|
On September 25 2020 05:11 Karis Vas Ryaar wrote:
There's also the distinction between racist acts and somebody being racist to an extent. You can do racist acts without literally believing in the superiority of a race to the extent some people require to be considered racist. Using a racial slur is racist and what that says about the person is another issue that people can argue about. the act itself is a racist act regardless of the person. The only exceptions I can think of would be like an academic setting where your discussing the word or something intrinsically related to it or if your saying someone used the word or similar situations.
It is usually not very helpful to judge people by the language they use, regardless wether you like it or not. I can be perfectly PC but still be an asshole to you. What counts is what a person does, not what they say and even less so how they say it.
|
On September 25 2020 05:25 alpenrahm wrote:Show nested quote +On September 25 2020 05:11 Karis Vas Ryaar wrote:
There's also the distinction between racist acts and somebody being racist to an extent. You can do racist acts without literally believing in the superiority of a race to the extent some people require to be considered racist. Using a racial slur is racist and what that says about the person is another issue that people can argue about. the act itself is a racist act regardless of the person. The only exceptions I can think of would be like an academic setting where your discussing the word or something intrinsically related to it or if your saying someone used the word or similar situations. It is usually not very helpful to judge people by the language they use, regardless wether you like it or not. I can be perfectly PC but still be an asshole to you. What counts is what a person does, not what they say and even less so how they say it.
In general I agree with you. but I just feel racial slurs are a category where its perfectly fine to be judgmental about the choice of words. I generally draw a distinction between that and a lot of the pc grey area people always argue about. I think explicit racial slurs are a different category than being non politically correct which I generally have less of an issue with. There's a lot of things people say that I think are racist that I don't get into arguments about because it's not worth it and it's enough of a grey area I'm not super offended by it. Again that's different that using the N word explicitly or one of the many Anti Asian explicit racial slurs. Being an asshole is different than using a racial slur so I don't think their really comparable. I welcome anyone who can be an asshole without being explicitly racist because it at least shows some awareness.
And again you can be really nice but it's still a racist act to say racial slurs regardless of how much you do for the community (see Donald Sterling getting an award from the NAACP for a sort of example). I would not be a friend with anyone who used racial slurs no matter how nice they were otherwise. Also I wouldn't be friends with an asshole just because they don't use racial slurs. We're free to disagree obviously about any part of this.
|
On September 25 2020 05:11 Karis Vas Ryaar wrote:
There's also the distinction between racist acts and somebody being racist to an extent. You can do racist acts without literally believing in the superiority of a race to the extent some people require to be considered racist. Using a racial slur is racist and what that says about the person is another issue that people can argue about. the act itself is a racist act regardless of the person. The only exceptions I can think of would be like an academic setting where your discussing the word or something intrinsically related to it or if your saying someone used the word or similar situations.
Yes exactly, having this discussion, in this instance about the gaming community doesn't mean saying that everyone involved is purposefully racist.
And talking about racism, similar to the way it is being done in academics, is not the same as purposefully invoking racist catagories (in reaction to the so often used argument that if we just stop talking about it the world will magically not be racist).
|
On September 25 2020 05:25 alpenrahm wrote:Show nested quote +On September 25 2020 05:11 Karis Vas Ryaar wrote:
There's also the distinction between racist acts and somebody being racist to an extent. You can do racist acts without literally believing in the superiority of a race to the extent some people require to be considered racist. Using a racial slur is racist and what that says about the person is another issue that people can argue about. the act itself is a racist act regardless of the person. The only exceptions I can think of would be like an academic setting where your discussing the word or something intrinsically related to it or if your saying someone used the word or similar situations. It is usually not very helpful to judge people by the language they use, regardless wether you like it or not. I can be perfectly PC but still be an asshole to you. What counts is what a person does, not what they say and even less so how they say it.
It's incredibly helpful.
It allows me to avoid spending time with people who are comfortable using racial slurs. If someone uses said slurs often, and has any awareness at all of how damaging they can be or what the history behind them is, it's a very clear indicator of a part of their character.
We are social creatures, words are actions.
|
i probably would never have learned any racial slurs til much later had i not been playing online games since 9 years old. i think it is ok for them to hear them, but you must provide context about why words are bad, and not just that they are bad. also avoid streamers that use slurs casually. it is very easy to adopt patterns from things you watch a lot. normalizing slurs is the worst possible outcome.
|
Using discriminatory words that carry the argument of, less than or greater than based upon racist-theory is racist.
No. It is not. It is about context. If you are using it to specifically mean that you are supierior simply because of that then yes, it would be. Words themselves lack much of their meaning without contextual substance.
If I call you a piece of shit, I am better then you.
When I degrade you with language, I am better then you.
Except for the part that you may think you are one as well.
Is there any difference to you in saying "you are such a^*%$!!!" (because my mom has said that to me more than once!)
Are you so upset because we aren't using the word bigot, which is the act of uttering hateful shit? Because we are talking mostly about writing?
Here you nicely assume that I am off my hinges with fury. Thanks for presuming. What I am pointing out is that you are diluting the meaning of the term, wittingly or not.
The expression of racial prejudices is racist.
No, it is not. People can form a prejudice based on their experience that has nothing to do with superiority. For example. Say a nonwhite person living in a hard part of town has only had bad experiences with whites. They can easily form a prejudice of all white people based on their shitty experiences with a few.
It is amazing for you to be so upset and so purposefully ignorant.
Thank you for assuming I am an unhinged loon. Thanks for trying to marginilize me into submission. Thanks for saying I don't know wtf I am talking about because I have zero knowledge of anything about this.
So, you are ... not on the side of being against racism?
Sounds about right from your dumbass indignation.
So, if I point out that language actually means something, and the dilution of it is not useful that I must be against ending racism. Talk about going to extremes.
You are on a bandwagon too. See here...here is a contextual example of using the term bandwagon in a general fashion to denote group thinking compared to meaning of direct superiority.
|
Funny, you degraded the whole conversation and those taking part of their disgusting intellectual dishonesty and then refuse to own your own outrage. Fucking child.
You answered nothing accurately or intelligently.
To quickly recap your bullshit.
A) you said you were upset by all of us group thinking people that are inadvertently the very enemy we hate.
B) you used an incorrect definition in order to redefine what a bigot is and what prejudice is.
C) This one is stupid .... Yes you can treat someone bad people cause their race without thinking you are hitlers dream.
Obvious and one of your most disingenuous points. Looking at someone putting them in a box and treating them differently because of race is an expression of racism and your argument that is it not, is horseshit.
I can call a Jew a dirty hate word or a Chinese person one, I do not need to think I am better than them for it to be racist.
What type of assholery is this.
By your logic nothing can be racist unless one of the races has an argument to superiority.
Once again, you said you were upset and outraged at how horrible people are for this conversation, and wrote your shit post. Then you just shit posted again. Quote all day long, if the arguments you make up are pulled out of your ass and smell like shit. It is all the same.
You got your response. You are someone who doesn't understand words and tries to reinvent their meanings in order to break the spell of wokeness and fit some mold that you made up aka just more gaslighting bullshit.
And your last point, doesn't even make sense. You are the worst attempt at arm-chair neckbearding I've seen in a while. For a more reasonable approach to your horseshit logic, see nearly every posts between your posts.
|
Some of the posts in this thread remind me why I don't bother posting in most places here. Ignorant racist posts are far too common.
|
On September 25 2020 01:32 NonY wrote:
the more evil people are the ones who learned to control themselves but are amused by people who can't. and they use a loophole in the concept or personal responsibility that a person is always responsible for their own actions even though another person can influence those actions. so they provoke the upset person in order to deepen or prolong their negative emotions, just to laugh at them. and feel morally superior at the same time. if that's a habit of yours, start working on controlling it.
This is very true. But there's some deeper nuance to this unfortunate phenomenon.
I come from a place with three very distinct ethnic groups. Two groups (majority and minority) are more emotionally-charged - quick to be triggered by hate speech, and quick to employ hate speech as well. The third group (minority) is more laidback and resilient - they can shrug away hate speech easily, and enjoy poking fun at their own stereotypes, perceived and real (in fact, most actually embrace the stereotypes cast upon them, and are rather 'indifferent' towards the whole 'racism' debate).
Here are three interesting facts:
- The two groups are more involved in violent racial spates.
- The 'more evil people' are actually the community leaders of these two groups (community leaders of the third group are focused on more practical matters, such as economy, employment and education)
- The third group just go on their business (and as a result, has become the most economically and socially stable of all three groups).
Moral of the story? I'll let you make up your own minds.
|
It's tough. While I can't recall ever using the N word, I definitely used an alternative homophobic variant quite regularly in high school and possibly even some of college. Can't recall the last time I've actually used the word, but my perspective has definitely turned from "it's just part of the culture" to "it doesn't have a place in gaming" as I've gotten older.
|
On September 25 2020 11:46 RKC wrote:Show nested quote +On September 25 2020 01:32 NonY wrote:
the more evil people are the ones who learned to control themselves but are amused by people who can't. and they use a loophole in the concept or personal responsibility that a person is always responsible for their own actions even though another person can influence those actions. so they provoke the upset person in order to deepen or prolong their negative emotions, just to laugh at them. and feel morally superior at the same time. if that's a habit of yours, start working on controlling it. This is very true. But there's some deeper nuance to this unfortunate phenomenon. I come from a place with three very distinct ethnic groups. Two groups (majority and minority) are more emotionally-charged - quick to be triggered by hate speech, and quick to employ hate speech as well. The third group (minority) is more laidback and resilient - they can shrug away hate speech easily, and enjoy poking fun at their own stereotypes, perceived and real (in fact, most actually embrace the stereotypes cast upon them, and are rather 'indifferent' towards the whole 'racism' debate). Here are three interesting facts: - The two groups are more involved in violent racial spates. - The 'more evil people' are actually the community leaders of these two groups (community leaders of the third group are focused on more practical matters, such as economy, employment and education) - The third group just go on their business (and as a result, has become the most economically and socially stable of all three groups). Moral of the story? I'll let you make up your own minds.
Martin Luther king talked about the sort of negative peace. that people want where those affected to simply be quiet as if that fixes the problem. That doesn't solve any of the problems though as you still have inequality and the tension that automatically comes with it. The solution is to move towards a peacful solution in harmony. If you're curious it's laid out pretty well in His letter from Birmingham Jail he wrote.
a short excerpt.
I had hoped that the white moderate would understand that the present tension in the South is a necessary phase of the transition from an obnoxious negative peace, in which the Negro passively accepted his unjust plight, to a substantive and positive peace, in which all men will respect the dignity and worth of human personality. Actually, we who engage in nonviolent direct action are not the creators of tension. We merely bring to the surface the hidden tension that is already alive. We bring it out in the open, where it can be seen and dealt with. Like a boil that can never be cured so long as it is covered up but must be opened with all its ugliness to the natural medicines of air and light, injustice must be exposed, with all the tension its exposure creates, to the light of human conscience and the air of national opinion before it can be cured.
whole thing is here. https://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_Birmingham.html
I don't see how accepting hate speech accomplishes anything but accepting an inferior position and creating more problems. Again we're talking about video games here though not larger philosophical issues or economic issues. And I'm not like super mad about it. I just think video game companies should be strict in moderating it. We're not talking about how to solve economic inequality or anything we're talking about racial slurs in video games.
|
On September 25 2020 12:49 Karis Vas Ryaar wrote:Show nested quote +On September 25 2020 11:46 RKC wrote:On September 25 2020 01:32 NonY wrote:
the more evil people are the ones who learned to control themselves but are amused by people who can't. and they use a loophole in the concept or personal responsibility that a person is always responsible for their own actions even though another person can influence those actions. so they provoke the upset person in order to deepen or prolong their negative emotions, just to laugh at them. and feel morally superior at the same time. if that's a habit of yours, start working on controlling it. This is very true. But there's some deeper nuance to this unfortunate phenomenon. I come from a place with three very distinct ethnic groups. Two groups (majority and minority) are more emotionally-charged - quick to be triggered by hate speech, and quick to employ hate speech as well. The third group (minority) is more laidback and resilient - they can shrug away hate speech easily, and enjoy poking fun at their own stereotypes, perceived and real (in fact, most actually embrace the stereotypes cast upon them, and are rather 'indifferent' towards the whole 'racism' debate). Here are three interesting facts: - The two groups are more involved in violent racial spates. - The 'more evil people' are actually the community leaders of these two groups (community leaders of the third group are focused on more practical matters, such as economy, employment and education) - The third group just go on their business (and as a result, has become the most economically and socially stable of all three groups). Moral of the story? I'll let you make up your own minds. Martin Luther king talked about the sort of negative peace. that people want where those affected to simply be quiet as if that fixes the problem. That doesn't solve any of the problems though as you still have inequality and the tension that automatically comes with it. The solution is to move towards a peacful solution in harmony. If you're curious it's laid out pretty well in His letter from Birmingham Jail he wrote. a short excerpt. Show nested quote + I had hoped that the white moderate would understand that the present tension in the South is a necessary phase of the transition from an obnoxious negative peace, in which the Negro passively accepted his unjust plight, to a substantive and positive peace, in which all men will respect the dignity and worth of human personality. Actually, we who engage in nonviolent direct action are not the creators of tension. We merely bring to the surface the hidden tension that is already alive. We bring it out in the open, where it can be seen and dealt with. Like a boil that can never be cured so long as it is covered up but must be opened with all its ugliness to the natural medicines of air and light, injustice must be exposed, with all the tension its exposure creates, to the light of human conscience and the air of national opinion before it can be cured. whole thing is here. https://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_Birmingham.htmlI don't see how accepting hate speech accomplishes anything but accepting an inferior position and creating more problems. Again we're talking about video games here though not larger philosophical issues or economic issues. And I'm not like super mad about it. I just think video game companies should be strict in moderating it. We're not talking about how to solve economic inequality or anything we're talking about racial slurs in video games.
I'm speaking from pragmatism, not philosophy. I'm citing from hard facts, not scholarly quotes 
There are 101 problems stemming from racism and discrimination. It's naive - if not impossible - to solve all of them. Prioritise. Pick your battles.
Group 3 focused on mitigating discrimination through economic and educational reforms.
Group 1 and 2 were more focused on 'abstract' battles of discrimination (e.g. religious buildings, hate speech, etc).
Today, Group 3 are more successful as a community. They achieved their long-term goals, and did not get bogged down into 'cultural' wars. Oh, their culture is as well intact as Group 1 and 2.
Maybe Group 3 people gets more verbal abuse than the rest due to their 'meekness'. But it's not a 'surrender'. They just don't care. Words are just words. Food on the table, a nice house, stable family - now, those are things worth fighting for.
Edit: And even if hate speech bothered Group 3, there's a choice to be made with limited resources. Do they start a campaign against video game companies demanding for stronger filters against hate speech? Or do they better invest their time demanding the local government build a new school in their community? It's a no-brainer question for Group 3. Call it lack of ambition, but they usually end up achieving 1/2 goals by focusing on 1 goal (rather than other minority groups achieving 0/2 goals by trying to focus on both).
|
Czech Republic12129 Posts
Meh, let them write whatever they like as long as they're not threating my family. It's a stranger on the internet, if a such person can offend me, it says more about me than the person trying to offend me.
|
I mean it's all connected and focusing on one rather than the other doesn't really solve the issue. Jews are well off economically in America does that mean their not subject to racial inequality? No. If someone spraypaints a swastika on a synagogue should the community just shrug it off if their an affluent community? There are many black American who are incredibly Successful? does this mean racism doesn't effect them or they can just sit there as if nothing is happening? No and you see this by the statements they put out. Chinese Americans are one of the highest educated ethnic groups in America in terms of college education? does that mean they don't face racism and should just shut up about it? No. If the system requires you to accept hate speech to be successful than the system if fundamentally flawed.
Secondly Martin Luther king wasn't just writing scholarly articles. He was directly marching to try to address inequality and he wrote that letter from a prison cell after being arrested for peacefully protesting. So it's not just a scholarly article.
I don't know why you insist on making it an either or thing. Sure you can build the schools and everything and be successful but that doesn't solve the issues of being treated as inferior or unequal. There has been tons of things written on this by minorities especially amount he Black community in America. You're basically saying people should accept never being accepted and being constantly discriminated against simply because it's in their economic interest which shows that the entire system is messed up. A prerequisite to being successful should not be being okay with a racist system. Cultural wars is generally a term made up by those in power to deny those without powers rights so it becomes less about inequality than an equal battle over differing values. I'm not saying you're doing that but a lot of times that is a way used to deflect and blame the community instead of trying to address the issues that their saying are affecting them. Usually the people in the actual communities know the best way their communities can be helped and long lectures about how they need to stop complaining accept being called racial slurs and focus on solving their economic inequality is not it.
Finally there's plenty of studies on the negative effects of racism in ways that are more than just economic. Also in most countries the system itself is built in a way that makes the sort of economic achievements your talking about way more difficult. All people want is to be treated with respect and not demeaned over their ethnicity. All the money in the world won't magically make those things go away. You just seem to think thing that everything is solved solely by economic power and there's countless examples of that not being the case. There's a baseball player who was pulled over by the police like 20 times because he was a Latino driving a fancy car, all the money in the world won't make the effects of racism go away. And why can't we try to get rid of racism? You seem to be starting with an awfully nihilistic opinion that we're stuck with a significant amount of racism that can't go away so we have to decide which part of it we want to go away and which part we want to live with. The goal should be to try to reduce it as much as possible across the board because ultimately its all interconnected. And finally you're not posting statistics, you're posting your personal interpretation of what's going on which is subject to your own biases and probably a lack of familiarity with the relevant statistics and academic work on the subject, Anyway I'm going to bed. I apologize if this came off harsh, I wasn't trying to be I'm just listing where I disagree, it's late and I don't have the energy to edit everything. I get where you're coming from but from my work with minority communities where I live I see it very differently. I agree that sometimes communities can waste time on grievances that don't matter or perceived racism that may be questionable but I don't think Explicit hate speech in the form of racial slurs is something that should be accepted. I'm not saying devote all the energy to trying to bring the full arm of the law on people for doing it but I feel there's a medium between that and simply learning to live with it as a part of your everyday life. Prob won't post more in this thread. I feel I've stated my viewpoint pretty clearly and I generally try to avoid spending too much time arguing. I'd rather state my piece and let people make up their minds. Finally sorry for the overly long wall of text. Just want to get it all off before I peace out.
|
Czech Republic12129 Posts
OK, let's decide what's the thread about. This is about racial slurs in general gaming, or SC2, isn't it? So giving examples from the real world is IMO senseless.
So, this is not the real world. unless you say share something about you - you're completely anonymous(even in games with a voice chat, voice filters exists!). Nobody knows your religion, color, nationality, weight, height, sex and size of your penis. So if anyone says to you something racist - is it racism when they don't know your race? And if calling you with a racial slur and it offends you, it IMO says more about you.
Racism is bad, but it does work ONLY if it offends you and only if the offending person KNOWS your race. Which happens on the non-anonymized part of the internets(e.g. facebook) and in the real world. Not in the anonymous gaming(and yes, pro players and streamers are not anonymous).
|
Russian Federation40186 Posts
I won't lie, this thread is so hilarious.
Granted, that's my twisted upbringing, but i for life of me can't understand the way americans get all careful over a handful of slurs. Because down here, we learn to not get too emotional over words in kindergarten already. If anything, a strong reaction to any insult down here is always interpreted as sign of insecurity.
|
I don't really get this thread :p
But as to the question asked by OP, are these people racist or not. Sometimes they are and sometimes they aren't, its impossible for us to know if a player says these words because they are "bad" or if they say them because they personally think these racial slurs are the worst thing you can call someone.
Like if a person is an actual racist they would call others that they want to offend by racial degrading terms, simply because being of that race is in their eyes a very bad and offending. While others are not racist and just using the words because its what makes most people upset or for any reason really.
The important thing is how we choose to raise our kids (those of us that have/gets kids), knowledge and education is power and so is teaching by example.
|
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On September 25 2020 16:48 lolfail9001 wrote:
I won't lie, this thread is so hilarious.
Granted, that's my twisted upbringing, but i for life of me can't understand the way americans get all careful over a handful of slurs. Because down here, we learn to not get too emotional over words in kindergarten already. If anything, a strong reaction to any insult down here is always interpreted as sign of insecurity.
Same here, the usual reaction is to not take it so seriously. My mum loves to say, that she can be offended only by smart folks and that shouting obscenities isn't exactly smart, is it? 
|
On September 25 2020 16:33 deacon.frost wrote:
OK, let's decide what's the thread about. This is about racial slurs in general gaming, or SC2, isn't it? So giving examples from the real world is IMO senseless.
So, this is not the real world. unless you say share something about you - you're completely anonymous(even in games with a voice chat, voice filters exists!). Nobody knows your religion, color, nationality, weight, height, sex and size of your penis. So if anyone says to you something racist - is it racism when they don't know your race? And if calling you with a racial slur and it offends you, it IMO says more about you.
Racism is bad, but it does work ONLY if it offends you and only if the offending person KNOWS your race. Which happens on the non-anonymized part of the internets(e.g. facebook) and in the real world. Not in the anonymous gaming(and yes, pro players and streamers are not anonymous).
You are quite correct. The international standard of 'hate speech' requires a close triangular connection between speaker, intended audience, and intention to incite hatred. It's doubtful that in-game racial slurs would meet the standard.
Nevertheless, I'm trying to empathise with the concern of the OP (and his/her supporters). From what I understand, they see in-game racism as a social problem which manifest in real life (e.g. normalisation of racist slurs can 'indoctrinate' kids to be racist). Remove in-game racism, and you tackle the wider issue of racism as a whole. That's where the debate seems to be heading (rightly or wrongly).
|
We all went through the gaming phase when we used every horrible word in any kind of language to insult people and vent.
Is that ok? Maybe not by the current American woke standard, maybe yes in some certain countries and settings, I'm not sure. However, I find it quite essential for the online gaming experience of a boy growing up. I would raise eyebrows but not really mind if my boy behaves that way in CSGOGO 10 years later, I was there before.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
