Quote from Manite »Quote from Wraithe »Quote from Manite »
I'm not even going to start touching upon the BLM movement, because we're skating on thin ice here as it is.
*snip a whole lot of stuff*
This post is most likely going to get moderated because it's controversial and barely on-topic.
You're literally the person that brought the subject up, then got a response addressing the very same controversial topic you yourself brought up to begin with. Indignation at a response to the very provocative subject you initiated comes across... fascinatingly. Not that's it's particularly SHOCKING a level of indignation, mind you.
A little thought experiment to show you how your initial question sounded. Change your initial post to something involving different dominant and marginalized groups, read it, and think about the type of response IT would garner: "You ever notice how, whenever a character of one race is dominating a character of a different race in the art, it's always a person of color dominating a white person? Why don't we ever see the reverse? It's hard to call it equal representation when the representation isn't actually equal."
Do you see how that just MIGHT be perceived as quite a problematic statement? Switching which dominant and marginalized groups are involved, especially to one with an even longer deeply heated and oppressive historical context, doesn't... change the problematic nature of the statement. At all.
But really. You brought this up to begin with. Did you truly expect no responses the likes of which you received? Honestly?
Next time, it might be a great idea to simply... not interject such "subversive", as you put it, thoughts into a forum about a game in a discussion about a card within that game? And you won't get the kinds of responses you then acted rather indignant towards. So yes. Back to the card at hand, rather than the controversial subject you yourself interjected into the conversation.
Well, my choices are 1) just accept the trend I find troubling and not say anything, or 2) bring it up in a place where people who need to see it will actually see it. My indignation is at someone else's assertation that it's progressive to favor one sex, but not the other. I think it's oppressive either way, and I'm trying to make it clear that that mentality does not sit well with me. And yes, I would say the exact same thing if we were talking about races as opposed to sexes, because being part of one race doesn't give you a right to oppress another race either.
I brought the subject up because I want people to think rather than just nod, accept, and try to assert that oppressing this group is okay now because some people of this group oppressed people of another group in the past. It doesn't matter whether the groups are men and women, whites and blacks, cats and dogs, or apples and oranges. Oppression is wrong, no matter who it's aimed at, no matter who it's coming from, I don't care what excuse is being used to rationalize it.
I find it perplexing that when I say "I'd like men and women both to be represented as dominant some of the time", I'm met with "no, women should be dominant all of the time". We are supposed to be moving past demographic biases like racism and sexism, yet so-called "progressives" are themselves trying to establish and enforce demographic biases. Again, I point to my statement that equality needs to be allowed, not forced.
I have a right to be indignant when I'm told "you should be submissive because you're male", just as much as women have a right to be indignant when they're told they should be submissive because they're female. A "person of color" has a right to be indignant if they were told they should be submissive because of their race. Every person has a right to be indignant at being told what they should or shouldn't be, especially when that decision is based on some physical attribute that, until recent history, they had no control over. I can't change the fact I was born a straight white cis male. And why would I want to? I am what I am. I don't want to change my race, my sex, or my sexuality. But what I am does not determine who I am.
I'm gonna give you a thought experiment. Let's say I'm a black woman. I come into this topic and see a card depicting a black woman being dominated by a white man. That bothers me, because I've seen it a lot since I started playing the game, yet I never see a black woman dominating a white man. I bring this up, I receive a response that says black people being dominated by white people is "progressive" and the other way around is "regressive", I respond with indignancy. Then you come along and tell me I shouldn't interject "subversive" thoughts into a forum about a game in a discussion about a card game. I'm a black woman who feels black women are not being given fair representation in the game's art, and you're saying I'm wrong for bringing that up? You're saying I'm wrong for becoming indignant when someone says I should be submissive because I'm black? Does any of that sound at all okay to you?
By the way, I'm only using the word "subversive" because the responder used it first. Since being "subversive" is apparently okay, I'm being "subversive" towards a "subversive" mindset. You gonna use fire, I'm gonna use it too.
People want me to choose one "side" or the other, the sides in this case being the sexes, and choosing either is sexist to me, so I'm choosing a third path here, one that sits in the middle and sees a problem with both extremes. You're only seeing the part of me that opposes the female extreme, because that's the extreme at work here; if I saw a male extreme here, I'd be arguing in favor of more representation of women and female dominance in the game, because my focus is on being fair. My focus is on making it so everybody can embrace the roles they want, and right now that's not the case. I ask for more instances of male dominance in a game that predominantly leans towards female domination and has for years, and I'm told "no, men shouldn't be dominant". That is not a fair, just, or equal mentality, that is a sexist mentality, just as sexist as if it was the other way around. How about instead we say "Both men and women can be dominant or submissive"? That's fair and equal. Same goes for race, orientation, whatever.
And I find it funny that nobody addresses the complications that trans people add to the equation. In my system, trans people are simply people, and they have a right to be dominant or submissive as much as anyone else. But if the issue is one hinging on fundamental differences in gender, then what's your ruling on these people? Does a trans man lose his "right" to be dominant because he stopped being a woman? Funny how almost nobody ever thinks of how the feminist and LGBT "causes" might occasionally grind against each other.
Frankly, I don't care if I get responses that make me indignant. I care about being able to speak my mind freely, indignant or not. If you're gonna say something that makes me indignant, than go ahead and say it. Speak your mind, and I'll speak mine. That's what Freedom of Speech is all about.
Dude seriously. No one wants to hear your audition for America's Next Top Victim.
3
speaking of double standards - I've edited your "argument," applying the filter of your own wish that Wizards' fantasy worlds should stick to their source material/inspiration more. hope this helps.
who am I kidding, you're beyond help.
2
they look like expressionless zombies in it. much prefer the regular version.
2
3
1