Quote from: Pat on July 06, 2021, 09:22:53 PM

Quote from: jhkim on July 06, 2021, 09:03:59 PM

But it seems to me that people like VengerSatanis and many others here are precisely complaining about being told "Shut Up and Sit Down" by the current game convention organizers like GenCon and others. They are pushing back because they feel that they are under fire. I didn't start that talk - I responded to VengerSatanis' complaint.

Are you reading the same thread? Because I don't see anyone in the group of people you're talking to saying they want to express their own political views at gaming conventions. No, they're saying they don't want politics forced on them. Multiple people have responded to your example of an anti-gay marriage couple with roughly the equivalent of "they should shut up too. We just want to game."

But but... don't you understand? Their beliefs aren't political! They are TRUTH! Only people with political agendas would try to deny TRUTH!

Sarcasm obviously intended... kinda; because that is how they see it. Obsession with genetalia and it's use is the core of their existence and so to deny or ignore it is to deny their very existence.

Eventually we're either going have to re-establish insane asylums or put the nutters down because they will not leave the vast majority alone and are increasingly trying to ruin and endanger the lives of those who don't succumb to their narcissistic demands.

Until then, at least I got an idea for my next adventure site in the campaign I'm running; a ruined asylum haunted by the angry ghosts of the mad trying to force their delusions on all who enter.

To what degree are we supposed to be invested in the personal beliefs, hangups and retarded framing of reality of the people around us when we're trying to play elf-games?

The answer is none.

It's like that.

Quote from: jhkim on July 06, 2021, 05:26:59 PM

Quote from: S'mon on July 05, 2021, 04:46:04 PM

Quote from: jhkim on July 05, 2021, 02:58:28 PM
I don't know the view of people who are vocally opposed to gay marriage. However, I play with plenty of gay and queer gamers. In my experience, most don't like associating socially with people who are opposed to gay marriage.

One of my players is gay and married or at least very long term partnered. He gets on fine with conservative gamers - I'd say he was fairly conservative himself - but he does get annoyed by some of the SJW snowflakes he encounters online whose identity is focused on 'privilege' and 'oppression'.

That's cool.

However, I feel like you've replace "anti-gay-marriage" (my words) with broader "conservative" - similar to how Gameogre replaced "Christian".

In general, gay people tend to lean liberal as a demographic - but almost no gay people are specifically anti-gay-marriage -- and in my experience, they tend to react poorly to people who are vocally anti-gay-marriage.

For example, back in 2008, I went out on my street corner with my son with signs opposing California Prop 8 that would ban gay marriage. There were also a bunch of members of the local Pentecostal Church holding signs supporting Prop 8. We were able to speak respectfully and our kids played some together and shared some ice cream. However, when I spoke of this with my gay friends, I recall some said that they didn't think they'd be able to do this. They felt it would be difficult to be respectful in the face of people picketing to deny them marriage rights, because they were inherently not being treated with respect by those church members.

I can't tell if this is different from your experience, because you're talking more broadly about just being "conservative" as opposed to "anti-gay-marriage".

I'm not sure exactly what you're saying.

IME:

1. Radical Christians who can't shut up about gay marriage long enough to play D&D are not the sort of people to play D&D; they probably think it's the work of Satan.

2. Normal gay people have no problem playing D&D with Christians and conservatives, nobody goes on about gay marriage at the game table.

3. There are a lot of social justice snowflakes on left-coast USA and a few other enclaves who have a highly distorted, media induced view of Christians & conservatives, causing them to be radicalised and intolerant. These people tend to drive away other sorts of gamers including many normal gay people.

Quote from: Dapig on July 03, 2021, 05:21:31 PM
...
I am a refugee from another site.  As soon as you start winning an argument, they impose restrictions on the language that you can use.  Over an ENWorld, you cannot use the words ideology, political, sjw and many others.  This is meant to cripple your ability to debate.
...

They must restrict words because they have no real answer to the truth.

The real truth is this:

Quote from: tenbones on July 07, 2021, 12:33:38 AM
To what degree are we supposed to be invested in the personal beliefs, hangups and retarded framing of reality of the people around us when we're trying to play elf-games?

The answer is none. ...

Because this!

Quote from: S'mon on July 07, 2021, 05:58:43 AM
...
IME:

1. Radical Christians who can't shut up about gay marriage long enough to play D&D are not the sort of people to play D&D; they probably think it's the work of Satan.

2. Normal gay people have no problem playing D&D with Christians and conservatives, nobody goes on about gay marriage at the game table.

3. There are a lot of social justice snowflakes on left-coast USA and a few other enclaves who have a highly distorted, media induced view of Christians & conservatives, causing them to be radicalised and intolerant. These people tend to drive away other sorts of gamers including many normal gay people.

If you show up to play, and are a good player – Nobody fucking cares!

Never have. This is not hard.

Nobody cares about outliers, edge cases, what if's, and "what about potential scenario x".

You want to keep wringing your hands, clutching your pearls, and keeping your smelling salts close at hand because some evil "christian" might jump out of the woodpile to oppress you... go right ahead.

The rest of us will be having fun playing elf-games.
So back on topic:

How do we defeat the SJW's?

Venger was right on this point:

We need to build our own Kingdoms.

The apolitical "gaming is for everyone" stance is not for the SJW's, it is for the normies.

We need outreach to show people that there are other ways to play "D&D", and to bring them into the fold.

Maybe even have them play non-fantasy games too... 

Because ultimately, tenbones is right:

Quote from: tenbones on July 03, 2021, 03:23:26 PM
...
I would add a necessary addendum to this: We need to reach out and bring new people into the fold. Without outreach this is plan of attrition where we get ground down. If we bring new players into our midsts... then we have the advantage. Our GM's are better. Our games are better. The best way to serve ourselves and our aims is to take their players from them and show them.

Remember - WE have been here longer than them. They own the name. We own the spirit.

These people are riding high on a pop-culture wave of popularity that they had nothing to do with. 5e had silly lucky timing, and they are acting like it will go on forever.

It will not.
WOTC will fuck it up.

And if we grow enough, someone on our side will be in a position to be the next pathfinder to WOTC's 6e woke abortion.

That is the goal. But make no mistake; it is one tall fucking order.

Quote from: S'mon on July 07, 2021, 05:58:43 AM
I'm not sure exactly what you're saying.

I think the gay marriage point is a dead end here - in retrospect, I regret engage when oggsmash brought it up. My point is simply that in the current political climate, the most left-leaning gamers and the most right-leaning gamers probably aren't happy gaming together.

Let me take a more concrete example. I currently game mostly at my local game conventions in the SF Bay Area - like Big Bad Con, Pacificon, and ConQuest. Here, a majority of the players and organizers are heavily left-leaning, and there are lots of left-leaning practices, like providing pronoun ribbons to put on one's convention badges. I think Venger is right that a MAGA-hat-wearing gamers would not be welcomed there, while BLM-shirt-wearing gamer would be. I don't think that they would be officially thrown out for that reason, but I'm sure it wouldn't work out well.

On the other hand, if a gamer doesn't mention any politics, as far as I know, they are welcome to play. There is no swearing-in ceremony that requires anyone to swear to liberal principles. The liberalness just shows up in the social practices and themes of the games played.

My question is: Would posters here be comfortable coming to these conventions and not mentioning politics? If not, then what changes could the organizers do that would convince you to come? It seems to me that many people here are expressing general disinterest in this, just like Jaeger posted:

Quote from: Jaeger on July 07, 2021, 04:07:17 PM
How do we defeat the SJW's?

Venger was right on this point:

We need to build our own Kingdoms.

The apolitical "gaming is for everyone" stance is not for the SJW's, it is for the normies.

We need outreach to show people that there are other ways to play "D&D", and to bring them into the fold.

I'm good with this, and I might even try playing the other ways, even though I'm generally happy with the games I'm currently playing.

Quote from: jhkim on July 07, 2021, 05:10:17 PM

My question is: Would posters here be comfortable coming to these conventions and not mentioning politics? If not, then what changes could the organizers do that would convince you to come?

There's a big difference between a convention banning politics of all stripes, and a very biased and political convention where people who don't agree are expected to shut up.

Nobody except you is bringing up the latter case.

Quote from: jhkim on July 07, 2021, 05:10:17 PM

Quote from: S'mon on July 07, 2021, 05:58:43 AM
I'm not sure exactly what you're saying.

I think the gay marriage point is a dead end here - in retrospect, I regret engage when oggsmash brought it up. My point is simply that in the current political climate, the most left-leaning gamers and the most right-leaning gamers probably aren't happy gaming together.

Let me take a more concrete example. I currently game mostly at my local game conventions in the SF Bay Area - like Big Bad Con, Pacificon, and ConQuest. Here, a majority of the players and organizers are heavily left-leaning, and there are lots of left-leaning practices, like providing pronoun ribbons to put on one's convention badges. I think Venger is right that a MAGA-hat-wearing gamers would not be welcomed there, while BLM-shirt-wearing gamer would be. I don't think that they would be officially thrown out for that reason, but I'm sure it wouldn't work out well.

On the other hand, if a gamer doesn't mention any politics, as far as I know, they are welcome to play. There is no swearing-in ceremony that requires anyone to swear to liberal principles. The liberalness just shows up in the social practices and themes of the games played.

My question is: Would posters here be comfortable coming to these conventions and not mentioning politics? If not, then what changes could the organizers do that would convince you to come? It seems to me that many people here are expressing general disinterest in this, just like Jaeger posted:

Quote from: Jaeger on July 07, 2021, 04:07:17 PM
How do we defeat the SJW's?

Venger was right on this point:

We need to build our own Kingdoms.

The apolitical "gaming is for everyone" stance is not for the SJW's, it is for the normies.

We need outreach to show people that there are other ways to play "D&D", and to bring them into the fold.

I'm good with this, and I might even try playing the other ways, even though I'm generally happy with the games I'm currently playing.

Yeah, because ribbons or badges with pronouns totally aren't political...

A MAGA hat wearing gamer would probably be thrown out and probable curbstomped by the antifart goons in the con, with the con latter baning said gamer while turning a blind eye to the antifart goons actions.

Those conventions ARE political, they have clearly choosen a side and are busy telling everybody which side that is. By using said pronoun ribbons or whatever.

But you are telling us they wouldn't throw out a MAGA hat wearing gamer? Come on, not even you believe what you wrote.

Quote from: jhkim on July 07, 2021, 05:10:17 PM

Quote from: S'mon on July 07, 2021, 05:58:43 AM
I'm not sure exactly what you're saying.

I think the gay marriage point is a dead end here - in retrospect, I regret engage when oggsmash brought it up. My point is simply that in the current political climate, the most left-leaning gamers and the most right-leaning gamers probably aren't happy gaming together.

Let me take a more concrete example. I currently game mostly at my local game conventions in the SF Bay Area - like Big Bad Con, Pacificon, and ConQuest. Here, a majority of the players and organizers are heavily left-leaning, and there are lots of left-leaning practices, like providing pronoun ribbons to put on one's convention badges. I think Venger is right that a MAGA-hat-wearing gamers would not be welcomed there, while BLM-shirt-wearing gamer would be. I don't think that they would be officially thrown out for that reason, but I'm sure it wouldn't work out well.

On the other hand, if a gamer doesn't mention any politics, as far as I know, they are welcome to play. There is no swearing-in ceremony that requires anyone to swear to liberal principles. The liberalness just shows up in the social practices and themes of the games played.

My question is: Would posters here be comfortable coming to these conventions and not mentioning politics? If not, then what changes could the organizers do that would convince you to come? It seems to me that many people here are expressing general disinterest in this, just like Jaeger posted:

I live in the Pacific Northwest, Seattle area, and there's a constant undertone of progressive politics when I go out in public to game. My local gaming pub does the "We're inclusive!" rainbow flag thing, and there's plenty of cons that advertise their LGBTQ+ friendliness. At this point, I just roll my eyes and play my games.
It's not a deal breaker... yet. But I'm constantly reminded that there is a hegemony of thought here, and some animals are more equal than others.

We beat them by not buying their products. If enough people buy their products they will keep making them. Plain and simple.

Quote from: Ratman_tf on July 07, 2021, 07:08:33 PM
I live in the Pacific Northwest, Seattle area, and there's a constant undertone of progressive politics when I go out in public to game. My local gaming pub does the "We're inclusive!" rainbow flag thing, and there's plenty of cons that advertise their LGBTQ+ friendliness. At this point, I just roll my eyes and play my games.
It's not a deal breaker... yet. But I'm constantly reminded that there is a hegemony of thought here, and some animals are more equal than others.

Thanks, Ratman. That sounds similar to the SF Bay Area. I also go to AmberCon Northwest in Portland, which is actually a little less explicitly progressive than the local Bay area conventions, but still has progressive influence and progressive-leaning attendees. The most left-leaning convention I've been to is probably Big Bad Con.

The general point here is that I have nothing against apolitical games - but I also have nothing against liberal-theme games or conservative-themed games. I don't think anyone is changing their politics over the games they play - they are just selecting games that fit their politics. A lot of people on both sides believe that the games of the opposing side need to get stamped out - I think that's futile.

With conventions, I welcome people running different conventions. I don't think there's a perfect solution where all the liberal Seattle-area gamers are happy and all the conservative gamers are also equally happy. There will be lots of little choices that each side will differ on. There can be centrist cons, or conservative cons, or liberal cons - but I don't think there's a con that everyone will be happy with. Most posters here probably don't care about whether the progressive Seattle crowd are happy, and that's fine -- run cons to please the people you care about.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on July 07, 2021, 05:48:06 PM
Those conventions ARE political, they have clearly choosen a side and are busy telling everybody which side that is. By using said pronoun ribbons or whatever.

But you are telling us they wouldn't throw out a MAGA hat wearing gamer? Come on, not even you believe what you wrote.

No, I agree that they have chosen a side and that they are political. I agree that pronoun use is political. I said that a MAGA hat wearing gamer would not be welcome, and would run into trouble. I don't think they would officially be thrown out for the reason of hat wearing, but more likely, they'd get into an argument with a con regular and they would be booted for being "disruptive" or similar.

Quote from: jhkim on July 07, 2021, 07:46:20 PM

Quote from: Ratman_tf on July 07, 2021, 07:08:33 PM
I live in the Pacific Northwest, Seattle area, and there's a constant undertone of progressive politics when I go out in public to game. My local gaming pub does the "We're inclusive!" rainbow flag thing, and there's plenty of cons that advertise their LGBTQ+ friendliness. At this point, I just roll my eyes and play my games.
It's not a deal breaker... yet. But I'm constantly reminded that there is a hegemony of thought here, and some animals are more equal than others.

Thanks, Ratman. That sounds similar to the SF Bay Area. I also go to AmberCon Northwest in Portland, which is actually a little less explicitly progressive than the local Bay area conventions, but still has progressive influence and progressive-leaning attendees. The most left-leaning convention I've been to is probably Big Bad Con.

The general point here is that I have nothing against apolitical games - but I also have nothing against liberal-theme games or conservative-themed games. I don't think anyone is changing their politics over the games they play - they are just selecting games that fit their politics. A lot of people on both sides believe that the games of the opposing side need to get stamped out - I think that's futile.

With conventions, I welcome people running different conventions. I don't think there's a perfect solution where all the liberal Seattle-area gamers are happy and all the conservative gamers are also equally happy. There will be lots of little choices that each side will differ on. There can be centrist cons, or conservative cons, or liberal cons - but I don't think there's a con that everyone will be happy with. Most posters here probably don't care about whether the progressive Seattle crowd are happy, and that's fine -- run cons to please the people you care about.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on July 07, 2021, 05:48:06 PM
Those conventions ARE political, they have clearly choosen a side and are busy telling everybody which side that is. By using said pronoun ribbons or whatever.

But you are telling us they wouldn't throw out a MAGA hat wearing gamer? Come on, not even you believe what you wrote.

No, I agree that they have chosen a side and that they are political. I agree that pronoun use is political. I said that a MAGA hat wearing gamer would not be welcome, and would run into trouble. I don't think they would officially be thrown out for the reason of hat wearing, but more likely, they'd get into an argument with a con regular and they would be booted for being "disruptive" or similar.

Right, they would make up a bullshit "reason" to throw him out. But we all know WHY would they throw him out.

Quote from: amacris on July 05, 2021, 03:20:22 PM

Quote from: Chris24601 on July 05, 2021, 02:44:30 PM
The mistake you make is thinking they have a conscience. Hypocrisy isn't a bug in their ideology, its a FEATURE. They are the Anointed so they don't have to abide by the same standards as the "Oppressors." Their proof that Gygax is a monster who needs to die is that someone else on Twitter said he was; no further proof needed.

I concur with Chris24601's thoughts on SJWs and would expand even further. They do not even acknowledge their hypocrisy. You have to read Herbert Marcuse's "Repressive Tolerance" to understand the full depth of their ideology. I've blogged about it extensively elsewhere with point by point elaborations; here, let's just summarize the doctrine of repressive tolerance in plain English:

1. Tolerance is only to be extended to truth.
2. Only leftism is objectively true, and anything other than leftism is not.
3. Therefore tolerance is only to be extended to leftism.
4. Anyone who disagrees with this has been indoctrinated by the right wing. To the extent that the majority of people disagree, that means the majority of people are indoctrinated.
5. Since most people are indoctrinated, leftists must break the indoctrination so that they can grasp the truth of leftism.
6. To break the indoctrination, leftists must promote left-wing thought and suppress right-wing thought.
7. Promoting left-wing thought is accomplished by changing "established universes of meaning" and actively presenting "information slanted in the opposite direction," e.g. by political correctness and propaganda.
8. Suppressing right-wing thought is accomplished by withdrawing the freedom of speech, press, and assembly for anyone who disagrees with leftists on race, gender, religion, armament, public services, social security, or healthcare, e.g. deplatforming us entirely.
9. If necessary to withdraw these freedoms, leftists must operate at such scale that the actions cease to be non-violent and become revolutionary violence.
10. Leftists who use revolutionary violence are not to be condemned by any leftists.

I could, if you want, back up each and every bullet point above with paragraph-length quotes by Herbert Marcuse and other New Leftists; but it's painful to read. In brief, the doctrine holds that left-wing speech, assembly and action must be praised and promoted; while right-wing speech, assembly, and action must be condemned, suppressed, and punished. It's not hypocrisy when they do that. It's their stated manifesto, with an elaborate ideological edifice to justify it.

Marcuse's take is a good start, but is not complete or comprehensive.

You need two more concepts for it all to click into place.

The first is Carl Schmidt's Friend/Enemy Distinction: "The specific political distinction to which political actions and motives can be reduced is that between friend and enemy."

The second is what defines a religion. This comes from my editor, Brian Niemeier, who is a trained theologian in addition to an Dragon Award winner:

First, let's define our terms. To qualify as a religion, a group must have three elements:

• Cult: a consistent body of rituals for public worship
• Code: a set of moral rules
• Creed: a canon of shared myths that defines a shared identity

I'll add a further criterion introduced by reader D.J. Schreffler. A religion offers adherents explanations for their past, present, and future.

• The origin story--this is part of the creed.
• Ritual laws for the here and now--see cult and creed above.
• Eschatology--the final chapter of the creed.

That is a good list to put in parallel to Marcuse's Repressive Tolerance quality list because it exposes Wokeness as a competing religion, and for our purposes what we need to observe is how the SJWs steal the Christian patrimony of moral authority to use for its own cult practices and thus to power their own push to seize and hold every last organ of cultural--and thus political--influence and power.

You want to know why you can't nail them for hypocrisy? Because you can't be a hypocrite to Enemies, and the Cult defines who is Friend and whom is Enemy. You want to know why they give no fucks about your pushbacks? Because you are a heretic and thus deserve to be crushed until you either convert or die. (You can see this happen to every Leonard that turns his coat against us.) You want to know why anti-SJW efforts heretofore are ineffective unless they directly attack their moral authority? This is why.

And if that's a big mindfuck for you, then you've got a much wilder ride ahead of you. For now, this will do. Grok Schmidt and how religions work and you'll go a lot further in dealing with the Death Cult.

Quote from: Bradford C. Walker on July 07, 2021, 09:22:37 PM
You want to know why you can't nail them for hypocrisy? Because you can't be a hypocrite to Enemies, and the Cult defines who is Friend and whom is Enemy. You want to know why they give no fucks about your pushbacks? Because you are a heretic and thus deserve to be crushed until you either convert or die. (You can see this happen to every Leonard that turns his coat against us.) You want to know why anti-SJW efforts heretofore are ineffective unless they directly attack their moral authority? This is why.

And if that's a big mindfuck for you, then you've got a much wilder ride ahead of you. For now, this will do. Grok Schmidt and how religions work and you'll go a lot further in dealing with the Death Cult.

So what do we do about it?

Quote from: Svenhelgrim on July 07, 2021, 09:45:59 PM
So what do we do about it?

Not that guy, but a step 1 would be to reject tenants of their religeon. Lots of people have been brainwashed into accepting their ideas because they piggyback on better ones.

An example I point to is diversity. Reject it as a part of morality. If you accept that diversity is a virtue in it of itself, then anything done in its name is good.
Diversity is a nuetral trait like something being red or green. Sometimes good, sometimes bad.

Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on July 07, 2021, 10:55:10 PM

Quote from: Svenhelgrim on July 07, 2021, 09:45:59 PM
So what do we do about it?

Not that guy, but a step 1 would be to reject tenants of their religeon. Lots of people have been brainwashed into accepting their ideas because they piggyback on better ones.

An example I point to is diversity. Reject it as a part of morality. If you accept that diversity is a virtue in it of itself, then anything done in its name is good.
Diversity is a neutral trait like something being red or green. Sometimes good, sometimes bad.

You're on the right track.

Wokeism--the Death Cult--is, specifically, a Christian Heresy. This is why it arises in what was Christendom, and can only be spread via piggybacking off memes of a Christian root (i.e. Western Liberalism). This is why it has particular animus for Christianity while making common cause with Islam and not giving two shits about Judaism or any other religion.

Listen to the language--the Rhetoric--they use. It's religious in its tone and presumes authority in its speech, authority that they seek to translate into power. No amount of facts or logic apply here; they are doubly-immune, first because it is not a rational argument and second because opposing them marks you as Enemy to them so they receive dispensation to prey upon you- and often with Establishment approval due to fellow travelers being in control of the institutions. (e.g. the difference between Antifa/BLM's legal issues and those of their targets).

You have to directly attack that authority. Arguing the tenants of their religion is pointless; you're an Enemy so you don't get a say. Go for the throat, and demand that they confess--in the religious sense foremost--that Jesus Christ is Lord and God raised Him from the dead. Do not stop until they confess or they retreat; if they try the false confession game GO HAM and post that confession EVERYWHERE THEIR PALS WILL SEE IT.

Remember Friend/Enemy? Remember this being a religion? Guess what confessing to the Enemy religion does?

EVERY SINGLE TIME this happens, they freak out and RUN. Online it's "Fuck this, Block/Protect/Hide" and NEVER do you see them or engage with them again and in meatspace they just LEAVE if they can't cow you into submission. No amount of Muh Atheism works. No non-Christian religions work. Just standing firm, calming repeating the demand until it is met, is sufficient to make them cave.

It IS weird, but it works, and that is why I tell you now that you cannot fight a false religion other than with a true one. You're not Enlightening your way out of this.