ArcoIris

Tell you what, I’ll concede that yes, that was an unfair thing to ask. I asked it specifically because those sorts of games are the ones that people complain about the most and I was feeling irritable that day. Instead, I’ll simply ask you to consider that, in the same vein, it’s equally unfair to demand specific examples of games being “political” (which, I will reiterate, is not the same thing as a game being about politics).

I believe this for two reasons. First, because bigoted sentiment doesn’t have to be overt to be noticeable - or, alternatively, game developers at least believe that to be the case, because if they didn’t, they wouldn’t feel the need to make public statements about microaggressions. Second, because when people notice something that they consider prejudiced against them or their way of life, due to the way cognitive dissonance works, their brain will have a tendency to block out that memory unless it’s something so exceptionally angering as to be worth ranting about online. Combined, these cause a situation where a person will eventually feel discriminated against at an institutional level, but will not be able to articulate why, because the only examples they can name are the especially bad ones that get dismissed as outliers (Spider-Man 2’s “no removing the pride flags” controversy, Suicide Squad’s female-on-male sexual harassment, Starfield’s “FUCKIN’ PRONOUNS”, etc.)

By now you’re probably already thinking, “yeah, that happens with racism, sexism, homophobia and transphobia too, what’s the difference?” Which is a fair point. The difference is that when someone says those specific forms of bigotry are happening to them, people on the internet will typically take their word for it. When a straight white cisgender man says he’s being discriminated against, it gets dismissed as whining, or worse, as deserved on the grounds of “white privilege” or something else of that sort. I don’t even need to give examples of it, you can see it in this very thread. But what those people fail to understand is, anyone who bases their opinions on the belief that white people are inherently advantaged in society is, by definition, a white supremacist.

My post kind of trailed off, but my point is, I believe that the reason the “gamers are all a bunch of racist white boys” angle being spread online by the likes of Sweet Baby is offensive is not because it’s racist against white people (which it is, but that’s beside the point), but because, the longer you think about it, the more apparent it becomes that it’s even more racist against everyone else. It actively works to tear people apart instead of bringing them together, and actively works to undermine the agency of marginalized groups by encouraging them to think of themselves as outcasts or victims of society instead of members of it. No matter how you slice it, the so-called DEI agenda is anti-diversity, anti-equity, and anti-inclusion.

I know you aren’t actually interested in hearing any more examples, so I’ll keep this short and name the example that comes right off the top of my head: Timespinner. Every bad guy is a straight white man and none of the characters considered sympathetic are more than one of those three things. And its writing is the worst thing about it.

If you’d care to show me some examples of games which are recent, western-made, high-budget, and have a white male protagonist who isn’t constantly getting put down by the game’s own narrative to prop up someone more politically correct, I’d genuinely love to hear them.

This is the single worst take in existence. I see it everywhere and it contributes nothing. There’s a difference between a game having politics in it and a game being political. A game with politics in it typically has a message with complexity and nuance and attempts to get people to ask questions by immersing them in an environment where philosophical ideas can be explored. A game that’s political typically has no message beyond “straight white men are inherently evil and cause all of the world’s problems”, and forgoes subtlety, nuance, and often even basic storytelling in favor of shouting that message in the viewer’s face as often and as loudly as it can, vainly attempting to tell its audience outright what the writer thinks they should believe no matter how much the end product’s quality suffers.

There are always people who will complain about black people, gay people and trans people being in a game at all. But don’t lump those people in with people who are simply sick of their entertainment trying to guilt-trip them into hating themselves for having physical traits they never asked for and can’t control, otherwise your message becomes this:

“There are
Many genders: The good ones, and male
Many races: The good ones, and white
Many orientations: The good ones, and straight”

And that’s an opinion only possessed by those narcissistic enough to consider their own prejudices more justified than anyone else’s. I don’t want to hear any of that “prejudice plus power” nonsense. Bigotry is bigotry is bigotry. And we all deserve better.

I rizzed in with a W cap from Ohio 🎶

Wait, really? I heard that what happened is they’d decided to be sneaky by patenting the control system for a heavier-than-air flying machine since they couldn’t patent the idea of the machine itself. Do you have sources I can research?

Neither does trying to apply arbitrary labels to people in an attempt to discredit them. Ad hominem is considered a logical fallacy for a reason. If you think I’m wrong about something, show me why you believe that, and I will concede if your arguments are valid. So far, you’ve instead opted to call me a sealion for suggesting that a socially-harmful blanket generalization like “men are bad and dangerous and don’t respect women” requires more proof than someone’s personal anecdotes and feelings. You’d want proof if someone on the internet was calling black people criminals or women gold-diggers or trans people child molesters, and as I’ve already had to state previously, discrimination and prejudice do not become okay based on how you personally feel about the group you’re discriminating against. If they did, then the douchebag in the comic would be morally justified.

“Insults are the arguments employed by those who are in the wrong.” - Jean-Jacques Rousseau

Listen. I am not angry at you, but I feel you need to understand a few things.

First of all, attempting to twist what I say to support your existing assumptions about men is not the way to engage in healthy discourse. If you go into a thread looking for something to get offended about, you’ll find it, regardless of whether it’s actually offensive, and if you go into it already totally convinced of your own moral superiority, you lose out on the opportunity to learn something.

Secondly, while I’m on the topic of assumptions, not wanting to approach someone for fear they’ll prematurely judge you is absolutely a reasonable decision. At the very least, it’s hardly more unreasonable than the notion that everyone bigger than you is going to kill you if you say the wrong thing. Yes, obviously it can happen. I’m not arguing that. But if some guy on the internet demanded that you prove to every man you talk to that you’re not going to falsely accuse them of raping you if they tell you they aren’t interested in you, you would rightfully tell him to fuck off, because A) proving intentions is impossible, B) you could just as easily just never talk to men instead of jumping through a bunch of hoops, and C) you should not have to. Besides, if women being murdered for rejecting men is really as scarily common as you claim, then by your logic, having fewer men approaching women is a good thing, and therefore, calling men fragile for giving up on dating is counter-productive to your assumed goal.

And finally, I must say, accusing other people of having “hurt fee-fees” is pretty brazen of you, considering that you’ve done nothing but respond with hostility and insults, whereas I’ve tried to be considerate of your feelings and even straight up apologized to you. Clearly something must happened to you to make you feel the way you do about men, and I sympathize with your situation, but I speak from experience when I say that having trauma does not make a person entitled to spread hatred. As you said, if a man is not a murderer, then in an ideal world, that would be the end of it. But you have made it clear through your words that whether someone is a murderer or not is less important to you than whether or not you fear they could be, and when you judge people by that metric, you become part of the problem you claim to want to solve.

To offer a shortened version of the reply I gave to another user who asked that same question, barely at all. But many men are so afraid of becoming that one in a million example that they don’t want to take that chance. The same can be said of women who are afraid of being murdered for turning a guy down - they feel the risk isn’t worth the reward. While both of those fears are understandable, I personally feel that they are also contributing to the degradation of the dating pool, which is what leads to situations like the one in the comic, as fewer well-adjusted men choose to approach women and more poorly-adjusted men come in to take their place. The solution is obvious, but it’s also difficult: People need to be better to each other by taking more chances and giving more chances. Otherwise we’ll have more lonely people in ten years than we already do.

It’s actually not common at all. But the few examples of it happening were bad enough that it has deterred a lot of men from approaching women at all. Plus, regular, reasonable guys don’t like the idea of asking out a woman who’s immediately afraid he’ll kill her if she says no, not just because they don’t like the idea of potentially making her uncomfortable just by approaching her, but also because even if she says yes, a relationship that has that level of fear or distrust right off the bat is doomed. Which of course leads to a vicious cycle, where the only men asking women out are douchebags, and then those women’s perception of men becomes worse. Nobody likes this cycle, but the only way to fix it is for people to be better to each other.

A sharp wit is more attractive than any physical feature.

Screenshotted for posterity.