Discrimination, Positive or Negative, is Stupid

[Amechra]

I'm kinda sick and tired of knowing who makes my entertainment; this is going to focus on the US for the most part, because they are ones who seem to be most concerned about the whole thing.

Oh, don't get me wrong - I don't want to go all "classic Scrooge McDuck" on media, where the only way to refer to things is "ooh, this stuff was done by the good Duck guy."

No, I'm just sick and fucking tired of being told "oh, this guy's white" or "this work was made by a woman" or whatever. Because, when you get down to it... it really don't matter. Sure, their life experiences matter, but life experiences aren't exclusive to "minorities" (a term I've hated, because everyone is a minority unless they make up more than 50% of the population. It's useful mostly as an emotional tool.) Everyone has them. Everyone.

I don't get why the US clumps you together by skin color before other factors like economic status or location - I highly doubt a rich black kid is going to feel more connection to a character from a ghetto than to another character who happens to be a rich kid, for example. Or vice versa- there is no connection there, other than "hey, this person looks vaguely like me!"

It's like the whole "girls need Strong Female Characters as role-models!" I'm sorry, but no - firstly, they need well realized characters with flaws and foibles and hopes and dreams more than they need a Strong Female Character. Secondly, you're assuming a lot when you say that that's the bit that that particular demographic will latch onto.

And (tangent) why are "Strong Characters" all overly violent? Why isn't, say, a single mother of three who raised her kids while trying to get her college degree a suitable role model? Why latch on to muscle-bound supermen?

I've long established that if I want to read or watch a good treatment of a sensitive subject, or a good, strong character... I pick up a play. We need more Mama Youngers than we need... oh, anyone that Hollywood thinks is a strong female character.


Why is it that violence is conflated with strength? And how did my topic drift that much?

[Kajhera]

Ehh ... for an example of knowing who someone is impacts how you should receive what they say ... my boyfriend apparently had a discussion assignment involving contrasting the written opinion on Islamic democracy of an anonymous Westerner with the prime minister of an Islamic democracy. Assigning equal weight to those would be ludicrous; ethos is clearly on the side of the person with practical experience.

Likewise, I do appreciate Octavia Butler's science fiction partly because of who she was, because I know she has practical experience with being African-American and female and that enhances her authority as far as the explorations of social issues related to her race and gender goes. Science fiction is where I go to grapple with meaningful questions more often than mindless entertainment, and the ethos of the writer makes a difference. Fact I love a woman's science fiction is just ... reassuring in terms of ambitions, too; I might love Asimov and Brin and many others, but yeah, there's something to having a role model. Role model often involves similarities with someone. For me, Octavia Butler was a role model specifically because she's female and writes amazing stories, Temple Grandin since she's on the autism spectrum and used her perspective to do a great deal of good while navigating a moral grey area, Stephen Hawking because he has had to deal with it taking forever to marshal and communicate his thoughts ...

We all have life experiences, but we all have different life experiences, and it makes a difference knowing that someone with your life experience is successful, visible, and respected.

US is racist for many unfortunate reasons, and skin color is just the racism that is most difficult to shake off by keeping your head down and pretending to be melting-pot-white. Ask the Irish immigrants, and then ask the Irish-descended why we were pretty racist in our turn (competition over the lower rungs of the socio-economic ladder was involved).

Strong does not equal violent, but people enjoy swordfights. Also there's the violence ~ aggression ~ assertiveness ~ confidence relationship, for whatever that's worth or not worth.

In conclusion:
Being good is important. Positive representation is important. Neither is strictly required for entertainment, both can certainly be beneficial.

[Amechra]

I guess. I guess.

[bhu]

And (tangent) why are "Strong Characters" all overly violent? Why isn't, say, a single mother of three who raised her kids while trying to get her college degree a suitable role model? Why latch on to muscle-bound supermen?

Because people equate respect with fear, without realizing the two are differing things.  Violence inspires fear, therefore that person is referred to as 'strong' because people piss themselves at the idea of talking back to the murderous sociopath.  Respect in it's true form does not mean people are terrified of you, therefore the merely respected are not perceived as strong as there are no immediate, painful consequences for telling them no.

[Unbeliever]

I think it mostly comes down to advertising.  It's hard to know whether new show X will be the next "Breaking Bad" beforehand.  It'd be hard to figure out how to even advertise that.  But, they can more easily say that the showrunner Shonda Rhimes (ignoring poor Peter Nowalk, and the fact that every ad that Hulu shoves down my throat makes the show seem terribad to me) and trade on that celebrity.

Also, most tv is well, shit.  So, they try to leverage what they can I guess. 

re:  race in America.  Honestly, race still makes a huge difference, though it depends a lot on where you live.  Even shared experiences, like poverty or wealth, end up different depending on racial or ethnic lines.

All that being said, I manage to remain reasonably ignorant about the life stories of the creators of most media I consume.  Which makes me talented or dense, depending on your perspective.  I also don't have all that much free time to begin with.

[wotmaniac]

I actually make it a point to know who's making the movies that I watch.  I understand that at the end of the day, it's still "art", and the "artist" has a message that they're trying to convey.  And I find that many of the messages that are being put out there are crap.  And if I throw money at their crap, then I'm doing my part to reinforce and further encourage their crap-making.  Which I cannot do in good conscience.
So yes, I have identified (completely subjective, of course) a handful of crap artists, and a handful of good artists, and direct my money accordingly.  For those I haven't identified in to one of those 2 groups, a take the pitch on its face ... sorta.  I have a default skepticism cynicism about movie makers, and find that the "good guys" are the exception, so the pitch have to start by "proving me wrong".

I know that I'm just but a single raindrop amidst a flood; but I can only do what I can do, and I choose to act conscientiously nonetheless.

And while I'm at it ....
See, Hollywood has a HUGE megaphone that they can sound from a HUGE platform.  Given the mindless nature of sheeple, and the persistence of the drumbeat pounded by Hollywood, all this crap starts to pervade through the culture until it eventually embeds itself in to the public consciousness.  And since I vehemently disagree with the Progressive agenda (in which the Hollywood establishment if deeply entrenched), I find myself compelled to do my part, however small that part is.  Otherwise, I'd be a bit of a hypocrite.

[/soapbox]

[Amechra]

I might watch... one movie in theatres every year or two, and usually only when I'm going with a friend.

I mostly disagree with directorial techniques; rapid camera shifts and 3D render film "illegible" to me. I think a prime example would be Guardians of the Galaxy; when it came to the big fight scene... I didn't know what the fuck was going on. I ended up getting bored with what was obviously intended to be an "exciting" part of the film.

And I don't think I've watched TV in... a couple years? I just can't get into any of the popular shows, and I've got the internet for everything else.

[CaptRory]

I agree with Amechra's original post and I wanna give wotmaniac a hug because I agree with him. I freaking hate progressiveism and I try to avoid throwing any money at them and find myself arguing against their agenda on a nearly daily basis.

[wotmaniac]

 

[awaken_D_M_golem]

The system I post through, just re-did it's whole system font ; so now the = sign comes up effectively subscripted like this:  ₌

I hate subscripted equals signs.
I hate them.
Urrr 
I proudly discriminate against subscripted equals signs ... especially when fascistic'ly forced to utilize it.

[wotmaniac]

The system I post through, just re-did it's whole system font ; so now the = sign comes up effectively subscripted like this:  ₌

I hate subscripted equals signs.
I hate them.
Urrr 
I proudly discriminate against subscripted equals signs ... especially when fascistic'ly forced to utilize it.

You could always use alt codes.

[dman11235]

In a similar vein: http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2014/10/14/the-only-guide-to-gamergate-you-will-ever-need-to-read/

And with regards to being a "drop in a flood", I searched Wolfram to see if it could tell me exactly how many raindrops are in a flood.  It read the query as "How much?" answer: "enough"

[Raineh Daze]

In a similar vein: http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2014/10/14/the-only-guide-to-gamergate-you-will-ever-need-to-read/

And with regards to being a "drop in a flood", I searched Wolfram to see if it could tell me exactly how many raindrops are in a flood.  It read the query as "How much?" answer: "enough"

I just remember the bit of it that got 4chan so pissed off at her that they promptly donated en masse to an indy games company.

[SolEiji]

In a similar vein: http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2014/10/14/the-only-guide-to-gamergate-you-will-ever-need-to-read/

And with regards to being a "drop in a flood", I searched Wolfram to see if it could tell me exactly how many raindrops are in a flood.  It read the query as "How much?" answer: "enough"

I just remember the bit of it that got 4chan so pissed off at her that they promptly donated en masse to an indy games company.

I saw that!  It was hilarious, and it created Vivian James, so win win.

[Raineh Daze]

In a similar vein: http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2014/10/14/the-only-guide-to-gamergate-you-will-ever-need-to-read/

And with regards to being a "drop in a flood", I searched Wolfram to see if it could tell me exactly how many raindrops are in a flood.  It read the query as "How much?" answer: "enough"

I just remember the bit of it that got 4chan so pissed off at her that they promptly donated en masse to an indy games company.

I saw that!  It was hilarious, and it created Vivian James, so win win.

And to make it more hilarious, the character's overriding principle is "Whatever, let's play games".

I'm even happier because my favourite game out of the four won. ^_^

[dman11235]

I'm not familiar with this part, what happened?

[Amechra]

People are deplorable.

I'm curious why no-one responds to those threats with a firmly worded message stating that, yes, you can try to come here and kill/rape me... which makes it entirely legal for me to respond with as much force as I need to protect myself.

Which, depending on where you live, can include lethal force.

I also have backing from the local police, probably a few of my neighbours...

Basically, public threats are the stupidest thing. Yeah, they make your life hard, but they also are a great legal justification for a self-defence case.

I dunno; I just learned in school that the way to handle bullying was to be the scariest fucker around. I believe the same premise holds true for the internet; then again, there's a reason why I don't social media*. There's no point to it, just petty spite and posturing.

*Yet; I haven't yet put in to motion my plan to create as authentic a fake identity as I can without going illegal. For the shiggles.

EDIT: Also, do you fuckers even have the money to get to where I live? Seriously? Depending on where you live, it'll be $50+ dollars both ways for public transportation alone, unless you drive (in which case, do you really want to waste that gas? It's $3+ dollars in this area, so you'd still be working up some costs).

I mean, is it worth $100+ dollars to you? You could buy more games with that; heck, that's one new premium title and maybe 4 really good indie games. At minimum.

[dman11235]

Because it's horrifying?  I shouldn't have to rely on defending myself.  That's why you go to the police.  Especially when the threats get specific.  Have the police protect you.  It's literally their job (half of it, the other half is serving).  What if they have bigger, better guns?  What if you don't HAVE a gun?  Or aren't experienced?  What if they're numerous?  What if they get lucky?  And not only that, but I certainly would have a hard time hurting someone, even if they were attacking me.  That hesitation could spell doom for me.  It's probably not all that different for her.  Again, especially since they got really specific.

[Amechra]

Just so it doesn't look like I'm heartless:

My opinion on the whole thing is that it started out as relatively normal fighting (I mean, people have been making artsy games for... almost 30 years now? What was so special about this one particular game?), which got vicious, then got out of hand, then turned into a witch-hunt.

It's just the passing of greed.

EDIT: I also grew up in a country where the police were quite famously useless. And I moved back to an area of the US where guns were practically part of the curriculum. So I guess I'm a bit biased on the gun readiness thing.

Also, I'm not actually all that afraid of death in the first place. I can see why other people would have more of an issue with it, though.

[Raineh Daze]

I think my opinion is mostly 'Quinn's a terrible person, but things have gotten terribly out of hand'.