EPT[WCS AM] ro32 RO32 Group G - Page 20
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Tournaments |
|
Badfatpanda
United States9719 Posts
| ||
|
StarVe
Germany13591 Posts
On May 10 2013 10:57 Thrillz wrote: aLive losing to foreigner is not as relevant since HerO was also in the group and both Koreans got out. Ryung loosing was disappointing though. Putting Polt and Violet is already kinda ridiculous, but add aLive and Ryung? Sure it's relevant, he couldn't manage to get first place because of that, groups are composed of two 1st placing guys and two 2nd placing guys. You can't make difference between players because of their reputation or something if you have nothing concrete to go by except for their placement in the Ro32. Sure HerO probably would've been even "worse" for most people, but I don't quite get the hassle. If you have so many Koreans in the Ro16 you'd better expect groups with many Koreans. What are you going to do? Switch NesTea with Ryung even though NesTea got 1st in his group because he's perceived as weaker now? It doesn't matter, groups can be hard, but I don't think after the Korean Ro16 anybody should complain about players being in the group of death. There's only one group of death and it was played out already. | ||
|
Diogenes
United States132 Posts
All seem to be class acts to me and I will root be rooting for the better player to win and not basing my judgments on some hyped-up, fake narrative of "foreigner versus Korean." | ||
|
Crownlol
United States3726 Posts
Race has nothing to do with it, GTFO. Sen is just not often seen in the big foreigner tournaments. You can bet he'd have a huge fanclub if we won MLG or Dreamhack. | ||
|
Crownlol
United States3726 Posts
On May 10 2013 11:41 Diogenes wrote: I don't really care about the foreigner, American dichotomy. Somehow we should root for suppy because he is "american" but not polt or violet? Suppy is a Chinese-American in school in America. Violet and Polt moved here to work and study in order to improve their lives. Doesn't seem different to me at all. All seem to be class acts to me and I will root be rooting for the better player to win and not basing my judgments on some hyped-up, fake narrative of "foreigner versus Korean." Was Suppy born in China? His liquipedia says USA, so I'm going with American. Not Chinese-American, or any other bullshit like that. I'm sick of these ridiculous fragmenting terms; African-American, Mexican-American, what have you. The only way that "African-American" is an excusable term is for someone that was born in Africa but was later naturalized as an American. Anyone born in America is a fucking American, regardless of their skin tone. | ||
|
Yorke
England881 Posts
| ||
|
wklbishop
United States1286 Posts
On May 10 2013 21:57 Crownlol wrote: Was Suppy born in China? His liquipedia says USA, so I'm going with American. Not Chinese-American, or any other bullshit like that. I'm sick of these ridiculous fragmenting terms; African-American, Mexican-American, what have you. The only way that "African-American" is an excusable term is for someone that was born in Africa but was later naturalized as an American. Anyone born in America is a fucking American, regardless of their skin tone. Where are you from in America btw? Identifying with Mexican-American, Asian-American, and so on is really similar to how the 1920s Irish and Italians identify themselves as Irish-Americans and Italian-Americans. Probably every large ethnic group at some point identified themselves as such before truly being integrated. The idea is that once they get integrated, those terms will eventually disappear. Though we still joke about Gingers, heh. America (as in all of the Americas) is different due to its unique history and dealings with race. If you haven't already, doing some research on Germans in America, you'd be surprised by just how separated some of their groups were in the late 19th century. More separated than any Asian-American group, but that was probably due to the feasibility of creating your own town in the middle of nowhere which isn't possible today. It's not really an issue of being fragmented, it just is the way things are. It takes time and you can't just tell every 2nd-3rd generation Italian to not be influenced by their 1st generation immigrant parents/grandparents. It just takes time for people to be assimilated. | ||
|
Crownlol
United States3726 Posts
On May 10 2013 22:43 wklbishop wrote: Where are you from in America btw? Identifying with Mexican-American, Asian-American, and so on is really similar to how the 1920s Irish and Italians identify themselves as Irish-Americans and Italian-Americans. Probably every large ethnic group at some point identified themselves as such before truly being integrated. The idea is that once they get integrated, those terms will eventually disappear. Though we still joke about Gingers, heh. America (as in all of the Americas) is different due to its unique history and dealings with race. If you haven't already, doing some research on Germans in America, you'd be surprised by just how separated some of their groups were in the late 19th century. More separated than any Asian-American group, but that was probably due to the feasibility of creating your own town in the middle of nowhere which isn't possible today. It's not really an issue of being fragmented, it just is the way things are. It takes time and you can't just tell every 2nd-3rd generation Italian to not be influenced by their 1st generation immigrant parents/grandparents. It just takes time for people to be assimilated. I'm not telling people not to identify with their heritage- that's totally cool with me, I encourage it. I'm from DC by the way. But I've always found the concept of identifying other people as different, with a whole different nationality almost, is very marginalizing. The guy next to me is an American with Mexican descent, I hate the term Mexican-American. It sounds like he's "almost American". Considering historical identification, you also have to consider historical subjugation and prejudice. Yes, the Irish and Italians identified themselves as their closely-knit groups by heritage but was it by choice? Or was it that they were beaten, abused, denied job opportunities, grouped into ghettos and discriminated against by natives? They *had* to band together for protection, it wasn't necessarily that they preferred to remain Italian or Irish. Pride grew out of their success and survival amid horrendous conditions and poor treatment. They didn't come over waving their flags, proud to be unique. They wanted a piece of the American dream, and a bunch of shithead locals made that very, very difficult for them. This triumph over adversity is what fostered the pride in one's background, not the other way around. | ||
|
farnham
1378 Posts
| ||
|
poisui
1088 Posts
| ||
| ||
