you expect me to do, cite someone's peer-reviewed study? I actually live in reality and I'm just not moved by, "Well, hey, this one white guy peed in his own pants crying about how woke everything is" and it's that guy I'm worried about, not the industry.

I wish the RPG industry were progressive, or even consistently a mainstream ally. If you don't see it that way, you're just lucky not to be affected by random dickery. In fact, you are likely part of the problem, but I'm offering you the benefit of the doubt, as well as making this argument in case anyone is actually listening.

Quote from: Fheredin on November 27, 2023, 09:41:22 AM
The RPG industry is currently made up of two groups; those who are hardcore leftists, and those who shut up about politics because they know they might get deplatformed.

Who are those people? Sure as fuck not people on this board. Some people will openly acknowledge all sorts of stuff people in civil society wouldn't be caught saying.  In fact, the right-wing shit baboons have never felt more free to comment whatever they feel like saying. The RPG industry is plagued by people who think their opinions are worth sharing. Nobody shuts up.

I know very few "hardcore leftists." I know a few, but they're nice people. Most people are not hardcore, really not even leftists. Just people who acknowledge modern governance and justice, and believe people have rights and value. Most are fine with mainstream Democratic politics, plenty would be happy to even vote for Romney. They are just regular, everyday people, who write RPG books.

Also btw I am Gen X, and Gen X is really driving social progress in gaming. They are older, more employed, and tired of boomer shit. If you think "millennials" are ruining gaming, sorry, you overslept your nap, grandpa.

Tradition is good and the right wing is correct about everything.

Quote from: Eirikrautha on November 27, 2023, 11:10:41 PM
Rando on Internet claims to be "insider"!  News at 11!

Lots of the folks on this board are also writers, designers or industry vets, and are pretty open about what they have worked on.  So, I'm gonna need some receipts...

Where do I claim to be an insider? I'm professing to know readily available, commonplace information.

Quote from: pawsplay on November 29, 2023, 12:19:37 AM

Quote from: Eirikrautha on November 27, 2023, 11:10:41 PM
Rando on Internet claims to be "insider"!  News at 11!

Lots of the folks on this board are also writers, designers or industry vets, and are pretty open about what they have worked on.  So, I'm gonna need some receipts...

Where do I claim to be an insider? I'm professing to know readily available, commonplace information.

Maybe this?

Quote from: pawsplay on November 27, 2023, 05:23:24 PM
I literally am a writer in the RPG industry, and I know tons of people in the RPG industry.

So which is it? Am I the rando, or am I an insider? All I said was that I'm a writer, which is true.

Quote from: pawsplay on November 29, 2023, 08:37:29 PM
So which is it? Am I the rando, or am I an insider? All I said was that I'm a writer, which is true.

I think there might be a clash of terms here. I'd say a writer is a professional, but not necessarily an insider if they only submit, rather than being on the decision-making side of things.

Quote from: pawsplay on November 29, 2023, 08:37:29 PM
So which is it? Am I the rando, or am I an insider? All I said was that I'm a writer, which is true.

I must say that for a "trans" you have some big cojones to be lying right below someone providing the EXACT quote.

Quote from: pawsplay on November 27, 2023, 05:23:24 PM
I literally am a writer in the RPG industry, and I know tons of people in the RPG industry.

Bolded the part about being an insider.

Quote from: jhkim on November 29, 2023, 08:58:27 PM

Quote from: pawsplay on November 29, 2023, 08:37:29 PM
So which is it? Am I the rando, or am I an insider? All I said was that I'm a writer, which is true.

I think there might be a clash of terms here. I'd say a writer is a professional, but not necessarily an insider if they only submit, rather than being on the decision-making side of things.

Stupid and irrelevant opinion noted.

Quote from: pawsplay on November 29, 2023, 08:37:29 PM
So which is it? Am I the rando, or am I an insider? All I said was that I'm a writer, which is true.

No, you claimed to know lots of people in the industry, know what they think and feel, and have information about what opinions were prevalent among the majority of people in the industry.  So post your C.V., or admit that you are lying/exaggerating (or delusional... and based on everything else you've said, that would be the logical inference...)

I mean, you know me, so I guess you all are insiders, too.

I will immediately derail this thread by espousing a belief in Moral Nihilism and demand evidence that morality is intrinsic to the universe.

Quote from: pawsplay on November 30, 2023, 12:20:27 AM
I mean, you know me, so I guess you all are insiders, too.

The only things that I know about you is that you are a left wing barking moonbat ranter and that you are prone to making sweeping assumptions about people motives and beliefs based on, essentially, nothing at all.

Quote from: pawsplay on November 30, 2023, 12:20:27 AM
I mean, you know me, so I guess you all are insiders, too.

Well with that and a nickel I can buy a hot cup of 'Who gives a shit?".

As if you're the only one here that's published or written in the industry? LOL... dude you should look around more.

QuoteI will immediately derail this thread by espousing a belief in Moral Nihilism and demand evidence that morality is intrinsic to the universe.

How about immediately derailing your desire for answer with swift ruthless execution, the most perfect argument against moral nihilists?

Quote from: MeganovaStella on November 30, 2023, 12:23:00 AM
I will immediately derail this thread by espousing a belief in Moral Nihilism and demand evidence that morality is intrinsic to the universe.

I'll just point out that the sheer number of beneficial coincidences on a universal scale required for you to even be able to make that statement points to a higher power who cared enough to put you here.

On topic, I would suggest that the humanities/creatives tend to be outliers to the general public in terms of beliefs and values and in the West that has naturally been outliers to Western civilization. Basically, being left of center is the average for creatives so it's not really that great of a surprise to find that tendency in RPG companies... particularly as it shifted away from its wargame roots (board, card and dice games are mainstream, war games are an outlier from that, rpgs started as an outlier of that outlier).

The main difference these days is that the scale has shifted so far to left that the old school left when many rpgs got their start are now considered far right (ex. Bill Clinton's policies in the 90's would be considered far right extremism today). A lot of the people labeled Green on the Woke Company guide would have been seen as "Liberals" in the 80's and 90's.

I would also suggest that as the Woke push further into the mainstream it will make the right into the natural outliers (indeed, the up and coming generation is more right-wing than its predecessors) simply because to go much further to the Left is to pass the event horizon of insanity (some on the Left already consider it valid to declare you identify as a cat and that refusing to let them shit in a litter box at school is a hate crime... at some point they're going to declare speaking a coherent language is a hate crime against the mentally disabled).

That means in the long run, I expect the RPGs that actually survive into the next decade to begin a swing back towards Western values simply because that's where the creative outliers who aren't shitting in litter boxes while babbling incoherently will be found.

Quote from: Chris24601 on November 30, 2023, 10:26:17 AM

Quote from: MeganovaStella on November 30, 2023, 12:23:00 AM
I will immediately derail this thread by espousing a belief in Moral Nihilism and demand evidence that morality is intrinsic to the universe.

I'll just point out that the sheer number of beneficial coincidences on a universal scale required for you to even be able to make that statement points to a higher power who cared enough to put you here.

On topic, I would suggest that the humanities/creatives tend to be outliers to the general public in terms of beliefs and values and in the West that has naturally been outliers to Western civilization. Basically, being left of center is the average for creatives so it's not really that great of a surprise to find that tendency in RPG companies... particularly as it shifted away from its wargame roots (board, card and dice games are mainstream, war games are an outlier from that, rpgs started as an outlier of that outlier).

The main difference these days is that the scale has shifted so far to left that the old school left when many rpgs got their start are now considered far right (ex. Bill Clinton's policies in the 90's would be considered far right extremism today). A lot of the people labeled Green on the Woke Company guide would have been seen as "Liberals" in the 80's and 90's.

I would also suggest that as the Woke push further into the mainstream it will make the right into the natural outliers (indeed, the up and coming generation is more right-wing than its predecessors) simply because to go much further to the Left is to pass the event horizon of insanity (some on the Left already consider it valid to declare you identify as a cat and that refusing to let them shit in a litter box at school is a hate crime... at some point they're going to declare speaking a coherent language is a hate crime against the mentally disabled).

That means in the long run, I expect the RPGs that actually survive into the next decade to begin a swing back towards Western values simply because that's where the creative outliers who aren't shitting in litter boxes while babbling incoherently will be found.

Not only do I agree, but I admire the very evocative way you put it...

Quote from: tenbones on November 30, 2023, 03:40:30 AM

Quote from: pawsplay on November 30, 2023, 12:20:27 AM
I mean, you know me, so I guess you all are insiders, too.

Well with that and a nickel I can buy a hot cup of 'Who gives a shit?".

As if you're the only one here that's published or written in the industry? LOL... dude you should look around more.

Thank you for restating my point, so concisely.

I may not have direct experience with the industry, but I do have basic situational awareness as a consumer. When a corporation sells a bundle promising that things will go to a political cause, that's a political stance. When accusations are made regarding the politics and morality of editions gone by, and they are edited to conform to the modern political and societal lines of a company, including censoring past lore after they had previously left it intact to "show how bad it was" and "not practice erasure" because the past editions and content is still selling, that's a political action. The left, and not the right, has been doing both of the former things. The first, widely across the industry, and with a wide range of corporations, many specific instances being noted in our segment on political censorship for, and what causes you support via the purchasing of, TTRPGs list. The latter in major corporate properties such as D&D, or even White Wolf stuff, which apparently is no longer far enough left.

Likewise, explicit censorship rules on major forums such as Reddit and rpg.net, which get more than 70% of incoming traffic, seem to actively target conservative voices within the hobby. Like reddit's ban on even discussing Ascendant or ACKS and condemnation of various other games and creators from a position of site authority, enforced with active mod rulings. Corporate censorship sucks, and it's more widespread than you might immediately suspect. Personally, I think sites should either be effectively free in speech or be counted as publishers for the views they condone and weed out as the ONE TRUTH from general public opinion, but that's neither here nor there.

When political views at the table are a required part of the game and your qualifications to DM or play it, that's political in nature. Guess who puts that into writing? There are many left-wing examples I could name, many quite popular, that have recently begun trying to dictate table political leanings from the corporate office. And I mean literally, in the rules of the game.

Now, are there games which explore left and/or right leaning, or even orthogonal, political and social themes to a heavy degree within their settings or content without doing that? Sure. Moreso on the left than on the right, probably, but I'd actually be broadly fine with that. The problem is that all the issues above are not only political, but actively encourage the overextension of corporate power over everyday life. They have ties also to rising plans of government censorship, which you should be concerned about regardless of political affiliation. They also have ties to ESG being the only metric legally endorsed as usable in investment that isn't profit when investing somebody's money. (Regardless of what they may value or want you to do, that's your only legal option, which is very much government-backed economic and societal distortion.) These complex issues all interconnect and come into play together.

In short, one can argue that woke ideology is not the dominant enforced ideology within a TTRPG context, but to do so is more or less delusional. If you must argue, argue for the rightness of the above practices and positions and acknowledge the consequent fact that the preceding statement is false. Because whilst still probably being wrong from a legit moral perspective, at least you won't be ignoring the reality of the situation.

And to segue into the whole morality thing... if you don't believe in the rightness of anything, or in any moral values, or objective "better" or "worse" situations, then by all means vacate any conversations of related bent, such as this one. But also, if remaining due to a belief that you are in the right, remember that if moral values do exist and there is no deity or magic force to tell us their attributes, you most certainly do not have a scientific way of ascertaining them magically, and there are in fact infinite theoretical possibilities as to what they could theoretically be. Which means you're still bullshitting yourself about the being right bit, if you really are an atheist who also doesn't believe in magic... yet still thinks they or anybody else can be a "good" human being. (Humanism is bullshit, pass it on.)


On a side note, I do enjoy philosophy, and would argue that there are roughly 3 core possibilities for morality within this world:

1. Magical knowledge or divine command makes ascertaining moral principles possible. One may be right, but only if you are in tune with what the revelatory moral force is saying. If you don't believe in a communicative entity that can reveal or order such things, you're probably wrong by failing the aforementioned hearing test.

2. Morality exists but a revelatory/communicative force of magical or divine nature does not, so there is a 1/infinity chance of finding the correct morality by guessing. You are wrong by default.

3. Morality does not exist.  You are not right, nor are you in the wrong, but that also means the same is true for folks like Hitler.

Quote from: KindaMeh on November 30, 2023, 07:07:08 PM
And to segue into the whole morality thing... if you don't believe in the rightness of anything, or in any moral values, or objective "better" or "worse" situations, then by all means vacate any conversations of related bent, such as this one. But also, if remaining due to a belief that you are in the right, remember that if moral values do exist and there is no deity or magic force to tell us their attributes, you most certainly do not have a scientific way of ascertaining them magically, and there are in fact infinite theoretical possibilities as to what they could theoretically be. Which means you're still bullshitting yourself about the being right bit, if you really are an atheist who also doesn't believe in magic... yet still thinks they or anybody else can be a "good" human being. (Humanism is bullshit, pass it on.)


On a side note, I do enjoy philosophy, and would argue that there are roughly 3 core possibilities for morality within this world:

1. Magical knowledge or divine command makes ascertaining moral principles possible. One may be right, but only if you are in tune with what the revelatory moral force is saying. If you don't believe in a communicative entity that can reveal or order such things, you're probably wrong by failing the aforementioned hearing test.

2. Morality exists but a revelatory/communicative force of magical or divine nature does not, so there is a 1/infinity chance of finding the correct morality by guessing. You are wrong by default.

3. Morality does not exist.  You are not right, nor are you in the wrong, but that also means the same is true for folks like Hitler.

and in a matter of five posts we have exceeded the total discussion quality made from the 505 posts of pawsplay

Quote from: KindaMeh on November 30, 2023, 07:07:08 PM
1. Magical knowledge or divine command makes ascertaining moral principles possible. One may be right, but only if you are in tune with what the revelatory moral force is saying. If you don't believe in a communicative entity that can reveal or order such things, you're probably wrong by failing the aforementioned hearing test.

2. Morality exists but a revelatory/communicative force of magical or divine nature does not, so there is a 1/infinity chance of finding the correct morality by guessing. You are wrong by default.

3. Morality does not exist.  You are not right, nor are you in the wrong, but that also means the same is true for folks like Hitler.

Divine command morality is the stupidest shit. You literally cannot create an actual set of moral values from it, because good becomes equivalent to evil if God commands it. Which means there actually isn't any such thing as morality.

Morality can be extracted from the struggle for survival and our social instincts as human beings. Morality is, roughly, what is good for you, and the people you care about, where "good" means beneficial.

Quote from: pawsplay on November 30, 2023, 09:23:53 PM

Quote from: KindaMeh on November 30, 2023, 07:07:08 PM
1. Magical knowledge or divine command makes ascertaining moral principles possible. One may be right, but only if you are in tune with what the revelatory moral force is saying. If you don't believe in a communicative entity that can reveal or order such things, you're probably wrong by failing the aforementioned hearing test.

2. Morality exists but a revelatory/communicative force of magical or divine nature does not, so there is a 1/infinity chance of finding the correct morality by guessing. You are wrong by default.

3. Morality does not exist.  You are not right, nor are you in the wrong, but that also means the same is true for folks like Hitler.

Divine command morality is the stupidest shit. You literally cannot create an actual set of moral values from it, because good becomes equivalent to evil if God commands it. Which means there actually isn't any such thing as morality.

Morality can be extracted from the struggle for survival and our social instincts as human beings. Morality is, roughly, what is good for you, and the people you care about, where "good" means beneficial.

okay, and what makes something 'good' for you?

Quote from: pawsplay on November 30, 2023, 09:23:53 PM

Quote from: KindaMeh on November 30, 2023, 07:07:08 PM
1. Magical knowledge or divine command makes ascertaining moral principles possible. One may be right, but only if you are in tune with what the revelatory moral force is saying. If you don't believe in a communicative entity that can reveal or order such things, you're probably wrong by failing the aforementioned hearing test.

2. Morality exists but a revelatory/communicative force of magical or divine nature does not, so there is a 1/infinity chance of finding the correct morality by guessing. You are wrong by default.

3. Morality does not exist.  You are not right, nor are you in the wrong, but that also means the same is true for folks like Hitler.

Divine command morality is the stupidest shit. You literally cannot create an actual set of moral values from it, because good becomes equivalent to evil if God commands it. Which means there actually isn't any such thing as morality.

Morality can be extracted from the struggle for survival and our social instincts as human beings. Morality is, roughly, what is good for you, and the people you care about, where "good" means beneficial.

Oh this again...

Quote from: Brad on November 30, 2023, 09:40:34 PM

Quote from: pawsplay on November 30, 2023, 09:23:53 PM

Quote from: KindaMeh on November 30, 2023, 07:07:08 PM
1. Magical knowledge or divine command makes ascertaining moral principles possible. One may be right, but only if you are in tune with what the revelatory moral force is saying. If you don't believe in a communicative entity that can reveal or order such things, you're probably wrong by failing the aforementioned hearing test.

2. Morality exists but a revelatory/communicative force of magical or divine nature does not, so there is a 1/infinity chance of finding the correct morality by guessing. You are wrong by default.

3. Morality does not exist.  You are not right, nor are you in the wrong, but that also means the same is true for folks like Hitler.

Divine command morality is the stupidest shit. You literally cannot create an actual set of moral values from it, because good becomes equivalent to evil if God commands it. Which means there actually isn't any such thing as morality.

Morality can be extracted from the struggle for survival and our social instincts as human beings. Morality is, roughly, what is good for you, and the people you care about, where "good" means beneficial.

Oh this again...

have a feeling they're going to respond like other leftists when faced with moral nihilism (which, btw, i don't believe in, but i believe it would be true under a certain worldview that leftism accepts).

The burden of proof rests on them. I can't prove a negative. They can try to prove that morals exist outside of a human imagination.

So, pawsplay... You may not like or believe in possibility 1, or the idea that objective morality could hypothetically be subject to change, but that doesn't negate my argument. Also, you're ignoring magical knowledge/gnosis/divine knowledge/whatever, which would not require divine command theory. Which was the other half to possibility number one. Though I guess in the absence of divine command, using my infinite moral possibilities argument, a randomly generated morality is likely to be essentially infinite in size, which would make achieving it without divine grace pretty damn hard for a finite mind and existence. 

Likewise, exactly as MeganovaStella hints at, the terms good/beneficial/moral/better/superior/whatever are normative assessments that positive science cannot claim to analyze under its present core assumptions. Hell, that's even in social "science" 101. You would have had a better shot with moral relativism, but that's basically an argument for point 3.

Also who says objective morality can be extracted from survival and social instincts? What proof do we have that humans, or I guess all other living creatures, are intrinsically evolutionarily disposed towards "good" in the absence of magical morality indicators? Rather, we seem to have a solid mathematical argument based on sheer number of moral possibilities to the contrary, if there is no magically or divinely revelatory moral force.

One could also accepts that morality exists within the human imagination, which is sufficient, because we are humans. But in any case, morality is what you make of it. Divine command is just abandoning your post, ethically speaking; divine command purports to establish morality, but actually establishes the nihilistic case.

I read my Nietzsche a long time ago; I don't find nihilism daunting. I feel sorry for people who can't wake up and understand what would be good in their lives, and what would be bad.

Quote from: KindaMeh on November 30, 2023, 09:50:10 PM
Also who says objective morality can be extracted from survival and social instincts? What proof do we have that humans, or I guess all other living creatures, are intrinsically evolutionarily disposed towards "good" in the absence of magical morality indicators? Rather, we seem to have a solid mathematical argument based on sheer number of moral possibilities to the contrary, if there is no magically or divinely revelatory moral force.

Not me! Whatever disposes us toward evolutionary success, that is the good. You are putting Descartes before the horse.

Quote from: pawsplay on November 30, 2023, 09:50:41 PM
One could also accepts that morality exists within the human imagination, which is sufficient, because we are humans. But in any case, morality is what you make of it. Divine command is just abandoning your post, ethically speaking; divine command purports to establish morality, but actually establishes the nihilistic case.

I read my Nietzsche a long time ago; I don't find nihilism daunting. I feel sorry for people who can't wake up and understand what would be good in their lives, and what would be bad.

Quote from: KindaMeh on November 30, 2023, 09:50:10 PM
Also who says objective morality can be extracted from survival and social instincts? What proof do we have that humans, or I guess all other living creatures, are intrinsically evolutionarily disposed towards "good" in the absence of magical morality indicators? Rather, we seem to have a solid mathematical argument based on sheer number of moral possibilities to the contrary, if there is no magically or divinely revelatory moral force.

Not me! Whatever disposes us toward evolutionary success, that is the good. You are putting Descartes before the horse.

so in other words, you agree with moral nihilism: good and evil don't exist out of the imaginations of a few naked apes.

...then why are you morally lecturing us?

I note you have failed to respond to any of my arguments. And seem to believe that if morality is subject to change (which you'd think would require its existence in some form) it must therefore not exist? Likewise, that establishing the existence of morality objectively... establishes nihilism, or the lack thereof? Abandoning your post ethically is seeking ethics in objective form, whether that be via divine command, external knowledge or magical indicators, grace or the like? Up is down, left is right? Don't believe in an objective way of finding morality, and this is the best way to move towards what is objectively good. Which is also discernable from evolution, somehow, despite that contradicting the former. The cognitive dissonance is real.


But  that said, this is getting a bit off track, and I do note that you don't seem to have taken issue with my post primarily pertaining to the actual topic of the thread. We can continue this morality topic if you want in the non-rpg section, I'm sure, which would be fun.

Quote from: MeganovaStella on November 30, 2023, 09:53:57 PM
so in other words, you agree with moral nihilism: good and evil don't exist out of the imaginations of a few naked apes.

...then why are you morally lecturing us?

How is that nihilistic? Are you saying the birth, life and deaths of a few apes isn't significant to you? Sad.

Sometimes I feel like a frog in boiling water with respect to all the censorship, active corporate stance-taking and overreach within the context of unrelated political issues, and changes within the cultural zeitgeist towards I guess what you could call a more illiberal society. I guess the question for me might be less the thread topic's stated question, and more at what point did all this cross a line in the proverbial sand? And at what point did it become an active and noticeable trait within the hobby at large?

Quote from: KindaMeh on November 30, 2023, 11:20:14 PM
Sometimes I feel like a frog in boiling water with respect to all the censorship, active corporate stance-taking and overreach within the context of unrelated political issues, and changes within the cultural zeitgeist towards I guess what you could call a more illiberal society. I guess the question for me might be less the thread topic's stated question, and more at what point did all this cross a line in the proverbial sand? And at what point did it become an active and noticeable trait within the hobby at large?

Compared to what? The 1980s? Companies actively censored all kinds of content they didn't like. Try to find a gay couple in any D&D product before 2000.

Quote from: pawsplay on November 30, 2023, 11:21:33 PM

Quote from: KindaMeh on November 30, 2023, 11:20:14 PM
Sometimes I feel like a frog in boiling water with respect to all the censorship, active corporate stance-taking and overreach within the context of unrelated political issues, and changes within the cultural zeitgeist towards I guess what you could call a more illiberal society. I guess the question for me might be less the thread topic's stated question, and more at what point did all this cross a line in the proverbial sand? And at what point did it become an active and noticeable trait within the hobby at large?

Compared to what? The 1980s? Companies actively censored all kinds of content they didn't like. Try to find a gay couple in any D&D product before 2000.

Yeah, the idea that corporations were all super-free-speech back in the 1980s is pretty ridiculous. What has changed is the sort of content that gets censored, not the censorship. TSR removed the terms demons and devils in 1989, for example.

As far as wokeness in the hobby, I'd draw a big line between online discussion of RPGs vs actual play and game material of RPGs. I think all discussion got very political some time in 2015 to 2016, including online discussion of RPGs. In terms of actual gaming material, I think the shift has been far less noticeable. If I look at recent WotC adventures like "Phandelver and Below: The Shattered Obelisk", I think most people wouldn't notice much in play. WotC is much bigger about proclaiming online in liberal forums about how woke they are, as opposed to actually writing woke content in published books.

Greetings!

I like apes. I also like elephants. Elephants should be able to say whatever they want, anywhere, to anyone.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Gonna drop a part of my earlier post here so that I can reference it more easily.

Quote from: KindaMeh on November 30, 2023, 07:06:59 PM

Likewise, explicit censorship rules on major forums such as Reddit and rpg.net, which get more than 70% of incoming traffic, seem to actively target conservative voices within the hobby. Like reddit's ban on even discussing Ascendant or ACKS and condemnation of various other games and creators from a position of site authority, enforced with active mod rulings. Corporate censorship sucks, and it's more widespread than you might immediately suspect. Personally, I think sites should either be effectively free in speech or be counted as publishers for the views they condone and weed out as the ONE TRUTH from general public opinion, but that's neither here nor there.

When political views at the table are a required part of the game and your qualifications to DM or play it, that's political in nature. Guess who puts that into writing? There are many left-wing examples I could name, many quite popular, that have recently begun trying to dictate table political leanings from the corporate office. And I mean literally, in the rules of the game.

Now, are there games which explore left and/or right leaning, or even orthogonal, political and social themes to a heavy degree within their settings or content without doing that? Sure. Moreso on the left than on the right, probably, but I'd actually be broadly fine with that. The problem is that all the issues above are not only political, but actively encourage the overextension of corporate power over everyday life. They have ties also to rising plans of government censorship, which you should be concerned about regardless of political affiliation. They also have ties to ESG being the only metric legally endorsed as usable in investment that isn't profit when investing somebody's money. (Regardless of what they may value or want you to do, that's your only legal option, which is very much government-backed economic and societal distortion.) These complex issues all interconnect and come into play together.

Gay couples in stories and supplements would fall under the first sentence of that last paragraph. Exploring themes without the aforementioned practices and the same degree of subsequent ties to the issues listed in that final paragraph's conclusion is of course fine, but not mandatory. If you lack publishing presence that's one thing, and on the flipside I don't have a problem with gay or left wing supplements being made available by corporations en masse to the public. (Though actively censoring creators and their content would certainly count for me as a problem in the same sense that hiring on the basis of race+politics counts to my mind these days in places like WOTC, sure. And I do think that some of that took place, and that the corporations have long had too much say in what hits the public debating square.)

So essentially, I'm talking more about literal censorship than "under-representation" (whoever the hell decides quotas for that) in market share.

On forums, for sure. I guess also maybe Youtube and other similar platforms, so the internet definitely comes into play a fair bit. Control that and you can control the conversation. Also at conventions with respect to who is allowed to speak, or even just attend within the hobby.

Also restrictions on politics of players at tables and who is and is not allowed to play. As enforced quite literally in many rulebooks these days. Censoring and rewriting past modules to erase past creative content and thereby control thoughts with respect to the game's history.

Also let's not pretend that ESG being the only alternative to profit under law has had no impact. That was a blatant distortion of the market and corporate values, and it's still ongoing.

All this and more points to the active repression of certain points of view within the hobby.




Outside the hobby, from a political standpoint, speech is getting banned more broadly. Sometimes it's hate speech that gets curtailed, sometimes it's criticism of religious identity as in DeSantis' Florida. Or, as a leftist, consider when Trump recently called for something to be done about MSNBC and mainstream media from a political perspective. Or all the calls to take down Fox News for misinformation or whatever on the other side. Or college campus agreements that stipulate you can be expelled or lose scholarships and whatnot for certain kinds of speech. Think about how workers are losing their right to bring cases to fair trial, because they can sign away their right to speak in court or just in general through arbitration agreements and NDAs. And again, corporate censorship is still censorship. A bit too much for me to go into there properly, but it's very much a thing. Consider also how ChatGPT answers certain search queries, for instance. Or I guess maybe think about school and library book bannings on both sides of the political aisle. The marketplace of ideas is dying out, because folks don't want to share the airwaves anymore. And they will soon possess the means to no longer have to. It's an issue for anyone and everyone, I feel.

Quote from: KindaMeh on November 30, 2023, 09:57:55 PM
I note you have failed to respond to any of my arguments. And seem to believe that if morality is subject to change

The thing to remember about woke morality is that there really isn't any such thing.  There are no underlying moral principles.  For the wokeists, morality is entirely instrumental.  It's just whatever suits them right now.  Bullying behavior is wrong and unacceptable unless they want to engage in or excuse bullying behavior.  Then it's not just acceptable but laudable.  Free speech is an important right unless people are saying things that they don't like.  The rest is just ad hoc justifications.  Their bullying behavior is acceptable because they are "punching down".  Speech they don't like is placed in a nebulous hate speech category with them defining what is hate speech ad hoc as it suits them.  There is no morality there.  There are just rationalizations couched in moral terms.

Quote from: pawsplay on November 30, 2023, 11:21:33 PM
Compared to what? The 1980s? Companies actively censored all kinds of content they didn't like. Try to find a gay couple in any D&D product before 2000.

Try to find much of anything about sexuality in D&D products before 2000.  Sometimes there was a little mention of a relationship a marriage or when it was pertinent to a central conflict like the Ravenloft module but that was extremely rare.  TSR went out of their way not to include things of a romantic or sexual nature because it didn't add anything to game play and they understood that much of their audience were minors.

Before ESG was set as a corporate drive, the only censorship companies engaged in was that which they felt gave a negative light on their products.  Now the same organizations that poison ground water, engage multi level financial fraud, and exploit their employees are acting morality police.  Mark my words, power wielded against your enemies will be used against you one day.   

Also, NGL, I wasn't even alive back in the 80s. Nor do I have any real recollections of the 90s, for that matter. So that wasn't really what I was thinking of earlier. Still, even with a relatively small lifespan sample size, I have noticed changes in censorship and corporate overreach. And broadly not for the better.

Quote from: BadApple on December 01, 2023, 01:41:09 AM
Try to find much of anything about sexuality in D&D products before 2000. 

Random harlot table. Naked succubus. The Grand Duchy of Karameikos is ruled by Stefan Karameikos, and his wife, Olivia, with whom he has three children.

Quote from: pawsplay on December 01, 2023, 02:00:54 AM

Quote from: BadApple on December 01, 2023, 01:41:09 AM
Try to find much of anything about sexuality in D&D products before 2000. 

Random harlot table. Naked succubus. The Grand Duchy of Karameikos is ruled by Stefan Karameikos, and his wife, Olivia, with whom he has three children.

I'll admit, that first one surprises me.

Quote from: KindaMeh on December 01, 2023, 02:03:05 AM

Quote from: pawsplay on December 01, 2023, 02:00:54 AM

Quote from: BadApple on December 01, 2023, 01:41:09 AM
Try to find much of anything about sexuality in D&D products before 2000. 

Random harlot table. Naked succubus. The Grand Duchy of Karameikos is ruled by Stefan Karameikos, and his wife, Olivia, with whom he has three children.

I'll admit, that first one surprises me.

It was a thing, for a short time, then it wasn't because Puritans, not sure if MY side or the feminist side, demanded it.

Same for the succubus, but that one was Christian fundamentalists.

Quote from: pawsplay on December 01, 2023, 02:00:54 AM

Quote from: BadApple on December 01, 2023, 01:41:09 AM
Try to find much of anything about sexuality in D&D products before 2000. 

Random harlot table. Naked succubus. The Grand Duchy of Karameikos is ruled by Stefan Karameikos, and his wife, Olivia, with whom he has three children.

One table, a picture and a mention of a marriage.  That's not much of anything.

Quote from: jhkim on November 30, 2023, 11:43:26 PM
If I look at recent WotC adventures like "Phandelver and Below: The Shattered Obelisk", I think most people wouldn't notice much in play.

Try looking at some of the other ones like Journeys Through the Radiant Citadel.

Quote from: yosemitemike on December 01, 2023, 02:24:48 AM
One table, a picture and a mention of a marriage.  That's not much of anything.

It's an example each of sexual liberality, sexual manipulation, and sexual reproduction within a heterosexual marriage. That pretty much covers all bases. Having demonstrated how obvious and well-known these examples are, I'm not going to encyclopedically list every other example. If you need a bunch of other examples in a hurry, just read up on the Guide to Hell and virtually anything involving drow.

Quote from: pawsplay on December 01, 2023, 02:44:16 AM

Quote from: yosemitemike on December 01, 2023, 02:24:48 AM
One table, a picture and a mention of a marriage.  That's not much of anything.

It's an example each of sexual liberality, sexual manipulation, and sexual reproduction within a heterosexual marriage. That pretty much covers all bases. Having demonstrated how obvious and well-known these examples are, I'm not going to encyclopedically list every other example. If you need a bunch of other examples in a hurry, just read up on the Guide to Hell and virtually anything involving drow.

It's an example of a random table common in old school games,  a traditional depiction of a mythic creature and the most common kind of marriage throughout history.  This covers nothing.  It means nothing.  This is not the gotcha you think it is.  It is not much of anything.

Neither is a pair of married, gay NPCs. But it was actively censored by all sorts of media companies throughout the 1980s and into the 1990s.

Got a concrete example?

Quote from: pawsplay on December 01, 2023, 02:00:54 AM

Quote from: BadApple on December 01, 2023, 01:41:09 AM
Try to find much of anything about sexuality in D&D products before 2000. 

Random harlot table. Naked succubus. The Grand Duchy of Karameikos is ruled by Stefan Karameikos, and his wife, Olivia, with whom he has three children.

And how many hundreds off books did you have to scour before you found those examples? 

The vast majority of the books are completely devoid of that kind of thing entirely and where it does exist, it's scant pieces that barely get any play or page real estate.  Face it, homosexuality wasn't censored and edited out, normal guys ( I guess you use your made up term of cishet) just don't think about homosexual or other queer relationships and so it wasn't added.  Neither was corn harvesting, trade systems for beeswax, or how to schedule traveling barber visits.  Normal sexuality was barely added.

Now sexuality has to be in everything and it has to be gay.  In gaming print, there is more gay content than straight and the more it's pushed in a particular book the lower the sales numbers.  (on a full scale, anything WOTC or Pathfinder will outsell indie products no mater the content but with in their own brand they do much less unit sales)  It's a sickness and it's destroying the companies that sell it.  You really don't have anything to offer humanity when your sexuality and sexual identity is the most important thing about you.

I don't dislike gay people, I just don't care about it.  I don't sit and talk about my sexuality with other straight guys, I damn sure don't want to talk about the subject when I have no personal interest in it like so much of "queerness."  But I guess that enough for you to go ahead and call me a homophobe and you might as well throw transphobe in there too. 

Quote from: BadApple on December 01, 2023, 06:35:38 AM

And how many hundreds off books did you have to scour before you found those examples? 

This is the standard cherry-picked list of things the SJW types invoke to excuse the current writers' obsession with sex, sexuality and, now, pronouns.  They claim the game has always been like that.  No, it hasn't.  The game was never obsessed with sex and sexuality like it is now.  The vast majority of the time we didn't even know what the character's sexuality and, if we did, it was mentioned in passing and not significant.  Now we have to know everyone's sexuality.  It's the same shit in comics.  They all cite the same few cherry-picked things to pretend that comics were always political to justify the current absurdly partisan political obsessions of comic writers.

Quote from: pawsplay on December 01, 2023, 02:56:08 AM
Neither is a pair of married, gay NPCs. But it was actively censored by all sorts of media companies throughout the 1980s and into the 1990s.

  You do not have to censor something that is such a tiny, tiny marginal portion of the population is interested in.  Its not censorship to just not go with something only a itty bitty tiny portion of the population would want or even care about.   Its just not bothering to show something no one gave two craps about.

  They were not printing pornographic images either...was that censorship? 

Quote from: BadApple on December 01, 2023, 06:35:38 AM

Quote from: pawsplay on December 01, 2023, 02:00:54 AM

Quote from: BadApple on December 01, 2023, 01:41:09 AM
Try to find much of anything about sexuality in D&D products before 2000. 

Random harlot table. Naked succubus. The Grand Duchy of Karameikos is ruled by Stefan Karameikos, and his wife, Olivia, with whom he has three children.

And how many hundreds off books did you have to scour before you found those examples? 

His examples were from the DM's Guide, the Monster Manual, and... I'm pretty sure the basic D&D Expert rulebook, but if not there, then from the basic D&D gazeteers. There wasn't a lot of scouring involved, really; these are core books for AD&D 1e and the setting books for D&D.

Quote from: BadApple on December 01, 2023, 06:35:38 AM
And how many hundreds off books did you have to scour before you found those examples? 

I spend three seconds consulting my own brain. Okay, I did fire up my copy of the Rules Cyclopedia to see how many children Stefan and Olivia have.

QuoteDivine command morality is the stupidest shit. You literally cannot create an actual set of moral values from it, because good becomes equivalent to evil if God commands it. Which means there actually isn't any such thing as morality.

On the contrary. If Divine is ontological source of all existence - therefore everything exist by God's command. If this means God ordained morality do not exist, that also means that created human or orc or elf does not exist. Therefore you return to ancient Parmenides statement that all observable world does not exist - because existing being needs to be autothelic (ergo self-created, otherwise external creator can revoke existence) and eternal.

In world with God - he commands all existence, and define all existence.

QuoteMorality can be extracted from the struggle for survival and our social instincts as human beings. Morality is, roughly, what is good for you, and the people you care about, where "good" means beneficial.

Sure that's materialistic perspective and I'm gonna argue in such case morality exists way way less than Divine Ordained one.

QuoteOne could also accepts that morality exists within the human imagination, which is sufficient, because we are humans. But in any case, morality is what you make of it. Divine command is just abandoning your post, ethically speaking; divine command purports to establish morality, but actually establishes the nihilistic case.

No it does not. Because if there is objective morality/ethics imbued in nature of reality by Creator, then it exist and we can seek it, research it and so on.
If it merely exist in your imagination - then the post also exist there and you are NOT obliged to research morality whatsoever because it's fake fairy tale.

QuoteHow is that nihilistic? Are you saying the birth, life and deaths of a few apes isn't significant to you? Sad.

Sad only to you. Not objectively. Ergo pure solipsism.

Quote from: Wrath of God on December 01, 2023, 06:21:21 PM

On the contrary. If Divine is ontological source of all existence - therefore everything exist by God's command. If this means God ordained morality do not exist, that also means that created human or orc or elf does not exist. Therefore you return to ancient Parmenides statement that all observable world does not exist - because existing being needs to be autothelic (ergo self-created, otherwise external creator can revoke existence) and eternal.

Let's reverse this. If God's existence defines all order, and morality exists because he chooses and establishes it, then in a universe with no God, why can't morality exists because a person exists, and their opinion is the only one that matters? It's a bankrupt position.

Let's try this.

Let's say that tomorrow, all-out warfare breaks out and a nuclear exchange occurs that wipes out 90% of the human species in a month. Is that a good thing, or a bad thing? If you think that's objectively a bad thing, then we can talk about the particulars of what is moral in different circumstances. If you don't believe that is objectively a bad thing, you don't believe in morality. You're not even a very serious human being, you are a bystander.

If you believe that if God, or His agents, ordered us to initiate a nuclear exchange, wiping out 90% of humanity, and we did, that it would be good because it is God commands, then "good" doesn't mean anything I care about.

And this concludes the first nine weeks grading period of Ethics 201. Hope you got something out of it.

Last I checked, from what I understood of our prior discussion, you yourself don't believe it is an objectively immoral thing? Are you calling yourself a bystander?

It's not even clear how that definition you had of good, as somehow separate to morality and tied to normative terms but also objective trends in evolution, would apply here. If the metric would consider it a thing that isn't good, if it somehow forwards evolution in a beneficial manner. Which is kind of irrelevant to moral discussion of the event to begin with, if it's distinct from morality within an objective context.

Also, under the terms discussed where there is an objective morality, even if good or moral didn't mean anything you care about, and even if what objective morality commanded was subjectively weird as shit, the moral imperative would still exist. I mean, people can be evil or want things for themselves or others that are not moral. Your not caring wouldn't stop you from being morally in the wrong. Indeed, the "But I don't like it." defense could just as easily be used by people who hate you for say your ethnicity, identity, and all that other stuff you seemed to care about in that other thread, and be just as (in)valid. I guess your reasoning might even imply moreso within a subjective societal or cultural context, because they have large global numbers and probably hate quite strongly. Indeed, nobody does stuff they don't agree is best from their perspective on some level, so it's not like doing what you want is a groundbreaking tactic, it's just the inevitable default, but seemingly combined in your case with closing your eyes to the possibility of objective morality. Abandoning your ethical post, to use your earlier words.

To tie this back into the discussion at hand, I note you don't seem to have contested most of my posts as regards the actual state of corporate practices within the ttrpg market. Nor have you made a moral case for the practices mentioned. If we're really going to go off onto moral tangents, we may as well tie them into the topic at hand and not derail.

Quote from: KindaMeh on December 01, 2023, 07:35:42 PM
Your not caring wouldn't stop you from being morally in the wrong.

Being "in the wrong" is a valueless statement in that context. Being "wrong" with a God that wants us to die in nuclear warfare is not a moral condition I'm afraid of... nor should it be for any rational human being, or anyone with an actual, functional sense of morality.

But to bring this back around, neither moral relativism nor moral cynicism are characters of "woke" political movements in general, nor to RPG segments of the community specifically. That's just a silly notion. People support BLM because they believe protecting Black people's safety and dignity is good, and overbearing, violent, and unregulated policing is bad. Saying something is harmful or something is beneficial is something about which you can debate the objective truth. There may not be a final, monumental statement that succinctly describes every situation; some situations are complex; any moral argument based on actual justice or utility requires some kind of framing in time; and yet, we can still broadly agree on things like it's wrong to hurt innocent people, either willfully or through unconscionable neglect. People who don't agree on stuff like aren't actually concerned with right or wrong in the first place.

Quote from: KindaMeh on December 01, 2023, 07:35:42 PM
Last I checked, from what I understood of our prior discussion, you yourself don't believe it is an objectively immoral thing? Are you calling yourself a bystander?

It's not even clear how that definition you had of good, as somehow separate to morality and tied to normative terms but also objective trends in evolution, would apply here. If the metric would consider it a thing that isn't good, if it somehow forwards evolution in a beneficial manner. Which is kind of irrelevant to moral discussion of the event to begin with, if it's distinct from morality within an objective context.

Also, under the terms discussed where there is an objective morality, even if good or moral didn't mean anything you care about, and even if what objective morality commanded was subjectively weird as shit, the moral imperative would still exist. I mean, people can be evil or want things for themselves or others that are not moral. Your not caring wouldn't stop you from being morally in the wrong. Indeed, the "But I don't like it." defense could just as easily be used by people who hate you for say your ethnicity, identity, and all that other stuff you seemed to care about in that other thread, and be just as (in)valid. I guess your reasoning might even imply moreso within a subjective societal or cultural context, because they have large global numbers and probably hate quite strongly. Indeed, nobody does stuff they don't agree is best from their perspective on some level, so it's not like doing what you want is a groundbreaking tactic, it's just the inevitable default, but seemingly combined in your case with closing your eyes to the possibility of objective morality. Abandoning your ethical post, to use your earlier words.

To tie this back into the discussion at hand, I note you don't seem to have contested most of my posts as regards the actual state of corporate practices within the ttrpg market. Nor have you made a moral case for the practices mentioned. If we're really going to go off onto moral tangents, we may as well tie them into the topic at hand and not derail.

His goal is to derail.

Yes, the big players are overwhelmingly woke:

Baizuo, WotZi, Evil Twat, SJG, and others, fuck they even got to Goodperson Games.

So you have the biggest, the second bigest and several of the other bigger publishers in that camp.

This isn't a matter of opinion but veryfiable fact, some leftard could argue this is a good thing but denying it with the ammount of evidence?

Only a disingenuous twat would attempt that.

Quote from: pawsplay on December 01, 2023, 07:45:18 PM

...nor should it be for any rational human being, or anyone with an actual, functional sense of morality.

Quote from: pawsplay on December 01, 2023, 07:45:18 PM

Saying something is harmful or something is beneficial is something about which you can debate the objective truth. There may not be a final, monumental statement that succinctly describes every situation; some situations are complex; any moral argument based on actual justice or utility...

So you DO believe in some degree of discernable objective morality. Good. Some dissonance there with prior statements, and perhaps not fully rationally warranted if you don't believe in a moral communicative force or related indicators, but very glad to hear it. Legitimately very positive about this, because it's a stance that isn't morally bankrupt. I would also agree that a lot of people on the left and right, and even within the woke left, legitimately believe in what they support from a moral perspective. Doesn't stop people across the political spectrum, and especially at the far edges such as say the far left from getting it wrong, but this is indeed a good thing.

That said, I earlier spoke of many specific corporate practices within the industry, and tied them to rising censorship trends within the industry and concerning trends within politics more broadly. I do not see support for them or those trends as potentially morally justified in the sense that even support for BLM could be argued potentially justified, at the individual level, at least in terms of some of the values you could theoretically hold or beliefs one might have about the situation. So with respect to the first sentence of this paragraph segment... Do you disagree with my earlier interpretation of trends, my moral interpretation of the implications of the same, or believe something else altogether?

(Personally, as a side note, I have a more complex take on policing than just defunding the police or leaving everything as is, and largely mistrust the official "marxist" fraudster heads of the BLM organization for perhaps good reason. I also think the movement has brought some good attention to policing and the fact that they are asked to deal with a lot of tasks they are not adequately trained for, including mental health crises. And that better safeguards for civilian life and liberty via better support for the police but also related liability reform may even be warranted. But I likewise think there were a lot of statistical lies tied up in the origins of the "hands up don't shoot" movement, and that a lot of people have been broadly deceived on a fair number of things. Which is why while I would agree with your characterization of most of the movement's intentions, we may well disagree as regards facts, outcomes and how policing in America specifically should move forward. I would not consider that a sign of myself or those with more conservative views being not "actually concerned with right or wrong in the first place".)

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 01, 2023, 08:13:49 PM

Yes, the big players are overwhelmingly woke:

Baizuo, WotZi, Evil Twat, SJG, and others, fuck they even got to Goodperson Games.

So you have the biggest, the second bigest and several of the other bigger publishers in that camp.

Actually this is a very interesting point. What is their market share at this point? I'd imagine pretty damn big. And they're aiming at controlling through places like Drivethrurpg who and what ideas do and do not get access to the marketplace. I feel like that's potential market manipulation if it winds up working in the end.

QuoteLet's reverse this. If God's existence defines all order, and morality exists because he chooses and establishes it, then in a universe with no God, why can't morality exists because a person exists, and their opinion is the only one that matters? It's a bankrupt position.

Because person is not authothelic, not sovereign and generally not source of reality, but merely one element among many. Separation and individuality is merely biologically convenient illusion.

QuoteLet's say that tomorrow, all-out warfare breaks out and a nuclear exchange occurs that wipes out 90% of the human species in a month. Is that a good thing, or a bad thing? If you think that's objectively a bad thing, then we can talk about the particulars of what is moral in different circumstances. If you don't believe that is objectively a bad thing, you don't believe in morality. You're not even a very serious human being, you are a bystander.

Considering I am not consequential ethic and I cannot judge morality of happenings, because sheer notion of giving moral value to them is absurd to me.
Of course nuclear warfare consist of countless decisions - probably mostly evil of people leading it, but ultimately result is just happening. Just like meteor hitting Earth and killing most of mankind is not good thing or bad thing, it's just a thing. Morality I care about exist in realm of human decisions (assuming humans are able to really make any decissions) not artifacts of matter.

And I'm absolutely serious - if I get cancer it's unpleasant to say very least, but it's not good thing or bad thing in moral sense.

QuoteIf you believe that if God, or His agents, ordered us to initiate a nuclear exchange, wiping out 90% of humanity, and we did, that it would be good because it is God commands, then "good" doesn't mean anything I care about.

Well I cannot say I care much about such delusion. What you care about compared to objective order is irrelevant.

QuoteAnd this concludes the first nine weeks grading period of Ethics 201. Hope you got something out of it.

Truly proof modern academia is doom of philosophy.

QuoteBeing "wrong" with a God that wants us to die in nuclear warfare is not a moral condition I'm afraid of... nor should it be for any rational human being, or anyone with an actual, functional sense of morality.

Terribly judgemental. If there is no objective morality then your judgements here are kinda worthless. If there is no God, not transcendence, just accidents of matter - then neither desire to procreate and growth OR desire to destroy all life on earth are neither rational or irrational, because since life is accidental and ultimately purposeless you are not breaking real purpose by just nuking entire planet (not to say lack of free will basically make it merely internal movements of universe). And since there is no objective morality - then everyone has actual functional sense of morality, they are just well let's say incompatible across human species - and your is not special, and people who want to eat you and your entire family up to seven generations, are no less or more moral - because there is simply not any scale to compare it.

We will eat you, and that's good, noble, proper and cool :P

Quote from: pawsplay on November 30, 2023, 10:14:13 PM

Quote from: MeganovaStella on November 30, 2023, 09:53:57 PM
so in other words, you agree with moral nihilism: good and evil don't exist out of the imaginations of a few naked apes.

...then why are you morally lecturing us?

How is that nihilistic? Are you saying the birth, life and deaths of a few apes isn't significant to you? Sad.

How should we determine what is significant?

Quote from: Wrath of God on December 01, 2023, 09:14:50 PM
Because person is not authothelic, not sovereign and generally not source of reality, but merely one element among many. Separation and individuality is merely biologically convenient illusion.

If there is no God, you are completely sovereign. If there is absolutely no higher authority or purpose that can define morality for you, then you have the same authority as a supreme God. No one can tell you otherwise. The justification based on "sovereignty" makes the nihilistic argument the same as the divine command one. If there is no higher power, there is no one to say what level of reality is illusion, or if anything matters at all.

I do agree that separatoin and individuality are are an illusion.

It's not me that has a problem believing in an objective standard of morality. If you need some powerful supernatural being to define it for you, then you never had it and it never existed in the first place.

I don't really see how you get from atheism to solipsism. Just because there is no god doesn't mean you have magical powers that grant you control over objective morality/reality and normative measures in the abstract. Or that you don't have to worry about objective reality kicking your shit in regardless of what illusions one may wish to believe. Not even if everybody else is dead or you're the only person/worldview, unless this is all secretly a Mage: The Ascension campaign.

Actually, in point of fact, there could still be objective morality without a deity or revelatory force, it's just that if it's randomly generated rather than generated by prior divine command or similar, it's probably both infinite and not guessable. Which means you will fail to achieve it, both mathematically speaking with respect to finding it, and then also accounting for the finite nature of the human mind and existence. You would still be morally answerable to it, though, by definition. And if one were to assume the absence of magical morality indicators/communicators, assuming one doesn't believe in such a thing, there is no way of knowing through observation one way or another whether there is or is not morality in the objective sense. Which would make trying to claim it doesn't exist an argument from ignorance at best, and I guess nihilism's chances of being right maybe even less than 50% probable at any given point in time. Because either there's genuinely no moral revelatory force/magical moral markers, and morality could theoretically exist without you knowing at about a 50% probability, since the observable outcome would be the same either way... Or a moral revelatory force does exist and only serves as evidence that morality must therefore exist. Basically the chances of it not existing under  such circumstances are capped at 50%, and can dip below that depending on aforementioned evidence.

So yeah, more like if you don't believe in some powerful supernatural being or force that can communicate or define objective morality... You are either right and never had nor will you ever have a connection to objective morality (which still has at least a 50% chance of existing). Or you are wrong and probably are failing to achieve it in part due to that mistaken belief. In order not to abandon your ethical post, it therefore actually makes sense to believe in some sort of communicative moral force. That said, I guess all else being equal, those who believe in such a force are probably statistically more likely to be correct morally in arguments like this one, from an objective perspective. According to the basic mathematics underlying the scenario. Maybe. This last paragraph was a bit of a leap, and I'm still working out my reasoning on this. As devil's advocate, maybe one could just stumble upon a stated moral code that is common within the world due to divine command and related understanding by others, and effectively profit off of their discovery by believing in it/following it more or less blindly despite not believing in a divine revelatory force. Of course, that would still be a bad strategy compared to legit searching for the truth and listening to the moral revelatory force, and would fail if acknowledging said force was part of morality, so, meh. *shrugs*

This all perhaps raises an interesting question... Is Woke/Humanism/Whatever Moral Code a religion/belief system by default, if it's by rational default entering into this kind of philosophical territory? I kind of feel like belief in discoverable objective good/evil/morality requires some sort of magic/supernatural/whatever-flavor-indicator to make it work rationally. And if it isn't working rationally due to its holders' cognitive dissonance, that's arguably just in good company with other moral systems and religions that in many cases arguably don't make much sense.   

Also, I really seem to have gotten off track relative to my earlier tangible reality points about corporate practices within the industry, looking back.

Greetings!

God defines *Man*, the Universe, and everything in it. Man doesn't define shit, except what God has commanded Man to do. Any individual that believes that *they* themselves define morality, Good and Evil, and are the supreme authority are delusional and full of shit. In the end, God will laugh at them and their arrogance and stupidity, and ultimately God will judge them for their heresy and rebellion, and they shall be thrown down into Hell, where their is endless torment and gnashing of teeth. They shall be justly damned for their rebellion.

Paul tells us that Man being moral and Good is a lie from Satan. No man is Good, no not one. ALL have sinned before God, and all have fallen short of the glory of God, and deserve judgement and damnation for their sin and rebellion. It is only by the grace and salvation of Christ Jesus that we may be redeemed for our sins and rebellion, and reconciled with God the Father. It is only by Christ that we may enter the Kingdom of Heaven.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: pawsplay on December 01, 2023, 07:45:18 PM

Quote from: KindaMeh on December 01, 2023, 07:35:42 PM
Your not caring wouldn't stop you from being morally in the wrong.

Being "in the wrong" is a valueless statement in that context. Being "wrong" with a God that wants us to die in nuclear warfare is not a moral condition I'm afraid of... nor should it be for any rational human being, or anyone with an actual, functional sense of morality.

But to bring this back around, neither moral relativism nor moral cynicism are characters of "woke" political movements in general, nor to RPG segments of the community specifically. That's just a silly notion. People support BLM because they believe protecting Black people's safety and dignity is good, and overbearing, violent, and unregulated policing is bad. Saying something is harmful or something is beneficial is something about which you can debate the objective truth. There may not be a final, monumental statement that succinctly describes every situation; some situations are complex; any moral argument based on actual justice or utility requires some kind of framing in time; and yet, we can still broadly agree on things like it's wrong to hurt innocent people, either willfully or through unconscionable neglect. People who don't agree on stuff like aren't actually concerned with right or wrong in the first place.

  No people support BLM because they have a fervent, zealous, religious level of belief that what BLM espouses and rants is truth without taking a closer look at anything they stand behind or at the people who are driving that monstrosity.   in short because they are just stupid.  Stupid and dangerous.  Others are going to "support" with hashtags or virtue signaling for a different reason, because they fear stupid dangerous people and pretending to care about what they care about is protection enough most of the time.   

Quote from: pawsplay on December 01, 2023, 02:00:54 AM

Quote from: BadApple on December 01, 2023, 01:41:09 AM
Try to find much of anything about sexuality in D&D products before 2000. 

Random harlot table. Naked succubus. The Grand Duchy of Karameikos is ruled by Stefan Karameikos, and his wife, Olivia, with whom he has three children.

The world's oldest profession - Don't let them see any Renaissance nudes in art class - Normal Nuclear Family.

So much Hetero! Lots of SEX SEX SEX!!!

Hetero Sex everywhere!!  So Unfair to tiny percent of Sodomites and Thespians!

Oh Noes! Must be Cis-Conspiracy!

Need more Sodomy. Must Normalize!

Hetero Bad. LGBTQP Good!

Must have Sodomy mentioned in RPG!

Like, all the time! Preferably in Drag!

You don't want to be Homophobe do you?

Homophobe = BAD WRONG EVIL!!!!

Why you no like Sodomy in RPG!?

You BAD WRONG EVIL???

Quote from: migo on October 25, 2023, 11:35:18 AM

Quote from: Trond on October 25, 2023, 11:25:50 AM

Quote from: migo on October 25, 2023, 08:55:05 AM
I'm not American, and have spent less than 24 hours in my entire life inside American borders.

It's the same shit outside America too.

Can confirm from Northern Europe and Canada. Sweden is possibly worst since they fell hard for feminism and self flagellation a long time ago, though I haven't spent that much time in Sweden specifically

I would expect that in Sweden ttRPGs don't stand out compared to other hobbies and sub-cultures as having been so thoroughly SJW-infested, not because they're not thoroughly infested, but because others are just as bad.

Sweden has produced a few popular RPGs and Wargames.

Drakkar och Demoner was a really popular one over there and seems to have been inspired by Runequest, complete with ducks. Also the origin of the Mutant RPG and the Mutant Chronicle wargame and board game. Probably more I am unaware of. Chronopocalypse or somesuch fantasy wargame?

No idea what they have lest today. I know around 2010 there was an ill-concieved try at reviving MC but with 50mm minis. That crashed. Mophidus I think was till recently putting out a MC Siege on the Citadel board game remake of the original. There was even a MC live action movie that had about nothing to do with the setting.

QuoteIf there is no God, you are completely sovereign.

On the contrary. If there is no God, then I'm illusion of person, accidental result of matter, dragged by strings I cannot mostly perceive and so is every living being in reality.

Quote
If there is absolutely no higher authority or purpose that can define morality for you, then you have the same authority as a supreme God.

On the contrary, because Absolute still exist - and it's mindless, cold, deterministic Universe of which I'm just part, with illusion of grandeur, when consciousness is like Peter Watts claim - basically disease. I have no Authority whatsoever, because I cannot decide anything. Because there is no I - merely illusion of I generated by sense called consciousness as a way to coordinate together functions of brains. Determinism is a bitch.

QuoteNo one can tell you otherwise. The justification based on "sovereignty" makes the nihilistic argument the same as the divine command one. If there is no higher power, there is no one to say what level of reality is illusion, or if anything matters at all.

Then nothing actually matters.

QuoteIt's not me that has a problem believing in an objective standard of morality. If you need some powerful supernatural being to define it for you, then you never had it and it never existed in the first place.

And here typical lefists nonsense return.
First it's ok that nothing matters and it's all worthless illusion - do whatever, but now - if you lack my imagined standard of morality you never had any morality whatsoever.
That's bullshit man - if your metaphysic is correct, any standard of morality is a lie, and therefore basically never existing thing. Whether you define it yourself, from book or from licking toxic snails.

Those two views does not compute. My objective standard may be real, only because it does not exist in me. If it does not exist at all then whatever I guess, but I can say for certain your is FALSE by your all decree. And non-existent and therefore unworthy of any discussion as you admited to pull it out of your ass by power of magic and rainbows.

Quote from: MeganovaStella on November 30, 2023, 12:23:00 AM
I will immediately derail this thread by espousing a belief in Moral Nihilism and demand evidence that morality is intrinsic to the universe.

There are universally preferable behaviors.  For example, people prefer not to be stolen from, lied to, assaulted, raped, and/or murdered.  Thus those behaviors are regarded as evil by everyone.

If evil exists, then to do the opposite(or to not do those evill acts) would be considered "good".  Hence universally intrinsic morality.

Voila!

Quote from: Wrath of God on December 02, 2023, 08:27:37 PM
Then nothing actually matters.

QuoteIt's not me that has a problem believing in an objective standard of morality. If you need some powerful supernatural being to define it for you, then you never had it and it never existed in the first place.

And here typical lefists nonsense return.
First it's ok that nothing matters and it's all worthless illusion - do whatever, but now - if you lack my imagined standard of morality you never had any morality whatsoever.
That's bullshit man - if your metaphysic is correct, any standard of morality is a lie, and therefore basically never existing thing. Whether you define it yourself, from book or from licking toxic snails.

Those two views does not compute. My objective standard may be real, only because it does not exist in me. If it does not exist at all then whatever I guess, but I can say for certain your is FALSE by your all decree. And non-existent and therefore unworthy of any discussion as you admited to pull it out of your ass by power of magic and rainbows.

I'm not sure where you skipped a track, but I'm not advocating for a person defining their own morality in absolute terms. I am arguing in favor of objective morality. The argument you are dissecting is what happens when you take all the arguments for a morality system based on divine command, and apply them to that cold and empty universe. Because believing in a God that has no morality, and morality is just whatever they say it is, is exactly like living in a universe with no God. A God who is not good is simply a pitiless, cold universe with no all-emanating source of meaning in it.

I'm saying it's an absolute joke to say you can't have morality without God. Plenty of the best people on Earth don't believe in a personal God, and plenty of people who do, are terrible. There is actually a Jewish story that concerns itself with "why God created atheists." There's a version in Tales from the Hasidim. But getting that far into the nitty gritty is probably going rather afield from the purpose of this forum.

Suffice it to say, I'm on the side of people against annihilation and tyranny, and against those would bring it about, whether willfully or through misplaced values or ignorance.

Further, it's more useful to focus on ethics absent a specific set of divine commands, because you can have ethical discussions with people who don't share your religion. Specific dogma and axioms I feel have an important role in culture and society, but are not themselves the source of morality. A dogma without human intellect guiding it, is like the Golem of Prague, doing the task it commanded, erratically, without any consideration of its purpose. This can be located in observations about Jewish morality, such as the observation that God's command to propagate and protect life supercedes specific ordinances, in matters of true need. In Christianity, you have "do unto others as they would do unto you," and also Jesus saying, only do this: do not reject the Holy Spirit. A Buddhist, a Christian, and a Jew can have a productive conversation about ethics, even if they disagree on many significant points. But two Christians can disagree, and become enemies, if the substance is about the meaning of a particular command, and this takes precedence over the broader points of agreement. Divine command theory had its time during the Middle Ages, but just has not held up as an authorship of morals.

If you think a leftist, "woke" person doesn't have a moral sense, doesn't understand ethics, and doesn't value human freedom and life, you are likely to make various errors and assumptions. It would be like if I suggested right-wingers don't have any good purposes in mind. I would bet the vast majority of you would help a wounded dog on the road, would give your lunch to a starving child, might even put your body between a killer and those you love. I don't think human goodness is a monopoly owned by any segment of humanity.

The suggestion that game companies are motivated solely by "pandering" or "virtue signaling" assigns a value to something without a clear purpose. Companies pander to money, all of them, to a lesser or greater extent. There's no ideological reason there, they sell things people want to buy, and don't sell things people hate. Virtue signaling, in a real anthropological sense, means doing something with a clear cost, to demonstrate your actual commitment to a sense of values. For instance, Chick-Fil-A doesn't sell fried chicken on Sundays, despite the fact that is the absolute best day to sell friend chicken in the South. It costs them millions, if not billions of dollars. That's actual virtue signalling. And what it shows is that their reasons for doing so are probably sincere, and not amenable to persuasion. So when you say a "woke person" is "virtue signaling," what you would literally be saying is they'd rather take a hit in the wallet than go against their values. Which is often true. The suggestion that some people pretend to have values, when it's easy or convenient, is often true, but that's a component of wokeness; that's just a general phenomenon of people who don't have an ideology at all. When someone says they want to see more Black characters in games and more Black creators being published and promoted, it's because they think that would be better. It's not likely for some kind of general cred or anything, because there isn't really money in that, for one thing.

The idea there is a woke "cult" is laughable. Progressives are nothing if not disunited. Currently, there is still a cool war waging on Mastodon between several Black instances and several queer instances, about who is not being intersectional and tolerant. If that's a cult, I can't imagine what the agenda is, or what values you think are being enforced. Wokeness, itself, is about individual conscience; it's about being awake, in a world where it's easy to be a sleepwalker, neither doing good nor identifying evil. Wokeness is similar to any other political call to action that asks people to examine if they are living a morally aware life, and if they recognize things being done to them they don't like.

What some of you need to understand is that plenty of left-leaning creators are as stubbornly willing to lose market share by advertising their beliefs, as are the right-leaning creators. Right and left people "virtue signal" in the sense of demonstrating a real willingness to take a loss or injury, rather than compromise their values. Once you stop seeing people as caricatures, perhaps you will start to have a real sense of what you are up against.

NGL, I seriously misinterpreted your earlier position despite responding to your specific arguments, and for that I apologize. I am sincerely very relieved to hear that you legit believe in objective morality, even if I don't agree with you on a lot of the particulars, nor your negative characterization of systems of divine metaphysical belief. Nor what I had previously been reading as active hostility for religion and other people's beliefs there more broadly, but which may not actually be your own personal position. I'm still going to stick up for my beliefs and try to explain what I was actually trying to communicate, but you do indeed deserve an apology in all likelihood, so yeah.

That said, to segue into what I was trying to say on morals...

If you argue in favor of objective morality, why not also argue in favor of a communicative moral force or magical moral indicators which can communicate these subtleties, as existing within the laws of the universe? That was basically my core question. Firstly, it makes the argument a whole lot easier to advance and prove. Secondly, as noted earlier, without that and with a randomly generated morality, neither you nor anybody else on earth will ever be finding/following it within the context of the infinite possibilities for what it could be and its presumably infinite size. At least with divine command theory and/or divine grace, which by the way does not intrinsically require a changing or what most people would deem Lovecraftian-esque deity, morality may be made either finite or mankind through grace potentially made to transcend our limitations that prevent say an infinite morality from being properly achieved. And again, if objective morality doesn't agree with the  human stomach, then whilst subjectively I'd agree it'd be very sad/suck, there would indeed still be a moral imperative to follow it, which was essentially part of the philosophical point I was trying to make. Incredulity or disagreement with an objective moral principle doesn't make it invalid. Much like disagreement with the rational calculus behind moral infinities and the like wouldn't in and of itself disprove what I have been trying to say.

Also, I'd agree that atheists can follow moral precepts. Of course I believe that, since I believe in both a divine communicative moral force and divine grace that is available to them, even if indirectly perhaps at times for the former. However, if there is no communicative moral force, and there is nobody to tailor morality to limited and achievable scope, it simply does not make sense to me to believe that humans can be following the objective moral code of the universe, even if it should exist. Which constitutes a problem, because people are relatively smart, and they will figure this out eventually. So in a sense, I'd argue that the belief in religious ties to morality, or magical moral indicators or what have you, actually serves a solid ethical and moral purpose, in that it makes trying to achieve morality potentially rational. As well as making argumentation as to morality's first causes and core principles a lot more viable, for obvious reasons. I legit thought you might be a moral relativist or nihilist or actively hate that kind of reasoning/religious beliefs or something from how I earlier read your stuff, to help explain why I thought that explaining this might be necessary.

I'll possibly get into the more thread-topic relevant stuff within your post later on, but again apologies for prospectively misinterpreting and mistargeting that earlier part of the conversation.

The real problem is that for most of the IP owners, who didn't create the material and don't feel any special connection to it, it's considered less hassle to simply pay off the troublemakers by giving in to their demands, shelling out chump change to them, or both*. Eventually, this backfires because it pisses off loyal customers who will not only NOT buy the new product, but will go elsewhere to spend their money -or in many cases, will find new pastimes.

I watched the NFL religiously since 1978. By 2016 I was done and haven't watched more than a few minutes of any pro football game. The same goes for Star Wars, which I started watching in 1977 and stopped watching after Solo. I quit Hasbro D&D more than 20 years ago and never looked back. Fretting over things you used to like out of misplaced loyalty or nostalgia is unhealthy and a waste of time.

*Norman Finkelstein, himself a hardcore lefty, describes this kind of payoff at length in his newest book, I'll Burn That Bridge When I get To It:

Quote from: Elfdart on December 03, 2023, 07:52:57 PM
The real problem is that for most of the IP owners, who didn't create the material and don't feel any special connection to it, it's considered less hassle to simply pay off the troublemakers by giving in to their demands, shelling out chump change to them, or both*. Eventually, this backfires because it pisses off loyal customers who will not only NOT buy the new product, but will go elsewhere to spend their money -or in many cases, will find new pastimes.

I watched the NFL religiously since 1978. By 2016 I was done and haven't watched more than a few minutes of any pro football game. The same goes for Star Wars, which I started watching in 1977 and stopped watching after Solo.

Among RPGs, a lot of the IP is held by the original creators -- but that doesn't consistently mean the best product. Personally, I stopped watching Star Wars after the first prequel which was by George Lucas - not watching the others or any other Star Wars for over a decade. My favorite edition of the HERO System is 4th edition, after it was taken over by ICE and Rob Bell rather than the original creators (MacDonald and Peterson). IPs can be screwed up no matter whose hands they are in. Handling them well long-term is a rare talent.

As I look over the history, RPGs most often fail with later editions getting more and more bloated with material. They fail to find new players, and so they cater increasingly to the most vocal hard-core fans. This is true regardless of whether the original creator was in charge or not.

It's am extremely tricky balance keeping old fans happy while also seeking new blood which is essential to any long-term IP.

---

Specifically about WotC and wokeness, what struck me is how the recent print products (i.e. actual printed material) bear little resemblance to the online controversies about them. In the limited sampling I've seen, there's virtue signaling over some tiny point and lots of posts pushing back, when 99% of the material is fairly pedestrian D&D (good or bad).

That isn't the wokeness of something like the Barbie movie. This is the wokeness of Dumbledore being gay, or "blink-and-you'll-miss-it" implied gay background character in a Disney movie like Finding Dory.

So no answer then, pawsplay? I'll take your silence as an admission that you haven't actually thought seriously about anything you claim to believe (not that you actually believe anything).

Quote from: Domina on December 04, 2023, 12:24:03 AM
So no answer then, pawsplay? I'll take your silence as an admission that you haven't actually thought seriously about anything you claim to believe (not that you actually believe anything).

Did you have some greater contribution than asking why a human life is significant? If so, I missed it.

Quote from: Domina on December 04, 2023, 12:24:03 AM
So no answer then, pawsplay? I'll take your silence as an admission that you haven't actually thought seriously about anything you claim to believe (not that you actually believe anything).

Thought? Are you implying a trans POC needs to THINK about anything? Nay, good sir, they are merely handed a packet of marching orders and opinions to espouse, they don't THINK about anything.

Quote from: Elfdart on December 03, 2023, 07:52:57 PM
I watched the NFL religiously since 1978. By 2016 I was done and haven't watched more than a few minutes of any pro football game. The same goes for Star Wars, which I started watching in 1977 and stopped watching after Solo. I quit Hasbro D&D more than 20 years ago and never looked back. Fretting over things you used to like out of misplaced loyalty or nostalgia is unhealthy and a waste of time.

Truth, especially because the thing you used to like doesn't actually exist anymore in anything but name.

(That said, to the NFL's credit they effectively got rid of both politics and Colin Kaepernick ... while companies like Hasbro were doubling and tripling down on the stupid.)

Quote from: Brad on December 05, 2023, 09:25:59 AM

Quote from: Domina on December 04, 2023, 12:24:03 AM
So no answer then, pawsplay? I'll take your silence as an admission that you haven't actually thought seriously about anything you claim to believe (not that you actually believe anything).

Thought? Are you implying a trans POC needs to THINK about anything? Nay, good sir, they are merely handed a packet of marching orders and opinions to espouse, they don't THINK about anything.

Are you suggesting that a PoC, by virtue of being so, is incapable of reason? That's definitely a take.

Quote from: pawsplay on December 06, 2023, 01:24:59 AM
Are you suggesting that a PoC, by virtue of being so, is incapable of reason? That's definitely a take.

Whenever I'm in a social setting and someone starts off an argument by saying something like, "Well, I have a PhD, and this is my opinion..." I know immediately that the next thing out of their mouth is going to be the dumbest shit possible. Start off with some alleged credentials to make an idiotic statement appear to have merit. Same with, "Well I'm a POC. I'm a tranny" Who gives a fuck? Just proves you have nothing valuable to say and are hiding behind labels to avoid criticism.

Funny how you keep talking about being some sort of racial minority based purely on color, while in another thread there's a clown saying race doesn't even exist. Fucking Schrodinger's racism.

Quote from: Brad on December 06, 2023, 04:56:14 AM

Quote from: pawsplay on December 06, 2023, 01:24:59 AM
Are you suggesting that a PoC, by virtue of being so, is incapable of reason? That's definitely a take.

Whenever I'm in a social setting and someone starts off an argument by saying something like, "Well, I have a PhD, and this is my opinion..." I know immediately that the next thing out of their mouth is going to be the dumbest shit possible. Start off with some alleged credentials to make an idiotic statement appear to have merit. Same with, "Well I'm a POC. I'm a tranny" Who gives a fuck? Just proves you have nothing valuable to say and are hiding behind labels to avoid criticism.

Funny how you keep talking about being some sort of racial minority based purely on color, while in another thread there's a clown saying race doesn't even exist. Fucking Schrodinger's racism.

I didn't start an argument. You put forward the thesis that trans POCs are automatons, or dare I say it, slaves. Incapable of thinking for themselves. I'm not trying to prove a point, I'm analyzing your words.

As for race... racism is real, and one of the qualities of it is believing things about race that aren't true. Race is, at best, a demographic category, and often a superficial one at that. Yet the societal attitudes surrounding race affect the destinies of billions of people. For instance, the Age of Sail era belief that PoC lacked reason and needed to be trained, and could be exploited, by white people.

Quote from: pawsplay on December 06, 2023, 06:41:54 PM

Quote from: Brad on December 06, 2023, 04:56:14 AM

Quote from: pawsplay on December 06, 2023, 01:24:59 AM
Are you suggesting that a PoC, by virtue of being so, is incapable of reason? That's definitely a take.

Whenever I'm in a social setting and someone starts off an argument by saying something like, "Well, I have a PhD, and this is my opinion..." I know immediately that the next thing out of their mouth is going to be the dumbest shit possible. Start off with some alleged credentials to make an idiotic statement appear to have merit. Same with, "Well I'm a POC. I'm a tranny" Who gives a fuck? Just proves you have nothing valuable to say and are hiding behind labels to avoid criticism.

Funny how you keep talking about being some sort of racial minority based purely on color, while in another thread there's a clown saying race doesn't even exist. Fucking Schrodinger's racism.

I didn't start an argument. You put forward the thesis that trans POCs are automatons, or dare I say it, slaves. Incapable of thinking for themselves. I'm not trying to prove a point, I'm analyzing your words.

As for race... racism is real, and one of the qualities of it is believing things about race that aren't true. Race is, at best, a demographic category, and often a superficial one at that. Yet the societal attitudes surrounding race affect the destinies of billions of people. For instance, the Age of Sail era belief that PoC lacked reason and needed to be trained, and could be exploited, by white people.

Obviously the point was that when someone has to announce that they are a trans-non-white, and then make a groupthink statement, is the point.  That person is the one pointing out his or her demographic, and associating the opinion with it, not the observer.

Quote from: pawsplay on December 05, 2023, 12:50:24 AM

Quote from: Domina on December 04, 2023, 12:24:03 AM
So no answer then, pawsplay? I'll take your silence as an admission that you haven't actually thought seriously about anything you claim to believe (not that you actually believe anything).

Did you have some greater contribution than asking why a human life is significant? If so, I missed it.

How about reading what I actually wrote, jackass?

I wonder how much of the wokeness we see in some RPG companies is due to new ESG requirements for preferred business loans which companies usually take out to keep things running, then for a higher ESG score to get better loans they need to do certain things like having diversity and inclusion officers, and then when those leeches get hired they start to influence the company towards the woke.

Quote from: Brad on December 06, 2023, 04:56:14 AM

Quote from: pawsplay on December 06, 2023, 01:24:59 AM
Are you suggesting that a PoC, by virtue of being so, is incapable of reason? That's definitely a take.

Whenever I'm in a social setting and someone starts off an argument by saying something like, "Well, I have a PhD, and this is my opinion..." I know immediately that the next thing out of their mouth is going to be the dumbest shit possible. Start off with some alleged credentials to make an idiotic statement appear to have merit. Same with, "Well I'm a POC. I'm a tranny" Who gives a fuck? Just proves you have nothing valuable to say and are hiding behind labels to avoid criticism.

Funny how you keep talking about being some sort of racial minority based purely on color, while in another thread there's a clown saying race doesn't even exist. Fucking Schrodinger's racism.

Whenever I'm on the internet and someone mentions their PhD anywhere in an argument, I don't believe them unless they're willing to dox themselves.

I'm also not impressed by anyone's PhD, because I have three.

Quote from: Corolinth on December 07, 2023, 11:42:30 AM

Quote from: Brad on December 06, 2023, 04:56:14 AM

Quote from: pawsplay on December 06, 2023, 01:24:59 AM
Are you suggesting that a PoC, by virtue of being so, is incapable of reason? That's definitely a take.

Whenever I'm in a social setting and someone starts off an argument by saying something like, "Well, I have a PhD, and this is my opinion..." I know immediately that the next thing out of their mouth is going to be the dumbest shit possible. Start off with some alleged credentials to make an idiotic statement appear to have merit. Same with, "Well I'm a POC. I'm a tranny" Who gives a fuck? Just proves you have nothing valuable to say and are hiding behind labels to avoid criticism.

Funny how you keep talking about being some sort of racial minority based purely on color, while in another thread there's a clown saying race doesn't even exist. Fucking Schrodinger's racism.

Whenever I'm on the internet and someone mentions their PhD anywhere in an argument, I don't believe them unless they're willing to dox themselves.

I'm also not impressed by anyone's PhD, because I have three.

It reminds me of back in the day when people said their dad worked at nintendo and they had secret codes to capture Mewthree

Quote from: Slambo on December 07, 2023, 12:03:48 PM

Quote from: Corolinth on December 07, 2023, 11:42:30 AM

Quote from: Brad on December 06, 2023, 04:56:14 AM

Quote from: pawsplay on December 06, 2023, 01:24:59 AM
Are you suggesting that a PoC, by virtue of being so, is incapable of reason? That's definitely a take.

Whenever I'm in a social setting and someone starts off an argument by saying something like, "Well, I have a PhD, and this is my opinion..." I know immediately that the next thing out of their mouth is going to be the dumbest shit possible. Start off with some alleged credentials to make an idiotic statement appear to have merit. Same with, "Well I'm a POC. I'm a tranny" Who gives a fuck? Just proves you have nothing valuable to say and are hiding behind labels to avoid criticism.

Funny how you keep talking about being some sort of racial minority based purely on color, while in another thread there's a clown saying race doesn't even exist. Fucking Schrodinger's racism.

Whenever I'm on the internet and someone mentions their PhD anywhere in an argument, I don't believe them unless they're willing to dox themselves.

I'm also not impressed by anyone's PhD, because I have three.

It reminds me of back in the day when people said their dad worked at nintendo and they had secret codes to capture Mewthree

It's probably the same people. Although to be fair, it's not all that farfetched to think many of them actually do have PhDs. After all, a black or brown person with designer pronouns is at the top of the list for university admissions.

Quote from: Cathode Ray on December 06, 2023, 08:59:05 PM
Obviously the point was that when someone has to announce that they are a trans-non-white, and then make a groupthink statement, is the point.  That person is the one pointing out his or her demographic, and associating the opinion with it, not the observer.

I didn't invite anyone to say PoC can't think for themselves.

Quote from: Corolinth on December 07, 2023, 11:42:30 AM

Quote from: Brad on December 06, 2023, 04:56:14 AM
Whenever I'm in a social setting and someone starts off an argument by saying something like, "Well, I have a PhD, and this is my opinion..." I know immediately that the next thing out of their mouth is going to be the dumbest shit possible. Start off with some alleged credentials to make an idiotic statement appear to have merit. Same with, "Well I'm a POC. I'm a tranny" Who gives a fuck? Just proves you have nothing valuable to say and are hiding behind labels to avoid criticism.

Whenever I'm on the internet and someone mentions their PhD anywhere in an argument, I don't believe them unless they're willing to dox themselves.

I'm also not impressed by anyone's PhD, because I have three.

In general, I'm conditionally willing to believe people about their background, but if they're trying to show a point, they should still explain themselves and/or give references. If someone has a PhD, they should have experience giving references in discussion.

I think that's a part of normal social communication. People can and should talk about themselves, because it helps other people to see where they're coming from. There's a lot of bad habits in segments of Internet discussion.

Also, doxxing by definition is something done against someone else's will. I am not doxxing myself by using my real name here - it's just my choice.

Quote from: Corolinth on December 07, 2023, 11:42:30 AM
Whenever I'm on the internet and someone mentions their PhD anywhere in an argument, I don't believe them unless they're willing to dox themselves.

I'm also not impressed by anyone's PhD, because I have three.

Well, you're the only person in this thread who's mentioned they have one, much less less three. So, like, are you the bad guy from Jessica Jones?

Quote from: pawsplay on December 07, 2023, 03:07:40 PM
I didn't invite anyone to say PoC can't think for themselves.

That's okay, I just paraphrased Joe Biden and said it for you.

Quote from: Brad on December 08, 2023, 01:31:50 PM

Quote from: pawsplay on December 07, 2023, 03:07:40 PM
I didn't invite anyone to say PoC can't think for themselves.

That's okay, I just paraphrased Joe Biden and said it for you.

Oof. Yeah. "You ain't black!"... was not one of his finer moments. Biden even took some heat from the left on that one.

Quote from: pawsplay on December 06, 2023, 06:41:54 PM

Quote from: Brad on December 06, 2023, 04:56:14 AM

Quote from: pawsplay on December 06, 2023, 01:24:59 AM
Are you suggesting that a PoC, by virtue of being so, is incapable of reason? That's definitely a take.

Whenever I'm in a social setting and someone starts off an argument by saying something like, "Well, I have a PhD, and this is my opinion..." I know immediately that the next thing out of their mouth is going to be the dumbest shit possible. Start off with some alleged credentials to make an idiotic statement appear to have merit. Same with, "Well I'm a POC. I'm a tranny" Who gives a fuck? Just proves you have nothing valuable to say and are hiding behind labels to avoid criticism.

Funny how you keep talking about being some sort of racial minority based purely on color, while in another thread there's a clown saying race doesn't even exist. Fucking Schrodinger's racism.

I didn't start an argument. You put forward the thesis that trans POCs are automatons, or dare I say it, slaves. Incapable of thinking for themselves. I'm not trying to prove a point, I'm analyzing your words.

As for race... racism is real, and one of the qualities of it is believing things about race that aren't true. Race is, at best, a demographic category, and often a superficial one at that. Yet the societal attitudes surrounding race affect the destinies of billions of people. For instance, the Age of Sail era belief that PoC lacked reason and needed to be trained, and could be exploited, by white people.

There are fundamental biological differences between different races.

Human don't come up with words for things for no reason. We notice differences, and then label them.

Back on topic. Whatever that was...

It sure feels like the woke are turning more and more companies and making inroads everywhere.

There is some pushback. But its been feeble so far or just lip service.

Also, the age of sail belief that people could be exploited was obviously correct, since they did in fact exploit people - because all people can be enslaved. Which is why every race has been enslaved.

And you still haven't answered me, pawsplay. Tell me how we should determine which things are significant, you communist coward.

Oh, jolly. Since I last visited we have had a PhDick measuring contest.

Academic credentials vary wildly in quality and content depending on the institution and the subject matter, but by and large over the last 15 years academic degrees have changed and are now more about conditioning specific behaviors and attitudes out of the students than providing them with knowledge and critical thinking skills. The majority of post-grad degrees in particular are an attempt to buy time for Aversion Therapy from A Clockwork Orange to take effect while they set you upon a Sisyphusian worthless task that adds no value to anyone's life except to be cited by other people going through Aversion Training.

I am sorry for people who got swindled into 6 figures of debt, but if you've actually got the chops the degree should have given you, then you don't need to dox the degree to prove you know something meaningful. You should just know something meaningful you can add to conversation. If you can't do that, your degree was worthless even if you do dox it. By their fruits ye shall know them.

Quote from: Omega on December 11, 2023, 05:11:28 AM
Back on topic. Whatever that was...

It sure feels like the woke are turning more and more companies and making inroads everywhere.

There is some pushback. But its been feeble so far or just lip service.

Bankruptcy is probably the only way to solve this. A lot of this is self-perpetuating machinery established in conventions, which most RPG-industry aspirees feel compelled to go and act the part if they actually want to succeed. The entire point is that they will only let you succeed through these venues if you sacrifice to the Caesar of Wokeness.

The wokies continue to infest more companies, destroying those companies, thereby forcing the non-woke to keep moving and forming new companies to avoid the infection. It keeps going and never lets up.

The absolute worst people I've chatted with are those who refuse to give up on compromised companies/IPs and insist that I'm defeatist and stupid (because of course they can't support their argument and must resort to ad hominem) for suggesting that they patronize different companies or try their hand at game design. They're so loyal to a particular brand that they stubbornly insist that everything would be perfect if we just followed the plans in their imagination that never disappoint them.

This is why nothing gets done anymore. People are being brainwashed to forget how capitalism works and treat brands like religions that they must adhere to forever or their souls are damned. Inventing your own thing? Witchcraft! Burn the heretic!

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on December 11, 2023, 10:23:02 AM
The wokies continue to infest more companies, destroying those companies, thereby forcing the non-woke to keep moving and forming new companies to avoid the infection. It keeps going and never lets up.

The absolute worst people I've chatted with are those who refuse to give up on compromised companies/IPs and insist that I'm defeatist and stupid (because of course they can't support their argument and must resort to ad hominem) for suggesting that they patronize different companies or try their hand at game design. They're so loyal to a particular brand that they stubbornly insist that everything would be perfect if we just followed the plans in their imagination that never disappoint them.

This is why nothing gets done anymore. People are being brainwashed to forget how capitalism works and treat brands like religions that they must adhere to forever or their souls are damned. Inventing your own thing? Witchcraft! Burn the heretic!

Outside RPGs the worst case I've seen was a few (but thankfully just a few) Tolkien fans who thought that they "must" like the Rings of Power show, just because some idiots slapped Tolkien's name on it. The good news is that most Tolkien fans resoundingly rejected the show, and the consensus seems to be that Amazon messed with the wrong fandom.

Quote from: Trond on December 11, 2023, 10:55:30 AM

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on December 11, 2023, 10:23:02 AM
The wokies continue to infest more companies, destroying those companies, thereby forcing the non-woke to keep moving and forming new companies to avoid the infection. It keeps going and never lets up.

The absolute worst people I've chatted with are those who refuse to give up on compromised companies/IPs and insist that I'm defeatist and stupid (because of course they can't support their argument and must resort to ad hominem) for suggesting that they patronize different companies or try their hand at game design. They're so loyal to a particular brand that they stubbornly insist that everything would be perfect if we just followed the plans in their imagination that never disappoint them.

This is why nothing gets done anymore. People are being brainwashed to forget how capitalism works and treat brands like religions that they must adhere to forever or their souls are damned. Inventing your own thing? Witchcraft! Burn the heretic!

Outside RPGs the worst case I've seen was a few (but thankfully just a few) Tolkien fans who thought that they "must" like the Rings of Power show, just because some idiots slapped Tolkien's name on it. The good news is that most Tolkien fans resoundingly rejected the show, and the consensus seems to be that Amazon messed with the wrong fandom.

In my experience, all the best works are created by single authors with coherent creative visions. Anything that passes through multiple authors inevitably falls apart, even without the political agenda at the root of problems over the last decade. That doesn't mean single authors cannot make mistakes if they aren't reined in (e.g. Ridley Scott, George Lucas), but in general problems are far less likely to occur if you have a single creative director who is competent and knows when and not to compromise. Although, a good creative director knows that works must have beginnings, middles, and ends. You can't keep something going for multiple decades without something going wrong.

This is why it is so important that 1) we be more open to reboots to address unruly continuity, and 2) we be more open to making new things and lots of them. Far too many terminally online people are obsessed with canon and memberberries at the expense of actual storytelling.

There's no shortage of IPs I once liked that have gone in terrible directions and I'm frustrated that I lack alternatives. There's no shortage of dead IPs that I wish weren't dead. I can't revive dead IPs due to that pesky copyright law, but I can make new things. The problem is getting other people interested. Because of the dogmatic elitist tribalism problem, people are very resistant to getting into new things unless it's really shiny and their current interests are going thru hard times.

Quote from: Omega on December 11, 2023, 05:11:28 AM
Back on topic. Whatever that was...

It sure feels like the woke are turning more and more companies and making inroads everywhere.

There is some pushback. But its been feeble so far or just lip service.

Disney lost 1 Billion this year alone in their movies/tv Shows and their stock is still dipping.

Hasbro stock is also down and their toys heading for a lanfill since not even at 1 dollar Ollies can sell them.

Inside of Hasbro, WotC's book sales are worst with each new political panflet they publish.

Comic Book Stores are closing and the American Comic Book industry's sales are tanking when you measure by issue, of course there's still enough idiots buying the overpriced toilet paper, but with each new price increase more dip out.

Dr. LGBTQ's viewership is also tanking even in the specials with David Tennant.

Hollyweird is loosing money hand over fist, the audience is rejecting their wokery

The ESG scam lost 5 TRILLION value in just 2 years (still worth something like 30 Trillion so it's not the time to cry victory YET).

Bud Light never recovered and it won't for at least 5 years to a decade, it's parent company stock is down too.

Target is closing stores.

Universities are running away from the anti-semites, scrambling to keep their funding.

No, I would say that, despite companies like Goodma'am Games looking like they just became woke (they didn't they already were as evidenced by their Burn Loot Murder virtue signal), the tides are turning.

Sure, it will take years before it's evident to all but it took decades to get to where we are now.

Take solace, roll those bones and have fun supporting games by people that don't hate you. (Like my upcomming OSR Pulp RPG).

There's never been a better time to make your own work and sell it. I'm surprised we're not seeing more of that. Where's the new urban fantasy trying to compete with Paradox?

Quote from: Domina on December 11, 2023, 01:02:43 AM
There are fundamental biological differences between different races.

Human don't come up with words for things for no reason. We notice differences, and then label them.

Okay, so you haven't kept up with any science on, well, anything, since about 1938. Good to know.

Quote from: Domina on December 11, 2023, 08:57:28 AM
Also, the age of sail belief that people could be exploited was obviously correct, since they did in fact exploit people - because all people can be enslaved. Which is why every race has been enslaved.

That part is certainly true. I believe that in the long run, we live more productive lives when we aren't maximally exploited, but in fact, live as free people. I'm not sure where you stand on that, but you do, you.

Quote
And you still haven't answered me, pawsplay. Tell me how we should determine which things are significant, you communist coward.

That's just your confession that you can't tell what is significant or worthwhile.

A human life is significant. Not always great, not always successful, or viable, or well-cared for. But it is the basic atom of the moral universe. If you can't recognize that, it's not my moral composition that is defective.

Quote from: pawsplay on December 11, 2023, 06:52:02 PMOkay, so you haven't kept up with any science on, well, anything, since about 1938. Good to know.

Like there aren't entire sub-fields of Science that you won't ignore or decry at the drop of a garish hat.

"Follow the Science!*"

*Unless it finds something contrary to my ideology.

Quote from: Grognard GM on December 11, 2023, 07:14:23 PM
Like there aren't entire sub-fields of Science that you won't ignore or decry at the drop of a garish hat.

"Follow the Science!*"

*Unless it finds something contrary to my ideology.

Such as?

Quote from: pawsplay on December 11, 2023, 08:01:32 PM

Quote from: Grognard GM on December 11, 2023, 07:14:23 PM
Like there aren't entire sub-fields of Science that you won't ignore or decry at the drop of a garish hat.

"Follow the Science!*"

*Unless it finds something contrary to my ideology.

Such as?

There are numerous examples of Leftists ignoring science to promote their "we're all one race, human" bullshit.  Take IQ, for example.  Leftists were agonized that no matter how they were jiggered to account for "cultural differences," they always came out the same.  Ashkenazi Jews scored highest, then Asians, whites around the middle, with blacks trailing far in the rear.  So they just dropped IQ tests and dismiss them as useless since they can't engineer one that fits their preconceived narrative.

Or your personal assertion that differences between the races don't exist.  Ever studied the effects of Vitamin D on pale skin vs. dark skin?  It's still a problem today, but was far worse in the past.  It's one of the reasons African slavery died out in the Northern U.S. but not the Southern U.S.  -- every winter, the New Englanders' African slaves died in droves from respiratory illness, while in the South it was the white bonded European servants who died from mosquito-borne ailments and heatstroke.  Africans did a lot better in the South and Europeans did a lot better in the North.  Hired white labor would have been a lot cheaper for Southern plantation owners, but at least the Africans had the virtue of staying alive from one year to the next, and it was hard for Yankees to make money using slaves in their rum factories when they had to buy whole new herds of them every Spring.

Also, Black Africans alone of all of humanity have no Neanderthal DNA.  On a  fundamental genetic level, they are different from the rest of us.  This fact outraged liberals worldwide when it became known.  They were like, "WHOA, stop science!  We're OFFENDED!"  Never mind that their being offended at a scientific fact is as silly as, say, me being offended by gravity because I can't jump sixty feet in the air.

Kennewick man is a perfect example of Leftists ignoring science.  A Caucasoid skeleton was found in the Pacific Northwest dating from a time when it was thought that only Paleo-Indians were in North America, and this offended many American Indians and offended their liberal white sycophants a lot more.  Never mind that it made perfect sense and would have been surprising if NO such skeletons were ever found in N. America, but libtards didn't like it so there was a controversy akin to the Nineteenth Century one where everyone "knew" that Africans couldn't have built Great Zimbabwe so they either ignored it or  claimed that a lost tribe of Israel built it.

And the latest, greatest example has been the libtarded Covid response, on which I could write a book.  You can research that for yourself, if you can stand being challenged with science instead of your own phony narrative.

Now... I expect to get a warning from Pundit about veering way off topic, and it would be deserved.  I would suggest that those who wish to carry this topic further, do so in a separate thread created for that purpose.

Quote from: I on December 11, 2023, 11:00:21 PM
There are numerous examples of Leftists ignoring science to promote their "we're all one race, human" bullshit.  Take IQ, for example.  Leftists were agonized that no matter how they were jiggered to account for "cultural differences," they always came out the same.  Ashkenazi Jews scored highest, then Asians, whites around the middle, with blacks trailing far in the rear.  So they just dropped IQ tests and dismiss them as useless since they can't engineer one that fits their preconceived narrative.

I've actually been trained to administrate IQ tests. Generally speaking, on a modern test, you're going to adjust for race. And here's the reason. If you use raw test scores, African-Americans tend to score the lowest of the big demographic groups. One thing IQ correlates with fairly well is college grades. Well, if you compare African-American performance on IQ tests to college grades, you discover they outperform for a given score. But if you make an adjustment, to make the raw score median look like everyone else's median score, guess what happens? Suddenly they have the same relationship between IQ and college grades. So the conclusion to be drawn here is that IQ tests are inaccurate on African-Americans, if you are talking about raw numbers. Essentially, for various inobvious reasons, IQ tests are demonstrably racist. But we can remove that racist factor and then they work fine, statistically. Not that you would ever base an evaluation purely on one type of test, but within its limitations as a tool, that's how it works.

I don't really know what point you are trying to prove, but I thought I would go ahead and refute your first point, using science. I think it's you whose ideology is in the way of understanding modern science. I could go on, like how most African-Americans in the USA have about 25% European DNA and this does not blunt the results in any way. Or how raw IQ scores have been rising steadily every decade across all groups, and the African-American gap has been mostly narrowing. There are just so many ways you are incorrect. But I don't know if facts are important to you at all; if so, it's unlikely you would still be clinging to early 20th century pseudo-science.

Many early IQ proponents were racists, and set out to prove racial disparities in intelligence. Over time, they have repeatedly, abjectly failed to produce results supporting such theories. That view is in the history museum of science.

So I can see why RPG companies might, at times, not find sales reach in certain pockets of the gaming universe, places where people mindlessly repeat half-remembered pseudo-science from a century ago, which was consciously and deliberately crafted to support a racist narrative, and expect surprise I don't un-critically accept premises that can be spoken in the same breadth as phrenology, orgones, and the chiropractic cure for cancer. I don't know how many publishers, writers, and other professionals want a dollar badly enough to pander to such stubbornly retrograde beliefs. I think most people would rather sell corn dogs in the mall than try to write to that level.

Quote from: pawsplay on December 12, 2023, 12:51:10 AM

Quote from: I on December 11, 2023, 11:00:21 PM
There are numerous examples of Leftists ignoring science to promote their "we're all one race, human" bullshit.  Take IQ, for example.  Leftists were agonized that no matter how they were jiggered to account for "cultural differences," they always came out the same.  Ashkenazi Jews scored highest, then Asians, whites around the middle, with blacks trailing far in the rear.  So they just dropped IQ tests and dismiss them as useless since they can't engineer one that fits their preconceived narrative.

I've actually been trained to administrate IQ tests. Generally speaking, on a modern test, you're going to adjust for race. And here's the reason. If you use raw test scores, African-Americans tend to score the lowest of the big demographic groups. One thing IQ correlates with fairly well is college grades. Well, if you compare African-American performance on IQ tests to college grades, you discover they outperform for a given score. But if you make an adjustment, to make the raw score median look like everyone else's median score, guess what happens? Suddenly they have the same relationship between IQ and college grades. So the conclusion to be drawn here is that IQ tests are inaccurate on African-Americans, if you are talking about raw numbers. Essentially, for various inobvious reasons, IQ tests are demonstrably racist. But we can remove that racist factor and then they work fine, statistically. Not that you would ever base an evaluation purely on one type of test, but within its limitations as a tool, that's how it works.

I don't really know what point you are trying to prove, but I thought I would go ahead and refute your first point, using science. I think it's you whose ideology is in the way of understanding modern science. I could go on, like how most African-Americans in the USA have about 25% European DNA and this does not blunt the results in any way. Or how raw IQ scores have been rising steadily every decade across all groups, and the African-American gap has been mostly narrowing. There are just so many ways you are incorrect. But I don't know if facts are important to you at all; if so, it's unlikely you would still be clinging to early 20th century pseudo-science.

Many early IQ proponents were racists, and set out to prove racial disparities in intelligence. Over time, they have repeatedly, abjectly failed to produce results supporting such theories. That view is in the history museum of science.

So I can see why RPG companies might, at times, not find sales reach in certain pockets of the gaming universe, places where people mindlessly repeat half-remembered pseudo-science from a century ago, which was consciously and deliberately crafted to support a racist narrative, and expect surprise I don't un-critically accept premises that can be spoken in the same breadth as phrenology, orgones, and the chiropractic cure for cancer. I don't know how many publishers, writers, and other professionals want a dollar badly enough to pander to such stubbornly retrograde beliefs. I think most people would rather sell corn dogs in the mall than try to write to that level.

I don't really have a strong opinion on "race and IQ" but I find this very odd, it's like talking from within a bubble so deep that you don't see how this could easily be used to show the opposite of what you're trying to say. So IQ tests are inaccurate for African Americans "for various inobvious reasons"? And this is going to convince how exactly? 

I remember reading somewhere that ADHD can vary significantly from population to population. I imagine this could easily affect IQ scoring on tests, and maybe it should. How it maps to American racial groups I'm not sure, and now I suspect we'll never know. People are so willing to tie themselves into hoops to explain things away.

I think the main point was with respect to educational attainment and that test-taking ability can be trained much in the same way IQ can be trained and learned. Kind of like yes, there can be differences between demographic categories, but it's probably not because of skin color. Just socioeconomic and educational factors. Not sure, though.

Also, I've started a thread now waiting for approval for scientific and academic biases and censorship more generally, in the hopes that we can get back to brass tacks here in a bit.

Quote from: KindaMeh on December 12, 2023, 12:07:23 PM
I think the main point was with respect to educational attainment and that test-taking ability can be trained much in the same way IQ can be trained and learned. Kind of like yes, there can be differences between demographic categories, but it's probably not because of skin color. Just socioeconomic and educational factors. Not sure, though.

Also, I've started a thread now waiting for approval for scientific and academic biases and censorship more generally, in the hopes that we can get back to brass tacks here in a bit.

Socioeconomic and educational factors, but also test-administrator bias, and "stereotype threat" (the psychological effects of when a stereotype is employed against you). Even such things as the physical concentration of libraries, or museums, or nature parks, which provide culturally-specific vocabulary and experiences the tests implicitly test for. Thus, the tests do not function as a truly neutral test of ability.

Quote from: pawsplay on December 12, 2023, 04:36:55 PM

Quote from: KindaMeh on December 12, 2023, 12:07:23 PM
I think the main point was with respect to educational attainment and that test-taking ability can be trained much in the same way IQ can be trained and learned. Kind of like yes, there can be differences between demographic categories, but it's probably not because of skin color. Just socioeconomic and educational factors. Not sure, though.

Also, I've started a thread now waiting for approval for scientific and academic biases and censorship more generally, in the hopes that we can get back to brass tacks here in a bit.

Socioeconomic and educational factors, but also test-administrator bias, and "stereotype threat" (the psychological effects of when a stereotype is employed against you). Even such things as the physical concentration of libraries, or museums, or nature parks, which provide culturally-specific vocabulary and experiences the tests implicitly test for. Thus, the tests do not function as a truly neutral test of ability.

If people like you are massaging these tests, it explains a lot about how society is going.

I also noticed that you say minority I.Q. tests don't align with college results, your immediate go to was 'so the tests must be racist,' and never once did the possibility that colleges fudge numbers upwards for ideological reasons, enter your mind.

I'm not even saying they do, but when things don't align, you consider both ends of the equation. That you don't speaks volumes about your ideology (on top of all the buzzwords you sprinkle around.)

Pundit: If you hand out warnings for continuing this off-topic, I stepped away but the thread keeps going and going without moderation, so... (shrug)

Quote from: Grognard GM on December 12, 2023, 04:51:39 PM

If people like you are massaging these tests, it explains a lot about how society is going.

I administrated the tests as I was trained, and was trained in giving adjusted and unadjusted results. These tests in various forms have been around forever, and most of their early developers were racist, classist nerds who fully expected the tests to confirm their views of white, elite superiority. Unfortunately for them, over a century of research has punishingly demonstrated the falseness of that theory.

Quote
I also noticed that you say minority I.Q. tests don't align with college results, your immediate go to was 'so the tests must be racist,' and never once did the possibility that colleges fudge numbers upwards for ideological reasons, enter your mind.

This wasn't some off the cuff notion I had. This is the research I was taught. It is simply a fact that the discrepancy in college grades closely matches the discrepancy in raw test scores; therefore the simplest conclusion is that a relatively strong third variable is mediating both results. It's useful, if reductive, to call this variable "racism" but as I noted above, you can break it down into various constituent parts.

Quote
I'm not even saying they do, but when things don't align, you consider both ends of the equation. That you don't speaks volumes about your ideology (on top of all the buzzwords you sprinkle around.)

Your unwillingness to accept decades of statistical science and sociological research shows your ideological bias. I am not being "political" in any sense this forum has ever cared about. The Pundit has made it abundantly clear that someone's political preferences have no bearing on the discussion of things that simply are. I have a degree in psychology. I am expressing the educated, overwhelmingly accepted generalities on the subject, you are trying to pick apart reality, reason, and, my goodness, math, by shooting from the hip. I think your agenda is obvious: you are unwilling to accept, for your own ideological reasons, that the very tools used by racists to justify their racism, have been extensively demonstrated to do no such thing. IQ tests were used by "scientific" racists from the 1930s to 1970s to try to prove their "theories," and the repeatedly damning result has been that IQ tests don't demonstrate any real world difference between "races;" indeed, inherent, "pure" intelligence is only one thing measured by such tests, not the only thing; real world populations, indeed, the human race as a whole, has shown repeated, steady increases in ability, despite being largely the same genetically we were a century ago. This isn't ideology, this is the product of multiple scientific fields, many of them dominated by white men with conservative political views.

So cry to the Pundit all you want, but refusing to acknowledge flat-Earth science isn't ideological, and you are just an ignoramus with an axe to grind.

Quote from: pawsplay on December 12, 2023, 06:04:54 PM
Your unwillingness to accept decades of statistical science and sociological research shows your ideological bias. I am not being "political" in any sense this forum has ever cared about. The Pundit has made it abundantly clear that someone's political preferences have no bearing on the discussion of things that simply are. I have a degree in psychology. I am expressing the educated, overwhelmingly accepted generalities on the subject, you are trying to pick apart reality, reason, and, my goodness, math, by shooting from the hip. I think your agenda is obvious: you are unwilling to accept, for your own ideological reasons, that the very tools used by racists to justify their racism, have been extensively demonstrated to do no such thing. IQ tests were used by "scientific" racists from the 1930s to 1970s to try to prove their "theories," and the repeatedly damning result has been that IQ tests don't demonstrate any real world difference between "races;" indeed, inherent, "pure" intelligence is only one thing measured by such tests, not the only thing; real world populations, indeed, the human race as a whole, has shown repeated, steady increases in ability, despite being largely the same genetically we were a century ago. This isn't ideology, this is the product of multiple scientific fields, many of them dominated by white men with conservative political views.

It's easy to see when you get triggered, and go on an emotional screed. Giant paragraphs, can't express yourself with fewer than 10,000 words, appeals to authority.

This is where you say "Nu uh, you!"

Quote from: Grognard GM on December 12, 2023, 06:19:33 PM
It's easy to see when you get triggered, and go on an emotional screed. Giant paragraphs, can't express yourself with fewer than 10,000 words, appeals to authority.

This is where you say "Nu uh, you!"

Okay, well, I can't say it now. You already did it better than I can.

Quote from: pawsplay on December 12, 2023, 06:22:26 PM

Quote from: Grognard GM on December 12, 2023, 06:19:33 PM
It's easy to see when you get triggered, and go on an emotional screed. Giant paragraphs, can't express yourself with fewer than 10,000 words, appeals to authority.

This is where you say "Nu uh, you!"

Okay, well, I can't say it now. You already did it better than I can.

There's nothing that can't be improved by a 1,000 word paragraph.

Quote from: pawsplay on December 12, 2023, 06:04:54 PMYour unwillingness to accept decades of statistical science and sociological research shows your ideological bias.

Anyone with an inkling of intelligence should know to be immediately suspect of anyone saying shit like this, because it is obvious that there is a whole ton of data fuckery, biased presentation of results, and straight-up suppression of studies against the mainstream narrative going on, and has been for decades.

I'm (among other things) a statistician. Fight me.

Quote from: GnomeWorks on December 12, 2023, 07:37:36 PM

Quote from: pawsplay on December 12, 2023, 06:04:54 PMYour unwillingness to accept decades of statistical science and sociological research shows your ideological bias.

Anyone with an inkling of intelligence should know to be immediately suspect of anyone saying shit like this, because it is obvious that there is a whole ton of data fuckery, biased presentation of results, and straight-up suppression of studies against the mainstream narrative going on, and has been for decades.

I'm (among other things) a statistician. Fight me.

You don't understand. In the past, corrupt, racist old white men made tests that excluded ethnic groups, and conspired to fudge results to suit their ideology.

Fortunately, they were replaced by unimpeachable bastions of truth, that changed everything so that now it removes biases. They do this by weighing results on their justice scales, then adding or removing weights until they get the correct balance to produce the results that everyone agrees are correct.

You know, Science stuff.

I think my thread is up in the political subforum if folks would be interested in posting on that kind of thing or any counterarguments  there.  8)

I guess to try to drag things back on track locally, do we think the marketing and sales data is being actively distorted in potentially unethical ways that are aligned with woke values? I feel like if so, that might be proof that the companies are both woke and acting in negative/bad faith fashion.

Quote from: KindaMeh on December 12, 2023, 08:11:44 PM
I think my thread is up in the political subforum if folks would be interested in posting on that kind of thing or any counterarguments  there.  8)

I guess to try to drag things back on track locally, do we think the marketing and sales data is being actively distorted in potentially unethical ways that are aligned with woke values? I feel like if so, that might be proof that the companies are both woke and acting in negative/bad faith fashion.

I know with the comics industry they've done all kinds of legerdemain to puff figures/hide bad sales.

Some include:

Over-shipping issues to stores (sometimes by a factor of 10) for 'free' (they're charged for extra shipping, yes they get away with that)

Counting issues printed or shipped, rather than actual sales.

Creating variant covers, and making retailors take several (unsellable) regular covers for every variant they're 'allowed' (again up to a 10-1 ratio)

Activists that are librarians/teachers, using public funds to purchase the most awful trash for their library/school.

When terrible sales are somehow discovered, saying they did GREAT in digital sales...that they won't reveal.


I'd be amazed if RPG's are doing variants of this, and their own unique tricks. One interesting difference seems to be that some Woke hobbyists will buy Woke games, just for their shelf, whereas the folks pushing agendas in comics only clap on Twitter.

Quote from: KindaMeh on December 12, 2023, 08:11:44 PM
I think my thread is up in the political subforum if folks would be interested in posting on that kind of thing or any counterarguments  there.  8)

I guess to try to drag things back on track locally, do we think the marketing and sales data is being actively distorted in potentially unethical ways that are aligned with woke values? I feel like if so, that might be proof that the companies are both woke and acting in negative/bad faith fashion.

I think it's more likely that the same old biases suppress participation of women and minorities in marketing research.

Quote from: GnomeWorks on December 12, 2023, 07:37:36 PM
I'm (among other things) a statistician. Fight me.

Like, baseball, or what?

I could have sworn that like 2/3rds of marketing and professional advertising is done by females. Though I do think I recall minorities being below their national population proportions, I also know they are rising proportionally at a rate that is notably faster than their population or socioeconomic improvement trends would predict. Not an issue as opposed to a positive in-and-of itself, I will note. Though there could admittedly be some overlap there with hiring practices that emphasize race as a credential in minority marketing and/or multicultural marketing. Which is essentially stereotyping. And a sketch practice WoTC openly admitted to using in who it hired for certain books as a required authorship credential, to bring things back around.

I think at bare minimum, companies that support more woke values would want to claim that's a winning move. Because then shareholders and the like will be jazzed as opposed to wanting to bail on them. So I don't think it's all that weird to think that they might want to massage or distort statistics, or trumpet woke strategies if they execute them, in principle, to seem like that's the case.

Quote from: pawsplay on December 12, 2023, 08:25:10 PM

I think it's more likely that the same old biases suppress participation of women and minorities in marketing research.

Nope.  Women outnumber men in marketing and advertising by over 2 to 1.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1179002/gender-distribution-advertising-agencies-type-united-states/

Quote from: Grognard GM on December 12, 2023, 08:24:30 PM

Creating variant covers, and making retailors take several (unsellable) regular covers for every variant they're 'allowed' (again up to a 10-1 ratio)

It has gotten worse.  1:25 and 1:50 variant covers are common now.  1:100 variants are not all that rare.  Back when Diamond was essentially the sole comics distributor, you could get reliable numbers for the number of issues ordered by stores.  Now, it's all hidden.  There are no reliable numbers for anything.  It's like the supposedly great digital sales that you didn't get to see except that's the entire market now.  We just have to take their word for it and they have been trying to shit us for years.

Quote from: yosemitemike on December 12, 2023, 10:13:24 PM

Quote from: pawsplay on December 12, 2023, 08:25:10 PM

I think it's more likely that the same old biases suppress participation of women and minorities in marketing research.

Nope.  Women outnumber men in marketing and advertising by over 2 to 1.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1179002/gender-distribution-advertising-agencies-type-united-states/

What causal relationship are you trying to establish?

First, that's about the category of the marketing professionals, not respondents to market research in general.
Second, that's a self-selecting sample. Anyone who's had a little statistics knows to take that with a little pink organic salt.
Third, what industries does that cover?
Fourth, why do we think RPG surveyors and RPG respondents, either one, are representative of the general public?
Fifth, self-selection, again. The surveys put out by WotC, for instance, are hardly scientific, and I think there's a strong reason to believe that women and minorities are under-represented in who would choose to respond. People respond when they expect their voices to be heard, and it's clear, that in many circles, it's an article of faith women and minorities don't belong to the community.

Quote from: pawsplay on December 12, 2023, 10:18:58 PM

What causal relationship are you trying to establish?

It's pretty obvious.  The fact that women outnumber men in marketing and advertising disproves the idea that bias is suppressing the participation of women in marketing and advertising.  It obviously isn't.  The idea that women are somehow being suppressed or kept out is a popular, knee-jerk assumption on the left but a simple Google search showed that it just isn't true.  You are still clinging to that assumption though and tying yourself in knots trying to justify it.

I'm pretty sure marketing divisions aren't idiots, by and large, when it comes to trying to get a representative sample of the population or their targeted portion of the population. Which, WoTC has been quite clear is not so much white males. So yeah...

Likewise, are you seriously going to argue that current WotC, of all companies, is not firmly left leaning? And that their marketing is not similarly oriented towards the company's apparent values there?

I could understand arguing that it's a good thing, from your perspective. Or that they haven't overstepped moral lines or boundaries, though I might not personally agree on that part. But it seems we are disagreeing here on a basic characterization of what the company values and how it operates.

Quote from: KindaMeh on December 12, 2023, 10:26:51 PM
Likewise, are you seriously going to argue that current WotC, of all companies, is not firmly left leaning? And that their marketing is not similarly oriented towards the company's apparent values there?

I could understand arguing that it's a good thing, from your perspective. Or that they haven't overstepped moral lines or boundaries, though I might not personally agree on that part. But it seems we are disagreeing here on a basic characterization of what the company values and how it operates.

I'd agree that WotC is left-leaning, but mostly they seem to be generically corporate (i.e. soulless money-grubbing) - and I don't find their actual published products particularly woke. There are a few nods like a gay side character on page 87 of an adventure, but that's pretty minor. These days, even some conservatives are allowing gay characters to appear in their stories. I recently got a free copy of one of "Phandelver and Below: The Shattered Obelisk", and despite online furor over a two-sentence sidebar on page 12, it reads like a standard D&D adventure.

There is a common point of view that if only WotC would publish more conservative material, they'd be making tons more money, but that seems like a stretch to me. Yes, the D&D movie flopped -- but the top box office movie of 2022 was Avatar: The Way of Water, and the top box office movie of 2023 was Barbie. Those were unquestionably woke. Many of the top RPG Kickstarters have woke themes, and few of them come from Ocule's Green list.

Quote from: jhkim on December 13, 2023, 12:56:08 AM

Quote from: KindaMeh on December 12, 2023, 10:26:51 PM
Likewise, are you seriously going to argue that current WotC, of all companies, is not firmly left leaning? And that their marketing is not similarly oriented towards the company's apparent values there?

I could understand arguing that it's a good thing, from your perspective. Or that they haven't overstepped moral lines or boundaries, though I might not personally agree on that part. But it seems we are disagreeing here on a basic characterization of what the company values and how it operates.

I'd agree that WotC is left-leaning, but mostly they seem to be generically corporate (i.e. soulless money-grubbing) - and I don't find their actual published products particularly woke. There are a few nods like a gay side character on page 87 of an adventure, but that's pretty minor. These days, even some conservatives are allowing gay characters to appear in their stories. I recently got a free copy of one of "Phandelver and Below: The Shattered Obelisk", and despite online furor over a two-sentence sidebar on page 12, it reads like a standard D&D adventure.

There is a common point of view that if only WotC would publish more conservative material, they'd be making tons more money, but that seems like a stretch to me. Yes, the D&D movie flopped -- but the top box office movie of 2022 was Avatar: The Way of Water, and the top box office movie of 2023 was Barbie. Those were unquestionably woke. Many of the top RPG Kickstarters have woke themes, and few of them come from Ocule's Green list.

Who has asked for "conservative material" from ANY RPG publisher? Do you even know what that would look like?

People are asking for less Current Year Seattle, which doesn't even mean zero gays.

But you're either too deep into your progressive bubble to understand or you're honestly conflating things.

We mean less prom, baristas, everybody is "diverse", OMG  so random!, everybody sings kumbaya.

But I guess when you're so far left anything to the right of Mao looks like conservativism.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 13, 2023, 01:30:32 AM
But you're either too deep into your progressive bubble to understand or you're honestly conflating things.

We mean less prom, baristas, everybody is "diverse", OMG  so random!, everybody sings kumbaya.

My issue is that you haven't read any of the published material that you're talking about.

I have only a handful of WotC books from the last few years, but in my sampling, there is almost nothing woke by your definition - beyond a handful of blink-and-you'll-miss it bits - say, less than 1% of content. For reference, the books I have are Candlekeep Mysteries, Fizban's Treasury of Dragons, Van Richten's Guide, Monsters of the Multiverse, Journeys Through The Radiant Citadel, The Shattered Obelisk.

For example, there was a thread here about the page 12 sidebar about player consent in The Shattered Obelisk. It was pitched as "now everyone sings kumbaya and nothing bad can happen to any PCs". But when I read it, it was a GM option to add to the atmosphere over the course of the plot by having random mutations from a table inflicted on the PCs. These had no saving throw and no way for the PCs to avoid them by tactics or action. So yeah, it's adding a consent, but it's not softening any part of the adventure. The adventure is killing goblins and mind flayers and other monsters, and possibly being killed.

(Edited to fix a miswritten sentence.)

EDITED TO ADD: There is various woke RPG material, like the Thirsty Sword Lesbians RPG. But the published WotC material I've read is overwhelmingly about the typical sort of D&D stuff of killing monsters, getting treasure, and leveling up.

Quote from: jhkim on December 13, 2023, 01:52:35 AM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 13, 2023, 01:30:32 AM
But you're either too deep into your progressive bubble to understand or you're honestly conflating things.

We mean less prom, baristas, everybody is "diverse", OMG  so random!, everybody sings kumbaya.

My issue is that you haven't read any of the published material that you're talking about.

I have only a handful of WotC books from the last few years, but in my sampling, there is almost nothing woke by your definition - beyond a handful of blink-and-you'll-miss it bits - say, less than 1% of content. For reference, the books I have are Candlekeep Mysteries, Fizban's Treasury of Dragons, Van Richten's Guide, Monsters of the Multiverse, Journeys Through The Radiant Citadel, The Shattered Obelisk.

For example, there was a thread here about the page 12 sidebar about player consent in The Shattered Obelisk. It was pitched as "now everyone sings kumbaya and nothing bad can happen to any PCs". But when I read it, it was a GM option to add to the atmosphere over the course of the plot by having random mutations from a table inflicted on the PCs. These had no saving throw and no way for the PCs to avoid them by tactics or action. So yeah, it's adding a consent, but it's not softening any part of the adventure. The adventure is killing goblins and mind flayers and other monsters, and possibly being killed.

(Edited to fix a miswritten sentence.)

EDITED TO ADD: There is various woke RPG material, like the Thirsty Sword Lesbians RPG. But the published WotC material I've read is overwhelmingly about the typical sort of D&D stuff of killing monsters, getting treasure, and leveling up.

EVEN if you were right and it was ONLY 1% woke it's too much.

But since you're a progressive I don't think you're the best judge of what's woke or isn't, BECAUSE of your pro woke bias.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 13, 2023, 03:10:33 AM

Quote from: jhkim on December 13, 2023, 01:52:35 AM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 13, 2023, 01:30:32 AM
But you're either too deep into your progressive bubble to understand or you're honestly conflating things.

We mean less prom, baristas, everybody is "diverse", OMG  so random!, everybody sings kumbaya.

My issue is that you haven't read any of the published material that you're talking about.

I have only a handful of WotC books from the last few years, but in my sampling, there is almost nothing woke by your definition - beyond a handful of blink-and-you'll-miss it bits - say, less than 1% of content. For reference, the books I have are Candlekeep Mysteries, Fizban's Treasury of Dragons, Van Richten's Guide, Monsters of the Multiverse, Journeys Through The Radiant Citadel, The Shattered Obelisk.

For example, there was a thread here about the page 12 sidebar about player consent in The Shattered Obelisk. It was pitched as "now everyone sings kumbaya and nothing bad can happen to any PCs". But when I read it, it was a GM option to add to the atmosphere over the course of the plot by having random mutations from a table inflicted on the PCs. These had no saving throw and no way for the PCs to avoid them by tactics or action. So yeah, it's adding a consent, but it's not softening any part of the adventure. The adventure is killing goblins and mind flayers and other monsters, and possibly being killed.

(Edited to fix a miswritten sentence.)

EDITED TO ADD: There is various woke RPG material, like the Thirsty Sword Lesbians RPG. But the published WotC material I've read is overwhelmingly about the typical sort of D&D stuff of killing monsters, getting treasure, and leveling up.

EVEN if you were right and it was ONLY 1% woke it's too much.

But since you're a progressive I don't think you're the best judge of what's woke or isn't, BECAUSE of your pro woke bias.

Every time jhkim discusses his friends, family and social groups, it sounds like a Disney+ show. Actually, Disney would tell the writers to tone it down.

If jhkim casually mentioned that his kid's little league coaches were Trans Eskimo conjoined twins, that wouldn't even surprise me. The view out of his window must resemble a page from 'And to Think That I Saw It on Mulberry Street.'

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on December 11, 2023, 10:23:02 AM
The absolute worst people I've chatted with are those who refuse to give up on compromised companies/IPs and insist that I'm defeatist and stupid (because of course they can't support their argument and must resort to ad hominem) for suggesting that they patronize different companies or try their hand at game design. They're so loyal to a particular brand that they stubbornly insist that everything would be perfect if we just followed the plans in their imagination that never disappoint them.

This is why nothing gets done anymore. People are being brainwashed to forget how capitalism works and treat brands like religions that they must adhere to forever or their souls are damned. Inventing your own thing? Witchcraft! Burn the heretic!

Not even a religion of the corps get their way. Step into the abattoir and by the next edition treadmill product! Customers will be reduced to mindless cattle. I used to see it alot on BGG before quitting the place.

Quote from: pawsplay on December 12, 2023, 12:51:10 AM

Many early IQ proponents were racists, and set out to prove racial disparities in intelligence. Over time, they have repeatedly, abjectly failed to produce results supporting such theories. That view is in the history museum of science.

Many modern IQ researchers are racist, and set out to prove that all races are exactly the same on an intellectual level by jiggering the tests to prove their preconceived narrative.  As you just admitted.  Let me tell you something:  facts are not racist.  Racism comes in in how people apply the results of the tests.  Like the Nazis of the past or Western liberals of the present, they see Jews achieving more than them and so they assume there's some conspiracy afoot to deliberately keep them down, so they take steps to rectify the situation.  Nazis were just more violent about it, killing people rather than "fixing"IQ tests or promoting unqualified diversity hires like modern Leftists do.

Like most liberals, you are obsessed with "any criticism of blacks = racism."  So let's flip this around:  if I tell you that if 10,00 WASPs like me are given an IQ test that's the same as 10,000 Ashkenazi Jews and 10,000 Japanese, that the folks like me are going to average lower scores than those two groups -- what's your response then?  Am I a racist for saying that my people are dumber than theirs?  And if you try to convince me that no, they only appear dumber because the IQ tests are inherently biased against WASPs and need to be "fixed" (by liberal "experts" like you, of course) so as to make sure the tests all come out the same -- then are you the racist for discriminating against Jews and Asians?  Why are Jews so over-represented among famous physicists?  Is it because of a big Jewish conspiracy against us?  I mean, they achieved something I didn't, so they must be oppressing me, right?  It's not possible that maybe they're just plain smarter than most people.

But let's not limit the discussion to brainpower.  If there's no difference between races (and even between different ethnicities in those races), then why are the Olympic contest results so skewed?  Why do East Africans excel at running?  Why do Turks and Bulgarians excel at power lifting?  You might expect that an Austrian is going to be better at skiing than an Arab, but do they run around a lot more in East Africa than other places, or pick heavy shit up more in Bulgaria than other places?  And why are there practically no black Olympic swimmers?  Why does 7% of the U.S. population (black males) dominate professional sports?  Is that because pro sports are inherently biased against whites and Asians and we need to lower the standards so that the athletes "look more like America" as your ilk is so fond of saying?

People like you are hesitant to admit differences between races/ethnicities/haplogroups/whatever because if ever admit that there are physical differences between them -- like the aforementioned ability of pale skin to absorb Vitamin D better than dark skin, or dark skin to withstand longer exposure to sunlight -- then you might start to consider that mental differences also exist, and your liberal religion forbids you from even going down that road, like a medieval Catholic cleric couldn't even consider that the Earth might revolve around the Sun, because it shatters your whole view of the world.  These differences exist because of evolution, which is part of that science you claim to value so highly yet abuse by ignoring every facet of it that doesn't align with your pseudoreligious view of reality.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 13, 2023, 03:10:33 AM

Quote from: jhkim on December 13, 2023, 01:52:35 AM
I have only a handful of WotC books from the last few years, but in my sampling, there is almost nothing woke by your definition - beyond a handful of blink-and-you'll-miss it bits - say, less than 1% of content. For reference, the books I have are Candlekeep Mysteries, Fizban's Treasury of Dragons, Van Richten's Guide, Monsters of the Multiverse, Journeys Through The Radiant Citadel, The Shattered Obelisk.

For example, there was a thread here about the page 12 sidebar about player consent in The Shattered Obelisk. It was pitched as "now everyone sings kumbaya and nothing bad can happen to any PCs". But when I read it, it was a GM option to add to the atmosphere over the course of the plot by having random mutations from a table inflicted on the PCs. These had no saving throw and no way for the PCs to avoid them by tactics or action. So yeah, it's adding a consent, but it's not softening any part of the adventure. The adventure is killing goblins and mind flayers and other monsters, and possibly being killed.

EVEN if you were right and it was ONLY 1% woke it's too much.

But since you're a progressive I don't think you're the best judge of what's woke or isn't, BECAUSE of your pro woke bias.

Even if we have different political views, there exists an objective reality that we should be able to agree on.

My problem is blatantly misrepresenting what is actually in the books. If you want to complain about a disabled NPC on page 146 of one book, fine, but it's objectively false to say something like "WotC adventures are now all about making friends and going to prom and singing kumbaya" or to say that all dungeons are now wheelchair accessible.

If you want to say that WotC is a soulless corporation churning out generic content where every third book has a token progressive inclusion hidden somewhere in it, then fine. If you want to say that WotC is represents progressive values, then I'm going to disagree.

Quote from: Grognard GM on December 13, 2023, 03:27:47 AM
Every time jhkim discusses his friends, family and social groups, it sounds like a Disney+ show. Actually, Disney would tell the writers to tone it down.

If jhkim casually mentioned that his kid's little league coaches were Trans Eskimo conjoined twins, that wouldn't even surprise me. The view out of his window must resemble a page from 'And to Think That I Saw It on Mulberry Street.'

Objectively, I don't think my circles are odd given real-life U.S. demographics. Like, I mentioned one member of my church being transgender, but that's out of 150 or so members - when LGBT are 7% of the U.S. population. I mean, I'm public about my identity, and I've been so since going online in the 1990s. You're free to check up on what I say, and I can give more details if you message me.

Quote from: jhkim on December 13, 2023, 12:35:22 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 13, 2023, 03:10:33 AM

Quote from: jhkim on December 13, 2023, 01:52:35 AM
I have only a handful of WotC books from the last few years, but in my sampling, there is almost nothing woke by your definition - beyond a handful of blink-and-you'll-miss it bits - say, less than 1% of content. For reference, the books I have are Candlekeep Mysteries, Fizban's Treasury of Dragons, Van Richten's Guide, Monsters of the Multiverse, Journeys Through The Radiant Citadel, The Shattered Obelisk.

For example, there was a thread here about the page 12 sidebar about player consent in The Shattered Obelisk. It was pitched as "now everyone sings kumbaya and nothing bad can happen to any PCs". But when I read it, it was a GM option to add to the atmosphere over the course of the plot by having random mutations from a table inflicted on the PCs. These had no saving throw and no way for the PCs to avoid them by tactics or action. So yeah, it's adding a consent, but it's not softening any part of the adventure. The adventure is killing goblins and mind flayers and other monsters, and possibly being killed.

EVEN if you were right and it was ONLY 1% woke it's too much.

But since you're a progressive I don't think you're the best judge of what's woke or isn't, BECAUSE of your pro woke bias.

Even if we have different political views, there exists an objective reality that we should be able to agree on.

My problem is blatantly misrepresenting what is actually in the books. If you want to complain about a disabled NPC on page 146 of one book, fine, but it's objectively false to say something like "WotC adventures are now all about making friends and going to prom and singing kumbaya" or to say that all dungeons are now wheelchair accessible.

If you want to say that WotC is a soulless corporation churning out generic content where every third book has a token progressive inclusion hidden somewhere in it, then fine. If you want to say that WotC is represents progressive values, then I'm going to disagree.

Quote from: Grognard GM on December 13, 2023, 03:27:47 AM
Every time jhkim discusses his friends, family and social groups, it sounds like a Disney+ show. Actually, Disney would tell the writers to tone it down.

If jhkim casually mentioned that his kid's little league coaches were Trans Eskimo conjoined twins, that wouldn't even surprise me. The view out of his window must resemble a page from 'And to Think That I Saw It on Mulberry Street.'

Objectively, I don't think my circles are odd given real-life U.S. demographics. Like, I mentioned one member of my church being transgender, but that's out of 150 or so members - when LGBT are 7% of the U.S. population. I mean, I'm public about my identity, and I've been so since going online in the 1990s. You're free to check up on what I say, and I can give more details if you message me.

Let's start by defining our terms so we can have a meaningful discussion without anyone equivocating between two different positions shall we?

Woke == Progressive == Being worried about appearing as a god person while doing evil: Equity > Equality, "Inclusion" by excluding, Oppresor-Oppressed narrative, ANY difference in outcomes is due to some ism/phobia, casting ANY criticism of your methods and goals as comming from istophobic straight white men, anti-Science (men can get pregnant, etc).

Now, let's discuss Radiant Citadel:

How was it advertised? It's Huwhite free, and it was. So, it is a woke product, you might like what's inside the book, it doesn't mean it isn't woke.

The one about going to higschool (can't remember the name right now): How was it advertised? What's the focus of it?

The rulebooks: Removing race because raicismism, removing races because some asshole said it was a minstrel (meaning black people), subreptitiosly changing the text in the PDFs, hiring politikal komissars (sensitivity readers AKA censors)... Woke

Including combat wheelchairs... Woke

I'm sure you'd love to focus in just the one thing, but we're not talking about just the one book here, we're talking about WotC being woke, I think I've made my case, you're free to disagree but you can't deny the evidence.

Quote from: yosemitemike on December 12, 2023, 10:26:12 PM
It's pretty obvious.  The fact that women outnumber men in marketing and advertising disproves the idea that bias is suppressing the participation of women in marketing and advertising. 

How does it prove that? Are most lawyers criminals? Is a butcher a cow?

Quote from: pawsplay on December 14, 2023, 04:34:11 PM
How does it prove that? Are most lawyers criminals? Is a butcher a cow?

I worked for a marketing company for 12 years; it's like 99% women and a few dudes who think like women, for the most part. Marketing is about convincing people to buy worthless crap, which means if you want to make any money you do whatever it takes or the client fires you. Bullshit woke marketing doesn't sell anything; it placates the morons on social media, alienates the people with money, and pisses off your clients because the dollars just don't appear in their ledgers.

Anyway, the notion that women are suppressed in marketing is absurd on its face. Dudes will buy beer if a hot girl in bikini is in an ad because he wants to be with the girl, and girls will also buy the beer because they want to be the bikini girl. Years and years of research has proven this. Woke morons crying about it on Twitter doesn't make this false. At all.

RE: lawyers, yes, they are in fact all criminals.

Quote from: pawsplay on December 14, 2023, 04:34:11 PM

Quote from: yosemitemike on December 12, 2023, 10:26:12 PM
It's pretty obvious.  The fact that women outnumber men in marketing and advertising disproves the idea that bias is suppressing the participation of women in marketing and advertising. 

How does it prove that? Are most lawyers criminals? Is a butcher a cow?

I have no idea what argument you are even trying to make with this nonsense.  Here's the bottom line.  Marketing and advertising are female dominated professions so, obviously, the participation of women in these professions is not being suppressed.  If there are more men than women in a profession. then obviously women are not being kept out of that profession.  How does it prove that?  Are you simple? 

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 13, 2023, 02:44:36 PM

Quote from: jhkim on December 13, 2023, 12:35:22 PM
If you want to say that WotC is a soulless corporation churning out generic content where every third book has a token progressive inclusion hidden somewhere in it, then fine. If you want to say that WotC is represents progressive values, then I'm going to disagree.

...
The rulebooks: Removing race because raicismism, removing races because some asshole said it was a minstrel (meaning black people), subreptitiosly changing the text in the PDFs, hiring politikal komissars (sensitivity readers AKA censors)... Woke

Including combat wheelchairs... Woke

I'm sure you'd love to focus in just the one thing, but we're not talking about just the one book here, we're talking about WotC being woke, I think I've made my case, you're free to disagree but you can't deny the evidence.

I can deny the evidence if it's wrong. Specifically - where in any WotC product is there a combat wheelchair? I know Pundit claimed that the combat wheelchair was in Candlekeep Mysteries, but I bought that book and found no combat wheelchair and no wheelchairs of any kind in either the text or illustrations.

I understand you classify based on your own test - i.e. even the smallest nod to wokism (you said 1% was too much), and the work is tainted - and that's your preference. Still, for clarity in communication, I'd want to know what the vast majority of the gaming content of a book is like.

For me, what I care about in an RPG book is how useful the gaming content is for my gaming. If something is 99% useful material and 1% dreck, I'll ignore the 1% and use the rest. I usually ignore more than 1% of a game book in any case.

Quote from: jhkim on December 14, 2023, 06:41:50 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 13, 2023, 02:44:36 PM

Quote from: jhkim on December 13, 2023, 12:35:22 PM
If you want to say that WotC is a soulless corporation churning out generic content where every third book has a token progressive inclusion hidden somewhere in it, then fine. If you want to say that WotC is represents progressive values, then I'm going to disagree.

...
The rulebooks: Removing race because raicismism, removing races because some asshole said it was a minstrel (meaning black people), subreptitiosly changing the text in the PDFs, hiring politikal komissars (sensitivity readers AKA censors)... Woke

Including combat wheelchairs... Woke

I'm sure you'd love to focus in just the one thing, but we're not talking about just the one book here, we're talking about WotC being woke, I think I've made my case, you're free to disagree but you can't deny the evidence.

I can deny the evidence if it's wrong. Specifically - where in any WotC product is there a combat wheelchair? I know Pundit claimed that the combat wheelchair was in Candlekeep Mysteries, but I bought that book and found no combat wheelchair and no wheelchairs of any kind in either the text or illustrations.

I understand you classify based on your own test - i.e. even the smallest nod to wokism (you said 1% was too much), and the work is tainted - and that's your preference. Still, for clarity in communication, I'd want to know what the vast majority of the gaming content of a book is like.

For me, what I care about in an RPG book is how useful the gaming content is for my gaming. If something is 99% useful material and 1% dreck, I'll ignore the 1% and use the rest. I usually ignore more than 1% of a game book in any case.

The adventure was made wheelchair accessible.  The actual combat wheelchair was a free release as part of the promotional effort for Candlekeep.  WOTC adapted it from a homebrew done by a disability "advocate."

Quote from: BadApple on December 14, 2023, 07:07:48 PM

Quote from: jhkim on December 14, 2023, 06:41:50 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 13, 2023, 02:44:36 PM
Including combat wheelchairs... Woke

I can deny the evidence if it's wrong. Specifically - where in any WotC product is there a combat wheelchair? I know Pundit claimed that the combat wheelchair was in Candlekeep Mysteries, but I bought that book and found no combat wheelchair and no wheelchairs of any kind in either the text or illustrations.

The adventure was made wheelchair accessible.  The actual combat wheelchair was a free release as part of the promotional effort for Candlekeep.  WOTC adapted it from a homebrew done by a disability "advocate."

This is false. The adventure in question is "The Canopic Being" by Jennifer Kretchmer. The entrance to the dungeon is down a ladder. Page 173, "Below the trapdoor is a 5-foot-diameter stone-walled well with a sturdy wooden ladder. The well descends 20 feet before opening up into a 40-foot-square chamber whose walls and floors are worked stone." The dungeon interior does have ramps, but it is based on Egyptian tombs, which in the real world also have ramps.

Also, WotC have never released any adaptation or promotion of a combat wheelchair that I've seen. There is a homebrew combat wheelchair by Sara Thompson, but it was never adapted or released by WotC. If you have the release, then please link it.

I know relatively little about the wheelchair accessible dungeons side of things. That said, I personally would roughly classify as woke that which is based around preferring active unequal treatment on the basis of race, sex, ethnicity, or similar such immutable categories, with the exclusion of more traditional racism, sexism, and the like for obvious reasons (the woke play different favorites). Typically with the intention of correcting a perceived imbalance, though I won't include intent as a hard part of the equation. Specific types of inequality under the law are arguably woke trends expressed politically. (ex: Race based financial aid to farmers that doesn't factor in need, existing for a time under the Biden administration before the courts struck it down.)

What then makes a corporation woke? I'd say that sure, hiring for authorship with race as a required credential would qualify, and WotC indeed does that, and has mentioned doing that specifically as part of its advertising. Likewise, supporting through product sales various causes with firm woke affiliations, while trumpeting such causes as a matter of corporate concern. If a bundle goes to equity, which is by definition unequal treatment on the basis of inherent qualities, then that counts for me. The corporation is woke, even if the product may not contain explicit messaging. I do personally think a lot of WotC and other corporate products are dog whistles to that crowd, with things like Thirsty Sword Lesbians going a smidge beyond that probably. But that aside, I do actually think that censorship with woke values in mind (ex: getting rid of the words tribe and slavery, for affiliated reasons) produces products that are, while perhaps not woke in messaging, censored in a woke manner by a woke corporation. Who if you fund them, will likely spend said money at least in part on furthering said ideology. And it may eventually come to damage the hobby and the inclusivity of its culture too. Such as by passing limits on who is and is not welcome at your table, and what can and cannot be said there, with a distinction of by who, or rather what held identity, espouses these positions, as given by the book's very rules. (Looking at you, Rokugan.) Or by determining who can and cannot speak at conventions on the basis of what political creed they follow. Or by banning roughly half of America from major forum sites like RPG.net on account of their being roughly Republican.

That said, sure I'm concerned about the rise of woke values more generally within the corporate sphere. With the caveat that obviously they have a right to speak their piece and to free speech as well. Doesn't mean I have to like or agree with what they say, or support their products, but I will absolutely give them that. That said, when race is a requirement for authorship I'm concerned and think it crosses a line. When hiring emphasizes immutable characteristics, whether with hopeful intentions or otherwise, I am concerned and feel it can go too far. When owned pdfs are edited without their owners' active consent, I find it deceptive and sketchy business practice. When alleged statistical sales and profitability are misleading, and market distortion occurs, in conjunction with notable online corporate censorship and libel, well... I dislike the former bits, and think the latter two items might actually be the sort of things that should be actively addressed. When this is all government subsidized via current law listing ESG as the ONLY alternative to profit in investing other folks' money, that potentially matters. And with things like all of that, it becomes more than just an issue of folks writing things in books that I don't like, and hence me just being recommended not to buy them.

Quote from: KindaMeh on December 14, 2023, 07:41:20 PM
I know relatively little about the wheelchair accessible dungeons side of things. That said, I personally would roughly classify as woke that which is based around preferring active unequal treatment on the basis of race, sex, ethnicity, or similar such immutable categories, with the exclusion of more traditional racism, sexism, and the like for obvious reasons (the woke play different favorites). Typically with the intention of correcting a perceived imbalance, though I won't include intent as a hard part of the equation. Specific types of inequality under the law are arguably woke trends expressed politically. (ex: Race based financial aid to farmers that doesn't factor in need, existing for a time under the Biden administration before the courts struck it down.)

What then makes a corporation woke? I'd say that sure, hiring for authorship with race as a required credential would qualify, and WotC indeed does that, and has mentioned doing that specifically as part of its advertising. Likewise, supporting through product sales various causes with firm woke affiliations, while trumpeting such causes as a matter of corporate concern. If a bundle goes to equity, which is by definition unequal treatment on the basis of inherent qualities, then that counts for me. The corporation is woke, even if the product may not contain explicit messaging. I do personally think a lot of WotC and other corporate products are dog whistles to that crowd, with things like Thirsty Sword Lesbians going a smidge beyond that probably. But that aside, I do actually think that censorship with woke values in mind (ex: getting rid of the words tribe and slavery, for affiliated reasons) produces products that are, while perhaps not woke in messaging, censored in a woke manner by a woke corporation. Who if you fund them, will likely spend said money at least in part on furthering said ideology. And it may eventually come to damage the hobby and the inclusivity of its culture too. Such as by passing limits on who is and is not welcome at your table, and what can and cannot be said there, with a distinction of by who, or rather what held identity, espouses these positions, as given by the book's very rules. (Looking at you, Rokugan.) Or by determining who can and cannot speak at conventions on the basis of what political creed they follow. Or by banning roughly half of America from major forum sites like RPG.net on account of their being roughly Republican.

That said, sure I'm concerned about the rise of woke values more generally within the corporate sphere. With the caveat that obviously they have a right to speak their piece and to free speech as well. Doesn't mean I have to like or agree with what they say, or support their products, but I will absolutely give them that. That said, when race is a requirement for authorship I'm concerned and think it crosses a line. When hiring emphasizes immutable characteristics, whether with hopeful intentions or otherwise, I am concerned and feel it can go too far. When owned pdfs are edited without their owners' active consent, I find it deceptive and sketchy business practice. When alleged statistical sales and profitability are misleading, and market distortion occurs, in conjunction with notable online corporate censorship and libel, well... I dislike the former bits, and think the latter two items might actually be the sort of things that should be actively addressed. When this is all government subsidized via current law listing ESG as the ONLY alternative to profit in investing other folks' money, that potentially matters. And with things like all of that, it becomes more than just an issue of folks writing things in books that I don't like, and hence me just being recommended not to buy them.

"But this book!" Jhkim probably.

If you take race, gender, sexuality into consideration in your hiring practices IDGAFF what your intentions are, it's discrimination and in the US (and my country) illegal. It's not that it can go too far, it has already crossed the line into "No, GFY".

WotC IS Woke, because of all of those and then some, IDGAFF if their books contain 1% wokery or none, why should I support a corporation that hates me for my skin color, religion, sex and sexuality?

And no Jhkim, "there's only 1%, there's no X" isn't proof it isn't woke, you keep trying to deflect to one book and point that it isn't, it has ONLY 1% or it doesn't have X, as if any of that (even if true) cancels all of the above, hint: It doesn't.

Quote from: jhkim on December 14, 2023, 07:40:37 PM

Quote from: BadApple on December 14, 2023, 07:07:48 PM

Quote from: jhkim on December 14, 2023, 06:41:50 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 13, 2023, 02:44:36 PM
Including combat wheelchairs... Woke

I can deny the evidence if it's wrong. Specifically - where in any WotC product is there a combat wheelchair? I know Pundit claimed that the combat wheelchair was in Candlekeep Mysteries, but I bought that book and found no combat wheelchair and no wheelchairs of any kind in either the text or illustrations.

The adventure was made wheelchair accessible.  The actual combat wheelchair was a free release as part of the promotional effort for Candlekeep.  WOTC adapted it from a homebrew done by a disability "advocate."

This is false. The adventure in question is "The Canopic Being" by Jennifer Kretchmer. The entrance to the dungeon is down a ladder. Page 173, "Below the trapdoor is a 5-foot-diameter stone-walled well with a sturdy wooden ladder. The well descends 20 feet before opening up into a 40-foot-square chamber whose walls and floors are worked stone." The dungeon interior does have ramps, but it is based on Egyptian tombs, which in the real world also have ramps.

Also, WotC have never released any adaptation or promotion of a combat wheelchair that I've seen. There is a homebrew combat wheelchair by Sara Thompson, but it was never adapted or released by WotC. If you have the release, then please link it.

I never looked at Candlekeep myself.  I quit looking at the new WOTC books after Tasha's.  I do remember there being a lot of marketing for Candlekeep and there were references to it being "the first official wheelchair accessible adventure" and such.  Polygon and The Nerdist covered it at the time so I'm sure the articles are still around.  I remember the four page 8.5x11 pamphlet at the LGS being passed around for the wheel chair and it looked official.  None of it appealed to me so I didn't look very carefully.

For me, the funniest thing about it all was the image of someone climbing a wall with a rope while being seated in a wheel chair.  Why wouldn't you pull yourself up without the chair and then pull up the chair?

Yeah, go too far is bad phrasing. I didn't mean to say that hiring discrimination of that sort is ever a positive. I was leaving an out for hiring folks more equally after bad prior practice, and correcting sketchy hiring practices if they were to do that, but that was a pretty terrible thing for me to state even inadvertently.

Quote from: yosemitemike on December 14, 2023, 06:14:41 PM

Quote from: pawsplay on December 14, 2023, 04:34:11 PM

Quote from: yosemitemike on December 12, 2023, 10:26:12 PM
It's pretty obvious.  The fact that women outnumber men in marketing and advertising disproves the idea that bias is suppressing the participation of women in marketing and advertising. 

How does it prove that? Are most lawyers criminals? Is a butcher a cow?

I have no idea what argument you are even trying to make with this nonsense.  Here's the bottom line.  Marketing and advertising are female dominated professions so, obviously, the participation of women in these professions is not being suppressed.  If there are more men than women in a profession. then obviously women are not being kept out of that profession.  How does it prove that?  Are you simple?

So if marketing execs are 90% female, does that mean they are targeting a 90% female audience? People work in marketing because their skills are useful. Actually, the reason women are so highly represented in marketing is because they are discriminated against in finance, so it's one of the few avenues open to women who are interested in executive positions.

EDIT: Anyway the numbers people are throwing around are probably way off. It's apparently closer to fifty-fifty, naturally, with men overrepresented in the highest positions.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/26/us/marketing-industry-sexism-brandsplaining.html

Quote from: pawsplay on December 14, 2023, 08:09:27 PM

Quote from: yosemitemike on December 14, 2023, 06:14:41 PM

Quote from: pawsplay on December 14, 2023, 04:34:11 PM

Quote from: yosemitemike on December 12, 2023, 10:26:12 PM
It's pretty obvious.  The fact that women outnumber men in marketing and advertising disproves the idea that bias is suppressing the participation of women in marketing and advertising. 

How does it prove that? Are most lawyers criminals? Is a butcher a cow?

I have no idea what argument you are even trying to make with this nonsense.  Here's the bottom line.  Marketing and advertising are female dominated professions so, obviously, the participation of women in these professions is not being suppressed.  If there are more men than women in a profession. then obviously women are not being kept out of that profession.  How does it prove that?  Are you simple?

So if marketing execs are 90% female, does that mean they are targeting a 90% female audience? People work in marketing because their skills are useful. Actually, the reason women are so highly represented in marketing is because they are discriminated against in finance, so it's one of the few avenues open to women who are interested in executive positions.

EDIT: Anyway the numbers people are throwing around are probably way off. It's apparently closer to fifty-fifty, naturally, with men overrepresented in the highest positions.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/26/us/marketing-industry-sexism-brandsplaining.html

Give it a rest guys, when arguing with a cultist you can't ever win, everything can be explained with their demon of the gaps (Patriarchy), even if they can't prove anything you plug one hole and they see two new ones, reminds me of the YEC arguing against evolution.

Quote from: pawsplay on December 14, 2023, 08:09:27 PM

So if marketing execs are 90% female, does that mean they are targeting a 90% female audience? People work in marketing because their skills are useful.

No one said anything even vaguely like that.  You can market to people who aren't just like you.

Quote from: pawsplay on December 14, 2023, 08:09:27 PM
Actually, the reason women are so highly represented in marketing is because they are discriminated against in finance, so it's one of the few avenues open to women who are interested in executive positions.

That's false too.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1250206/gender-marketing-north-america/

You can always tell someone who is defending an ideologically motivated assumption.  Their arguments change as they are shot down but their conclusion never shifts no matter how much contradictory evidence is presented.

Quote from: yosemitemike on December 14, 2023, 09:31:11 PM
No one said anything even vaguely like that.  You can market to people who aren't just like you.

So what I hear you saying is that the demographics of who works in marketing doesn't really anything about the demographics of their audience, or what ideologies, cultural aspects, or implicit biases they may be conveying.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 14, 2023, 08:22:32 PM
Give it a rest guys, when arguing with a cultist you can't ever win, everything can be explained with their demon of the gaps (Patriarchy), even if they can't prove anything you plug one hole and they see two new ones, reminds me of the YEC arguing against evolution.

That's right. Give up now. Surrender.

Quote from: yosemitemike on December 14, 2023, 09:31:11 PM

Quote from: pawsplay on December 14, 2023, 08:09:27 PM

So if marketing execs are 90% female, does that mean they are targeting a 90% female audience? People work in marketing because their skills are useful.

No one said anything even vaguely like that.  You can market to people who aren't just like you.

Quote from: pawsplay on December 14, 2023, 08:09:27 PM
Actually, the reason women are so highly represented in marketing is because they are discriminated against in finance, so it's one of the few avenues open to women who are interested in executive positions.

That's false too.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1250206/gender-marketing-north-america/

You can always tell someone who is defending an ideologically motivated assumption.  Their arguments change as they are shot down but their conclusion never shifts no matter how much contradictory evidence is presented.

You're arguing with a cultist, it's their demon of the gaps, you plug one and they see two new ones that are of course filled by Teh Patriarchy TM.

As with any cult, their demon is omnipresent, omnipotent and omnisapient but can't be falsified.

Quote from: pawsplay on December 14, 2023, 09:36:16 PM

So what I hear you saying

(https://i.imgur.com/zxQkoeU.gif)

Quote from: yosemitemike on December 14, 2023, 09:31:11 PM
That's false too.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1250206/gender-marketing-north-america/

You can always tell someone who is defending an ideologically motivated assumption.  Their arguments change as they are shot down but their conclusion never shifts no matter how much contradictory evidence is presented.

I mean, you can argue about causality. But I am entirely correct about women in financial positions in corporations.
https://www.journalofaccountancy.com/news/2023/feb/the-number-cfo-women-hits-all-time-high.html

Quote
Women made up 16% of CFOs last year, which is up from 6.3% in 2004, when Crist Kolder began tracking the data.

Wow! So woke!

I thought the connection of all this to the thread was when you (pawsplay) were saying that women (Who make up most of marketing and advertising, so it threw me for a loop that in the rpg sphere this wouldn't be the case. Though on average prior to now I could maybe believe it due to numbers of specific nerd demographics in the hobby.) were underrepresented in WotC, or (Somehow? Despite actively curating authors by race and trumpeting inclusivity initiatives.) in its hiring practices.

Either numbers matter, and marketing has a numeric bias in that sense towards a female perspective more generally... or they don't and I'm not sure what that would really imply within the context of the original claims. Which again, kind of confused me, because WotC has actively minority preferential hiring practices. To the point of making it a job requirement to have specific ethnicities as the only ones allowed for authoring certain books.

Quote from: pawsplay on December 14, 2023, 09:44:23 PM

I mean, you can argue about causality. But I am entirely correct about women in financial positions in corporations.
https://www.journalofaccountancy.com/news/2023/feb/the-number-cfo-women-hits-all-time-high.html
Wow! So woke!

If you cherry-pick carefully enough and shift the goalposts enough times.  The sources I found indicate anything from a slight minority (46%) to a slight majority (53%) to a significant majority (60%)

Of course you have now moved the goalpost from women in financing to women in that specific position.  There's also the general assumption that any statistical disparity must prove discrimination.  It doesn't and never has.  Statistical disparities, by themselves, prove nothing. 

The finance bit is probably true, given roughly 40-ish percent of finance is women, and something less than 20% in notable leadership positions, though active measures are being taken to shift that in recent years. That said... How many efforts at building a glass escalator for men in female dominated industries have been lauded as opposed to maligned on parts of the left as a negative sociological factor? I will ask. Because if equal representation only goes one way, that's arguably a problem. And I would personally argue that would be woke policy, to make it only go one way. Or to assume truly equal outcomes, as opposed to opportunity, are required, if preferences and causality do differ. I do agree that opportunities should be made more meritocratic and equal. I may have differing views in certain areas and disagreement with respect to particular demographics being made "more" equal than others. And with discrimination in hiring being seen as a good thing under any circumstances.

Quote from: KindaMeh on December 14, 2023, 10:01:13 PM
The finance bit is probably true, given roughly 40-ish percent of finance is women, and something less than 20% in notable leadership positions, though active measures are being taken to shift that in recent years. T

The existence of a disparity does not prove that the disparity is caused by discrimination.  People say that "only" 16% of CFOs are women and then leave it hanging as if this proves that this disparity must be caused by sexism.  It doesn't though.  Like the sipposed wage gap, the idea that this is at least partly because men and women have different preferences and make different choices on average is just ignored.  Any reason other than ism is ignored.

Group that progressives promote is massively overrepresented in a field or sport: "This is fantastic! It just shows that they were always better at the thing, but were held back by Istiphobia! We need to up the numbers, 80% isn't enough!"

Group that progressives hate is even marginally overrepresented in a field or sport:
"This is terrible! Super competent people are being kept out of this thing, purely because of Istaphobia!

Things need to be brought up to a perfect ratio with demographics! Oh we overshot, and the new groups are now way overrepresented? This is fantastic! It just shows that..."

Quote from: Grognard GM on December 14, 2023, 10:16:39 PM
Group that progressives promote is massively overrepresented in a field or sport: "This is fantastic! It just shows that they were always better at the thing, but were held back by Istiphobia! We need to up the numbers, 80% isn't enough!"

Group that progressives hate is even marginally overrepresented in a field or sport:
"This is terrible! Super competent people are being kept out of this thing, purely because of Istaphobia!

Things need to be brought up to a perfect ratio with demographics! Oh we overshot, and the new groups are now way overrepresented? This is fantastic! It just shows that..."

The progressive's concern for statistical disparities is very selective.  Blacks are massively overrepresented in basketball but no one seems to find this a problem and there's no demand for inclusivity and diversity programs to get more whites into the sport.  On the other hand, the NHL has been under pressure for years because of overrepresentation of white in the sport and has recently created a Player Inclusion Coalition To Promote Diversity In Hockey to address the terrible problem of too many white people playing hockey.  The publishing industry has been dominated by women for some time now but this is, apparently, not a problem and there's no need for special programs to recruit more men to address this disparity.  Their concern is also limited to certain, prestigious professions.  No one is bemoaning the fact that ~94% of garbage collectors are men. 

Quote from: yosemitemike on December 14, 2023, 10:35:20 PMNo one is bemoaning the fact that ~94% of garbage collectors are men.

OMG, that's awful!

6% are women that are made to pick up garbage?

"ONLY 20% OF CEOS IN FINANCE ARE WOMEN! REEEEEEE!"

Yeah, well like only 2% of coal miners are women, but no one gives a single fuck. Because that job sucks ass.

While I tend to disagree with most of what Pawsplay has ever said here, I think you guys misunderstood the post that started this whole tangent.

Quote from: pawsplay on December 12, 2023, 08:25:10 PM

Quote from: KindaMeh on December 12, 2023, 08:11:44 PM
I think my thread is up in the political subforum if folks would be interested in posting on that kind of thing or any counterarguments  there.  8)

I guess to try to drag things back on track locally, do we think the marketing and sales data is being actively distorted in potentially unethical ways that are aligned with woke values? I feel like if so, that might be proof that the companies are both woke and acting in negative/bad faith fashion.

I think it's more likely that the same old biases suppress participation of women and minorities in marketing research.

Quote from: GnomeWorks on December 12, 2023, 07:37:36 PM
I'm (among other things) a statistician. Fight me.

Like, baseball, or what?

Pawsplay wasn't referring to women and minorities in the profession of marketing, rather women and minorities participating in marketing research. The claim was that the "old biases" were responsible for one or both of the following:

A) Women and minorities weren't the target of studies, polls, etc because it was believed they weren't the audience
B) Women and minorities self selected out of such research because they felt they weren't the target audience

Then again maybe I'm misunderstanding and Pawsplay can come along and correct as needed.

Pretty sure that the broader context was a claim that within mainstream TTRPGs, women and minorities are both kept out of marketing research (as in marketing and advertising more broadly, hence the exchanges on demographics there). Likewise, also that the marketing division does not target them adequately (WotC was used as an example, which struck me as very weird given their values, hiring practices, and marketing strategies).

A would very much not make sense in my understanding of WotC as a company, or I suspect within the context of similar companies within the industry, which make up most of its market share. Not even talking about smaller companies like the Blue Rose folks.

B could make sense, but only if they don't engage with TTRPGs and this mainstream effort towards them. Which, maybe, but I doubt it, and they seem like a more competent and proactive player base to me than that. Also, it would require the literal professionals on marketing at a left leaning company who are targeting them to really drop the ball in ways that don't make sense for highly paid experts at a major corporation to do. Especially one with the values and assumptions that WotC has, from a left-leaning perspective, that would push them to acknowledge any such gaps.

Quote from: rgalex on December 15, 2023, 09:44:04 AM
While I tend to disagree with most of what Pawsplay has ever said here, I think you guys misunderstood the post that started this whole tangent.

Quote from: pawsplay on December 12, 2023, 08:25:10 PM

Quote from: KindaMeh on December 12, 2023, 08:11:44 PM
I think my thread is up in the political subforum if folks would be interested in posting on that kind of thing or any counterarguments  there.  8)

I guess to try to drag things back on track locally, do we think the marketing and sales data is being actively distorted in potentially unethical ways that are aligned with woke values? I feel like if so, that might be proof that the companies are both woke and acting in negative/bad faith fashion.

I think it's more likely that the same old biases suppress participation of women and minorities in marketing research.

Quote from: GnomeWorks on December 12, 2023, 07:37:36 PM
I'm (among other things) a statistician. Fight me.

Like, baseball, or what?

Pawsplay wasn't referring to women and minorities in the profession of marketing, rather women and minorities participating in marketing research. The claim was that the "old biases" were responsible for one or both of the following:

A) Women and minorities weren't the target of studies, polls, etc because it was believed they weren't the audience
B) Women and minorities self selected out of such research because they felt they weren't the target audience

Then again maybe I'm misunderstanding and Pawsplay can come along and correct as needed.

Let's say you're correct in your interpretation of pawsplay bullcrap, so women and minorities "didn't participate" in marketing research, what pawsplay calls "old biases" I call empirical knowledge:

I'll restrict myself to D&D because the forum is for that and because what's true in one instance for one product might not be true for other products.

QuoteA) Women and minorities weren't the target of studies, polls, etc because it was believed they weren't the audience

Empirical knowledge, D&D comes from Wargaming, the overwhelming majority of wargamers were? Men, sure, there were some women sprinkled here and there but not in numbers.

Of those who participated in wargaming they were middle class and upwards, Speaking of the US, suburban types.

What was (and is) the "racial" majority in suburbia? White people, even more so back then.

So, you have a new type of game emerging from wargaming, whose player base is made of white suburban types, who are you going to market to?

Now, turns out some women do like the game, so you start including women in your marketing in the form of players in your publicity. But you're still marketing the same product, it's a niche product, for a niche audience, who like it because of how it is.

QuoteB) Women and minorities self selected out of such research because they felt they weren't the target audience

Bullcrap, this is the "If you ONLY change X then more (insert "marginalized group" here) will play!" "argument".

How many black athletes you saw on publicity back then? Not many, did black boys still play ball? Because they found it interesting and because the entry price point was lower. You don't even need regulation equipment to play with your mates on the back alley, street, school, etc.

Why is it that among the poor people in México, Brazil, etc soccer is the favourite sport for boys? You can play with ANY ball, even without shoes.

What pawsplay (and all leftards) want is to change X to appeal to Y audience, something you never see in reverse, nobody is demanding that 50 shades of rape gets changed to appeal to men.

D&Ds target demographic was "people who like to play in an adventure game where they get to pretend to be someone else", if said target audience is/was at one point almost 100% male it was by accident not by discrimination.

If the player base is almost 100% white (in the US) it's not by discrimination (or subconscious biases or other leftard bullshit), it's because the black population in the US deems certaing things as "acting white" so there's a social pressure against partaking in those, you want to "keep it real yo". Therefore black kids are less likelly to play D&D to avoid being bullied by other black kids for "wanting to be white".

Now, what happens when a corporation gives in to the woketard demands and changes the Thing to "appeal to a wider audience"? Sales drop, because whatever other racial, sexual, etc demographics were going to buy your shit are already doing so because they like it as it is, so when you change it you lose your base customer and you gain almost zero new ones.

I can cite countles examples but lets just look at comics, Marvel movies, Star Wars, etc. Changed to "appeal to a wider audience" and now their sales are shit.

Now, woketards can keep on chanting their religious mantras all day, reality doesn't care about their feelings.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 15, 2023, 12:10:57 PMIf the player base is almost 100% white (in the US) it's not by discrimination (or subconscious biases or other leftard bullshit), it's because the black population in the US deems certaing things as "acting white" so there's a social pressure against partaking in those, you want to "keep it real yo". Therefore black kids are less likelly to play D&D to avoid being bullied by other black kids for "wanting to be white".

This is also why the base is disproportionately Middle Class.

I grew up in the British equivalent of the Ghetto, and I was hassled several times for having books in my backpack. Not even nerd books, just the fact I had books was enough.

You're damned right I kept my hobby on the Q.T.

Quote from: Grognard GM on December 15, 2023, 02:12:46 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 15, 2023, 12:10:57 PMIf the player base is almost 100% white (in the US) it's not by discrimination (or subconscious biases or other leftard bullshit), it's because the black population in the US deems certaing things as "acting white" so there's a social pressure against partaking in those, you want to "keep it real yo". Therefore black kids are less likelly to play D&D to avoid being bullied by other black kids for "wanting to be white".

This is also why the base is disproportionately Middle Class.

I grew up in the British equivalent of the Ghetto, and I was hassled several times for having books in my backpack. Not even nerd books, just the fact I had books was enough.

You're damned right I kept my hobby on the Q.T.

Up until D&D became popular how were nerds treated by women?

Now, maybe some of those really wanted to play with us but there was social pressure to shun us.

Now they are playing and still want to shun us, to expell us from OUR hobbies.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 15, 2023, 02:21:46 PMUp until D&D became popular how were nerds treated by women?

Now, maybe some of those really wanted to play with us but there was social pressure to shun us.

Now they are playing and still want to shun us, to expell us from OUR hobbies.

Gaming in the 90's and 2000's, I never played in a game with a girl that wasn't the wife or GF of a player/GM, and it was very rare. Of those ladies, not a one knew rules well, and most were clearly there on sufferance.  RPGs were girl kryptonite, and we were always ecstatic to get ANY new players, so there was no barrier.

After a break, getting back into rpg's in the 2010's, women were suddenly playing. But they are always young, still no more than say 1-in-8 ratio wise, and only the autistic girls are interested in the nuts and bolts of game mechanics. The rest are just there for the acting-with-dice aspect.

EDIT:
As far as shunning goes, the young women shun to the degree that they are, to a woman, left leaning and progressive.

The real problem people I've gamed with were an incredibly toxic Trans-Woman with a Dark Triad personality, and an ethnic minority guy that pulled the racism card like other people pull a Bus Pass.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 14, 2023, 07:56:40 PM

Quote from: KindaMeh on December 14, 2023, 07:41:20 PM
I'd say that sure, hiring for authorship with race as a required credential would qualify, and WotC indeed does that, and has mentioned doing that specifically as part of its advertising.

If you take race, gender, sexuality into consideration in your hiring practices IDGAFF what your intentions are, it's discrimination and in the US (and my country) illegal. It's not that it can go too far, it has already crossed the line into "No, GFY".

Regarding discrimination, my question is -- is WotC actually a place where non-whites have all the high-paying jobs and qualified white people can't get ahead because of systematic discrimination? i.e. If there was a fair judge and jury, could the white people working there make a case that they were being systematically discriminated against?

Or is it a place where white people are in charge and have tossed some one-time token contracts to non-whites for a pittance to get some visibility?

In some workplaces, people of X race could be systematically discriminated against being hired and advancement -- and also, a few people of X race are token hires - i.e. hired because of their race for low-paying jobs just so that the company can pad their demographics.

Legally, one can take things like gender, national origin, race, and religion into account for contracts if it is relevant to the specific work. It's illegal for a company to systematically discriminate against Irish people. It's not illegal for a company to want to hire an Irish writer for a story about Ireland. One could say "Oh, but shouldn't they consider a non-Irish person who has studied Ireland?" -- but that's up to them. They could decide that growing up in an Irish family is important to the perspective they want.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 14, 2023, 07:56:40 PM
WotC IS Woke, because of all of those and then some, IDGAFF if their books contain 1% wokery or none, why should I support a corporation that hates me for my skin color, religion, sex and sexuality?

And no Jhkim, "there's only 1%, there's no X" isn't proof it isn't woke, you keep trying to deflect to one book and point that it isn't, it has ONLY 1% or it doesn't have X, as if any of that (even if true) cancels all of the above, hint: It doesn't.

No one is asking you to support WotC. You can hate it and you can rail against it all you want. However, if you start going on about "Now WotC's adventures are all about going to prom and making friends" or "Now all dungeons are wheelchair accessible" or "Now it requires player consent for anything bad to happen to any PC" -- then you're not talking about reality, because that's not what the books are actually like.

The actual content is still about killing goblins and mind flayers and other evil beings that are doing evil, and collecting treasure and rewards.

I cited the six recent books over the last four years that I have, and I am talking about the mass of all those books. I am not deflecting to a single book or isolated passages. I'm talking about the overall substance of the books. If I ran The Shattered Obelisk for a D&D group in the 1990s, they wouldn't notice anything all that different about it (aside from the 5E mechanics). If I ran Dragon of Icespire Peak, they might notice the gay NPC on page XX -- which is different because TSR didn't allow any gay NPCs in any modules. But the rest of the adventure would be as expected.

I don't disagree that there are some token nods like this, but that's different than claiming about the overall substance of the books.

Quote from: jhkim on December 15, 2023, 03:51:27 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 14, 2023, 07:56:40 PM

Quote from: KindaMeh on December 14, 2023, 07:41:20 PM
I'd say that sure, hiring for authorship with race as a required credential would qualify, and WotC indeed does that, and has mentioned doing that specifically as part of its advertising.

If you take race, gender, sexuality into consideration in your hiring practices IDGAFF what your intentions are, it's discrimination and in the US (and my country) illegal. It's not that it can go too far, it has already crossed the line into "No, GFY".

Regarding discrimination, my question is -- is WotC actually a place where non-whites have all the high-paying jobs and qualified white people can't get ahead because of systematic discrimination? i.e. If there was a fair judge and jury, could the white people working there make a case that they were being systematically discriminated against?

Or is it a place where white people are in charge and have tossed some one-time token contracts to non-whites for a pittance to get some visibility?

In some workplaces, people of X race could be systematically discriminated against being hired and advancement -- and also, a few people of X race are token hires - i.e. hired because of their race for low-paying jobs just so that the company can pad their demographics.

Legally, one can take things like gender, national origin, race, and religion into account for contracts if it is relevant to the specific work. It's illegal for a company to systematically discriminate against Irish people. It's not illegal for a company to want to hire an Irish writer for a story about Ireland. One could say "Oh, but shouldn't they consider a non-Irish person who has studied Ireland?" -- but that's up to them. They could decide that growing up in an Irish family is important to the perspective they want.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 14, 2023, 07:56:40 PM
WotC IS Woke, because of all of those and then some, IDGAFF if their books contain 1% wokery or none, why should I support a corporation that hates me for my skin color, religion, sex and sexuality?

And no Jhkim, "there's only 1%, there's no X" isn't proof it isn't woke, you keep trying to deflect to one book and point that it isn't, it has ONLY 1% or it doesn't have X, as if any of that (even if true) cancels all of the above, hint: It doesn't.

No one is asking you to support WotC. You can hate it and you can rail against it all you want. However, if you start going on about "Now WotC's adventures are all about going to prom and making friends" or "Now all dungeons are wheelchair accessible" or "Now it requires player consent for anything bad to happen to any PC" -- then you're not talking about reality, because that's not what the books are actually like.

The actual content is still about killing goblins and mind flayers and other evil beings that are doing evil, and collecting treasure and rewards.

I cited the six recent books over the last four years that I have, and I am talking about the mass of all those books. I am not deflecting to a single book or isolated passages. I'm talking about the overall substance of the books. If I ran The Shattered Obelisk for a D&D group in the 1990s, they wouldn't notice anything all that different about it (aside from the 5E mechanics). If I ran Dragon of Icespire Peak, they might notice the gay NPC on page XX -- which is different because TSR didn't allow any gay NPCs in any modules. But the rest of the adventure would be as expected.

I don't disagree that there are some token nods like this, but that's different than claiming about the overall substance of the books.

So, you're okay with discrimination as long as the upper echelons are white people, nice of you to own to it.

Besides pointing to a disparity, can you show ANY evidence of discrimination against non-whites, women, LGBTQWIFiPassword? IF there was any they would get sued, like Disney just got sued by 9000 women. They are in Commiefornia after all.

Again, the question doesn't say if books from X publisher are woke, but if the publisher IS woke, you can't say it isn't (when the evidence shows it is) by pointing to the published books.

Besides your known woke tendencies blind you to wokeness.

So, jhkim, with respect to the legality and morality of hiring based on race and the like...

I personally would find it abhorrent for anybody to say that when writing about say, europe, one needs to be of european heritage, even if they have lived in europe or professionally studied it. Because it straight up assumes that bloodline is more important than say knowledge of the subject at hand. I would understand preferring to some extent folks for a book on living in Nigeria who have lived in or grown up in say Nigeria, because that's not an immutable birth trait, and may actually denote some degree of understanding with respect to the specific subject at hand, sure. It could even be a big factor. But if the basic qualifying requirement were to write about Africa more broadly, you must be of pure African heritage, that seems pretty messed up to me. WotC took it a step further. They outright selected based on race, not even nationality, as a NECESSARY prerequisite for writing fantasy books with African-esque themes. (On which note, one could actually also argue they did some folks dirty in places like Radiant Citadel, and that they did nevertheless write other ethnicities in potentially offensive or whatnot ways, though I'm not even going to go into that.) That is toxic in many respects, and I trust you to see the applicable difference there.

As regards legality... I think it pretty clearly should be illegal to discriminate on immutable racial traits in that way. If it were somebody claiming European-fantasy requires European blood or white perspective, I'd want them prosecuted and bankrupt for doing that. And I think the state would be well within its rights. Under title 7, I'm pretty sure it's consistently been ruled that all races are protected from having hiring being determined with race as a disqualifying factor. I guess you'll probably argue they could make a BFOQ argument (though race is not mentioned as getting an out through this loophole), but even there you would have to prove that ancestry is a requirement to write African fiction competently. (Notably, it can't just be better or preferred by customers if such cases as flight attendants, minority customer pairings with minority service [even in the public sector], and the current shift away in the courts from recognizing female sex at say Hooters as a necessary qualification for certain positions are to be referenced.) And we shouldn't want them to succeed, because that would basically be sanctioning the ACTUAL alt-right to use that as a defense against hiring POCs to write (insert white culture here) fiction. I also would be leery of giving the go-ahead for race-based artistic discrimination, basically corporate censorship, on the basis of corporate speech or something. Whether left or alt-right, it's not okay.

And to end this on a personal note, I think it's not wrong to have settings which incorporate from other cultures and give them exposure. And I actually think playing and writing characters who aren't 100% like yourself broadens horizons and increases representation and diversity of opinion/perspective. Also, it avoids the horrible idea of corporations censoring people or stereotyping authorial and cultural credentials on the basis of race.

The plain language of the Civil Rights Act makes discrimination based on race illegal.  The courts have been finding creative to get around that since they first needed to justify affirmative action policies that clearly violate the plain meaning of that law.  So you're protected against discrimination based on race unless the court wants to promote the discriminatory policy in question.  Then the 14th amendment suddenly has an unstated, underlying purpose of fighting oppression that no one has ever seen before so it's okay to discriminate against white people because oppression.  The courts have been quite creative in coming up with pretenses to ignore what the Civil Rights Act says in very clear language. 

Quote from: KindaMeh on December 19, 2023, 08:22:06 PM
So, jhkim, with respect to the legality and morality of hiring based on race and the like...

I personally would find it abhorrent for anybody to say that when writing about say, europe, one needs to be of european heritage, even if they have lived in europe or professionally studied it. Because it straight up assumes that bloodline is more important than say knowledge of the subject at hand. I would understand preferring to some extent folks for a book on living in Nigeria who have lived in or grown up in say Nigeria, because that's not an immutable birth trait, and may actually denote some degree of understanding with respect to the specific subject at hand, sure. It could even be a big factor. But if the basic qualifying requirement were to write about Africa more broadly, you must be of pure African heritage, that seems pretty messed up to me. WotC took it a step further. They outright selected based on race, not even nationality, as a NECESSARY prerequisite for writing fantasy books with African-esque themes.

Maybe you're correct - I think it would take a lawsuit to look into the details of the hiring process. I don't know the inside story. According to you, they only looked at bloodline and didn't consider the writer's background and culture. A lawsuit could show that they passed over more qualified white candidates to write the same material.

Still, for decades, I've seen a lot of back-and-forth over "Look, we hired a non-white person" - which is then responded to with "You only hired them because they're non-white so it's a racist token hire."

I question your characterization in particular because the book doesn't have much African-themed material. There are 2 of 14 adventures which have mini-settings inspired by the Empire of Mali, but the rest is non-African.

The question is -- would the book be more true to its writing goals if only they hired more white writers? I don't know the background of most of the authors, but in a previous thread on this, someone criticized the Mexican-themed adventure, and in discussing that author (Mario Ortegón), I found he was born, raised, and living in Mexico. That is lived experience, and relevant to writing a Mexican-themed fantasy adventure. If they had hired someone of Mexican ancestry who was adopted and didn't speak Spanish, the criticism would have more weight, but they didn't.

Quote from: KindaMeh on December 19, 2023, 08:22:06 PM
And to end this on a personal note, I think it's not wrong to have settings which incorporate from other cultures and give them exposure. And I actually think playing and writing characters who aren't 100% like yourself broadens horizons and increases representation and diversity of opinion/perspective. Also, it avoids the horrible idea of corporations censoring people or stereotyping authorial and cultural credentials on the basis of race.

I agree about this. My current D&D setting is based on Incan culture, which I have no ethnic tie to. I obviously don't think there's anything wrong with that. But, I think a Quechua-speaking author from Peru would have insights that I don't have on Incan and Andean culture, and I don't think it is racist to acknowledge that.

It's not that they didn't consider other factors, but that race was used as a disqualifying factor that I was referring to. It's not about lived international experience, or if it is then a prerequisite for that to matter is skin color. That's never okay. Also, if it wasn't actually on Africa/Middle East/Wherever other "culture", that kind of just proves my point. I honestly didn't think they'd go that far, and thought they had a more solid defense.

I don't want more white writers, I want fair and lawful hiring practices. (Not that you'll find a plaintiff with standing and the pockets or courage to challenge them on this.) And I'd understand based on multiple facts about WotC and their past and present characterization that this is not what is currently happening. Not even fair in firing. (They dropped a whole lot of competent and high producing employees lately, many who were somewhat woke sure, but still more skilled than those who got kept on the basis of woke credentialing.) I think it hurts the company too, which has to mean something to fans of their work. (I used to be one, and it's a bummer watching them both discriminate and also destroy themselves.)

I also think that when something like this happens it undermines not only faith in but also the operations of actual anti-discriminatory laws on hiring. Because the point there is not to give undue preference to a given group based on skin color or the like, but to prevent disqualification or disfavor based on the same. Or, dare I say it, to prevent a group from being hired in part due to inborn attributes linked to racial, sexual, etcetera identity. Not least because when you talk about folks jeering the hiring of minorities simply because they are not white, I'm pretty sure that's also what's being talked about. Clear hiring bias towards white, straight, or heterosexual or whatever stuff is bad too, you see.

I can acknowledge, as listed earlier, that lived experience within a culture or nation or religion can be valuable for writing or knowing about said items. So too research, which can even be necessary in a heavy sense to prevent serious error if you are unfamiliar. Still, I'm genuinely fearful given what WotC has done without any real pushback or reprisal, given Rokugan, and given wider trends within the TTRPG world that race is becoming considered a credential on other cultures, nations, or religions. For writers, at the table, etcetera. It's disturbing in part because it undermines the actual credentialing of having studied or experienced said culture, nation, or religion. That's not even talking about the credential of race for appearing on panels or at conventions or the like, which is a separate issue that could be discussed, I feel.

Quote from: KindaMeh on December 20, 2023, 11:05:53 AM
It's not that they didn't consider other factors, but that race was used as a disqualifying factor that I was referring to. It's not about lived international experience, or if it is then a prerequisite for that to matter is skin color. That's never okay. Also, if it wasn't actually on Africa/Middle East/Wherever other "culture", that kind of just proves my point. I honestly didn't think they'd go that far, and thought they had a more solid defense.

Quote from: KindaMeh on December 20, 2023, 11:05:53 AM
I can acknowledge, as listed earlier, that lived experience within a culture or nation or religion can be valuable for writing or knowing about said items. So too research, which can even be necessary in a heavy sense to prevent serious error if you are unfamiliar.

Again, I don't claim to know the internal hiring practices at WotC. I'm not an insider. You claim that they looked only at skin color first, and lived experience was only a secondary consideration - so they unlawfully discriminated against qualified white writers with more relevant lived experience. If so, then yes, this is discriminatory.

I'm skeptical, though, since you don't know the content of the book - so I'd also question how much you know about the hiring practices.

It seems possible to me that they hired directly for lived experience in non-white cultures.

If they did select for authorship of the literature based on weighting cultural and national experience, and did not disqualify based on race, and the experience held was within the context of the stories they would be writing, then I would agree that might well be understandable. I could indeed be wrong on this. That said, I had heard that they decided in advance select works and books such as radiant citadel stuff would be POC-only (whites disqualified by race), and advertised in part based on that. If I am wrong, you or others should obviously feel free to correct me as to the specifics.

Quote from: KindaMeh on December 20, 2023, 02:53:34 PM
If they did select for authorship of the literature based on weighting cultural and national experience, and did not disqualify based on race, and the experience held was within the context of the stories they would be writing, then I would agree that might well be understandable. I could indeed be wrong on this. That said, I had heard that they decided in advance select works and books such as radiant citadel stuff would be POC-only (whites disqualified by race), and advertised in part based on that. If I am wrong, you or others should obviously feel free to correct me as to the specifics.

From https://www.belloflostsouls.net/2022/03/dd-journeys-through-the-radiant-citadel-wotcs-first-ever-poc-led-book-and-other-details.html#SnippetTab:

Quote
In June of 2020, I pitched the idea to Jeremy Crawford and Wes Schneider at the D&D Studio for a book written by Black and brown writers.

and

Quote
There is so much we've accomplished with this unbelievable book:
...
This is the first D&D book conceived, created, and written entirely by PoCs

So you remembered correctly, POC-only by design, and used as a selling point.

Quote from: Krazz on December 20, 2023, 03:05:49 PM

Quote from: KindaMeh on December 20, 2023, 02:53:34 PM
If they did select for authorship of the literature based on weighting cultural and national experience, and did not disqualify based on race, and the experience held was within the context of the stories they would be writing, then I would agree that might well be understandable. I could indeed be wrong on this. That said, I had heard that they decided in advance select works and books such as radiant citadel stuff would be POC-only (whites disqualified by race), and advertised in part based on that. If I am wrong, you or others should obviously feel free to correct me as to the specifics.

From https://www.belloflostsouls.net/2022/03/dd-journeys-through-the-radiant-citadel-wotcs-first-ever-poc-led-book-and-other-details.html#SnippetTab:

Quote
In June of 2020, I pitched the idea to Jeremy Crawford and Wes Schneider at the D&D Studio for a book written by Black and brown writers.

and

Quote
There is so much we've accomplished with this unbelievable book:
...
This is the first D&D book conceived, created, and written entirely by PoCs

So you remembered correctly, POC-only by design, and used as a selling point.

In the first quote, you snipped out of the paragraph. The full quote reads:

QuoteIn June of 2020, I pitched the idea to Jeremy Crawford and Wes Schneider at the D&D Studio for a book written by Black and brown writers. The idea was to create new places and lands based on our cultures, histories, myths, and lived experiences. To my surprise and joy, they agreed and asked me to co-lead it with Wes Schneider!

The question with KindaMeh was whether they were selecting for skin color, or whether they were selecting for lived personal experience of non-white cultures. Again, I'm not claiming that I know what they actually did, but leaving out that part of the quote is deceptive.

Quote from: jhkim on December 20, 2023, 03:40:00 PM

Quote from: Krazz on December 20, 2023, 03:05:49 PM

Quote from: KindaMeh on December 20, 2023, 02:53:34 PM
If they did select for authorship of the literature based on weighting cultural and national experience, and did not disqualify based on race, and the experience held was within the context of the stories they would be writing, then I would agree that might well be understandable. I could indeed be wrong on this. That said, I had heard that they decided in advance select works and books such as radiant citadel stuff would be POC-only (whites disqualified by race), and advertised in part based on that. If I am wrong, you or others should obviously feel free to correct me as to the specifics.

From https://www.belloflostsouls.net/2022/03/dd-journeys-through-the-radiant-citadel-wotcs-first-ever-poc-led-book-and-other-details.html#SnippetTab:

Quote
In June of 2020, I pitched the idea to Jeremy Crawford and Wes Schneider at the D&D Studio for a book written by Black and brown writers.

and

Quote
There is so much we've accomplished with this unbelievable book:
...
This is the first D&D book conceived, created, and written entirely by PoCs

So you remembered correctly, POC-only by design, and used as a selling point.

In the first quote, you snipped out of the paragraph. The full quote reads:

QuoteIn June of 2020, I pitched the idea to Jeremy Crawford and Wes Schneider at the D&D Studio for a book written by Black and brown writers. The idea was to create new places and lands based on our cultures, histories, myths, and lived experiences. To my surprise and joy, they agreed and asked me to co-lead it with Wes Schneider!

The question with KindaMeh was whether they were selecting for skin color, or whether they were selecting for lived personal experience of non-white cultures. Again, I'm not claiming that I know what they actually did, but leaving out that part of the quote is deceptive.

So, a "brown" Mexican knows more about Mexican culture by virtue of being brown? What about a Japanese woman who has spent 20 years studying our culture?

"lived-experience" define this in a noin self referential way and that's falsifiable.

"non-white cultures" Are you aware that the majority of latinos aren't what you would call "brown"? So how exactly is Mexican culture non-white? And it is Mexican culture not prehispanic.

But even if it were pre-hispanic, now you selected a "brown" Mexican over a Japanese woman that has spent 30 years studying Aztec culture. Why? In what way does his nationality, place of residence and skin color make him more able to write about the Aztecs?

You're just dancing and waving your arms to try and deflect from the clear racial discrimination.

Why couldn't I a "white" Mexican write about my culture? In which way does his skin color make him better suited than me to do so? So, given that Mexican culture isn't "non-white", and that even if it were merelly by virtue of your ethnicity you don't have a magical knowledge of it it's a racist thing to do.

Just like they clearly said.

"But I don't know what they did!"

Well, they ARE telling the world EXACTLY what they did!

Why are you so unwilling to take them at their word?

Because the upper echelons of WotKKK are huwhite? That's what justifies discrimination?

Seriously Jhkim you need to stop and reasses your positions.

Quote from: KindaMeh on December 20, 2023, 02:53:34 PM
If they did select for authorship of the literature based on weighting cultural and national experience, and did not disqualify based on race, and the experience held was within the context of the stories they would be writing, then I would agree that might well be understandable. I could indeed be wrong on this. That said, I had heard that they decided in advance select works and books such as radiant citadel stuff would be POC-only (whites disqualified by race), and advertised in part based on that. If I am wrong, you or others should obviously feel free to correct me as to the specifics.

But they did disqualify huwhites by virtue of their skin color, as proven by their own words:

Quote
In June of 2020, I pitched the idea to Jeremy Crawford and Wes Schneider at the D&D Studio for a book written by Black and brown writers.

So, because I'm "white" I'm less qualified to write about my own culture than a "brown" Mexican?

How?

Answer: Because WotC is woke, and woke (just like progressivism) is a racist ideology.

Yeah, this skin-color-predetermined stuff sounds pretty horrible, possibly as bad or worse than I had originally thought.  I don't want to, but I feel I have to take WotC at their word that they decided to disqualify whites at the start. Black and brown means excluding some asians too, I think, by default. I suspect even other potentially POC folks may have been disqualified who didn't share the obvious racial makeup for the place whose culture was supposed to inspire an adventure, though I guess the only real proof we have is for folks who aren't of brown or black races being excluded. Which is still terrible enough.

Also, I want to clarify that I would not in any way want to devalue folks like GeekyBugle's own perspective on their own culture, and it kind of sounds like that's what they did. I want to be clear that I would not support doing something like that, especially since GeekyBugle is an actual ttrpg content producer and writer on top of having that kind of cultural experience. This seems like potentially solid racial discrimination from my perspective.

(Actually, if they had hired him, maybe some of their depictions there would have been less bad in Radiant Citadel, since I heard that there were death cult cartel depiction related issues. Not sure if the latter part was actually a thing, but just saying. They're shooting even themselves in the foot, apparently, with things like this, not that he would likely want to work for such a company.)

Quote from: KindaMeh on December 20, 2023, 04:16:52 PM
Yeah, this skin-color-predetermined stuff sounds pretty horrible, possibly as bad or worse than I had originally thought.

Also, I want to clarify that I would not in any way want to devalue folks like GeekyBugle's own perspective on their own culture, and it kind of sounds like that's what they did. I want to be clear that I would not support doing something like that, especially since GeekyBugle is an actual ttrpg content producer and writer on top of having that kind of cultural experience. This seems like potentially solid racial discrimination from my perspective.

(Actually, if they had hired him, maybe some of their depictions there would have been less bad in Radiant Citadel, since I heard that there were death cult cartel depiction related issues. Not sure if the latter part was actually a thing, but just saying. They're shooting even themselves in the foot, apparently, with things like this, not that he would likely want to work for such a company.)

Not even our resident aspie (ME!  8) ) is thinking you're in support of that or even making excuses for them.

There's almost ZERO TTRPG companies/developers I would consider working WITH, working FOR WotKKK? For a penny a word? with their ideological constraints? with their Kultural Kommisars looking over my shoulder? Fuck that noise!

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 20, 2023, 04:26:46 PM

Quote from: KindaMeh on December 20, 2023, 04:16:52 PM
Yeah, this skin-color-predetermined stuff sounds pretty horrible, possibly as bad or worse than I had originally thought.

Also, I want to clarify that I would not in any way want to devalue folks like GeekyBugle's own perspective on their own culture, and it kind of sounds like that's what they did. I want to be clear that I would not support doing something like that, especially since GeekyBugle is an actual ttrpg content producer and writer on top of having that kind of cultural experience. This seems like potentially solid racial discrimination from my perspective.

(Actually, if they had hired him, maybe some of their depictions there would have been less bad in Radiant Citadel, since I heard that there were death cult cartel depiction related issues. Not sure if the latter part was actually a thing, but just saying. They're shooting even themselves in the foot, apparently, with things like this, not that he would likely want to work for such a company.)

Not even our resident aspie (ME!  8) ) is thinking you're in support of that or even making excuses for them.

There's almost ZERO TTRPG companies/developers I would consider working WITH, working FOR WotKKK? For a penny a word? with their ideological constraints? with their Kultural Kommisars looking over my shoulder? Fuck that noise!

Fair enough.  ;D

Quote from: KindaMeh on December 20, 2023, 04:16:52 PM
Yeah, this skin-color-predetermined stuff sounds pretty horrible, possibly as bad or worse than I had originally thought.  I don't want to, but I feel I have to take WotC at their word that they decided to disqualify whites at the start. Black and brown means excluding some asians too, I think, by default. I suspect even other potentially POC folks may have been disqualified who didn't share the obvious racial makeup for the place whose culture was supposed to inspire an adventure, though I guess the only real proof we have is for folks who aren't of brown or black races being excluded. Which is still terrible enough.

It does sound awful at how East Asian authors were excluded from the collection because they aren't black or brown. Except... I know that East Asian authors were included in the adventure.

Again, I think it's legitimate to select on writers who grew up in the culture they're writing about. Here "lived experience" means that one's childhood and personal life is in the culture, as opposed to studying the culture as a profession - dealing with it from 9 to 5, and then going home to a different culture. This isn't the same as skin color, but it also isn't the same as birthplace. My ex-father-in-law, for example, is white and was born and raised in Venezuela - but he grew up in an oil company expatriate neighborhood, speaking mostly English with other American families. He knows a lot about Venezuela, but he wasn't raised in Venezuelan culture.

As for what WotC actual process was... I realized that GeekyBugle will declare that I'm on the side of the woke and making excuses for them, but I do exactly the same with *all* claims of racism of this sort. It's really common on the Internet for people to look over a game company's social media and find a statement to declare them racist - and I am always skeptical of those claims.

Quote from: jhkim on December 21, 2023, 04:09:15 PM
claims of racism

It's not just a claim when they say flat out what they are doing and use that to promote the product.

Quote from: jhkim on December 21, 2023, 04:09:15 PM
It does sound awful at how East Asian authors were excluded from the collection because they aren't black or brown. Except... I know that East Asian authors were included in the adventure.

They're still the "POCs" that WOTC talk about, though. In fact, I suspect the only reason they weren't included in the original quote was that it was using colours in its racial segregation of the world's population, and they'd be embarassed to refer to East Asians that way.

Quote from: jhkim on December 21, 2023, 04:09:15 PM
Again, I think it's legitimate to select on writers who grew up in the culture they're writing about. Here "lived experience" means that one's childhood and personal life is in the culture, as opposed to studying the culture as a profession - dealing with it from 9 to 5, and then going home to a different culture. This isn't the same as skin color, but it also isn't the same as birthplace. My ex-father-in-law, for example, is white and was born and raised in Venezuela - but he grew up in an oil company expatriate neighborhood, speaking mostly English with other American families. He knows a lot about Venezuela, but he wasn't raised in Venezuelan culture.

This is not about growing up in a culture. Brooke Bruk-Jackson wouldn't have been chosen to write with her experience growing up in Zimbabwe, because she was the wrong race. It's textbook racism.

Quote from: jhkim on December 21, 2023, 04:09:15 PM
As for what WotC actual process was... I realized that GeekyBugle will declare that I'm on the side of the woke and making excuses for them, but I do exactly the same with *all* claims of racism of this sort. It's really common on the Internet for people to look over a game company's social media and find a statement to declare them racist - and I am always skeptical of those claims.

I'm very skeptical of people claiming racism too, especially in this day and age when such claims have been weaponised. But when the people in question explicitly say:

Quote
In June of 2020, I pitched the idea to Jeremy Crawford and Wes Schneider at the D&D Studio for a book written by Black and brown writers.

why would I doubt them? It's possible that they ignored race in picking people to work on the book, but happened to find the best writers were all non-white, then crowed about that and also lied, claiming that they had been racist when they hadn't. Possible, but the likelihood is overwhelmingly against that version of events. They're spelled out exactly what they did.

Let me put it to you another way: people say the KKK is racist. They admit that they are racist. Do you umm and ahh, wondering whether they are racist? If not, what's the difference between the two?

Apparently the pitch either did not line up with the final product, and I was wrong about Asians specifically being excluded. (Just the non-POC, in execution of the plan formed around race based disqualification, being excluded.) Or the pitch considered them to be grouped in with darker hues of skin color when push came to shove. In either case, wouldn't really change the nature of the original pitch, the marketing on the basis of authorial race, or much else for that matter. I do appreciate the correction with respect to specific fact. I guess I was wrong about the degree to which they were racist and using race as a disqualifying factor. They targeted only whites for skin based disqualification, and not POC, it would seem.

Hell, maybe they even lied about the book being written solely by POC, or that being the original intent. If you come across a white author (probably with some sort of fancy identity or the like to make up for it), that would indeed be good to know and I would indeed reconsider further some of my understanding of the situation. That said, I kinda doubt it.

Quote from: Krazz on December 21, 2023, 05:10:50 PM

Quote from: jhkim on December 21, 2023, 04:09:15 PM
Again, I think it's legitimate to select on writers who grew up in the culture they're writing about. Here "lived experience" means that one's childhood and personal life is in the culture, as opposed to studying the culture as a profession - dealing with it from 9 to 5, and then going home to a different culture. This isn't the same as skin color, but it also isn't the same as birthplace. My ex-father-in-law, for example, is white and was born and raised in Venezuela - but he grew up in an oil company expatriate neighborhood, speaking mostly English with other American families. He knows a lot about Venezuela, but he wasn't raised in Venezuelan culture.

This is not about growing up in a culture. Brooke Bruk-Jackson wouldn't have been chosen to write with her experience growing up in Zimbabwe, because she was the wrong race. It's textbook racism.

So, there are three Hispanic authors in the book, and two of them wrote fantasy based on post-colonial culture - though still with distinct non-European aspects like Day of the Dead, ghost orchids, and tepui. I don't know the authors' genetic makeup. Maybe they are mixed race, maybe they are pure native, or maybe they are white.

You suggest that in recruiting them, WotC checked first about their ancestry rather than about the culture they grew up in. Maybe they did. We could ask the Hispanic authors if WotC tried to confirm about their genetics first.

Still, the declared idea was that the authors write from lived experience of non-white cultures. You're choosing to skip that part, and assume that they chose based on author genetics, and thus there is no way they'd choose a genetically white Venezuelan.

I don't know. I'll state that I don't agree with choosing based on author genetics, but choosing based on the author's raised culture is reasonable.

Honestly, the skin color pitch moves me away from feeling I could easily give them the benefit of the doubt. They outright said it was intended from the start to be a fantasy series written by black and brown authors, with that as a qualifying factor being apparent if the pitch was actually followed through on. That and then afterwards marketing the book in advance as having been intended as written by POCs. (Hence by definition not considering non-POCs, I would guess?)

It seems like strong circumstantial evidence combined with a confession, for me. I'm not the most knowledgeable on all this, and on some things like thinking they discriminated within POC I'll admit I jumped the gun. But I do think they considered biology a disqualifying factor.

And they did so not within the context of "Oh it's a book on growing up black in part of the south and you grew up black in the south, so we'll give you high marks on fit, as opposed to lower marks for those who didn't." but rather within the context (if I understand correctly) of "We want fantasy written by POC, which will mirror in flavor where they are culturally AND biologically from, and you are not a POC, so you are disqualified (by race) even if you grew up in Mexico." Now again, I could be wrong on this. But it seems to me like we should take them at their word when they have not retracted or outright contradicted prior statements.

I can appreciate that jhkim understands it would be wrong to discriminate and disqualify on the basis of race. Even if not with respect to POC. I also understand wanting to give folks the benefit of the doubt where it may be warranted. That said, in this instance it does not to me seem warranted, on account of the specific situation at hand.

Quote from: jhkim on December 22, 2023, 01:57:29 PM

Quote from: Krazz on December 21, 2023, 05:10:50 PM

Quote from: jhkim on December 21, 2023, 04:09:15 PM
Again, I think it's legitimate to select on writers who grew up in the culture they're writing about. Here "lived experience" means that one's childhood and personal life is in the culture, as opposed to studying the culture as a profession - dealing with it from 9 to 5, and then going home to a different culture. This isn't the same as skin color, but it also isn't the same as birthplace. My ex-father-in-law, for example, is white and was born and raised in Venezuela - but he grew up in an oil company expatriate neighborhood, speaking mostly English with other American families. He knows a lot about Venezuela, but he wasn't raised in Venezuelan culture.

This is not about growing up in a culture. Brooke Bruk-Jackson wouldn't have been chosen to write with her experience growing up in Zimbabwe, because she was the wrong race. It's textbook racism.

So, there are three Hispanic authors in the book, and two of them wrote fantasy based on post-colonial culture - though still with distinct non-European aspects like Day of the Dead, ghost orchids, and tepui. I don't know the authors' genetic makeup. Maybe they are mixed race, maybe they are pure native, or maybe they are white.

You suggest that in recruiting them, WotC checked first about their ancestry rather than about the culture they grew up in. Maybe they did. We could ask the Hispanic authors if WotC tried to confirm about their genetics first.

Still, the declared idea was that the authors write from lived experience of non-white cultures. You're choosing to skip that part, and assume that they chose based on author genetics, and thus there is no way they'd choose a genetically white Venezuelan.

I don't know. I'll state that I don't agree with choosing based on author genetics, but choosing based on the author's raised culture is reasonable.

"But maybe, if you squint hard enough it's not racist!"

Come one dude, why would ANYONE give them the benefit of the doubt when they clearly state their intentions?

Do you do the same for the KKK?

A few points of contention:

There's EXACTLY zero "pure native" people in latin America (I find the term highly racist but I'm using YOUR terms), doesn't matter how "brown" they are they are all mixed race.

The ONLY "pure white" people here are those who immigrated recently or are first generation born here from TWO "white" parents.

Your position that by "growing in a culture" someone has some magical knowledge of it that couldn't be gained and surpased by research is assinine.

Define "non-white culture", because in Latin America I know of not a single country that's either white or non-white, much less the cultures, since those come from 500 fucking years on interbreeding and mashing and mixing together our European Ancestors culture with those of the indigenous people that were conquered.

Let me give you a pro-tip:

Non racist pitch: We'll choose the best creators to write this book we can find with the deepest knowledge of whatever they want to write about.

Racist pitch:

QuoteIn June of 2020, I pitched the idea to Jeremy Crawford and Wes Schneider at the D&D Studio for a book written by Black and brown writers.

I'll point to you how ONLY one mentions skin color.

Why are you so intent on obfuscating this clear fact from their own mouths is beyond me, especially since you claim not to be on the side of the woke.

Quote from: KindaMeh on December 22, 2023, 02:35:17 PM
Honestly, the skin color pitch moves me away from feeling I could easily give them the benefit of the doubt. They outright said it was intended from the start to be a fantasy series written by black and brown authors, with that as a qualifying factor being apparent if the pitch was actually followed through on. That and then afterwards marketing the book in advance as having been intended as written by POCs. (Hence by definition not considering non-POCs, I would guess?)

It seems like strong circumstantial evidence combined with a confession, for me. I'm not the most knowledgeable on all this, and on some things like thinking they discriminated within POC I'll admit I jumped the gun. But I do think they considered biology a disqualifying factor.

And they did so not within the context of "Oh it's a book on growing up black in part of the south and you grew up black in the south, so we'll give you high marks on fit, as opposed to lower marks for those who didn't." but rather within the context (if I understand correctly) of "We want fantasy written by POC, which will mirror in flavor where they are culturally AND biologically from, and you are not a POC, so you are disqualified (by race) even if you grew up in Mexico." Now again, I could be wrong on this. But it seems to me like we should take them at their word when they have not retracted or outright contradicted prior statements.

I can appreciate that jhkim understands it would be wrong to discriminate and disqualify on the basis of race. Even if not with respect to POC. I also understand wanting to give folks the benefit of the doubt where it may be warranted. That said, in this instance it does not to me seem warranted, on account of the specific situation at hand.

They considered skin color, which is the most egregious shit I can think of.

I've got a friend of many years whose family, due to their ancestry constantly produces blond, red head and "brown" children. So of this 3 brothers (two brothers and a sister actually), only the brown one would qualify as a writer because he's brown, not the red headed girl, nor the blond boy.

Furthermore, they included "Santa" Muerte as part of our culture, fuck that shit, that's Narco Culture (think also the MS13 animals worship that demon).

Here comes Jhkim to the defense of the megacorporation (for reasons that escape me) declaring they will and did discriminate in the basis of the writer's skin color, to say that "hey maybe they didn't!" WTAFF!?

Speaking about "Non-White" cultures in Latin America? Dude should stick to speaking about what he knows, becauyse he obviously has exactly ZERO knowledge about Latin America.

I'll renew my invitation to him: Define what you mean by "Non-White" cultures. Because in Latin America there's not a single "White Culture" we've been interbreeding biologically and culturally for 500 fucking years.

Now, after he groks that, he can maybe explain what magic grants the brown son a deeper understanding of the exact same culture he and his brother and sister were born and raised in.

I would like to jump in here a bit to say that...

Much of the argumentation here seems to yield to the assumption that a person's race lends them authenticity in some way.

One's race (subjective as it is) gives them no claim on culture.  In fact, nothing gives you a claim on culture as it is not something to be owned.  It cannot be commodified in that way.

Yielding to this position inherently supports the position of racial essentialists and allows them to dictate the parameters of the debate.

Y para ser mucho mas directo... me vale un puto carajo lo que opinan los gringos sobre quien si, o quien no, tiene el derecho de hablar por parte de los Latinos. 

Quote from: jhkim on December 22, 2023, 01:57:29 PM
You suggest that in recruiting them, WotC checked first about their ancestry rather than about the culture they grew up in. Maybe they did. We could ask the Hispanic authors if WotC tried to confirm about their genetics first.

No, I don't "suggest" it. WOTC outright state it:

Quote
In June of 2020, I pitched the idea to Jeremy Crawford and Wes Schneider at the D&D Studio for a book written by Black and brown writers.

How did they check their race? I don't know. Maybe they asked them. Maybe they looked at pictures of them and guessed. Maybe they assumed everyone from Latin America is a POC. There's a good chance that the authors don't know how they were chosen. Even after being chosen, WOTC claimed that:

Quote
This is the first D&D book conceived, created, and written entirely by PoCs

So WOTC appear to have satisfied themselves as to the races of the authors. Why bother if they were just going for different cultures?

Quote from: jhkim on December 22, 2023, 01:57:29 PM
Still, the declared idea was that the authors write from lived experience of non-white cultures. You're choosing to skip that part, and assume that they chose based on author genetics, and thus there is no way they'd choose a genetically white Venezuelan.

No, the declared idea, right from the pitch, was to hire based on race. You're choosing to skip that part. They then celebrated the author races (not cultures) after the book was written. And I'm not "assuming" that they chose based on author genetics. Let's have that quote from WOTC again:

Quote
In June of 2020, I pitched the idea to Jeremy Crawford and Wes Schneider at the D&D Studio for a book written by Black and brown writers.

If people saying that they chose to go about something in a racist way, isn't enough to convince you of racism, may I ask what your standard is?

Quote from: Captain_Pazuzu on December 22, 2023, 03:44:53 PM
I would like to jump in here a bit to say that...

Much of the argumentation here seems to yield to the assumption that a person's race lends them authenticity in some way.

One's race (subjective as it is) gives them no claim on culture.  In fact, nothing gives you a claim on culture as it is not something to be owned.  It cannot be commodified in that way.

Yielding to this position inherently supports the position of racial essentialists and allows them to dictate the parameters of the debate.

Y para ser mucho mas directo... me vale un puto carajo lo que opinan los gringos sobre quien si, o quien no, tiene el derecho de hablar por parte de los Latinos.

Primero que nada: Bienvenido! Mexicano?

After the niceties, yes, I agree 100% it's the crux of my argument.

This is fair. I don't think in retrospect I should even have allowed for that possibility with my wording. There is no such thing as white culture, as understood best by whites. So it would indeed be racist to assume anything exists like that for other skin colors. Understanding of culture or society, and skin color, do not relate.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 22, 2023, 03:48:58 PM

Quote from: Captain_Pazuzu on December 22, 2023, 03:44:53 PM
I would like to jump in here a bit to say that...

Much of the argumentation here seems to yield to the assumption that a person's race lends them authenticity in some way.

One's race (subjective as it is) gives them no claim on culture.  In fact, nothing gives you a claim on culture as it is not something to be owned.  It cannot be commodified in that way.

Yielding to this position inherently supports the position of racial essentialists and allows them to dictate the parameters of the debate.

Y para ser mucho mas directo... me vale un puto carajo lo que opinan los gringos sobre quien si, o quien no, tiene el derecho de hablar por parte de los Latinos.

Primero que nada: Bienvenido! Mexicano?

After the niceties, yes, I agree 100% it's the crux of my argument.

A huevo!  8)

Quote from: Captain_Pazuzu on December 22, 2023, 03:57:29 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 22, 2023, 03:48:58 PM

Quote from: Captain_Pazuzu on December 22, 2023, 03:44:53 PM
I would like to jump in here a bit to say that...

Much of the argumentation here seems to yield to the assumption that a person's race lends them authenticity in some way.

One's race (subjective as it is) gives them no claim on culture.  In fact, nothing gives you a claim on culture as it is not something to be owned.  It cannot be commodified in that way.

Yielding to this position inherently supports the position of racial essentialists and allows them to dictate the parameters of the debate.

Y para ser mucho mas directo... me vale un puto carajo lo que opinan los gringos sobre quien si, o quien no, tiene el derecho de hablar por parte de los Latinos.

Primero que nada: Bienvenido! Mexicano?

After the niceties, yes, I agree 100% it's the crux of my argument.

A huevo!  8)

Bienvenido paisano! De donde eres? Yo de chilangolandia.

Quote from: KindaMeh on December 22, 2023, 03:51:49 PM
This is fair. I don't think in retrospect I should even have allowed for that possibility with my wording. There is no such thing as white culture, as understood best by whites. So it would indeed be racist to assume anything exists like that for other skin colors. Understanding of culture or society, and skin color, do not relate.

My dude, no need to apologize, we're not like the Cancel Pigs to come devour you for an innocent slip.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 22, 2023, 04:00:13 PM

Quote from: KindaMeh on December 22, 2023, 03:51:49 PM
This is fair. I don't think in retrospect I should even have allowed for that possibility with my wording. There is no such thing as white culture, as understood best by whites. So it would indeed be racist to assume anything exists like that for other skin colors. Understanding of culture or society, and skin color, do not relate.

My dude, no need to apologize, we're not like the Cancel Pigs to come devour you for an innocent slip.

I appreciate that, and that's definitely part of why I post here. Still, I felt bad about maybe having steered the discussion in a questionable direction. *shrugs*

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 22, 2023, 03:59:04 PM

Bienvenido paisano! De donde eres? Yo de chilangolandia.

Igual.

Precisamente de Coyoacan. 

Ya me siento mas en casa sabiendo que hay mas Chilango.  Jeje.

Saludos.

Quote from: Captain_Pazuzu on December 22, 2023, 04:18:49 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 22, 2023, 03:59:04 PM

Bienvenido paisano! De donde eres? Yo de chilangolandia.

Igual.

Precisamente de Coyoacan. 

Ya me siento mas en casa sabiendo que hay mas Chilango.  Jeje.

Saludos.

Muy cerca de donde vivo, en la Benito Juarez, a ver si nos ponemos de acuerdo para jugar.

Quote from: jhkim on December 21, 2023, 04:09:15 PM
Again, I think it's legitimate to select on writers who grew up in the culture they're writing about. Here "lived experience" means that one's childhood and personal life is in the culture, as opposed to studying the culture as a profession - dealing with it from 9 to 5, and then going home to a different culture. This isn't the same as skin color, but it also isn't the same as birthplace. My ex-father-in-law, for example, is white and was born and raised in Venezuela - but he grew up in an oil company expatriate neighborhood, speaking mostly English with other American families. He knows a lot about Venezuela, but he wasn't raised in Venezuelan culture.

I am reminded of Sony's presentation for Ghost of Tsushima where people crawled out of the woodwork to whine that "a white man" was playing the Japanese instrument at the show.  Only to have to slink away when the actual Japanese people told them that white man was one of the few living masters of the instrument and famous for his skill with it in that country.  Nobody has to grow up somewhere to become an expert in aspects of its culture.  I fully expect that there are plenty of people outside the US who quite exceed my knowledge of the history of the nation; for me to claim that someone born elsewhere could not possibly write a better story about it than I could would be stupid.

WotC was absolutely pandering by race for that book, it was the clear intention from the get-go.  You can tell because the first sentence was not, "We want authentic and meaningful cultural input from other places", it was "black and brown people".  They gave it away right at the start.  At this point I'd be amused for someone to come up with a pseudonym and do up a suitably brown AI photo and submit works of pure tripe to WotC and see if it gets published.

Quote from: KindaMeh on December 22, 2023, 02:35:17 PM
And they did so not within the context of "Oh it's a book on growing up black in part of the south and you grew up black in the south, so we'll give you high marks on fit, as opposed to lower marks for those who didn't." but rather within the context (if I understand correctly) of "We want fantasy written by POC, which will mirror in flavor where they are culturally AND biologically from, and you are not a POC, so you are disqualified (by race) even if you grew up in Mexico." Now again, I could be wrong on this. But it seems to me like we should take them at their word when they have not retracted or outright contradicted prior statements.

I can appreciate that jhkim understands it would be wrong to discriminate and disqualify on the basis of race. Even if not with respect to POC. I also understand wanting to give folks the benefit of the doubt where it may be warranted. That said, in this instance it does not to me seem warranted, on account of the specific situation at hand.

Fair enough, KindaMeh. We seem clear enough on the issues.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 22, 2023, 03:34:44 PM
Speaking about "Non-White" cultures in Latin America? Dude should stick to speaking about what he knows, becauyse he obviously has exactly ZERO knowledge about Latin America.

I'll renew my invitation to him: Define what you mean by "Non-White" cultures. Because in Latin America there's not a single "White Culture" we've been interbreeding biologically and culturally for 500 fucking years.

White culture is defined by originating from Europe, just like white people are defined that way. Sure, the distinction is less clear in Latin America, as well as on the Eastern Europe and Central Asia border. But borderline cases doesn't mean a distinction doesn't exist. There is no culture in the world without mixing and borderline cases. In any case, the idea of a white race and white culture doesn't come from modern leftism - it was around for centuries within European and American culture, and is still a common belief today.

By the historical definition of "white" in the U.S., significantly mixed ancestry was not considered white - and the same for mixed culture. If mixed culture has significant African or Native American influence, then it is non-white.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 22, 2023, 03:34:44 PM
Furthermore, they included "Santa" Muerte as part of our culture, fuck that shit, that's Narco Culture (think also the MS13 animals worship that demon).

There is no mention of Santa Muerte in the book, but there is a local spirit called La Catrina -- as a fantasy creation written by Mexican author Mario Ortegón. This is D&D, so the relation of anything to real-life beliefs is up to the reader. In the mini-setting, La Catrina is not a goddess and is not worshipped, but she is considered a patron spirit of the city and respected.

Quote from: jhkim on December 22, 2023, 06:49:33 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 22, 2023, 03:34:44 PM
Speaking about "Non-White" cultures in Latin America? Dude should stick to speaking about what he knows, becauyse he obviously has exactly ZERO knowledge about Latin America.

I'll renew my invitation to him: Define what you mean by "Non-White" cultures. Because in Latin America there's not a single "White Culture" we've been interbreeding biologically and culturally for 500 fucking years.

White culture is defined by originating from Europe, just like white people are defined that way. Sure, the distinction is less clear in Latin America, as well as on the Eastern Europe and Central Asia border. But borderline cases doesn't mean a distinction doesn't exist. There is no culture in the world without mixing and borderline cases. In any case, the idea of a white race and white culture doesn't come from modern leftism - it was around for centuries within European and American culture, and is still a common belief today.

By the historical definition of "white" in the U.S., significantly mixed ancestry was not considered white - and the same for mixed culture. If mixed culture has significant African or Native American influence, then it is non-white.

So, to you (and the woke in general) All European cultures are the same...

How it shows you woke Americans know nothing beyond your own parochial communities, French Culture is very different from British Culture and German Culture and Romanian Culture and Italian culture etc, etc.

But you judge them the same because the people are huwhite.

How many drops of blood? How many drops of blood are needed to make a culture white or non-white?

It amazes me you can write such things and not notice how racist you sound, I'm sure you also lump us Mexicans together with the rest of Latin America as "brown" people.

Please, I implore you, stop for a moment and think, go read again what you wrote and give it a good long and deep thinking, maybe there's still hope for you.

Quote from: jhkim on December 22, 2023, 06:49:33 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 22, 2023, 03:34:44 PM
Furthermore, they included "Santa" Muerte as part of our culture, fuck that shit, that's Narco Culture (think also the MS13 animals worship that demon).

There is no mention of Santa Muerte in the book, but there is a local spirit called La Catrina -- as a fantasy creation written by Mexican author Mario Ortegón. This is D&D, so the relation of anything to real-life beliefs is up to the reader. In the mini-setting, La Catrina is not a goddess and is not worshipped, but she is considered a patron spirit of the city and respected.

"patron spirit" Patron Saint... How it shows you know nothing about our culture or you would know enough to make the connection, La Catrina is La Muerte (Death), so if there's a patron saint that is La Catrina it is "Santa" Muerte with a very thin coat of paint.

But thank you for trying to explain my culture to me.

Quote from: Valatar on December 22, 2023, 06:45:31 PM

Quote from: jhkim on December 21, 2023, 04:09:15 PM
Again, I think it's legitimate to select on writers who grew up in the culture they're writing about. Here "lived experience" means that one's childhood and personal life is in the culture, as opposed to studying the culture as a profession - dealing with it from 9 to 5, and then going home to a different culture. This isn't the same as skin color, but it also isn't the same as birthplace. My ex-father-in-law, for example, is white and was born and raised in Venezuela - but he grew up in an oil company expatriate neighborhood, speaking mostly English with other American families. He knows a lot about Venezuela, but he wasn't raised in Venezuelan culture.

I am reminded of Sony's presentation for Ghost of Tsushima where people crawled out of the woodwork to whine that "a white man" was playing the Japanese instrument at the show.  Only to have to slink away when the actual Japanese people told them that white man was one of the few living masters of the instrument and famous for his skill with it in that country.  Nobody has to grow up somewhere to become an expert in aspects of its culture.  I fully expect that there are plenty of people outside the US who quite exceed my knowledge of the history of the nation; for me to claim that someone born elsewhere could not possibly write a better story about it than I could would be stupid.

WotC was absolutely pandering by race for that book, it was the clear intention from the get-go.  You can tell because the first sentence was not, "We want authentic and meaningful cultural input from other places", it was "black and brown people".  They gave it away right at the start.  At this point I'd be amused for someone to come up with a pseudonym and do up a suitably brown AI photo and submit works of pure tripe to WotC and see if it gets published.

If I can convince my cousin we might not even need a fake picture or name, let me see if he's willing to participate in trolling them. We would still need someone not from México to write it, better yet if it's an Irish redhead.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 22, 2023, 04:58:06 PM

Quote from: Captain_Pazuzu on December 22, 2023, 04:18:49 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 22, 2023, 03:59:04 PM

Bienvenido paisano! De donde eres? Yo de chilangolandia.

Igual.

Precisamente de Coyoacan. 

Ya me siento mas en casa sabiendo que hay mas Chilango.  Jeje.

Saludos.

Muy cerca de donde vivo, en la Benito Juarez, a ver si nos ponemos de acuerdo para jugar.

Seria chido pero no puedo.  Acabo de regresar de Vietnam donde estuve viviendo 6 meses.  Ahora estoy en los EUA.  Nadamas estoy los veranos en Mexico y normalmente me los paso en Temixco (cerca de Cuernavaca). 

Pero... hay vemos si nos ponemos de acuerdo un de estos dias. 

Saluuuud!

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 22, 2023, 07:45:20 PM

Quote from: Valatar on December 22, 2023, 06:45:31 PM

Quote from: jhkim on December 21, 2023, 04:09:15 PM
Again, I think it's legitimate to select on writers who grew up in the culture they're writing about. Here "lived experience" means that one's childhood and personal life is in the culture, as opposed to studying the culture as a profession - dealing with it from 9 to 5, and then going home to a different culture. This isn't the same as skin color, but it also isn't the same as birthplace. My ex-father-in-law, for example, is white and was born and raised in Venezuela - but he grew up in an oil company expatriate neighborhood, speaking mostly English with other American families. He knows a lot about Venezuela, but he wasn't raised in Venezuelan culture.

I am reminded of Sony's presentation for Ghost of Tsushima where people crawled out of the woodwork to whine that "a white man" was playing the Japanese instrument at the show.  Only to have to slink away when the actual Japanese people told them that white man was one of the few living masters of the instrument and famous for his skill with it in that country.  Nobody has to grow up somewhere to become an expert in aspects of its culture.  I fully expect that there are plenty of people outside the US who quite exceed my knowledge of the history of the nation; for me to claim that someone born elsewhere could not possibly write a better story about it than I could would be stupid.

WotC was absolutely pandering by race for that book, it was the clear intention from the get-go.  You can tell because the first sentence was not, "We want authentic and meaningful cultural input from other places", it was "black and brown people".  They gave it away right at the start.  At this point I'd be amused for someone to come up with a pseudonym and do up a suitably brown AI photo and submit works of pure tripe to WotC and see if it gets published.

If I can convince my cousin we might not even need a fake picture or name, let me see if he's willing to participate in trolling them. We would still need someone not from México to write it, better yet if it's an Irish redhead.

In the US, people have trouble understanding any viewpoint that is not native to their own imperial worldview.  Try explaining that most Mexicans identify as mestizo.  In the USA, being mixed is not a valid category.  All people must fit into, and be defined by, the categories that they themselves (US intellectuals) invented. 

One has to be completely ignorant of the world in order to accept the idea that there is anything deterministic about the concept of "whiteness."

Ahora intenta explicarle que Mexico jamas fue colonia, fue virreinato. 

No entienden.  Ni lo van a entender nunca. 

Quote from: Captain_Pazuzu on December 22, 2023, 10:40:36 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 22, 2023, 04:58:06 PM

Quote from: Captain_Pazuzu on December 22, 2023, 04:18:49 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 22, 2023, 03:59:04 PM

Bienvenido paisano! De donde eres? Yo de chilangolandia.

Igual.

Precisamente de Coyoacan. 

Ya me siento mas en casa sabiendo que hay mas Chilango.  Jeje.

Saludos.

Muy cerca de donde vivo, en la Benito Juarez, a ver si nos ponemos de acuerdo para jugar.

Seria chido pero no puedo.  Acabo de regresar de Vietnam donde estuve viviendo 6 meses.  Ahora estoy en los EUA.  Nadamas estoy los veranos en Mexico y normalmente me los paso en Temixco (cerca de Cuernavaca). 

Pero... hay vemos si nos ponemos de acuerdo un de estos dias. 

Saluuuud!

También se puede en roll20, si te interesa le digo a mi GM o creamos un grupo de latinos para jugar en Español.

Quote from: Captain_Pazuzu on December 22, 2023, 10:51:41 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 22, 2023, 07:45:20 PM

Quote from: Valatar on December 22, 2023, 06:45:31 PM

Quote from: jhkim on December 21, 2023, 04:09:15 PM
Again, I think it's legitimate to select on writers who grew up in the culture they're writing about. Here "lived experience" means that one's childhood and personal life is in the culture, as opposed to studying the culture as a profession - dealing with it from 9 to 5, and then going home to a different culture. This isn't the same as skin color, but it also isn't the same as birthplace. My ex-father-in-law, for example, is white and was born and raised in Venezuela - but he grew up in an oil company expatriate neighborhood, speaking mostly English with other American families. He knows a lot about Venezuela, but he wasn't raised in Venezuelan culture.

I am reminded of Sony's presentation for Ghost of Tsushima where people crawled out of the woodwork to whine that "a white man" was playing the Japanese instrument at the show.  Only to have to slink away when the actual Japanese people told them that white man was one of the few living masters of the instrument and famous for his skill with it in that country.  Nobody has to grow up somewhere to become an expert in aspects of its culture.  I fully expect that there are plenty of people outside the US who quite exceed my knowledge of the history of the nation; for me to claim that someone born elsewhere could not possibly write a better story about it than I could would be stupid.

WotC was absolutely pandering by race for that book, it was the clear intention from the get-go.  You can tell because the first sentence was not, "We want authentic and meaningful cultural input from other places", it was "black and brown people".  They gave it away right at the start.  At this point I'd be amused for someone to come up with a pseudonym and do up a suitably brown AI photo and submit works of pure tripe to WotC and see if it gets published.

If I can convince my cousin we might not even need a fake picture or name, let me see if he's willing to participate in trolling them. We would still need someone not from México to write it, better yet if it's an Irish redhead.

In the US, people have trouble understanding any viewpoint that is not native to their own imperial worldview.  Try explaining that most Mexicans identify as mestizo.  In the USA, being mixed is not a valid category.  All people must fit into, and be defined by, the categories that they themselves (US intellectuals) invented. 

One has to be completely ignorant of the world in order to accept the idea that there is anything deterministic about the concept of "whiteness."

Ahora intenta explicarle que Mexico jamas fue colonia, fue virreinato. 

No entienden.  Ni lo van a entender nunca.

You'll find that here that rule doesn't apply, here most understand that the woke world view is deeply flawed, racist and sexist.

Of course we have our resident leftists who try to equivocate or who openly claim it's the "humane" way to look at things.

Por ejemplo Shark! es un tipo a toda madre.

I didn't mean to give you a bad impression of this site, so apologies for anything I may have done there. I realize that we of clan gringo talking about who has the best(?) qualifications to talk about a culture probably wasn't the best introduction. Though for the record, I do agree with what you said about culture not working that way and not being a commodity to be owned. I'll openly admit to not knowing shit about Mexican history, or even global history more generally, though even I know better than to think y'all were just some Spanish colony in the British vein or something. Or that our past and present racism should be the lens through which things should be viewed here, much less in other nations. Also, GeekyBugle is awesome and you should totally ask him about his professional game design if y'all wind up gaming together and you'd be interested. Also, I kind of suck at Spanish, even though globally it's a pretty important language, so forgive me if I wind up misinterpreting anything you had said with respect to where I made mistakes. (I'd try to write a properly languaged response, but that's barely better than my speaking, which is frankly less than three year old level.)

Quote from: KindaMeh on December 22, 2023, 11:57:05 PM
I didn't mean to give you a bad impression of this site, so apologies for anything I may have done there. I realize that we of clan gringo talking about who has the best(?) qualifications to talk about a culture probably wasn't the best introduction. Though for the record, I do agree with what you said about culture not working that way and not being a commodity to be owned. I'll openly admit to not knowing shit about Mexican history, or even global history more generally, though even I know better than to think y'all were just some Spanish colony in the British vein or something. Or that our past and present racism should be the lens through which things should be viewed here, much less in other nations. Also, GeekyBugle is awesome and you should totally ask him about his professional game design if y'all wind up gaming together and you'd be interested. Also, I kind of suck at Spanish, even though globally it's a pretty important language, so forgive me if I wind up misinterpreting anything you had said with respect to where I made mistakes. (I'd try to write a properly languaged response, but that's barely better than my speaking, which is frankly less than three year old level.)

Stahp! You're making me blush!

Quote from: KindaMeh on December 22, 2023, 11:57:05 PM
I didn't mean to give you a bad impression of this site, so apologies for anything I may have done there. I realize that we of clan gringo talking about who has the best(?) qualifications to talk about a culture probably wasn't the best introduction. Though for the record, I do agree with what you said about culture not working that way and not being a commodity to be owned. I'll openly admit to not knowing shit about Mexican history, or even global history more generally, though even I know better than to think y'all were just some Spanish colony in the British vein or something. Or that our past and present racism should be the lens through which things should be viewed here, much less in other nations. Also, GeekyBugle is awesome and you should totally ask him about his professional game design if y'all wind up gaming together and you'd be interested. Also, I kind of suck at Spanish, even though globally it's a pretty important language, so forgive me if I wind up misinterpreting anything you had said with respect to where I made mistakes. (I'd try to write a properly languaged response, but that's barely better than my speaking, which is frankly less than three year old level.)

No worries Sir.

Most people don't really know much about history... in the US, Mexico or anywhere else.

I'm happy enough just to see people admit they don't know everything. 

To be honest, there is not much consensus on how to view history in Mexico either, plenty of arguments in that regard.

Just to give you an (unsolicited) idea of one way in which it differs from the US experience... some argue that the Spanish conquered us.  Others argue that this is impossible because Mexicans did not exist before the Spanish came.  Therefore, it is actually the Spanish who created us through the mestizaje (racial mixing).  Some argue that we are totally distinct from the Spanish because of the indigenous racial and cultural influence. And others argue that this is a silly thing to discuss given that we are using a European language (Spanish) and praying to a Middle Eastern God.

So... still fun.  :D

A more fun question is... where do Filipinos fit into all this? (They were a Spanish colony for 300+ years)

Anyhow.. nay pedo hermano.

Quote from: Captain_Pazuzu on December 23, 2023, 02:45:18 AM
A more fun question is... where do Filipinos fit into all this? (They were a Spanish colony for 300+ years)

Most Filipinos I know see the Spanish as occupiers and accept that part of their history with a shrug and a "that's life" attitude.  In some areas of the country have a lot of Spanish blood, particularly in southern Luzon and Cebu, but other areas had little to no interbreeding with the Spanish.  My wife and her family are almost pure Malay and physically look different from the more mestizo people that are around.  With this in mind, most Filipinos see themselves as Filipino and more broadly as Asian rather than having any real Spanish roots.  They speak Tagalog and English primarily, with local languages used outside of Manila.  A few affluent families see themselves as Spanish rather than Filipino and speak Spanish at home but this is extremely rare.

Every Filipino I've ever heard talk about it sees the Spanish occupation as something bad where as more than half wish the American would come back.  I'm not saying this is a national consensus, I'm just saying that this is what I've been exposed to.

Quote from: BadApple on December 23, 2023, 06:18:12 AM

Quote from: Captain_Pazuzu on December 23, 2023, 02:45:18 AM
A more fun question is... where do Filipinos fit into all this? (They were a Spanish colony for 300+ years)

Most Filipinos I know see the Spanish as occupiers and accept that part of their history with a shrug and a "that's life" attitude.  In some areas of the country have a lot of Spanish blood, particularly in southern Luzon and Cebu, but other areas had little to no interbreeding with the Spanish.  My wife and her family are almost pure Malay and physically look different from the more mestizo people that are around.  With this in mind, most Filipinos see themselves as Filipino and more broadly as Asian rather than having any real Spanish roots.  They speak Tagalog and English primarily, with local languages used outside of Manila.  A few affluent families see themselves as Spanish rather than Filipino and speak Spanish at home but this is extremely rare.

Every Filipino I've ever heard talk about it sees the Spanish occupation as something bad where as more than half wish the American would come back.  I'm not saying this is a national consensus, I'm just saying that this is what I've been exposed to.

I guess my sociological inquiry revolves around the question of... do they count as Latinos?  Spanish is ubiquitous within Tagalog.  They are Christian (unlike every other East Asian nation). The influence is absolutely there.

I have no idea what the answer is but it's fun to think about.

If you're interested...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Boxlz1HA0U

Quote from: Captain_Pazuzu on December 23, 2023, 10:25:04 AM

Quote from: BadApple on December 23, 2023, 06:18:12 AM

Quote from: Captain_Pazuzu on December 23, 2023, 02:45:18 AM
A more fun question is... where do Filipinos fit into all this? (They were a Spanish colony for 300+ years)

Most Filipinos I know see the Spanish as occupiers and accept that part of their history with a shrug and a "that's life" attitude.  In some areas of the country have a lot of Spanish blood, particularly in southern Luzon and Cebu, but other areas had little to no interbreeding with the Spanish.  My wife and her family are almost pure Malay and physically look different from the more mestizo people that are around.  With this in mind, most Filipinos see themselves as Filipino and more broadly as Asian rather than having any real Spanish roots.  They speak Tagalog and English primarily, with local languages used outside of Manila.  A few affluent families see themselves as Spanish rather than Filipino and speak Spanish at home but this is extremely rare.

Every Filipino I've ever heard talk about it sees the Spanish occupation as something bad where as more than half wish the American would come back.  I'm not saying this is a national consensus, I'm just saying that this is what I've been exposed to.

I guess my sociological inquiry revolves around the question of... do they count as Latinos?  Spanish is ubiquitous within Tagalog.  They are Christian (unlike every other East Asian nation). The influence is absolutely there.

I have no idea what the answer is but it's fun to think about.

If you're interested...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Boxlz1HA0U

They don't see themselves as Latino, in my experience.

Quote from: BadApple on December 23, 2023, 11:39:49 AM

Quote from: Captain_Pazuzu on December 23, 2023, 10:25:04 AM

Quote from: BadApple on December 23, 2023, 06:18:12 AM

Quote from: Captain_Pazuzu on December 23, 2023, 02:45:18 AM
A more fun question is... where do Filipinos fit into all this? (They were a Spanish colony for 300+ years)

Most Filipinos I know see the Spanish as occupiers and accept that part of their history with a shrug and a "that's life" attitude.  In some areas of the country have a lot of Spanish blood, particularly in southern Luzon and Cebu, but other areas had little to no interbreeding with the Spanish.  My wife and her family are almost pure Malay and physically look different from the more mestizo people that are around.  With this in mind, most Filipinos see themselves as Filipino and more broadly as Asian rather than having any real Spanish roots.  They speak Tagalog and English primarily, with local languages used outside of Manila.  A few affluent families see themselves as Spanish rather than Filipino and speak Spanish at home but this is extremely rare.

Every Filipino I've ever heard talk about it sees the Spanish occupation as something bad where as more than half wish the American would come back.  I'm not saying this is a national consensus, I'm just saying that this is what I've been exposed to.

I guess my sociological inquiry revolves around the question of... do they count as Latinos?  Spanish is ubiquitous within Tagalog.  They are Christian (unlike every other East Asian nation). The influence is absolutely there.

I have no idea what the answer is but it's fun to think about.

If you're interested...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Boxlz1HA0U

They don't see themselves as Latino, in my experience.

IIRC Tenbones is Filipino, you could ask him but...

AFAIK Latino is a narrow term only applied to those cultures created by Spain/Portugal in what would become LatinAmerica. I speak of cultures because IMO a Japanese, descendant of Japanese but either born or raised in México is more Latino than the people who are of Mexican descent but only know American culture.

This is all a fair bit more complex than I would have originally assumed. Even given that I was assuming there would be complexity. Just goes to show, I guess.

Hopefully not jumping topics too much, but are there significant differences in Woke positioning or influence and the like in say Latin America's TTRPG market as compared to the USA's? I'd guess in advance that there would be significant international differences more broadly, but I guess might as well ask those who might know. (Also Pundit is in Uruguay, right? Unlikely he'll see this part of the thread, but he might have some takes on this industry question too, I guess.)

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 23, 2023, 12:13:14 PM
IIRC Tenbones is Filipino, you could ask him but...

My wife is Filipina (not Fil-Am, right from the islands) and she thought the idea of being Latino was funny.  Then I asked her what did she think she was and she asked me if I was feeling all right.

Quote from: KindaMeh on December 23, 2023, 12:31:26 PM
This is all a fair bit more complex than I would have originally assumed. Even given that I was assuming there would be complexity. Just goes to show, I guess.

Hopefully not jumping topics too much, but are there significant differences in Woke positioning or influence and the like in say Latin America's TTRPG market as compared to the USA's? I'd guess in advance that there would be significant international differences more broadly, but I guess might as well ask those who might know. (Also Pundit is in Uruguay, right? Unlikely he'll see this part of the thread, but he might have some takes on this industry question too, I guess.)

Brazil's is overwhelmingly woke, as in all the big players are.

In México the scene is much smaller, mainly because there's zero local TTRPG publishers TIKO and because Mexicans tend to be very proud of their ignorance and don't read, speak, understand anything but Spanish and most very poorly at that.

No idea how are things in the rest of the continent.

I don't know why, but I had always assumed Mexico's inhabitants tended to be multilingual or at least better about that than Joe Sixpack of USA inhabitance. I guess that they wouldn't necessarily be thus makes sense though, since Mexico  may be less a nation of language-differentiated immigrants? I may have just made the (in retrospect somewhat odd) assumption that English was common among random members of the populous, for no good reason, outside the borders of places where that's the primary language.

Are most Portuguese language games from Brazil, I wonder? Where are the majority of spanish language games or translations from? The USA? (Wouldn't have guessed that, if so.)

Quote from: KindaMeh on December 23, 2023, 02:28:37 PM
I don't know why, but I had always assumed Mexico's inhabitants tended to be multilingual or at least better about that than Joe Sixpack of USA inhabitance. I guess that they wouldn't necessarily be thus makes sense though, since Mexico  may be less a nation of language-differentiated immigrants? I may have just made the (in retrospect somewhat odd) assumption that English was common among random members of the populous, for no good reason, outside the borders of places where that's the primary language.

Are most Portuguese language games from Brazil, I wonder? Where are the majority of spanish language games or translations from? The USA? (Wouldn't have guessed that, if so.)

Most Spanish written RPGs are from Spain.

That makes sense, in retrospect. Are translations also Spain? Or varying more based on the original country or locality?

Edit: Actually, dunno if this even matters. In the US relatively few TTRPG games of major success are translated from the languages of other areas. I can think of a few Japanese ones and the like, but yeah... are translated games a big thing, even? I had heard often when TTRPGs are successful elsewhere it's the result of a locality making it their own, but I don't know how true that is.

Quote from: KindaMeh on December 23, 2023, 02:36:59 PM
That makes sense, in retrospect. Are translations also Spain? Or varying more based on the original country or locality?

Edit: Actually, dunno if this even matters. In the US relatively few TTRPG games of major success are translated from the languages of other areas. I can think of a few Japanese ones and the like, but yeah... are translated games a big thing, even? I had heard often when TTRPGs are successful elsewhere it's the result of a locality making it their own, but I don't know how true that is.

Everything from Free League is originally in Swedish though some of their games are developed simultaneously in English.  The Dark Eye is a German game that's had pretty good success in the US.  Brancalonia is an Italian product that's going bananas right now.  Dragon Bane is a recent translation and import as well.  Finally, every Shadowrun player I know is using the German version and translating it into English because Catalyst Labs sucks.

Huh. Maybe I'm just not in a social group that plays a lot of them or hears about them a lot. Might have been me assuming my individual experience/sampling was more common than it was in practice.

Quote from: KindaMeh on December 23, 2023, 03:27:44 PM
Huh. Maybe I'm just not in a social group that plays a lot of them or hears about them a lot. Might have been me assuming my individual experience/sampling was more common than it was in practice.

It may be more of a thing where you've come across games and not known they were translations and imports.  Take a look at Free League and their massive list of games.  Most people I know think they were originally in English.  (I swear their translation team is as good as their art team.)

Good catch. Even I'm not living under a rock to the point where the one ring and forbidden lands aren't names I know.  :)

Quote from: KindaMeh on December 23, 2023, 02:28:37 PM
I don't know why, but I had always assumed Mexico's inhabitants tended to be multilingual or at least better about that than Joe Sixpack of USA inhabitance. I guess that they wouldn't necessarily be thus makes sense though, since Mexico  may be less a nation of language-differentiated immigrants? I may have just made the (in retrospect somewhat odd) assumption that English was common among random members of the populous, for no good reason, outside the borders of places where that's the primary language.

I grew up in the Central Valley in California.  There are a lot of Mexicans there.  I mean Mexicans not Americans whose ancestors immigrated from Mexico generations ago.  A large majority of them only speak Spanish.  They don't speak any English and don't care to learn.  They don't need to because there are whole neighborhoods where everything is in Spanish.  It's easy to tell when you are in a neighborhood like that because the signage is all in Spanish.  You can live your whole life in the Central Valley without ever learning a word of English and there are a lot of people who do just that.  There are far more white Americans who speak Spanish than Mexicans who bother learning English. 

I don't know if it's just because I assumed English was intrinsically this major global language or that I thought Mexicans would interact a lot with English speakers or what, but for whatever reason that just seems super weird to me. Like, when I think American I think some white dude who speaks only English, too. Not saying that's the actual demographic or linguistic competency level, but it's the stereotype for me that springs to mind. I guess the reality is kind of more reversed for known languages, maybe? Odd, from my perspective.   ???

Quote from: KindaMeh on December 24, 2023, 02:16:31 AM
I don't know if it's just because I assumed English was intrinsically this major global language or that I thought Mexicans would interact a lot with English speakers or what, but for whatever reason that just seems super weird to me. Like, when I think American I think some white dude who speaks only English, too. Not saying that's the actual demographic or linguistic competency level, but it's the stereotype for me that springs to mind. I guess the reality is kind of more reversed for known languages, maybe? Odd, from my perspective.   ???

Yeah, stereotypes are fun for jokes, but probably not the best ground for basing reality on.

This is true, and a very fair point. Heuristics and stereotypes are generally trash for actual learning, actual demographics and the like. I wasn't actively planning on using them, but am indeed going to have to re-evaluate where they may be subconsciously steering me astray in places like this. Might have been over sharing, but I suspect unfortunately I might not be the only person who has had similar thoughts. A lot of times if you don't specifically look into the content in question, things like this and resulting ignorance probably can indeed get you into trouble. The intent was less to offend or promote the stereotype, and more note that for me this all challenged a less rigorous understanding of how things might be or the like.

Quote from: BadApple on December 23, 2023, 12:35:16 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 23, 2023, 12:13:14 PM
IIRC Tenbones is Filipino, you could ask him but...

My wife is Filipina (not Fil-Am, right from the islands) and she thought the idea of being Latino was funny.  Then I asked her what did she think she was and she asked me if I was feeling all right.

Haha!

Now ask her how to say silverware in Tagalog?  (Then compare to Spanish)  Or restaurant... bucket... bacon...  snake... and many more.

Quote from: KindaMeh on December 24, 2023, 12:07:52 PM
This is true, and a very fair point. Heuristics and stereotypes are generally trash for actual learning, actual demographics and the like. I wasn't actively planning on using them, but am indeed going to have to re-evaluate where they may be subconsciously steering me astray in places like this. Might have been over sharing, but I suspect unfortunately I might not be the only person who has had similar thoughts. A lot of times if you don't specifically look into the content in question, things like this and resulting ignorance probably can indeed get you into trouble. The intent was less to offend or promote the stereotype, and more note that for me this all challenged a less rigorous understanding of how things might be or the like.

No offense is taken where none is intended.  Just people chatting about stuff.

Latin America generally is difficult to categorize.  Too much variation between countries and regions. 

There is also the issue that modern Western thought seems to conflate race and culture.  People can share the same culture and be of different races.  People can share the same race and be from different cultures.  Not sure why this has become such an elusive concept these days.

I would add that one's race gives them no claim on any particular culture.  This is why "African/Mexican/European American" is a stupid concept.

They are just different flavors of Americans with different skin tones.

Can confirm about Mexicans in California. We have three generations right next door in LA, and only the youngest generation speak fluent English (that's something I guess).

Quote from: Captain_Pazuzu on December 24, 2023, 12:19:31 PM
There is also the issue that modern Western thought seems to conflate race and culture. 

American thought, not Western (and neither modern). It's Americans that tend to create massive socio-cultural buckets ("Caucasian", "Latino", "Black" and so on) based on outdated and misproved concepts ("race" is quite simply not a thing) and then go along for the ride.

Quote from: yosemitemike on December 24, 2023, 02:07:29 AM

Quote from: KindaMeh on December 23, 2023, 02:28:37 PM
I don't know why, but I had always assumed Mexico's inhabitants tended to be multilingual or at least better about that than Joe Sixpack of USA inhabitance. I guess that they wouldn't necessarily be thus makes sense though, since Mexico  may be less a nation of language-differentiated immigrants? I may have just made the (in retrospect somewhat odd) assumption that English was common among random members of the populous, for no good reason, outside the borders of places where that's the primary language.

I grew up in the Central Valley in California.  There are a lot of Mexicans there.  I mean Mexicans not Americans whose ancestors immigrated from Mexico generations ago.  A large majority of them only speak Spanish.  They don't speak any English and don't care to learn.  They don't need to because there are whole neighborhoods where everything is in Spanish.  It's easy to tell when you are in a neighborhood like that because the signage is all in Spanish.  You can live your whole life in the Central Valley without ever learning a word of English and there are a lot of people who do just that.  There are far more white Americans who speak Spanish than Mexicans who bother learning English.

My mom is from Texas, and her first language was Spanish. Her family grew up around the cotton farms there. We go all the way back to the conquistador days; one of my famous ancestors bought a huge tract of land out there, years before the USA existed at all.

I think I kinda dragged us off track with some of this stuff. I found out a lot of cool things as a result, but at this point I'm probably derailing a bit.

I guess to go back to translations and things in and from other nations, what's the general board consensus on the politics of different nations' TTRPG markets? I feel a lot of what we've discussed has related to US and English-speaking markets for the most part. Though I did appreciate hearing a bit about further left products existing in Brazil. Does Mexico mostly play games that are translated from other languages, for instance, or from Spain if that's where most Spanish language rpgs are from and they lack a strong internal market? How does this impact the politics of the game and corporations, more to the point?

Quote from: KindaMeh on December 29, 2023, 07:14:43 PM
I think I kinda dragged us off track with some of this stuff. I found out a lot of cool things as a result, but at this point I'm probably derailing a bit.

I guess to go back to translations and things in and from other nations, what's the general board consensus on the politics of different nations' TTRPG markets? I feel a lot of what we've discussed has related to US and English-speaking markets for the most part. Though I did appreciate hearing a bit about further left products existing in Brazil. Does Mexico mostly play games that are translated from other languages, for instance, or from Spain if that's where most Spanish language rpgs are from and they lack a strong internal market? How does this impact the politics of the game and corporations, more to the point?

AFAIK there's only one RPG in development/published by a Mexican right now (not counting myself). I live in a middle class neighborhood, the only RPG store nearby was tiny, about 12 square meters tops, and it closed down a few years back.

IME most Mexican gamers play American RPGs, either translated or not, I'm not sure most even know about Legends of the West Mark (the only OSR from Spain).

Oof. So mostly our own larger brands of woke offal. Yeah, that's probably less than fun for those who are new to TTRPGs there, I would guess.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 29, 2023, 08:49:43 PMAFAIK there's only one RPG in development/published by a Mexican right now (not counting myself). I live in a middle class neighborhood, the only RPG store nearby was tiny, about 12 square meters tops, and it closed down a few years back.

IME most Mexican gamers play American RPGs, either translated or not, I'm not sure most even know about Legends of the West Mark (the only OSR from Spain).

"Like, Coyote and Crow is like, Pan-American indigenous nativeeeessss. So, like, it's really a Mexican game, or like any Latinx or whateevvveeerrrrr."

I found a couple that look to be in Mexico.  They are apparently both making Powered by the Apocalyspe games.
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1971035968/nahual-a-tabletop-rpg-of-mexican-urban-fantasy
https://smokingmirrorgames.com/

Because of course they fucking are.

Quote from: pawsplay on December 29, 2023, 06:57:16 PM
My mom is from Texas, and her first language was Spanish. Her family grew up around the cotton farms there. We go all the way back to the conquistador days; one of my famous ancestors bought a huge tract of land out there, years before the USA existed at all.

Your point being?

Quote from: yosemitemike on December 30, 2023, 08:22:49 AM
I found a couple that look to be in Mexico.  They are apparently both making Powered by the Apocalyspe games.
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1971035968/nahual-a-tabletop-rpg-of-mexican-urban-fantasy
https://smokingmirrorgames.com/

Because of course they fucking are.

Quote from: pawsplay on December 29, 2023, 06:57:16 PM
My mom is from Texas, and her first language was Spanish. Her family grew up around the cotton farms there. We go all the way back to the conquistador days; one of my famous ancestors bought a huge tract of land out there, years before the USA existed at all.

Your point being?

Right, I forgot about nahual, a woke game where the nahual (who was considered evil even before the conquista) hunts Angels... PbtA because of course, the other one I didn't know about but seems to be woke garbage too.

Notice how both are in English and Spanish? My bet is it's audience will buy it to show how progressive and inclusive they are. So mainly white liberal Americans.

Quote from: KindaMeh on December 29, 2023, 08:55:44 PM
Oof. So mostly our own larger brands of woke offal. Yeah, that's probably less than fun for those who are new to TTRPGs there, I would guess.

60 $ times 3 is 180 dollars, convert to pesos 17X180 = 3060 pesos...

Not something most Mexicans can spend in a hobby.

Factor in the average books read is 2.5 per mexican per year (and that ppl like me who read at least 12 and sometimes 52 books per year bump the average upwards), and that reading is needed to play.

Compounding it with most  Mexicans proud ignorance of any other language.

Once you take all of that into consideration you need to also remember the honorable tradition of pirating stuff.

The national market isn't very attractive.

Quote from: yosemitemike on December 30, 2023, 08:22:49 AM
Your point being?

That there is a large Spanish-speaking local population in the Texas and nearby, who are not immigrants. Just useful info.

Quote from: pawsplay on December 30, 2023, 11:15:20 PM

Quote from: yosemitemike on December 30, 2023, 08:22:49 AM
Your point being?

That there is a large Spanish-speaking local population in the Texas and nearby, who are not immigrants. Just useful info.

and how is that relevant to anything I wrote?

Quote from: yosemitemike on December 30, 2023, 11:47:49 PM

Quote from: pawsplay on December 30, 2023, 11:15:20 PM

Quote from: yosemitemike on December 30, 2023, 08:22:49 AM
Your point being?

That there is a large Spanish-speaking local population in the Texas and nearby, who are not immigrants. Just useful info.

and how is that relevant to anything I wrote?

It's not. As is obvious by now, pawsplay's only interest is in dragging threads off-topic and onto themselves.

The fact that a shit hasn't already been booted as being a "poor fit" is an example of the difference between a free speech site and one run by the woke. Pundit doesn't ban people just for being a shit.

Quote from: yosemitemike on December 30, 2023, 11:47:49 PM

Quote from: pawsplay on December 30, 2023, 11:15:20 PM

Quote from: yosemitemike on December 30, 2023, 08:22:49 AM
Your point being?

That there is a large Spanish-speaking local population in the Texas and nearby, who are not immigrants. Just useful info.

and how is that relevant to anything I wrote?

You mentioned a multi-generational Spanish-speaking population in California. I made a comment about Texas. There is no deeper meaning.

Quote from: pawsplay on December 31, 2023, 10:38:48 AM
You mentioned a multi-generational Spanish-speaking population in California. I made a comment about Texas. There is no deeper meaning.

So it's just a non sequitur.  Okay.

Quote from: yosemitemike on December 31, 2023, 11:25:33 AM

Quote from: pawsplay on December 31, 2023, 10:38:48 AM
You mentioned a multi-generational Spanish-speaking population in California. I made a comment about Texas. There is no deeper meaning.

So it's just a non sequitur.  Okay.

Non sequitur means "it doesn't follow." My comment was a reply to yours.

I'm gonna initiate an actual tangent/topic jump, in the hopes of getting us back on track:

I feel like TTRPG related conventions have been getting worse in recent years from a political intolerance and panelist identity-demanding perspective. That said, I could be wrong on that. Are corporate conventions and public events, specifically, the ones going in that direction? Or is it indeed most conventions/the average which seems to be trending that way? Or am I wrong on this and there's some sort of counterculture I wasn't previously aware of that's been developing?

Quote from: KindaMeh on December 31, 2023, 12:28:01 PM
I feel like TTRPG related conventions have been getting worse in recent years from a political intolerance and panelist identity-demanding perspective. That said, I could be wrong on that. Are corporate conventions and public events, specifically, the ones going in that direction? Or is it indeed most conventions/the average which seems to be trending that way? Or am I wrong on this and there's some sort of counterculture I wasn't previously aware of that's been developing?

It's probably hard to get a big picture here. I regularly go to the four SF Bay Area conventions (DunDraCon, KublaCon, Big Bad Con, Pacificon) and to AmberCon Northwest in Portland.

I don't pay much attention to panelists at game conventions - I go there to play and run games. Of the SF Bay Area conventions, Big Bad Con most recently has had more industry involvement and also has been more overtly political (leftist). The others that I go to haven't changed significantly from the previous twenty years, as far as I can see (though again, I'm not paying attention to panels).

Quote from: KindaMeh on December 31, 2023, 12:28:01 PMI feel like TTRPG related conventions have been getting worse in recent years from a political intolerance and panelist identity-demanding perspective. That said, I could be wrong on that. Are corporate conventions and public events, specifically, the ones going in that direction? Or is it indeed most conventions/the average which seems to be trending that way? Or am I wrong on this and there's some sort of counterculture I wasn't previously aware of that's been developing?

A Youtuber who went to Gen Con was attacked by a mentally ill far Leftist, at an eatery near to the convention, and Gen Con permanently banned them both. Bear in mind that the Youtuber in question was sucker-punched while eating, and didn't fight back.

Conventions with safe rooms where white people aren't allowed.

Overly draconian interaction rules that de facto bar autistics, because they're unable to decipher the (often hidden or contradictory) subtleties.

Panels dumping designers and writers with decades of experience in the hobby because they're white and male, for diverse people with a combined experience less than your average single convention-goer.


People have to be either ideologically corrupt, or have suffered a major head injury, not to acknowledge the takeover. And that's not even getting into the general normiefication of gaming conventions, or how they turned into female cosplay events.

I knew some of that stuff existed, and that things have been bad at a lot of the conventions. But was unsure whether things were getting worse or better on the whole compared to say the relatively recent vaccine and masking requirement days. Also kind of just was hoping some areas might be unaffected or pushing back despite more general TTRPG corporate trends.

Sounds like jhkim has noticed a negative difference, but only in some of the conventions he attends, though presumably he'd have a notably higher bar for what qualifies. I myself don't get out much these days, and I'm not sure where one would find the metadata on all this, but was interested within the context of this thread topic. I do think that conventions are oftentimes woke and discriminatory, and that a lot of this is recent. Else I would not have mentioned it here, especially with respect to recent corporate trends. Still, was unsure of broader prospective ebb and flow there, for instance whether directly branded corporate events are more that way, and figured it might be topic relevant. *shrug*

Quote from: Grognard GM on December 31, 2023, 03:39:30 PM
Conventions with safe rooms where white people aren't allowed.

Let's phrase that differently. Conversation spaces that aren't forced to admit white people.

Quote from: pawsplay on December 31, 2023, 04:49:37 PM
Let's phrase that differently. Conversation spaces that aren't forced to admit white black people.

Yep, racist confirmed.

What's with the segregation and hiring discrimination push more generally within TTRPG corporate contexts? I ask because in most other service provision contexts, I'd say that at the very least the former would be frowned upon. The latter also wouldn't typically go to the point of outright disqualification on the basis of skin color, especially not with that being the stated intent in advance. Yet somehow here this is considered a marketing virtue and a survivable legal move? Something feels kind of off here, beyond just normal poor decision making and a weak moral compass. Either the corporations are right, and this is both what the public wants and what the courts will illegally tolerate, or there's been a significant distortion of corporate capacity to make reasonable decisions, I feel. Beyond the pale of elsewhere.

Quote from: pawsplay on December 31, 2023, 04:49:37 PM

Quote from: Grognard GM on December 31, 2023, 03:39:30 PM
Conventions with safe rooms where white people aren't allowed.

Let's phrase that differently. Conversation spaces that aren't forced to admit white people.

Rephrasing this does not actually change what they are. Trying to paint the image with a different filter comes across as extremely insincere.

Quote from: Dropbear on December 31, 2023, 05:50:09 PM

Quote from: pawsplay on December 31, 2023, 04:49:37 PM

Quote from: Grognard GM on December 31, 2023, 03:39:30 PM
Conventions with safe rooms where white people aren't allowed.

Let's phrase that differently. Conversation spaces that aren't forced to admit white people.

Rephrasing this does not actually change what they are. Trying to paint the image with a different filter comes across as extremely insincere.

I think at this point it's pretty apparent that pawsplay is posting in an insincere way to derail topics. I've put pawsplay on my very short ignore list as a reminder to not fall for the bait.

Quote from: Eirikrautha on December 31, 2023, 05:04:54 PM

Quote from: pawsplay on December 31, 2023, 04:49:37 PM
Let's phrase that differently. Conversation spaces that aren't forced to admit white black people.

Yep, racist confirmed.

Was there any doubt?

The worst part is the guy must think he can't be racist towards white people because buzzword, word salad, buzzword.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 31, 2023, 07:44:26 PM

Quote from: Eirikrautha on December 31, 2023, 05:04:54 PM

Quote from: pawsplay on December 31, 2023, 04:49:37 PM
Let's phrase that differently. Conversation spaces that aren't forced to admit white black people.

Yep, racist confirmed.

Was there any doubt?

The worst part is the guy must think he can't be racist towards white people because buzzword, word salad, buzzword.

The entitled racism of people like this is one of the very disconcerting signs of our times.  All the buzzwords and nomenclature boil down to... it's ok to be racist towards white people because they are bad.  These broken people view themselves as modern crusaders on a quest to right the universe, so they feel entitled to behave abominably and still embrace the delusion that they are the good guys.

"The surest way to work up a crusade in favor of some good cause is to promise people they will have a chance of maltreating someone. To be able to destroy with good conscience, to be able to behave badly and call your bad behavior 'righteous indignation' — this is the height of psychological luxury, the most delicious of moral treats." - Aldous Huxley



Aldous Huxley

Looking around various sites for LFG calls, and seeing all the weird hoops people jump through with safety tools and safe gaming. It's insanity.

Safety tools and the sites that host paid gaming and require them... They are literally branches of woke expression and constraint within the TTRPG market. They exist oftentimes as expressions of a sickness in the hobby. And more to the point, they exclude folks both from markets and from tables and from entire games (if the games requiring them have their way) on the basis of a lack of ideological conformity.

I'll also add this video as to why it's a bad idea in the hobby more generally: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPlJPHcmd6s

Quote from: KindaMeh on January 06, 2024, 04:56:24 PM
Safety tools and the sites that host paid gaming and require them... They are literally branches of woke expression and constraint within the TTRPG market. They exist oftentimes as expressions of a sickness in the hobby. And more to the point, they exclude folks both from markets and from tables and from entire games (if the games requiring them have their way) on the basis of a lack of ideological conformity.

I'll also add this video as to why it's a bad idea in the hobby more generally: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPlJPHcmd6s

It's everywhere in online gaming. Go to almost every place, Discord and such, that are to connect players and GM's. The first thing you see is LGBTQI+, Trans and BLM flags, and blocks of text saying how inclusive and moral they are. It's tagging territory with your gang colors.

Quote from: jhkim on December 13, 2023, 12:35:22 PM
My problem is blatantly misrepresenting what is actually in the books. If you want to complain about a disabled NPC on page 146 of one book, fine, but it's objectively false to say something like "WotC adventures are now all about making friends and going to prom and singing kumbaya" or to say that all dungeons are now wheelchair accessible.

If you want to say that WotC is a soulless corporation churning out generic content where every third book has a token progressive inclusion hidden somewhere in it, then fine. If you want to say that WotC is represents progressive values, then I'm going to disagree.

This is part of the problem. WotC spouts some woke sounding nonesense about a module. But then when you look at the module theres no such thing in it. Candlekeep has nothing that says "wheelchair accessible" and they keep doing this because they know it will get people to scream and that is free advertising.

They know doing a diversity hire for Radiant Citadel would get people riled. More free advertising.

As long as marketing keeps pushing that outrage marketing is profitable they will keep doing it.

Quote from: Grognard GM on January 06, 2024, 06:33:34 PM
It's everywhere in online gaming. Go to almost every place, Discord and such, that are to connect players and GM's. The first thing you see is LGBTQI+, Trans and BLM flags, and blocks of text saying how inclusive and moral they are. It's tagging territory with your gang colors.

  Not just online. There's a Champions group in my area that's had a "looking for players" message up on the FLGS bulletin board for several months at least (possibly a couple of years), and the first thing they specify is "18+ and queer-friendly."

>queer-friendly
my thing there is they likely do not define queer friendly the same as me. i've had friends and players who were gay men (he's dead now but we had allen for many years, big gay al as we called him, after the southpark character of same name) and many lesbians (lesbians in my experience seem to outnumber gay men, they seem less frowned on and thus more open about it, two lesbians kissing makes my warp nacelle leak plasma but two gay men kissing makes me retch a little for example), we did not abuse them for it and treated them as we would want to be treated.

But these groups likely mean "militantly pro-queer, anti-hetero, anti-western, anti-christian, etc" when they say pro-queer. You can be gay and play at my table just fine, but not you, nor anyone else, should be making out at the table or doing ERP...we came to kill goblins dammit.

I will not lie and pretend that I do not find male on male to be an abomination and disgusting, but so long as you and your consenting adult partner can keep that out of sight (i don't bend my wife over the table in front of you, i expect the same from you, come on now) I can treat you just like a friend who chooses to drink an inferior brand of whiskey when I'm not looking. I find the male physical form to be disgusting really, so perhaps homophobe would be the right word except that i do not fear, so the phobe part is misassigned.

But I feel, based on having lived too long already, that by "queer friendly" they likely mean that if you don't lie and pretend to be enthusiastic about gaying all the things then you are a bigot. Ok sure I can be a bigot I guess.

I really dislike men acting effeminate though, as a separate issue that goes beyond whether you are queer or not, it really raises my hackles and cutesie shit puts me in a murderous mood, as I find it on a subconcious level to be uncanny valley, a sort of "neener-neener you won't dare hurt me" taunt, the air becomes pregnant with an unfulfilled need to drop harsh reality crashing down hard on the cutesie thing to remind it that this world is not cute, i am not cute, you are not cute, and cute is for the select few who deserve such like children who still believe in santa. It feels like you are somehow taking candy from orphans when a grown ass man tries to do cutesie.

If "queer friendly" means shut up and adopt every plank of my agenda with full rigor then you should be hanged for trying to weaponize language and being a disingenuous twat. You know who is allowed to play a magic anime girl? the 12 year old girl, NOT the 40 something neckbeard. (said girl can also play a pokemon type monster and the rest of you will be told to make normal characters because you are not a 12 y/o girl).

>unnnhhh its not fair
life is not fair, even god got ganked by the romans for equipping cloth armor in a melee slot, you will fair no better, so take this form, draw a picture of your blasted ass on it and shade in the area where it hurts for me so i can kick you there until you straighten up.

Yeah I'm "queer friendly" I'm just not "pedantic dumbshit" friendly I suppose.

Quote from: Slipshot762 on January 07, 2024, 01:07:58 AM
But these groups likely mean "militantly pro-queer, anti-hetero, anti-western, anti-christian, etc" when they say pro-queer.

"Queer" is one of those words with different meanings to different people.
To most people it just means some umbrella term for gay, lesbian, bi, etc.
But there is also an ideological and political meaning of the word.
Queer theory (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queer_theory#:~:text=Queer%20theory%20and%20politics%20necessarily,demonstrably%20defiant%20definitions%20and%20configurations.)
That is where you get your militant activist mentality.

Quote from: KindaMeh on January 06, 2024, 04:56:24 PM
Safety tools and the sites that host paid gaming and require them... They are literally branches of woke expression and constraint within the TTRPG market. They exist oftentimes as expressions of a sickness in the hobby. And more to the point, they exclude folks both from markets and from tables and from entire games (if the games requiring them have their way) on the basis of a lack of ideological conformity.

I'll also add this video as to why it's a bad idea in the hobby more generally: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPlJPHcmd6s

I think he sums it up nicely, and while the "if you need safety tools to play a game, you have bigger issues and probably shouldn't play" sounds harsh, it's absolutely true. These things are primarily in place to have people conform to some weird and arbitrary constraints, not on what you put in your games, but on how you can and must behave. This is indeed, like RPG Elite says, pandering to the lowest common denominator around the table.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer on January 06, 2024, 09:43:35 PM

Quote from: Grognard GM on January 06, 2024, 06:33:34 PM
It's everywhere in online gaming. Go to almost every place, Discord and such, that are to connect players and GM's. The first thing you see is LGBTQI+, Trans and BLM flags, and blocks of text saying how inclusive and moral they are. It's tagging territory with your gang colors.

  Not just online. There's a Champions group in my area that's had a "looking for players" message up on the FLGS bulletin board for several months at least (possibly a couple of years), and the first thing they specify is "18+ and queer-friendly."

I know a guy who was regularly running pick-up games at his FLGS, in the year of our Lord 2023. That requires some combination of bravery and brain injury.

If queer friendly means what people say it means, then I find the whole thing to be pointless.  They say it's just a statement that you won't be assholes to queer people.  How about not being an asshole full stop?  This is what I would call a normal game.  You don't need to specify that people not be assholes to this small subset of players.  Just don't be an asshole.  You don't need to virtue signal about it.  Just don't be an asshole.

Quote from: yosemitemike on January 07, 2024, 08:03:51 AM
If queer friendly means what people say it means, then I find the whole thing to be pointless.  They say it's just a statement that you won't be assholes to queer people.  How about not being an asshole full stop?  This is what I would call a normal game.  You don't need to specify that people not be assholes to this small subset of players.  Just don't be an asshole.  You don't need to virtue signal about it.  Just don't be an asshole.

If that's what it meant, I'd be cool with it.  What it means is your game has to be a gay pride celebration. 

Quote from: Slipshot762 on January 07, 2024, 01:07:58 AM
>queer-friendly
my thing there is they likely do not define queer friendly the same as me. i've had friends and players who were gay men (he's dead now but we had allen for many years, big gay al as we called him, after the southpark character of same name) and many lesbians (lesbians in my experience seem to outnumber gay men, they seem less frowned on and thus more open about it, two lesbians kissing makes my warp nacelle leak plasma but two gay men kissing makes me retch a little for example), we did not abuse them for it and treated them as we would want to be treated.

But these groups likely mean "militantly pro-queer, anti-hetero, anti-western, anti-christian, etc" when they say pro-queer. You can be gay and play at my table just fine, but not you, nor anyone else, should be making out at the table or doing ERP...we came to kill goblins dammit.

I will not lie and pretend that I do not find male on male to be an abomination and disgusting, but so long as you and your consenting adult partner can keep that out of sight (i don't bend my wife over the table in front of you, i expect the same from you, come on now) I can treat you just like a friend who chooses to drink an inferior brand of whiskey when I'm not looking. I find the male physical form to be disgusting really, so perhaps homophobe would be the right word except that i do not fear, so the phobe part is misassigned.

But I feel, based on having lived too long already, that by "queer friendly" they likely mean that if you don't lie and pretend to be enthusiastic about gaying all the things then you are a bigot. Ok sure I can be a bigot I guess.

I really dislike men acting effeminate though, as a separate issue that goes beyond whether you are queer or not, it really raises my hackles and cutesie shit puts me in a murderous mood, as I find it on a subconcious level to be uncanny valley, a sort of "neener-neener you won't dare hurt me" taunt, the air becomes pregnant with an unfulfilled need to drop harsh reality crashing down hard on the cutesie thing to remind it that this world is not cute, i am not cute, you are not cute, and cute is for the select few who deserve such like children who still believe in santa. It feels like you are somehow taking candy from orphans when a grown ass man tries to do cutesie.

If "queer friendly" means shut up and adopt every plank of my agenda with full rigor then you should be hanged for trying to weaponize language and being a disingenuous twat. You know who is allowed to play a magic anime girl? the 12 year old girl, NOT the 40 something neckbeard. (said girl can also play a pokemon type monster and the rest of you will be told to make normal characters because you are not a 12 y/o girl).

>unnnhhh its not fair
life is not fair, even god got ganked by the romans for equipping cloth armor in a melee slot, you will fair no better, so take this form, draw a picture of your blasted ass on it and shade in the area where it hurts for me so i can kick you there until you straighten up.

Yeah I'm "queer friendly" I'm just not "pedantic dumbshit" friendly I suppose.

Preach.

I don't make you practice Christianity to play at my table.  I don't make you vote Republican to sit at my table.  I don't make you kiss a girl to be a permanent member of my gaming group.  All you have to do is want to play the game.  So, honestly, my table is far more inclusive than any of these "queer-friendly" tables that demand you behave and believe their narrow ideologies in order to participate.  They are the bigots, not me...

I just don't give a fuck about player's sexuality.  What you do with other consenting adults is your business and doesn't have anything to do with what we are doing here.

Quote from: Dropbear on December 31, 2023, 05:50:09 PM

Quote from: pawsplay on December 31, 2023, 04:49:37 PM

Quote from: Grognard GM on December 31, 2023, 03:39:30 PM
Conventions with safe rooms where white people aren't allowed.

Let's phrase that differently. Conversation spaces that aren't forced to admit white people.

Rephrasing this does not actually change what they are. Trying to paint the image with a different filter comes across as extremely insincere.

Yet I'll bet plenty of you would squeal like piglets about Girl Scouts requiring troops to admit trans girls. People like to crack jokes about safe spaces, but the fact is that a lot of people's egos simply can't handle something not being about them. Not for a couple of hours in a back room at a con.

It's certainly not good for the hobby that you can't create a space at large events where a bunch of white ignoramuses who think white people are the ones truly discriminated against can't come in and snort like rhinos. Justify it however you want, the message is clear. There is no corner on Earth you can game, or talk, in peace, without certain people feeling like they have to barrel in and destroy it.

It's pretty ironic, considering how a lot of people here would react to a bunch of storygamers feeling like they have to invade every discussion of old school gaming and explaining how they are wrong, etc.

Quote from: pawsplay on January 09, 2024, 03:55:58 AMPeople like to crack jokes about safe spaces, but the fact is that a lot of people's egos simply can't handle something not being about them.

the irony here is so thick one could cut it with a knife.

When simply being a certain skin color is assumed to mean you are a political threat, and that you must be excluded from a part of the hobby or an event as a result, there's a problem. Especially when that skin color is more politically divided in fact than pretty much any other skin color in America. Racialized discrimination and prejudice is driving a clear instance of intentional event segregation, on the basis of skin color. It's disgusting.

And for the record, it would be equally disgusting if in an effort to avoid woke gaming the same were enacted for a different set of skin tones. But thankfully at least the allegedly all white "ignoramuses" you speak of aren't the ones stooping that low in this instance. Apparently they have either the conscience or enforced legal constraints that those conventions feel they're fine to lack.

Quote from: pawsplay on January 09, 2024, 03:55:58 AMIt's certainly not good for the hobby that you can't create a space at large events where a bunch of white ignoramuses who think white people are the ones truly discriminated against can't come in and snort like rhinos. Justify it however you want, the message is clear. There is no corner on Earth you can game, or talk, in peace, without certain people feeling like they have to barrel in and destroy it.

Would you support conventions having safe spaces where black people are not allowed?

If not, why not?

Exactly. Banning POC on the basis of skin color would be completely insane, and at least folks have the capacity to recognize that. You could claim it was for "political lean" or "demographic trends" or even "wokeness" but there at least people would be sane enough to understand that dividing based off of race is racial stereotyping and discrimination regardless. But change the colors slightly, and everyone gets so much fucking dumber.

As regards free speech... Hell, we have plenty of storygamers, left wingers, and the like here on this site, because it's a forum that is dedicated to rpg discussion and related free speech. In fact, what few rules and limitations we have lean left wing, not right, for political moderation. Show me a forum that allows unmuzzled political discussion from a right wing perspective that is owned by firmly left wing folks. Or hell, just a forum that like this one allows full and free discussion of politics within TTRPG context. They broadly don't exist, which says something about speech and its freedom within the hobby.

I'm fine with there existing ideological organizations that wouldn't take me as a member on the basis of ideology. Even if a table doesn't want me after getting to know me, that's fine too. But when folks decide to exclude in advance all sorts of other people on the basis of skin color stereotyping, or inborn identity, they should be subject to lawsuits. More than that, it's just plain wrong.

Greetings!

Having "safe spaces" where WHITE people are banned, well, that's just fine and dandy.

Woke morons love being full of racism and hate.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: pawsplay on January 09, 2024, 03:55:58 AM

Quote from: Dropbear on December 31, 2023, 05:50:09 PM

Quote from: pawsplay on December 31, 2023, 04:49:37 PM

Quote from: Grognard GM on December 31, 2023, 03:39:30 PM
Conventions with safe rooms where white people aren't allowed.

Let's phrase that differently. Conversation spaces that aren't forced to admit white people.

Rephrasing this does not actually change what they are. Trying to paint the image with a different filter comes across as extremely insincere.

Yet I'll bet plenty of you would squeal like piglets about Girl Scouts requiring troops to admit trans girls. People like to crack jokes about safe spaces, but the fact is that a lot of people's egos simply can't handle something not being about them. Not for a couple of hours in a back room at a con.

It's certainly not good for the hobby that you can't create a space at large events where a bunch of white ignoramuses who think white people are the ones truly discriminated against can't come in and snort like rhinos. Justify it however you want, the message is clear. There is no corner on Earth you can game, or talk, in peace, without certain people feeling like they have to barrel in and destroy it.

It's pretty ironic, considering how a lot of people here would react to a bunch of storygamers feeling like they have to invade every discussion of old school gaming and explaining how they are wrong, etc.

Oh noes! people want to preserve SEX segregated spaces for women/girls (adult/immature human females) to keep away the mentally ill and predators!

Proving once more you hate women and are a racist.

Quote from: Grognard GM on January 09, 2024, 11:09:04 AM

Quote from: pawsplay on January 09, 2024, 03:55:58 AMIt's certainly not good for the hobby that you can't create a space at large events where a bunch of white ignoramuses who think white people are the ones truly discriminated against can't come in and snort like rhinos. Justify it however you want, the message is clear. There is no corner on Earth you can game, or talk, in peace, without certain people feeling like they have to barrel in and destroy it.

Would you support conventions having safe spaces where black people are not allowed?

If not, why not?

The DemoKKKrats managed to convince black people to be PRO-Segregation... "For their own good".

Quote from: Grognard GM on January 09, 2024, 11:09:04 AM

Quote from: pawsplay on January 09, 2024, 03:55:58 AMIt's certainly not good for the hobby that you can't create a space at large events where a bunch of white ignoramuses who think white people are the ones truly discriminated against can't come in and snort like rhinos. Justify it however you want, the message is clear. There is no corner on Earth you can game, or talk, in peace, without certain people feeling like they have to barrel in and destroy it.

Would you support conventions having safe spaces where black people are not allowed?

If not, why not?

No, because black people are a historically excluded community. There might be a space from which black people might be excluded, for instance, a space for Asian and Pacific Islander gamers. But they would be welcome if they were also Asian. No, I can't think of any reason of conscience to exclude black people specifically from a gaming event. That seems like an idea that would only seem reasonable to a Nazi or a Klansman, or maybe a nervous and un-reflective suburbanite.

Quote from: pawsplay on January 09, 2024, 03:55:58 AM

Quote from: Dropbear on December 31, 2023, 05:50:09 PM

Quote from: pawsplay on December 31, 2023, 04:49:37 PM

Quote from: Grognard GM on December 31, 2023, 03:39:30 PM
Conventions with safe rooms where white people aren't allowed.

Let's phrase that differently. Conversation spaces that aren't forced to admit white people.

Rephrasing this does not actually change what they are. Trying to paint the image with a different filter comes across as extremely insincere.

Yet I'll bet plenty of you would squeal like piglets about Girl Scouts requiring troops to admit trans girls. People like to crack jokes about safe spaces, but the fact is that a lot of people's egos simply can't handle something not being about them. Not for a couple of hours in a back room at a con.

Let's do try not to bring a trans strawman into the topic of discussion you brought up here. People laboring under a mental illness has nothing to do with racist behavior. They are not the same nor are they even similar.

If you set up ANY area as segregated for or from ANY skin color at ANY public gathering, that's racist. Promoting such is racist.

And for the record, no I don't believe that any self-diagnosed (or parent-diagnosed with blind affirmation from a "gender clinic") "trans" individual who has not been clinically diagnosed  over time as gender dysphoric should be allowed into women's  or girl's spaces. I do not believe people just because they say something. Attention-seeking behavior should not be accepted, validated, and rewarded, but medical diagnoses after more than a single affirmation visit to a gender clinic are acceptable.

Transtrender is a thing. And the vast majority of the transgender people I have met fall under that umbrella.

My question would be, are the Girl Scouts inherently sexist and boy-hating because they don't allow boys in?

I am opposed to gender discrimination, but I am OK with the Girl Scouts as well as Boy Scouts, along with men's groups and women's groups, as long as they aren't enforced by the government or tied to overall real-world advancement. People should be free to gather around particular identities. As another example, it's fine if a church restricts itself to Christian people, or a synagogue restricts itself to Jewish people. Arbitrarily discriminating against Jews is wrong, but hiring a Christian-only Sunday school teacher is reasonable.

I've seen school clubs like a Christian club, but also ethnic identities like a Filipino-American club. I don't think this is inherently racist any more than the Girl Scouts are inherently sexist.

I haven't seen a white-only club or gathering, but my big question about one would be why the organizers want it. I understand with something like a Filipino-American club that it's a chance for people with shared identity to interact with each other -- when in everyday life, they are surrounded by non-Filipinos. For white people - especially in RPGs - there are already a lot of accidentally white-only games and spaces, so that reason doesn't apply.

"There might be a space from which black people might be excluded, for instance, a space for Asian and Pacific Islander gamers."

You do realize that POC sometimes historically have discriminated against and been racist towards one another, including along these specific lines? It's not a good thing, it divides people and spreads racial stereotypes, and it shouldn't be encouraged. I understand that on some level you must be against discrimination. If so, do not support stereotyping social threat and excluding people from locations and events on the basis of skin color. If you are against racial profiling and pro-BLM in that sense, all the more reason not to do that. Seriously, how the hell are folks selling this double think to keep us all divided and willing to enable overt race-disqualification based hiring discrimination and segregation, of all things?

Quote from: KindaMeh on January 09, 2024, 05:29:42 PM
"There might be a space from which black people might be excluded, for instance, a space for Asian and Pacific Islander gamers."

You do realize that POC sometimes historically have discriminated against and been racist towards one another, including along these specific lines? It's not a good thing, it divides people and spreads racial stereotypes, and it shouldn't be encouraged. I understand that on some level you must be against discrimination. If so, do not support stereotyping social threat and excluding people from locations and events on the basis of skin color. If you are against racial profiling and pro-BLM in that sense, all the more reason not to do that. Seriously, how the hell are folks selling this double think to keep us all divided and willing to enable overt race-disqualification based hiring discrimination and segregation, of all things?

What, really???

It's almost like I just mentioned someone who is both black and Asian should be welcome at such a gathering.

I had a friend who was a Mexican Jew. Went to synagogue with a bunch of white kids. They were absolutely shitty to him.

This is not about qualification. That's your fantasy, that people who seek diversity are trying to check some boxes, or load the bases, or something. It's about providing a welcoming experience. And sometimes that means un-inviting people who are not welcoming.

For instance, if you were running a panel on OSR games, and some storygamer went in there and started raising their hand a lot, and criticizing the very idea of traditional games, and was disruptive, you would kick them the fuck out.

Imagine if you offered me some nightshade berries, and I was like, "No, thanks." Then you said, "How can you can justify this? I know you eat blueberries, which are also berries."

That is what this line of argument sounds like to me.

Quote from: jhkim on January 09, 2024, 05:22:04 PM
My question would be, are the Girl Scouts inherently sexist and boy-hating because they don't allow boys in?

In context? Yes.

https://www.scouting.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/BSA_Family-Entry-Fact-Sheet.pdf

https://www.girlscouts.org/en/raising-girls/happy-and-healthy/happy/girls-only-single-gender-empowering-girls.html

Quote from: jhkim on January 09, 2024, 05:22:04 PM
My question would be, are the Girl Scouts inherently sexist and boy-hating because they don't allow boys in?

I am opposed to gender discrimination, but I am OK with the Girl Scouts as well as Boy Scouts, along with men's groups and women's groups, as long as they aren't enforced by the government or tied to overall real-world advancement. People should be free to gather around particular identities. As another example, it's fine if a church restricts itself to Christian people, or a synagogue restricts itself to Jewish people. Arbitrarily discriminating against Jews is wrong, but hiring a Christian-only Sunday school teacher is reasonable.

I've seen school clubs like a Christian club, but also ethnic identities like a Filipino-American club. I don't think this is inherently racist any more than the Girl Scouts are inherently sexist.

I haven't seen a white-only club or gathering, but my big question about one would be why the organizers want it. I understand with something like a Filipino-American club that it's a chance for people with shared identity to interact with each other -- when in everyday life, they are surrounded by non-Filipinos. For white people - especially in RPGs - there are already a lot of accidentally white-only games and spaces, so that reason doesn't apply.

Ideological discrimination is one thing. Atheist groups should not have to take non-atheists, for example, as part of an ideological group founded around atheism. Likewise, even outside a religious context, I respect the right of an organization to set ideological boundaries related to its function. There is no ideological reason why someone can't be ideologically safe to be around and also white, while gaming, even from a leftist point of view. Racial essentialism is basically the only way to suggest otherwise. So that's not a good defense within the specific context being discussed.

I don't personally think that white-only clubs are any more okay. It's weird to even hear that they might be tolerated. Not least because even if you wanted to have, say, a club that celebrates whatever primarily white European culture, there's no reason why folks who aren't that skin color couldn't appreciate it. An Egyptian-only Egyptian culture club would also be racist and wrong, by the same token.

Even if we go down the route of saying there should be a safe organization for white, or black, or asian, or whatever people wherein they are ideologically respected and discrimination fought against... Why can't there be, say, black people within that space? Or white people? Or Asians? PROVIDED, that they are ideologically decent people, and support the premise of this, why are we disqualifying solely based off of what would then be inaccurate racial stereotyping?

pawsplay's brain seems to be a bag of angry cats.

Racist, bigoted angry cats.

Quote from: pawsplay on January 09, 2024, 05:39:17 PM

Quote from: KindaMeh on January 09, 2024, 05:29:42 PM
"There might be a space from which black people might be excluded, for instance, a space for Asian and Pacific Islander gamers."

You do realize that POC sometimes historically have discriminated against and been racist towards one another, including along these specific lines? It's not a good thing, it divides people and spreads racial stereotypes, and it shouldn't be encouraged. I understand that on some level you must be against discrimination. If so, do not support stereotyping social threat and excluding people from locations and events on the basis of skin color. If you are against racial profiling and pro-BLM in that sense, all the more reason not to do that. Seriously, how the hell are folks selling this double think to keep us all divided and willing to enable overt race-disqualification based hiring discrimination and segregation, of all things?

What, really???

It's almost like I just mentioned someone who is both black and Asian should be welcome at such a gathering.

I had a friend who was a Mexican Jew. Went to synagogue with a bunch of white kids. They were absolutely shitty to him.

This is not about qualification. That's your fantasy, that people who seek diversity are trying to check some boxes, or load the bases, or something. It's about providing a welcoming experience. And sometimes that means un-inviting people who are not welcoming.

For instance, if you were running a panel on OSR games, and some storygamer went in there and started raising their hand a lot, and criticizing the very idea of traditional games, and was disruptive, you would kick them the fuck out.

Imagine if you offered me some nightshade berries, and I was like, "No, thanks." Then you said, "How can you can justify this? I know you eat blueberries, which are also berries."

That is what this line of argument sounds like to me.

I'm gonna go point by point and try to reach you on this. It is specifically the idea of excluding folks or determining them not to be ideologically safe or belong in a safe space BASED ON SKIN COLOR that I am arguing against. Perhaps even especially with respect to the tension between blacks and Asians.

Firstly, not being Asian is the disqualifying factor from a racial perspective.

This is bad enough in and of itself, but if you allow disqualifying discrimination along lines that have historical baggage (ex: blacks who are not Asian) that's a problem. Not least because it can be used or fuel the flames of actual racism.

Also, even in the earlier stated instance, is that African-American who is also Asian in a "safe space"? Maybe, maybe not. If not, the problem is ideology, not skin color. Which segues into my next point. Regardless, this hypothetical group of Asian-Americans has apparently decided that those who are not of Asian race and heritage are to be stereotyped as unsafe within the context of this get-together. They may not believe that all blacks are unsafe, but they apparently believe they can stereotype them racially based off of broader demographic trends to use a messed up rule of thumb, which is literally just that if you're not Asian (ex: only black) you're too racist/anti-Asian or something.

BLM was in part a major pushback against racial profiling in policing. A choosing of who is "safe" to be around via the context of racial stereotypes and demographics. Do you see the connection?

A policing trend which was perhaps rightly accused of only perpetuated the same stereotypes, prejudices, and miseries that fueled it. Similar in a sense to how stereotyping and race based exclusion based on stereotyping, ideological or otherwise, fan the flames of racism and further stupid ethnic tit-for-tat.

Quote from: KindaMeh on January 09, 2024, 06:17:47 PM
Firstly, not being Asian is the disqualifying factor from a racial perspective.

This is bad enough in and of itself,

How is that bad? Who is hurt by Asians only wanting Asians to participate in a small, closed group, focused on an Asian perspective, inside a larger event which is generally inclusive of potentially any human being on Earth?

I'm not sure what your qualifications are to lecture me on skin color, or being stereotyped just for looking a certain way. As a person of mixed ethnicity living in the USA, I've had ample time to experience various scenarios and think about them. My mother grew up in segregation in West Texas. What do you have to tell me about what racism is really like, I can't learn from her?

I don't think there's anything particularly "woke" about holding a few closed meetings, for people of like experiences to connect. It's not even particularly leftist, it's not particularly ideological. The people attending might be as woke as a gathering of Black Republicans, for all I know. It's a gathering based on natural affinities. And whether or not you are allowed to go there, whether or not anyone stops you from going there, if you got somewhere uninvited, you don't belong there. You're being an asshole.

So the question is, should a bunch of assholes who don't belong at a certain gathering be allowed to bully themselves in to spaces focused on underrepresented minorities? Is the only argument you have that not letting white people into a meeting for, say, black players of Vampire, is exactly the same as white people making my mom sit in the movie theater balcony away from white people? Do you not understand that whitening such a gather reproduces the conditions that made it desirable in the first place?

Quote from: jhkim on January 09, 2024, 05:22:04 PM
My question would be, are the Girl Scouts inherently sexist and boy-hating because they don't allow boys in?

I am opposed to gender discrimination, but I am OK with the Girl Scouts as well as Boy Scouts, along with men's groups and women's groups, as long as they aren't enforced by the government or tied to overall real-world advancement. People should be free to gather around particular identities. As another example, it's fine if a church restricts itself to Christian people, or a synagogue restricts itself to Jewish people. Arbitrarily discriminating against Jews is wrong, but hiring a Christian-only Sunday school teacher is reasonable.

I've seen school clubs like a Christian club, but also ethnic identities like a Filipino-American club. I don't think this is inherently racist any more than the Girl Scouts are inherently sexist.

I haven't seen a white-only club or gathering, but my big question about one would be why the organizers want it. I understand with something like a Filipino-American club that it's a chance for people with shared identity to interact with each other -- when in everyday life, they are surrounded by non-Filipinos. For white people - especially in RPGs - there are already a lot of accidentally white-only games and spaces, so that reason doesn't apply.

You know there is no more Boy Scouts of America, right?

The women in charge of the Girl Scouts engaged in lawfare against them until they collapsed.  They did so on the basis that there shouldn't exist a boys only organization.  However, they've not made any moves or statements in the direction of allowing boys into their organization.

Yes, the girl scouts are clearly sexist.

Edit:  BSA corporation still exists but it doesn't function.  There is no more nationwide organization, no more jamborees, no more camps, and no more outings.  It's all gone except a name and an empty bank account.

Quote from: BadApple on January 09, 2024, 06:38:01 PM
You know there is no more Boy Scouts of America, right?

The women in charge of the Girl Scouts engaged in lawfare against them until they collapsed.  They did so on the basis that there shouldn't exist a boys only organization.  However, they've not made any moves or statements in the direction of allowing boys into their organization.

Yes, the girl scouts are clearly sexist.

Is this a joke? If so, I don't get it. The Boy Scouts of America still exist, and boys can join Girl Scouts.

pawsplay, you could save a lot of wear and tear on your keyboard by just posting "some olden days people, that happened to be white, were racist to my mom. As a result I consider all white people to be demons, and take pleasure at every activity that hurts or excludes them, as they deserve everything they get."

You know, it seems like white folks are getting a might uppity. Maybe one of your small, closed groups based upon shared ethnicity, could do something about it. There's a lot of them though, so maybe dress up in some kind of concealing costume while carrying out righteous acts.

Please read through and respond to the rest of what I said. I've said quite a bit, and a fair amount is pretty damn relevant here. I'll also try to respond to more of what you have yourself posted.

"For instance, if you were running a panel on OSR games, and some storygamer went in there and started raising their hand a lot, and criticizing the very idea of traditional games, and was disruptive, you would kick them the fuck out."

If they are actively being disruptive not at all in a way that encourages decent criticism, sure, maybe. But I would never kick them out in advance just because they happen to be a storygamer, or have a White Wolf shirt, because that would be outright fucked up. Even if such people were more likely to screw up in that way. If you want to kick a disruptive player who happens to be white, go ahead. But don't set up corporate events where white people aren't allowed in certain sections. Because that is racial segregation, based off of ideological and political stereotyping on the basis of race.

"Imagine if you offered me some nightshade berries, and I was like, "No, thanks." Then you said, "How can you can justify this? I know you eat blueberries, which are also berries.""

Think for a moment about the fact that you may be subconsciously assuming white people WILL ruin your game, or be unkind to you, or hold a political view, or whatever, to a person. In the same sense that nightshade berries will to a berry cause you harm. Now consider that this would, if someone did it, be racial stereotyping along the lines of ethnic essentialism. It's terrible when white people use it, and yes, many ethnic essentialists over the years have been white. Do you really want to join them in assuming that race dictates opinion, competence, safety, and character? No. You do not. Nobody with half a functioning brain does.

It sounds like you have had more reason, by a lot, than most white racists to assume that a certain skin color will do you harm. Still, regardless of skin color, and regardless of who's making this point, racial profiling and stereotyping is wrong, as is segregation. Skin color does not define us, so it should not be used in place of ideology or character to exclude from unrelated tasks like gaming. Or really just in general.

If you want to set up a game with friends who aren't white, go ahead. I wouldn't say it'd be great to exclude a friend or even just a good fit on the basis of race, and it might even be morally questionable. Still, not the same as deciding that those who want events and spaces under corporate or government dominion not to be segregated on the basis of racial stereotyping are asshole bullies. Or that it is not only acceptable but laudable to stereotype safety and ideology off of skin color. Don't do that to yourself, don't do that to other people. Don't encourage it when a corporation does it.

Why do you think I think white people are demons? Why do you think I bother talking to people about this stuff? It's not a waste of time to me.

Quote from: KindaMeh on January 09, 2024, 06:45:33 PM
"Imagine if you offered me some nightshade berries, and I was like, "No, thanks." Then you said, "How can you can justify this? I know you eat blueberries, which are also berries.""

Think for a moment about the fact that you may be subconsciously assuming white people WILL ruin your game, or be unkind to you, or hold a political view, or whatever, to a person. In the same sense that nightshade berries will to a berry cause you harm.

Do you think you, personally, have ever done anything to convince someone otherwise? I don't get what mean by subconscious. White people showing up to an event that is black only, to be a safe space for black people, are ruining the experience for people. Black people don't need to be freed from racism, they need to be freed from the racism of white people.

Quote from: pawsplay on January 09, 2024, 06:47:12 PM
Why do you think I think white people are demons? Why do you think I bother talking to people about this stuff? It's not a waste of time to me.

At. You talk at people about this stuff, while casually throwing out the most heinous racism, because your cult has told you only white people can be racist.

Quote from: Grognard GM on January 09, 2024, 06:50:01 PM

Quote from: pawsplay on January 09, 2024, 06:47:12 PM
Why do you think I think white people are demons? Why do you think I bother talking to people about this stuff? It's not a waste of time to me.

At. You talk at people about this stuff, while casually throwing out the most heinous racism, because your cult has told you only white people can be racist.

Usually when people talk about imaginary cults on an RPG board, I expect it to be about Bothered About Dungeons & Dragons.

Welp, This thread haven't been about the topic in several pages.  We aren't having a meaningful conversation about the politicization of companies that produce RPG material anymore. 

Pawsplay managed to get our goat and get us to destroy yet another thread.  Frankly, It would serve us all right if Pundit locked this thread and banned us all.

Quote from: pawsplay on January 09, 2024, 06:47:12 PM

Quote from: KindaMeh on January 09, 2024, 06:45:33 PM
"Imagine if you offered me some nightshade berries, and I was like, "No, thanks." Then you said, "How can you can justify this? I know you eat blueberries, which are also berries.""

Think for a moment about the fact that you may be subconsciously assuming white people WILL ruin your game, or be unkind to you, or hold a political view, or whatever, to a person. In the same sense that nightshade berries will to a berry cause you harm.

Do you think you, personally, have ever done anything to convince someone otherwise? I don't get what mean by subconscious.

That's a pretty damn low bar. So yes. Literally anything said that takes a stance against racism more broadly, within this very thread, would qualify. But yes, even outside that kind of thing.

As for the second sentence, I was hoping you weren't consciously racially profiling all white people. That's what I meant by subconscious, and I even couched it within terms that implied the possibility of not doing that. Seems I may have been wrong about that. Do you seriously think that white people are homogenous in opinion? Or that they are to a person horrible people by right of their skin color's inevitable influence? Or that we don't care about other people who are of different skin colors than us? That we do not have friends, loved ones, and compassion across the bounds of race? That we are as nightberries intrinsically harmful to society and people of color? If you answered yes to any of those questions, you may want to seriously reconsider not only your position, but also the degree to which you are beginning to resemble the discrimination and racism you claim to oppose.

Quote from: BadApple on January 09, 2024, 07:07:53 PM
Welp, This thread haven't been about the topic in several pages.  We aren't having a meaningful conversation about the politicization of companies that produce RPG material anymore. 

Pawsplay managed to get our goat and get us to destroy yet another thread.  Frankly, It would serve us all right if Pundit locked this thread and banned us all.

He could ban all of us, and make pawsplay a mod. Then he could take up his purple lightsabre, and join TBP as a Sith Lord.

Quote from: KindaMeh on January 09, 2024, 07:14:50 PM

That's a pretty damn low bar. So yes. Literally anything said that takes a stance against racism more broadly, within this very thread, would qualify. But yes, even outside that kind of thing.

As for the second sentence, I was hoping you weren't consciously racially profiling all white people. That's what I meant by subconscious, and I even couched it within terms that implied the possibility of not doing that. Seems I may have been wrong about that. Do you seriously think that white people are homogenous in opinion? Or that they are to a person horrible people by right of their skin color's inevitable influence? Or that we don't care about other people who are of different skin colors than us? That we do not have friends, loved ones, and compassion across the bounds of race? That we are as nightberries intrinsically harmful to society and people of color? If you answered yes to any of those questions, you may want to seriously reconsider not only your position, but also the degree to which you are beginning to resemble the discrimination and racism you claim to oppose.

Saying I'm consciously racially profiling people is like saying, if someone robs a bank, I'm profiling them as a bank robber. A white person who invades a safe space that is not for them is doing something. They are not being pre-judged. They are completely guilty of what they are being judged for. All the white people NOT expressing their white pride by invading intentionally POC spaces? Perfectly cool.

Quote from: Ratman_tf on January 09, 2024, 05:48:39 PM

Quote from: jhkim on January 09, 2024, 05:22:04 PM
My question would be, are the Girl Scouts inherently sexist and boy-hating because they don't allow boys in?

In context? Yes.

https://www.scouting.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/BSA_Family-Entry-Fact-Sheet.pdf

https://www.girlscouts.org/en/raising-girls/happy-and-healthy/happy/girls-only-single-gender-empowering-girls.html

It sounds like you disagree with the argument that the Boy Scouts should necessarily admit girls. i.e. That the old 20th-century Boy Scouts and Girls Scouts were fine, even though they discriminated based on gender.

The point is about the inherently exclusion which was a part of the founding of the scouts. Do you think the 20th-century Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts were OK, or were they inherently wrong because they were gender-discriminatory, and needed to be corrected?

TLDR for folks: Don't support racial discrimination and related stereotyping in corporations, or corporate events. Don't support segregation. It's the sort of thing that strengthens racism and racial divisions more broadly, not least in that it is once again RACIAL STEREOTYPING and RACIAL DISCRIMINATION. This is directly relevant within the context of such initiatives within the industry for the hobby, and why they ought to be both recognized and opposed through boycott. It's very much relevant to this thread, I am sorry to say, because it is arguably the obvious face of the primary problem.

"Safe Spaces" created by service providing corporations that discriminate entry to gaming on the basis of race, with the justification that white people are unsafe per their race... Or using race as a stereotyping shorthand for ideological safety, or however you may want to put it... Are enacting segregation on the basis of racial stereotyping. That is my point. Never said folks should bust in there where we're unwanted, but hey, you know what? Segregation is illegal, and that's what a lot of people did back in the day, as they say, to end it. I don't think that's a good answer for things now. It would only risk further division. But where would we be if folks listened to the white folks who said they were fine with black folks who stayed in their place and didn't enter segregated spaces? Don't be the kind of person who wants segregation to stay. Be better. We can all try that, and to try to strive for equality under the law, even if it's hard.

Quote from: BadApple on January 09, 2024, 07:07:53 PM
Welp, This thread haven't been about the topic in several pages.  We aren't having a meaningful conversation about the politicization of companies that produce RPG material anymore. 

Pawsplay managed to get our goat and get us to destroy yet another thread.  Frankly, It would serve us all right if Pundit locked this thread and banned us all.

You know, at any given moment, people could choose to stop attacking me personally, and instead start complaining about how woke my publishing company is. Put me in the red, mock the quality of my products, complain about inclusive language. People are choosing, instead, just to act up, because they think they can.

Quote from: jhkim on January 09, 2024, 07:27:19 PM

Quote from: Ratman_tf on January 09, 2024, 05:48:39 PM

Quote from: jhkim on January 09, 2024, 05:22:04 PM
My question would be, are the Girl Scouts inherently sexist and boy-hating because they don't allow boys in?

In context? Yes.

https://www.scouting.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/BSA_Family-Entry-Fact-Sheet.pdf

https://www.girlscouts.org/en/raising-girls/happy-and-healthy/happy/girls-only-single-gender-empowering-girls.html

It sounds like you disagree with the argument that the Boy Scouts should necessarily admit girls. i.e. That the old 20th-century Boy Scouts and Girls Scouts were fine, even though they discriminated based on gender.

The point is about the inherently exclusion which was a part of the founding of the scouts. Do you think the 20th-century Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts were OK, or were they inherently wrong because they were gender-discriminatory, and needed to be corrected?

I have opinions, but in consideration to not falling for pawsplay getting threads derailed I'm going to abstain. It was dumb of me to reply even to a reply to a reply.

*Edit* In anyone wants to fork off a thread in Pundit's section, I'll glady follow up there.

Say what you will. I've engaged in you in recent posts with good faith and positive intentions. I would like to think you've attempted to do the same. I personally think this has all been firmly topic relevant. Especially the discussions I've had with you and jhkim on segregation and racial disqualification within the industry.

Quote from: BadApple on January 07, 2024, 09:01:01 AM

Quote from: yosemitemike on January 07, 2024, 08:03:51 AM
If queer friendly means what people say it means, then I find the whole thing to be pointless.  They say it's just a statement that you won't be assholes to queer people.  How about not being an asshole full stop?  This is what I would call a normal game.  You don't need to specify that people not be assholes to this small subset of players.  Just don't be an asshole.  You don't need to virtue signal about it.  Just don't be an asshole.

If that's what it meant, I'd be cool with it.  What it means is your game has to be a gay pride celebration.

I'm just sick of being beaten over the head 24/7 with all this woke mania. I am particularly sick of so called gays who push being gay like its a combination sex fetish and spreadble disease. The fucks make life hell for everyone else just trying to get along.

Let's try this again.

Woke is purely preformative and always has been, it's about pretending to be seen as a good person while doing the most heinious shit (racial segregation/discrimination, sex discrimination/segregation [where not warranted by biology/pudor/safety of women], etc).

So, ANY RPG company that engages in performative wokery IS woke. D&D has repeatedly engaged in wokery in advertising, in letting their employes vomit racist/sexist bullcrap and by casting developers by skin color (despite the cries of Jhkim asking for any other source than D&Ds own words).

Goodma'am has engaged in wokery by supporting Burn Loot Murder and the rainbow flag nazis.

Baizuo has engaged in wokery and has it in their books too.

SJG has engaged in Wokery.

Aren't those the biggest companies? Among the four of them they're over 90% of the market.

Conclusion, while the smaller of small fish might not be woke the faces everybody recognizes are.

So, the answer is yes but?

Quote from: Omega on January 10, 2024, 02:21:50 AM
I'm just sick of being beaten over the head 24/7 with all this woke mania. I am particularly sick of so called gays who push being gay like its a combination sex fetish and spreadble disease. The fucks make life hell for everyone else just trying to get along.

I think this trans lunacy is a big part of why acceptance of LGBT people is down for the first time in decades.  Trans activists have pushed and pushed and just gotten crazier and crazier.  The inevitable backlash is here and the other people who have been lumped in with them are being caught up in it.   

Quote from: pawsplay on January 09, 2024, 03:55:58 AM
Yet I'll bet plenty of you would squeal like piglets about Girl Scouts requiring troops to admit trans girls. People like to crack jokes about safe spaces, but the fact is that a lot of people's egos simply can't handle something not being about them. Not for a couple of hours in a back room at a con.

Or to rephrase that - "apples or not like pears but I'm making them equivalent bigots'."

First and last time I'm responding to this racist buffoon, time to stop feeding the narcissist.

Pawsplay loves when we react to his hate for pages of off-topic arguing.  Let's just agree on these irrefutable facts and move on:
Pawsplay is a racist bigot.  He is wrong that the Girl Scouts shouldn't be allowed to admit boys.

Also, RPG companies are overwhelmingly woke.  Too much is on cringe "we are diverse", and not enough "we make quality products".

I think "overwhelmingly" is a misstatement.  A bunch of the companies are doing low-effort virtue-signaling like replacing their logo with a rainbow for pride month, pasting some HR drivel about how much they love diversity, then doing a find/replace text search on their product to swap pronouns and create some hilarious misspellings after they couldn't be assed to do the correct search parameters.  And they do it because it gets them a net positive amount of ass-pats versus pushback on twitter, so they conclude that it has resonated well with the customer, never mind that most people camping out on twitter aren't buying any of their product in the first place, which leads to the whole "get woke go broke" phenomenon; their belief that appeasing twitter people is going to translate into sales doesn't pan out and they wind up in the lurch as a result when the silent, uncounted customers silently wander away.

Quote from: Valatar on January 10, 2024, 05:48:45 PM
I think "overwhelmingly" is a misstatement.  A bunch of the companies are doing low-effort virtue-signaling like replacing their logo with a rainbow for pride month, pasting some HR drivel about how much they love diversity, then doing a find/replace text search on their product to swap pronouns and create some hilarious misspellings after they couldn't be assed to do the correct search parameters.  And they do it because it gets them a net positive amount of ass-pats versus pushback on twitter, so they conclude that it has resonated well with the customer, never mind that most people camping out on twitter aren't buying any of their product in the first place, which leads to the whole "get woke go broke" phenomenon; their belief that appeasing twitter people is going to translate into sales doesn't pan out and they wind up in the lurch as a result when the silent, uncounted customers silently wander away.

You raise some excellent points, which brings me to something I've been speculating:
How much of the industry's wokeness is due to extremist beliefs, how much to virtue signalling, how much bandwagon-jumping, and how much is to submit to the economic terrorism of Human Rights Council's extortion racket?  I have no solid statistics to formulate any conclusive answer.

Quote from: Cathode Ray on January 10, 2024, 08:17:37 PM

Quote from: Valatar on January 10, 2024, 05:48:45 PM
I think "overwhelmingly" is a misstatement.  A bunch of the companies are doing low-effort virtue-signaling like replacing their logo with a rainbow for pride month, pasting some HR drivel about how much they love diversity, then doing a find/replace text search on their product to swap pronouns and create some hilarious misspellings after they couldn't be assed to do the correct search parameters.  And they do it because it gets them a net positive amount of ass-pats versus pushback on twitter, so they conclude that it has resonated well with the customer, never mind that most people camping out on twitter aren't buying any of their product in the first place, which leads to the whole "get woke go broke" phenomenon; their belief that appeasing twitter people is going to translate into sales doesn't pan out and they wind up in the lurch as a result when the silent, uncounted customers silently wander away.

You raise some excellent points, which brings me to something I've been speculating:
How much of the industry's wokeness is due to extremist beliefs, how much to virtue signalling, how much bandwagon-jumping, and how much is to submit to the economic terrorism of Human Rights Council's extortion racket?  I have no solid statistics to formulate any conclusive answer.

I agree with Valatar. For most of these companies, the wokeness seems like very low-effort gestures that at most shows up as a small sidebar somewhere in their production lineup.

As for getting solid answers about their motivation, that would take action like studying the subject and interviewing people who work there, and even maybe (gasp) reading their material. I doubt anyone here is interested in that sort of actual research. I have only a handful of WotC products from the last five years, and haven't bought anything from them since the OGL scandal a year ago. I prefer to put my effort into learning more about games I genuinely like, and products I'm interested in playing.

Quote from: jhkim on January 10, 2024, 08:40:57 PM

Quote from: Cathode Ray on January 10, 2024, 08:17:37 PM

Quote from: Valatar on January 10, 2024, 05:48:45 PM
I think "overwhelmingly" is a misstatement.  A bunch of the companies are doing low-effort virtue-signaling like replacing their logo with a rainbow for pride month, pasting some HR drivel about how much they love diversity, then doing a find/replace text search on their product to swap pronouns and create some hilarious misspellings after they couldn't be assed to do the correct search parameters.  And they do it because it gets them a net positive amount of ass-pats versus pushback on twitter, so they conclude that it has resonated well with the customer, never mind that most people camping out on twitter aren't buying any of their product in the first place, which leads to the whole "get woke go broke" phenomenon; their belief that appeasing twitter people is going to translate into sales doesn't pan out and they wind up in the lurch as a result when the silent, uncounted customers silently wander away.

You raise some excellent points, which brings me to something I've been speculating:
How much of the industry's wokeness is due to extremist beliefs, how much to virtue signalling, how much bandwagon-jumping, and how much is to submit to the economic terrorism of Human Rights Council's extortion racket?  I have no solid statistics to formulate any conclusive answer.

I agree with Valatar. For most of these companies, the wokeness seems like very low-effort gestures that at most shows up as a small sidebar somewhere in their production lineup.

As for getting solid answers about their motivation, that would take action like studying the subject and interviewing people who work there,

An interview would be an interesting thing to see. Even if we got a lot of corporate boilerplate, I'm sure in an era of DEI and ESG, that boilerplate would be both revealing and disturbing.

Quote from: Ratman_tf on January 10, 2024, 09:39:33 PM
An interview would be an interesting thing to see.

Could be a group effort hosted on these forums. Invite industry professionals and fire away with the questions.

I think we'll see some from under every column, except from the real die-hards like evil hat:

- The common zeitgeist among the left is that being "inclusive" is basically mandatory to be a good person, so you'll see some amount of it just because the creator feels it's a necessary act of a decent person.
- Some amount is probably because they're seeing other companies do it and feel that it's where the market is going, so they have to follow.
- Some amount is because if they don't they know someone's popping into twitter or big purple to start a thread about how problematic their stuff is.
- And lastly I think they expect that they can snag some free goodwill from the community from some virtue-signals that will turn into more sales.

There are the hardcore left creators out there busy creating games about killing cops in the name of the new post-capitalist utopia, but from what I've seen they represent a very small minority.  Most of what I've seen is minimal effort stuff that I suspect is coming from a cocktail of those four elements above.  They do just enough to be fairly sure a twitter mob isn't showing up with torches and pitchforks and call it a day.

Some of them do it because they know that they are exactly the kind of sorry person that they accuse others of.  Classic projects mired in deep insecurity.  Makes them feel better to assume everyone else is as sorry as they are.  If they acknowledged their own limitations and did something about them, that would take real work. 

"Low effort gestures" is just people putting in at least minimal effort to do what they believe is decent, modern, civilized behavior. Some are sincere, some are just people that smile to your face, just about the same as most people, game publishers or not.

Quote from: Grognard GM on January 09, 2024, 06:44:38 PM
pawsplay, you could save a lot of wear and tear on your keyboard by just posting "some olden days people, that happened to be white, were racist to my mom. As a result I consider all white people to be demons, and take pleasure at every activity that hurts or excludes them, as they deserve everything they get."

You know, it seems like white folks are getting a might uppity. Maybe one of your small, closed groups based upon shared ethnicity, could do something about it. There's a lot of them though, so maybe dress up in some kind of concealing costume while carrying out righteous acts.

He's just a racist being racist. 

I don't know why people keep interacting with him. 

Quote from: pawsplay on January 09, 2024, 07:39:53 PM

Quote from: BadApple on January 09, 2024, 07:07:53 PM
Welp, This thread haven't been about the topic in several pages.  We aren't having a meaningful conversation about the politicization of companies that produce RPG material anymore. 

Pawsplay managed to get our goat and get us to destroy yet another thread.  Frankly, It would serve us all right if Pundit locked this thread and banned us all.

You know, at any given moment, people could choose to stop attacking me personally, and instead start complaining about how woke my publishing company is. Put me in the red, mock the quality of my products, complain about inclusive language. People are choosing, instead, just to act up, because they think they can.

Stop behaving like a retard and we may consider not mocking you for being a retard, retard.