Originally posted by Zampanó
Dave asks every so often why it matters that athletes come out, or why so many ("so many"😉 tv characters are gay. My answer is that the media kids (and adults) consume helps to determine the way they see the world, and also themselves. This seems like evidence for that last point.(Race sensitivity isn't bullshit you asshat)
It is when it's ultrasensitive to the point or stupidity. Same goes for political correctness.
Bravo to this guy standing up and telling idiots to quit blaming every shooting on PTSD.
Originally posted by ZampanóThat didn't really answer my question though.
Dave asks every so often why it matters that athletes come out, or why so many ("so many"😉 tv characters are gay. My answer is that the media kids (and adults) consume helps to determine the way they see the world, and also themselves. This seems like evidence for that last point.(Race sensitivity isn't bullshit you asshat)
Originally posted by Nephthys
I find it funny how its always ultra-privileged white men who talk about how annoying racial sensitivity is. Because gosh, we wouldn't want to annoy them, amirite? 🙄
There definitely is a lot of people who use "you're too PC/overly sensitive!" as a way to try and not talk about real problems.
The best way to deal with problems is to acknowledge they exist and not just 'hope they go away,' y'know?
Originally posted by psmith81992
The majority of society IS too PC/overly sensitive though. Nobody is trying to ignore the problems but very few of the so called problems are actually problems.
Originally posted by psmith81992
The majority of society IS too PC/overly sensitive though. Nobody is trying to ignore the problems but very few of the so called problems are actually problems.
Oh, I disagree, lots of people ignore those problems.
The thing is, if you just hang out with a group who doesn't talk about it much, it's easy to go, "Well, I don't personally see it, so therefore I'm going to assume everyone is that way."
If you look around, though... a study not too long ago showed that white ex-cons and black convicts had roughly similar hiring rates (like, they'd literally take the same resumes, put one in the hand of a black person [who was in reality a young hard-working recent college graduate] and another in a white man's hands but marked as a convict, and they'd get hired at similar rates).
Or in Canada, for example, a city managed to lower the rate of rapes by 10% by the simple means of... putting up posters saying having sex with wasted people is rape and they shouldn't do it, because a lot of people still think it's perfectly ok to have sex with a woman just because she's falling down drunk/dressed wrong/etc.. Rape also remains one of the most underreported and least falsely reported crimes due to victim-blaming, and many people will go to extreme lengths to inform you that, no, the *real* problem is too many false accusations, no matter what police statistics say is by-far the more common.
In media, things are quite white-male centric, sometimes in ways you don't notice too much until you pay attention to the patterns over multiple shows, and which a lot of people will get *very mad at you* for looking at and noting what patterns you see.
The youtube video series "Tropes vs Women," which dealt with some problematic bits on women's portrayal in video games in an *incredibly* mild ways ('hey, ever notice in video games princesses get kidnapped a lot?'😉.... was met with an outpouring of rape threats and other threats.
The comic versus forum here has tons of examples of a female character coming up in a vs fight and some posters automatically going "she gets raped" "he has sex with her" etc. and similar problematic responses, and female posters will often get dismissed or harassed for being so, it's a rather hostile place for non-males actually. And when it's brought up, I've had several people say, "It doesn't seem too bad..." or "It's just a few posters...", when it's really not just a few posters, it's them *and* most everyone else just ignoring it and writing it off as normal.
And then, when one tries to address any problem about how the sexes or races are treated differently, even in a calm factual way? A lot of people go, "You're just trying to blame me/my sex/race/whatever! Stop trying to blame me! You're just making problems that aren't there, so stop talking about it!". People get pissed when you imply there's a problem that affects large groups of people they aren't part of it.
"People are just being overly sensitive" is the kind of thing you can say before you actually try talking about and addressing the problems, no matter how lightly.
There's way more people claiming others are oversensitive than there are actual cases of the same.
I can argue that there's way more people screaming foul than there is actual foul.
Good example of some dumb writer (not of the article but who the article talks about) reaching due to baseless overreaction.
Originally posted by Q99
The youtube video series "Tropes vs Women," which dealt with some problematic bits on women's portrayal in video games in an *incredibly* mild ways ('hey, ever notice in video games princesses get kidnapped a lot?'😉.... was met with an outpouring of rape threats and other threats.
Anita Sarkeesian (sp?) is a bad person who has bad ideas though.
psmith
Good example of some dumb writer (not of the article but who the article talks about) reaching due to baseless overreaction.
You can argue, but it's a weak argument based on pushing up individual anecdotes, not full studies or the like. Heck, the original article, agree with it or not, is not particularly sensationalist, and does note the way-overrepresentation of who gets killed (while the motive for supporting the death penalty may or may not be off, the racial tint in who *does* get killed really is not remotely in question), a fairly serious subject, and the response is simply, "This is why we disagree, based on these things." Neither side comes off as crazy to me.
Can you find people who overreact? Sure. Does that prove a pattern, let alone a pattern bigger than the very statistically obvious pattern ? Not really.
Is that article even an example of one? I wouldn't even necessarily say that's the case.
Actually, this is a good point- Someone says they think they see racism there, and has some fairly real reasons to. You call it an 'overreaction.' Not just disagreeing, but an overreaction.
Talking about racism is not automatically an overreaction, like you imply here.
Originally posted by NemeBro
Anita Sarkeesian (sp?) is a bad person who has bad ideas though.
That's really the thing, isn't it: She's really not, and people blew up in a HUGE RAGE.... before so much as the first video.
Her stuff is incredibly mild, generally quite factual, and the reaction to it was absolutely bugnuts and disgusting.
A whole ton of guys up and decided that discussing women's negative portrayal in video games- in a way that wasn't really venomous towards anyone save perhaps game designers- was the worst thing ever and must be responded to with threats and mass sexism.
Originally posted by Q99
That's really the thing, isn't it: She's really not, and people blew up in a HUGE RAGE.... before so much as the first video.Her stuff is incredibly mild, generally quite factual, and the reaction to it was absolutely bugnuts and disgusting.
A whole ton of guys up and decided that discussing women's negative portrayal in video games- in a way that wasn't really venomous towards anyone save perhaps game designers- was the worst thing ever and must be responded to with threats and mass sexism.
The bad person part was a joke, and please don't lump me in with the idiots who were sending her rape threats, lol.
I stand by "bad ideas" though. For a feminist, some of her opinions are actually oddly sexist.
Like, for example, she doesn't view Mattie(sp?) from True Grit as a feminist character because she "promotes the masculine qualities of revenge and violence rather than feminine qualities of cooperation peace".
Originally posted by NemeBro
That didn't really answer my question though.