TheRPGSite

The Lounge => Media and Inspiration => Topic started by: Kellri on August 26, 2008, 10:10:35 pm

Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Kellri on August 26, 2008, 10:10:35 pm
Today I had a first in my gaming life...I was told by another gamer that I wouldn't be welcome in his gaming group because 'these days he only games with folks who share his world view'. I had to do a double-take. No, he wasn't saying we have different gaming preferences (we're both 1st edition Gamma Worlders) or that I'm an asshole (which I could understand and respect if he thought as much). But no, after clarification, he was saying he doesn't roll with anyone who has different religious & political beliefs. That really burns me up - personally, l'd game with the Taliban if they brought snacks and tried to be civil. So, anybody else seen this kind of intolerant asshattery in gaming?
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: J Arcane on August 26, 2008, 10:16:49 pm
Yeah that seems a little on the fucked up side.  So much for brotherly love.

Maybe it's just because I'm basically my own one-man denomination, but I can't imagine limiting my gaming to only co-religionists, I'd never get to game at all.

Besides, Christ hung out and got drunk with tax collectors and whores.  I hear the phrase "WWJD" and I think "Probably hang out with a lot of rabble like the kind I find at my game tables".
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Silverlion on August 26, 2008, 10:16:51 pm
Yeah. I've seen some that way.

It's funny--in this case atheists, trying to only game with other atheists.   I don't get it personally.  

Mind you, I'd draw the line at something DEEPLY impacting their ability to play the kind of games I like to play. (I suspect terrorists in general wouldn't enjoy my moral takes.)

I am religious, but I don't presume to make gaming about that.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Kyle Aaron on August 26, 2008, 10:17:03 pm
That would rather restrict my gaming, if I could only game with vaguely greenish and Jewish people who are also straight.

No, I've not encountered it. Perhaps their faith in their worldview is a bit weak? I've found (outside gaming) that people of weak faith are more inclined to associate only with those of the same faith. They don't want to meet dissenters or infidels in case it destroys their faith entirely. I mean, that's why religious cults go and hide in caves and stuff.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Werekoala on August 26, 2008, 10:17:58 pm
Depends on his religious and political beliefs I guess - he might be right! :)

I kid, I kid. No, it dosn't matter to me - I'm there to game, not re-create an Off-Topic thread.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Harsh on August 26, 2008, 10:21:24 pm
lol, yes. Yes I have, but I have come to expect that my 'religious' views are unpopular. It's not fun, but you get used to it I guess.

People are just like that. They tend to instinctively segregate themselves into comfortable social groups. Many psychological experiments have shown this result (if you believe in all that). It's unfortunate that more people cannot be more forgiving. I think it's fun to get to know and learn about other people's culture and life experiences.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: walkerp on August 26, 2008, 10:23:47 pm
I'd only be able to play with animals if that were the case and most of them would have a hell of a time with the dice!
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Serious Paul on August 26, 2008, 10:24:31 pm
It's not how I'd run my show, or table, but I can see some people here easily agreeing with him, and his point of view. I hope this doesn't cost you your game night, but if it does hopefully you'll land on your feet.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: noisms on August 26, 2008, 10:26:21 pm
He's obviously a very insecure person.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: StormBringer on August 26, 2008, 10:31:59 pm
Quote from: Serious Paul;240342
It's not how I'd run my show, or table, but I can see some people here easily agreeing with him, and his point of view. I hope this doesn't cost you your game night, but if it does hopefully you'll land on your feet.
NPR had a story a week or so ago that the entire US is kind of going this way.  It's not proximity to schools or anything like that, it's all about moving to a neighbourhood where most of the people share your ideology.

Of course, Kellri is in Vietnam, so I don't know if the trend is starting over there with game groups or what.  As little as actual religion comes up, I am having a hard time seeing myself excluding someone because of ideology, unless it was trully repellent, of course.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Aos on August 26, 2008, 10:43:14 pm
I'd have to say that I'd game with just about anyone- if they can take me as I am and avoid trying to save my soul or moderate my habits. Truthfully, my profession and general level of immaturity cause me a lot more trouble in these regards than gaming. All in all, I'm far more likely to be denied than to deny.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Silverlion on August 26, 2008, 10:45:39 pm
Quote from: Aos;240350
I'd have to say that I'd game with just about anyone- if they can take me as I am and avoid trying to save my soul or moderate my habits. .


Aaah but your soul is sooooooo shineeeee....and you aren't using it.

:D
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Aos on August 26, 2008, 10:48:21 pm
I assure you that any shine you see is the product of glossy tarnish.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Kellri on August 26, 2008, 10:52:36 pm
No, this isn't in Vietnam, it's an online thing. Expats couldn't afford to be that intolerant. My regular IRL gaming group are all 6th grade Korean kids - they're pretty much stuck with me. No, this particular American guy has decided I'm a shill for a 'murderous communist regime' and an 'athiest'. Neither could be farther from the truth (are there even any communists left, surely not in VN) but don't tell him that.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Spike on August 26, 2008, 10:55:13 pm
I refuse to play with anyone I like too much, or have too much in common with. Yeah, in fact, since all of you post on the same website as I do, you are all hereby disbarred from my table, or any table I chose to play at. That goes double for those of you currently living in the pacific northwest. Can't STAND playing with people who share geographic proximity......

In fact, I've decided that I can not play with even those that share my kingdom. So most of my fellow players right now are rocks and houseplants that are scattered over the globe. I think that weird deep sea thing shaped like a fan is currently the best player I've got...
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Aos on August 26, 2008, 10:57:39 pm
Sorry, dude, I think it posts here.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Koltar on August 26, 2008, 10:57:44 pm
Kellri - he sounds like a flake.

 Don't sweat it.

Besides - 6th graders....Good indoctrination job there.
Soon they will be spreading our strange little hobby to the rest of Vietnam, then Asia...then ... we'll control the whole...

Um sorry - didn't mean to channel Pinky & The Brain there...


- Ed C.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: walkerp on August 26, 2008, 10:58:36 pm
Wait, it's online!!!!

Okay that really is kind of beyond the pale.  I mean how much OOC chatter is there online?

Or is it on a site like this one and you've had verbal fights with him or others on other threads?  That I could see.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Spike on August 26, 2008, 11:05:18 pm
Quote from: Aos;240357
Sorry, dude, I think it posts here.


Damn!  Well, I guess that means I've got an empty seat to fill... I heard there's a funny shaped icicle on antarctica that rolls a mean fire wizard...
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: CavScout on August 26, 2008, 11:28:22 pm
I hope no one who complained in this thread (http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=11659) comes here and is shocked about reactions to different world views....
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Ian Absentia on August 26, 2008, 11:37:10 pm
Quote from: Kellri;240355
No, this particular American guy has decided I'm a shill for a 'murderous communist regime' and an 'athiest'.
Brian Gleichman? :eek:

!i!
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: shalvayez on August 27, 2008, 12:05:15 am
I absolutely refuse to play RaHoWa with Nazis, F.A.T.A.L. with anal rapists, or Vampire with Goths.
 
But I digress, as I have "religious" views that are pretty much far left and to some, "questionable", I have found that gaming with Christians to be a fairly difficult endeavor. It's a matter of tact, in which I have very little. So the game becomes, "How do I play this character without pissing everybody off.", which eventually becomes a strain. Not that I only play characters that are involved in F.A.T.A.L. like activities, but I do occasionally play characters with one or more gfs, and looking for more, etc.
 
Which reminds me, I think I wanna play as an abortion doc in UnHallowed Metropolis.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: StormBringer on August 27, 2008, 12:08:27 am
Quote from: Kellri;240355
No, this isn't in Vietnam, it's an online thing. Expats couldn't afford to be that intolerant. My regular IRL gaming group are all 6th grade Korean kids - they're pretty much stuck with me. No, this particular American guy has decided I'm a shill for a 'murderous communist regime' and an 'athiest'. Neither could be farther from the truth (are there even any communists left, surely not in VN) but don't tell him that.
Well, that makes a bit more sense then.  Still, weird reaction.

Unless you are a shill.  ;)
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: HinterWelt on August 27, 2008, 12:24:31 am
Quote from: Kellri;240333
Today I had a first in my gaming life...I was told by another gamer that I wouldn't be welcome in his gaming group because 'these days he only games with folks who share his world view'. I had to do a double-take. No, he wasn't saying we have different gaming preferences (we're both 1st edition Gamma Worlders) or that I'm an asshole (which I could understand and respect if he thought as much). But no, after clarification, he was saying he doesn't roll with anyone who has different religious & political beliefs. That really burns me up - personally, l'd game with the Taliban if they brought snacks and tried to be civil. So, anybody else seen this kind of intolerant asshattery in gaming?


Hmm, I don't know if this is the same thing but I have had to kick people out because of their "world view" twice. The first was a fervent Christian who played for about 8 sessions or so before he began to insistently "convert" other people's characters. He then moved up to the players. I tried to ask him to keep it out but then the group insisted he go. I must say, I was not too said.

The second was a guy who was a very green oriented guy. He was really cool for about a year then something went off the rails. It started with him going off game with rants about how the technologies in my Traveller game were not green eco-friendly. A few sessions later he started threatening the players with slashing the tires on the "carbon-puke producers". He was gone but good.

So, yeah, if your world view gets in the way of the game, I would ask you to leave. It does not sound like that is the case here but it can happen and believe me, the number of players who bring strangeness to the table is often mind boggling.

Bill
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Kyle Aaron on August 27, 2008, 12:27:15 am
Quote from: Harsh;240339
lPeople are just like that. They tend to instinctively segregate themselves into comfortable social groups. Many psychological experiments have shown this result
Yes and no.

There have been lots of studies on intimate relationships, but not many on friendships. I do recall there was one study where they said, "well, what we really need is some situation where all the people meet up and nobody knows each-other, we could then see who they become friends with, and what determines whether or not they become friends."

So they looked at Army basic training. And that really made them scratch their heads, because they couldn't find anything which determined friendship, not political beliefs, introvert/extrovert, nothing like that. The one correlation was... whether their surnames were close in the alphabet. And that was really puzzling to them, until they realised that the Army assigned them bunks and rooms in alphabetical order.

In order words, people became friends with people who happened to be near them and who they saw all the time, and were not so likely to be friends with some guy they hardly ever saw.

Most people, I think, are fairly tolerant, and will try to get along with others. This is perhaps less so than it used to be. David Wong writes about this (http://www.cracked.com/article_15231_7-reasons-21st-century-making-you-miserable.html), basically saying that our technology and lifestyle lets us filter people out based on trivialities - a bit like the way on Seinfeld he used to dump girls after a date or two because they wore the same dress all the time or had a flinty voice or something. Because we can filter people out so easily, we often don't take the time to get to know them.

The guys in the Army, they're stuck with the same seven or so guys in their room for thirteen weeks, so they fucking well better get to like them or life will be miserable. But some geek sitting at his computer can just tell people to fuck off and never speak to them again because they liked the Star Wars prequels or some trivial shit like that.

So I think Kellri's associates are being intolerant fucksticks mostly because, like anyone else online, they can be.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Kyle Aaron on August 27, 2008, 12:31:13 am
Quote from: HinterWelt;240394
The second was a guy who was a very green oriented guy.[...] A few sessions later he started threatening the players with slashing the tires on the "carbon-puke producers". He was gone but good.
That's awesome! As in the "awesome stupid" way. I was just saying to a gamer friend yesterday that while I am greenish, action heroes are not very green, because being an action hero is all about killing people and blowing shit up, but that's all good. There's fantasy, and then there's reality, it's not good to have them overlap a lot. :)
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Will on August 27, 2008, 12:39:51 am
I sort of understand the idea of 'I want to play with friends, and people who don't share my worldview annoy me and aren't friends.'

But then, I find someone whose worldview is such that those who don't share it piss him off to be an asshole whose views on friendship are unacceptable to me.

Me, I game with people far to the right, people far to the left, and have gamed with people of all sorts. The big thing, I think, is to shut the fuck up about CAUSE and pass the snacks.

Doesn't matter what CAUSE is; either I agree and I'm tired of discussing it because I'm here to game, or I disagree and I'm not really interested in yet another vent about it because I'm here to game.


So sez me.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Abrojo on August 27, 2008, 03:29:16 am
It doesnt seem to be your case, but i do believe that in practice, different beliefs can turn a player away from a party.

If a player has to hear during the downtime, food break or even on some small talk, the rest of the players bashing on a political/religious figure he likes. Can't or wont enjoy arguing with everyone else, it will be unconfortable.

If its a player in question that likes to give some comments outloud on the bash side, even when with comedy in mind, eventually it can tire the other players out. Though at that point, it would make much sense to first ask the player to refrain from talking on the subject and stick to gaming or leave the table.

So basically, yeah. I can see beliefs breaking a player apart from a party.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Pseudoephedrine on August 27, 2008, 03:52:54 am
I'm more concerned about the actions of my fellow players than their beliefs, but one of the guys I play with is hostile to the idea of bringing anyone who's overtly religious to the table. He might tolerate some irreligious "I'm spiritual" type, but only just. He's the GM though, and a pal, and I don't really hang around with too many deeply religious people (and none who also happen to game) anyhow, so it hasn't been an issue in practice.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Kellri on August 27, 2008, 04:53:52 am
No, it ain't gleichman or anybody else on the RPGsite.

Y'know, I love this site because of the genuine tolerance you find here, as opposed to the 'bait-ignore-or-banhammer' tolerance on found on most other gaming sites. Here I can feel free to flame somebody on an OT thread and turn around and cooperatively discuss game design with the same guy on another. What's more democratic than that?

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;240395
Because we can filter people out so easily, we often don't take the time to get to know them.

Excellent point. If anything, I think the Internet is potentially damaging to Western democracy because it makes polarizing attitudes so much easier to enforce and encourages 'sticking with your own kind'. IRL, I might call somebody like gleichman a right-wing cunt but I'd also want to go out and drink a beer together, maybe find out what's driving the guy and reach some common ground (we both love motorcycles??). Online it's just too easy to flame someone, hold a grudge, and not worry about any sort of rational relationship or personal accountability. If that's my hippy-dippy deadhead side coming out, so be it, we're all still human.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: S'mon on August 27, 2008, 05:00:08 am
Living in London I don't think it would be very practical for me to only game with Ulster-Unionist Atheist Paleoconservatives - I'm probably the only one...

I'm fine with a wide, wide range of political views, as long as everyone can keep it civil.  Not being English I have a bit of trouble with the English class system, which is still nearly ingrained here as race distinctions are in the USA.  Player X once complained about short-term player Y, an unemployed 'incapacity benefit' type.  Player X is an actor.  I joked "Not posh enough for you, eh?"  Player X took grave offence.  In retrospect, I realise that saying that to an Englishman would be the equivalent of saying "Not white enough for you, eh?" to a white American.  Classism is nearly as grave a sin here among liberals as racism in the US, at the same time as being deeply ingrained.  I'm first generation middle class Ulsterman and my Ulster friends are all working class, so I have a bit of trouble with middle class English mores.

A different issue, I once had a player in a long running campaign who was a real-life Crowleyan Chaos Sorcerer.  He got on well with the evangelical Christian player, but I found him creepy.  One day he 'accidentally' brought a Chaos spirit to the game.  Not sure if it's some kind of mental energy or a coincidence - I didn't know it at the time - but the game was a total shambles, the window on my back door smashed, showering glass everywhere and traumatising a nervous player.  My part-Finnish wife put up a protection from evil ward on our front door after that (a traditional Finnish charm).  I ended up dropping the guy, and his Crowleyism was certainly part of the reason.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: S'mon on August 27, 2008, 05:11:25 am
Quote from: Kyle Aaron;240336
That would rather restrict my gaming, if I could only game with vaguely greenish and Jewish people who are also straight.


Homosexuality is an interesting one.  I'm a straight male.  I had a very good player in my game who was queer as a three dollar bill.  His PC though was a heterosexual female, which worked great.  I have no trouble NPCing love interests and such for a straight female PC, whether the player is straight male, gay male, straight female or lesbian female - and I think I've seen all those combos.  I think though I would have trouble with a player playing an overtly gay male PC who wanted the PC's sexuality to a be a big part of the game.  Again, I don't think it would matter what the player's own orientation was.

I recently played in a game with an overtly gay GM.  He kept asking me if my hulk-smash Barbarian PC was gay; also would I like to play a disabled character (with an in-game bonus).  This in a 1st level 3e D&D game, not some points-buy game.  I got a little uncomfortable:  "Thongar likes WOMEN!!"
He also wanted all the players to choose a multicultural array of human ethnicities for their PCs.  This in a typical pseudo-medieval vanilla D&D setting.  Luckily I'd already got an idea Thongar looked vaguely Amerindian - 'Native American' - which kept him happy.  I got the impression he wouldn't have been too happy if Thongar was a blond Aryan as well as an able-bodied straight male.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Rob Lang on August 27, 2008, 05:20:28 am
As long as they're not a twat at the table, they can believe in Michael Jackson for all I care.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Monster Manuel on August 27, 2008, 05:36:54 am
I can game with people with different viewpoints from me as long as they're not extreme, and they don't push them down my throat, or assume I agree with them.

For example, I played in a group a few years back that had a creationist and a vaguely racist person.

The creationist/fundamentalist was actually a pretty cool person and after we both agreed not to talk belief systems, we got along very well.

The vaguely racist person was harder to deal with. He assumed that since we were all white guys at the table he could make racist jokes. He'd also make jokes about handicapped people (my son is autistic), so he was the total package. I used to dread game night.

I laughed to myself when he met my hispanic wife.  

After a while I quit the group and didn't game for a few years. Now i'm playing online, and may be getting back into a local group I've played with before, depending on whether I decide to move away or not. Those guys are mostly cool, but I'm definitely the odd man out, making for a bit of an uncomfortable feeling. That's what it comes down to for me- comfort level.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Kellri on August 27, 2008, 05:48:01 am
Quote from: S'mon;240439
He also wanted all the players to choose a multicultural array of human ethnicities for their PCs.  This in a typical pseudo-medieval vanilla D&D setting.  Luckily I'd already got an idea Thongar looked vaguely Amerindian - 'Native American' - which kept him happy.  I got the impression he wouldn't have been too happy if Thongar was a blond Aryan as well as an able-bodied straight male.


You weren't gaming with Bruce Baugh by any chance??
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: S'mon on August 27, 2008, 06:17:27 am
Quote from: Monster Manuel;240444
The vaguely racist person was harder to deal with. He assumed that since we were all white guys at the table he could make racist jokes.


I love my old friends from Ulster, but I cringe when they're visting me here in London and we're in public (say on the Tube), or when we're playing an online PBEM with strangers, and they say... stuff...
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: S'mon on August 27, 2008, 06:19:04 am
Quote from: Kellri;240448
You weren't gaming with Bruce Baugh by any chance??


No.  I did recently donate my collection of Baugh's d20 Gamma World stuff to my local animal farm.  :D
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Kyle Aaron on August 27, 2008, 06:29:28 am
Quote from: S'mon;240435
Player X once complained about short-term player Y, an unemployed 'incapacity benefit' type.  Player X is an actor.  I joked "Not posh enough for you, eh?"  Player X took grave offence.
Player X is a tosser, then. If you judge someone unfairly, you ought to expect people to take the piss. He fully deserved to be put in his place.

Quote from: S'mon
In retrospect, I realise that saying that to an Englishman would be the equivalent of saying "Not white enough for you, eh?" to a white American.  Classism is nearly as grave a sin here among liberals as racism in the US, at the same time as being deeply ingrained.  
I don't have sympathy for people getting all shitty when accused of bigotry. Either I'm not bigoted, in which case I'll just say, "what the fuck?!" and be confused, not offended - or else I am bigoted, in which case I should be questioning myself and sorting myself out.
Quote from: S'mon
I think though I would have trouble with a player playing an overtly gay male PC who wanted the PC's sexuality to a be a big part of the game.
I don't give a toss where people want to put their genitals, I don't want their genitals as part of my game. Their relationships certainly should be, though. I mean, PCs should have spouses, boyfriends and girlfriends. Makes 'em more human, instead of everyone playing Captain Teflon Psycho.
Quote from: Monster Manuel
The vaguely racist person was harder to deal with. He assumed that since we were all white guys at the table he could make racist jokes. He'd also make jokes about handicapped people (my son is autistic), so he was the total package. I used to dread game night.
That sounds awful. Me, as a player I never play bigoted characters - chauvinistic, as in, "we [nationality, occupation, etc] are the bestest, it's not that you're crap, it's just that we're so awesome", but not bigoted. But as GM I have some bigoted NPCs, because it can be funny (like making fun of "ocker" Australians who are bigoted), or ludicrous ("die infidels!") and also so that the players have someone who deserves being hated. I mean, players need that, a few NPCs who are genuinely real cunts and thoroughly hateable. The bigoted NPCs are never presented sympathetically, they're always a bit stupid or lazy or using it as an excuse for sheer nastiness.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: S'mon on August 27, 2008, 06:40:32 am
Quote from: Kyle Aaron;240455
I don't give a toss where people want to put their genitals, I don't want their genitals as part of my game. Their relationships certainly should be, though. I mean, PCs should have spouses, boyfriends and girlfriends. Makes 'em more human, instead of everyone playing Captain Teflon Psycho.


I mean I'm not comfortable with playing out the gay male PC's trip to the bath house, even if it's kept at a PG level of discreteness or a '6 Feet Under' level of dramatic skill, nor am I comfortable with playing potential love interests, boyfriends etc for a gay male PC.  Likewise (off topic) I wasn't comfortable with our German doula's suggestion I should learn to lactate so I could share the joy of breastfeeding my son: "I'm not that comfortable with my sexuality, thanks".
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: gleichman on August 27, 2008, 07:32:08 am
Quote from: Kellri;240434
No, it ain't gleichman or anybody else on the RPGsite.


In the interest of a 'What if', I likely wouldn't game with you or many other here if it came up.

Hate D&D and D20, so those people are out. Hate light rule games, so those people are out. Seems a bunch of people think I need to bend my campaign to get them a new character immediately if they should die, so those people are out. Etc.

Religion and Politics could even come into play depending upon the person. Engine, Serious Paul, Kyle, Jackalope, Stormbringer, Walkerp etc are completely out. This is the only place I'd deal with them at all- and I really don't deal with them (except Engine) even here.

My current group is all Christian/Conservative, with one good-natured Atheist/Liberal.


In your case, for some reason you impressed the guy such that he thought you "a shill for a 'murderous communist regime' and an 'athiest'". I must wonder just how you did that, maybe just by saying where you're from (only a really stupid person to reach that viewpoint based on that), or maybe you said something that sounded like it came from a a 'murderous communist regime' and an 'athiest'". In any case, there are lots of people online. Shouldn't be difficult for either of you to find other players.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Monster Manuel on August 27, 2008, 07:40:04 am
Quote from: gleichman;240465

In your case, for some reason you impressed the guy such that he thought you "a shill for a 'murderous communist regime' and an 'athiest'". I must wonder just how you did that,


All he said was "God is dead, and the People of my country killed him for his bourgeois ways."
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: One Horse Town on August 27, 2008, 07:52:55 am
Hey, i worked hard to get onto that list. Sigh, always ignored...;)
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Kellri on August 27, 2008, 07:56:12 am
Quote from: gleichman;240465
In the interest of a 'What if', I likely wouldn't game with you or many other here if it came up...My current group is all Christian/Conservative, with one good-natured Atheist/Liberal.


Well shit man, that really narrows it down. Lemme think...Do you like Israel? How about Black Powder firearms? Traveller gearheading? Link Wray? Awana? Titty bars?? I just can't imagine there's NOTHING we can agree on.

Quote
I must wonder just how you did that, maybe just by saying where you're from (only a really stupid person to reach that viewpoint based on that), or maybe you said something that sounded like it came from a a 'murderous communist regime' and an 'athiest'". In any case, there are lots of people online. Shouldn't be difficult for either of you to find other players.


The idea that one American would accuse another of being a communist is just laughable. I knew some in the US at university (20 years ago), but I can honestly say I've NEVER met a dyed-in-the-wool true believer in any Communist country I've visited (pretty much all of them except Cuba & N. Korea). How do you spot them? Look for the Mao-suit and the Little Red Book?

It's not about finding other players. It's just the principle of the thing. The guy himself is one of these 'Bible Verses in the Sig' kinda dudes if that says anything.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: David R on August 27, 2008, 07:57:18 am
Hmmm, two issues here. Tolerence level towards subject matter and tolerence level towards players (the kind you would game with). The former is less controversial I guess. With the latter it's all about the social accpetability of one's prejudice (which I suppose could apply to the former as well).

Regards,
David R
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: jgants on August 27, 2008, 10:18:44 am
Quote from: S'mon;240439
He also wanted all the players to choose a multicultural array of human ethnicities for their PCs.  This in a typical pseudo-medieval vanilla D&D setting.


Heh, this makes me think of my current AD&D Forgotten Realms character,  named Hamzah ibn Usuman, who is very loosely based on the idea of a medieval Songhay-esque warrior (the in-game explanation is that he comes from a tribe in the Shaar area).  

It's sort of a running gag in the game that he sticks out like a sore thumb because he's the only black man in all of the Realms.

To make things more interesting, I keep coming up with "tribal customs" (very loosely based on Islam, or rather Islam stereotypes) that make life more difficult for the party.  I think my favorite is my running joke about "in my tribe, they would stone you to death for that" whenever one of the female PCs does something my character doesn't like.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Age of Fable on August 27, 2008, 10:25:36 am
Quote from: walkerp;240341
I'd only be able to play with animals if that were the case and most of them would have a hell of a time with the dice!


I tried gaming with animals, but they wanted to play anthropomorphised animals the whole time. Ugh, damn baldies.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Will on August 27, 2008, 10:26:18 am
Fucking uncle toms.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: gleichman on August 27, 2008, 10:27:42 am
Quote from: Kellri;240468
Well shit man, that really narrows it down. Lemme think...Do you like Israel? How about Black Powder firearms? Traveller gearheading? Link Wray? Awana? Titty bars?? I just can't imagine there's NOTHING we can agree on.


Of that list, I can say that I repect and support Israel (which is slightly different than saying I like it- haven't been there and so can't really say).

The rest is either losing or indifferent.

So maybe we can play 1967: The Owning.


Quote from: Kellri;240468

The idea that one American would accuse another of being a communist is just laughable.


I don't think it's reasonable to expect anyone to apply the label based upon pure definitions. Even self-identified Communists typically didn't honestly buy into those. But if one sees someone going on and on about Class Warfare and the evils of Capitalism, one shouldn't be surprised to see the label applied.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Will on August 27, 2008, 10:32:58 am
People who spend their lives in the birchwoods, the swamp mangroves, and the scrub pine might find it weird to all be called 'forest dwellers' by the horsemen of the steppe.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Kellri on August 27, 2008, 10:50:34 am
Quote
So maybe we can play 1967: The Owning.


Cool. 6 Days and 5 Hours of Glory.

Quote
But if one sees someone going on and on about Class Warfare and the evils of Capitalism, one shouldn't be surprised to see the label applied.


Sure, but I've never seen that kind of talk on a gaming site or anywhere else, really. Have you?
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: gleichman on August 27, 2008, 10:54:36 am
Quote from: Kellri;240518
Sure, but I've never seen that kind of talk on a gaming site or anywhere else, really. Have you?


Sure.

Jackalope for example spews some good examples of it. Happened all the time when I was on rpgnet years ago.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Settembrini on August 27, 2008, 11:04:14 am
I have found that the way some people behave & think sometimes correlates with certain political views. I have found that I don´t like those kind of people, on a personal level.

That said, I can get along with many divergent world views and convictions, as long as they are not acting in a certain way about it.

Pharisaism, self-righteousness.

At least here it often goes together with a certain political view.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: ColonelHardisson on August 27, 2008, 11:04:55 am
Quote from: Kyle Aaron;240395
Most people, I think, are fairly tolerant, and will try to get along with others. This is perhaps less so than it used to be. David Wong writes about this (http://www.cracked.com/article_15231_7-reasons-21st-century-making-you-miserable.html), basically saying that our technology and lifestyle lets us filter people out based on trivialities - a bit like the way on Seinfeld he used to dump girls after a date or two because they wore the same dress all the time or had a flinty voice or something. Because we can filter people out so easily, we often don't take the time to get to know them.


When the hell did Cracked Magazine - Cracked-Fucking-Magazine! - become so insightful? That has to be one of the, if not the, most poignant and (in my experience and estimation) spot-on articles I've read about why the internet is engendering antisocial and (perhaps) sociopathic behavior. It nails the subject of this thread right to the wall. Thanks for the link.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Seanchai on August 27, 2008, 03:48:52 pm
There are folks I wouldn't knowingly play with. Pedophiles, for example. I could care less about religion, etc.. If some folks have problems with that, well, I find it weird, but I guess that's their right.

Seanchai
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: jgants on August 27, 2008, 05:41:36 pm
Quote from: Seanchai;240710
There are folks I wouldn't knowingly play with. Pedophiles, for example.


Agreed.  Gaming night at NAMBLA would be right up there with putting my arm into a meat grinder.  :eek:
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: S'mon on August 27, 2008, 06:05:16 pm
Quote from: Seanchai;240710
I could care less about religion, etc..


I'm fine with religion in general (Wiccans, Christians, Jews, atheists et al), but don't leave summoned Chaos spirits in my house, please.  Likewise if your religion requires you to do other anti-social activity in my house or at my game table.  If you need to tell me I'm going to Hell that's ok though, growing up in Ulster I got used to that.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Age of Fable on August 27, 2008, 06:12:58 pm
Quote from: jgants;240828
Agreed.  Gaming night at NAMBLA would be right up there with putting my arm into a meat grinder.  :eek:


Notice how people find the idea of NAMBLA members playing role-playing games unpleasant - but not implausible...
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: gleichman on August 27, 2008, 06:13:56 pm
Quote from: Age of Fable;240845
Notice how people find the idea of NAMBLA members playing role-playing games unpleasant - but not implausible...


I'm rather sure that Posion'd and Grey Ranks would be high on their favored game list...
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Arminius on August 27, 2008, 06:35:14 pm
Quote from: Kellri;240518
Sure, but I've never seen that kind of talk on a gaming site or anywhere else, really. Have you?
Dude, I live in Berkeley, CA. Assuming they aren't FBI undercover types, I'm pretty sure I've spoken to some real Communists.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: S'mon on August 27, 2008, 06:46:42 pm
Quote from: Elliot Wilen;240854
Dude, I live in Berkeley, CA. Assuming they aren't FBI undercover types, I'm pretty sure I've spoken to some real Communists.


I live in London.  Half my players are Communist.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Joshua Ford on August 27, 2008, 07:01:16 pm
Quote from: gleichman;240847
I'm rather sure that Posion'd and Grey Ranks would be high on their favored game list...


Paedophiles have a thing about being pirates? Who would have thought it?

Cheap dig gleichman
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: castiglione on August 27, 2008, 07:43:46 pm
This is messed up.

Is this what we've come to?  Only associating with people who share our world view?  All that does is encourage the incestuous propagation of ideas; nothing is challenged and every discussion ends up being a circle jerk.

What's next?  Ignoring that people with world views other than our own do not exist?  It's almost like something out of Jack Vance's Dying Earth stories...the one with the people with green and grey cloaks running around, unaware of the other group, and when they finally do become aware, they go on a crazy killing spree.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Spike on August 27, 2008, 07:50:59 pm
Sorry... those guys are wearing cloth... too similar to me, can't play with them. They gotta go.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Grimjack on August 27, 2008, 10:26:16 pm
Putting aside the extremes like pedophiles, Klansmen, etc., I will game with anyone.  I've gamed with homophobic military officers and a wiccan lesbian at the same time and we never had any friction at all except in character.  Sadly I think Stormbringer and others are right that society is moving toward little enclaves of people who all think alike and don't want to have their world views challenged.  Personally, I'm not going to pass up a good game or avoid someone just because they don't vote or think the way I do.

Come to think of it, I did have one bit of friction from someone's out of game beliefs. I was a player at the time and a fundamentalist christian dude quit the game because he got offended that my character spent all of his loot from the previous adventure in a whorehouse and then set it on fire while fighting some old enemies who showed up to settle a score.  He said that the game threatened his relationship with Jesus or something.

I could see that kind of thing being a problem but the fucktard referred to in the OP should just be happy he can find someone who still plays Gamma World 1e and not be such an asshat about it.  Sounds like you are better off not playing in that game.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Kyle Aaron on August 27, 2008, 10:42:08 pm
Quote from: ColonelHardisson;240525
When the hell did Cracked Magazine - Cracked-Fucking-Magazine! - become so insightful?
I dunno about Cracked 'zine, that's just David Wong, he's a fuckin' genius. Check out his other articles here (http://www.cracked.com/members/David+Wong), if you liked the "21st century life is making us miserable one" you'll like the Monkeysphere one, too.
Quote from: Grimjack
I could see that kind of thing being a problem but the fucktard referred to in the OP should just be happy he can find someone who still plays Gamma World 1e and not be such an asshat about it.
Helping run GameCircle.org, and doing the Geektogethers, and just generally trying to help gamers hook up with other gamers, I've found that there are a fair number of supposed gamers out there who really aren't.

They tell you they're desperate for a game and will game with anyone, you introduce them to a couple of game groups and they never contact them, or if contacted don't email or call back. Or they might say they really want a game of X (where X is Gamma World 1e, D&D3.5, Frogs in the Caneyard or whatever), you find them a group playing it and they never show up. Or perhaps they're a GM looking for players, and you say, "well, we're just four in our group and I'd like a break as a GM, you could come over" - and you never hear from them again. Or they ask when and where the game is, and you tell them, "we like to meet socially before we game with people, just a nice geeky chat over some drinks, here's my number" and they never call.

And if you ask around you find that these people have been doing it for years, someone will have had the person hovering around five years ago, they were useless then, too. If you press them they give some weak and limp excuse like, "we have different political views" or some bullshit like that. They claim to want to game but won't put out.

And I find that online we get more flaky gamers, online games have a much higher fizzle rate than in person ones. After all, it's easier to weasel away online. If you're the sort of person who's not that committed to things and wants to be able to weasel out, if you're irresolute and spineless, then you'll prefer settings where you can drift in and out like that. You'll fuck around with some poor bastard online in Vietnam instead of going down to the local game club. I mean, those people will get to know you and tell you to fuck off after a while, but online there's a whole world of people to fuck around with.

Sometimes people talk about someone apparently offering you sex but then not putting out, we call them a cocktease or clittease. Well, I reckon there are a few out there who are gameteases.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: GrimJesta on August 27, 2008, 11:03:22 pm
Quote from: S'mon;240857
I live in London.  Half my players are Communist.


Hell, being a punk many of my friends are Anarcho-punx, i.e. Communists that think they're not Communists because they don't call themselves Communists. But if the shoe fits...

ut hell, likes someone said above, barring really radical crap like the KKK and pedophiles, I'll game with anyone. Well, I did have a neo-nazi skinhead in my 2e AD&D game in high school. The rest of my group was one WASP, one African American (who looked JUST LIKE MC Hammer), one Korean-American, two atheist punx (myself being one) and a Jewish/Irish-American girl. No tension.

Why?

I've noticed that gamers see themselves as gamers first, usually, especially when around their kind.

-=Grim=-
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Aos on August 28, 2008, 12:16:01 am
That David Wong article was great. Among other things it finally clued me in to the exact nature of the ecological niche occupied by racoons.

I deal with lots of annoying people every day. Everyone who enters my line of work is a fucking annoying crazy ass fucknut- except me, (I'm like FDR, MLK, JFK, and MMDA, all rolled into one). And then there are the undergrads. Holy fucking fuck.  After a while you get so you don't notice it so much- or you just shrug it off;  sometimes you kind of groove on it.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Settembrini on August 28, 2008, 01:22:22 am
Quote from: Elliot Wilen;240854
Dude, I live in Berkeley, CA. Assuming they aren't FBI undercover types, I'm pretty sure I've spoken to some real Communists.

People in my very apartment building are/have been REAL communists (tchekists, socialist avantgarde, what have you). I live next to the former Stasi HQs, and there´s still a lot of old timer officers around. They are not into RPGs though.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: CraigLee on August 28, 2008, 01:56:38 am
This whole thread blows my mind...I can't believe someone would get ousted for having a different worldview. Frankly, how do you even FIND a full group of willing gamers without getting a variety of views in the process? I mean, wtf...
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Will on August 28, 2008, 02:12:35 am
One thing I can understand is that sometimes people's worldview bleeds in and can be really off-putting.

Online, for example, I've had people make comments along the lines of 'everyone sane and right is clearly a liberal and Bush is vile and demonic and eats babies.' Blissfully unaware of how outrageously offensive some of the shit spilling from their mouth is.

What's great is when it's combined with such people commenting about how intolerant and offensive Republican assholes are, and can't wait until we can shove them in ovens, hur hur hur.

Which isn't to say conservatives are never dicks, but I seem to run into liberal dicks a lot more often on RP stuff online.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: S'mon on August 28, 2008, 02:48:50 am
Quote from: Will;240969

Which isn't to say conservatives are never dicks, but I seem to run into liberal dicks a lot more often on RP stuff online.


I think RPers as a group are skewed leftwards vs the population as a whole, though there is a substantial Libertarian contingent going back to Gygax.  A lot of RPG publishers, though are fairly right wing - after all they are small businessmen!  Right-of-centre US RPG publishers I've known include West End Games (The Price of Freedom), GDW (Twilight: 2000) and Troll Lord Games.  They tend to be Libertarian or/and Reaganite conservative.

The last long-running C&C campaign I ran here in London, one player was a posh accented country lady with conservative views, another had radical Marxist views but in the lazy, unconsidered way that's common down here - he worked in HM Treasury; government bureaucrats especially seem very prone to this.  They generally got on well but there was some tension when the lady hosted a dinner party for us and the conversation turned to fox hunting...
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Kyle Aaron on August 28, 2008, 04:22:26 am
Quote from: S'mon;240972
I think RPers as a group are skewed leftwards vs the population as a whole,
I don't think so. It's just a matter of the circles you live and socialise in. I mean, when I gamed in the Army, there were very few lefties. I think a few of the officers might have been commies but the soldiers generally were right-wing through and through :)

And if you try, you can make sure most of the people in your life a lot share your views. And most people do try that, they avoid people who'll challenge their views a lot.

I mean, most gamers I know are essentially apolitical, apathetic. Their views are vaguely liberal both socially and economically, but it's not very well thought-out, there are lots of issues they've never considered because they've never thought about them. They were busy reading comics or something :)

But this I think is a general trend in Australian society, rather than gamer-specific. So people won't avoid people with X views, rather they'll avoid people with any strong views at all.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: The_Shadow on August 28, 2008, 04:32:05 am
Quote from: CraigLee;240965
This whole thread blows my mind...I can't believe someone would get ousted for having a different worldview. Frankly, how do you even FIND a full group of willing gamers without getting a variety of views in the process? I mean, wtf...


Mate, forget worldviews, I'd oust you just for writing in a different coloured font!
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: S'mon on August 28, 2008, 04:53:11 am
Quote from: Kyle Aaron;240975
I don't think so. It's just a matter of the circles you live and socialise in. I mean, when I gamed in the Army...


Military gaming is clearly an exception.  Though I remember reading that the Israeli military sees RPGers as a security risk and won't give them the higher security clearances.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Kellri on August 28, 2008, 06:20:29 am
Tell me if I'm wrong, but this kind of intolerant gamer is almost always an American. Brits + Aussies are for the most part able to handle themselves with a whole lot more good humor than Yanks. I guess I just wish my countrymen weren't such a bunch of insufferable knobgoblins.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Kyle Aaron on August 28, 2008, 06:53:29 am
Quote from: S'mon;240979
Military gaming is clearly an exception.
You were speaking of gamers in general. They're part of them.

Again, it's just a matter of who you mix with day-to-day, you tend to assume most of your country is like them. But you also tend to mix with people like yourself, people from a similar background and attitude to things.

For example, in my current campaign, it's set in modern-day Australia. I present some of the NPCs as being bigoted. This gives the players a laugh - I'm not presenting them sympathetically, their bigotry is a definite flaw - but they sometimes joke that it reflects my attitudes, rather than just being some NPC personalities. You see, they're basically not racist, and they associate mainly with non-racists, so they imagine most of the country is non-racist.

So I sent them this old YouTube clip (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtuxy7jhRiU&feature=dir). The thing is, the bigots in that clip will think that everyone's just like them.

And that's the thing, we tend to think everyone is just like ourselves. In theory the internet would change this, since it exposes us to a diversity of people we mightn't normally meet. But in practice, as kellri has described and as David Wong's excellent article talked about, people exclude those even trivially different to themselves.

So that kellri's would-be gamer associate probably thinks everyone's just like him, too.
Quote from: kellri
Tell me if I'm wrong, but this kind of intolerant gamer is almost always an American. Brits + Aussies are for the most part able to handle themselves with a whole lot more good humor than Yanks.
I've encountered it a lot from Americans, but I couldn't say if it's more likely with them. I mean, most of the English-speaking people you meet online will be American, so it's hard to add 'em all up and decide who's the most sensitive.

However, the American reputation is of being rather easily offended, compared to the British and certainly Australians. I remember a while back on rpg.net an Aussie commented that most of the Aussie posters probably didn't even know there was a report button. We just don't have the same culture of outrage, though as Wong's article says, everyone involved in the internet is getting some of that culture. We're all becoming reclusive crybabies.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: S'mon on August 28, 2008, 07:10:51 am
Quote from: Kyle Aaron;240999
For example, in my current campaign, it's set in modern-day Australia. I present some of the NPCs as being bigoted. This gives the players a laugh - I'm not presenting them sympathetically, their bigotry is a definite flaw - but they sometimes joke that it reflects my attitudes, rather than just being some NPC personalities. You see, they're basically not racist, and they associate mainly with non-racists, so they imagine most of the country is non-racist.

So I sent them this old YouTube clip (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtuxy7jhRiU&feature=dir). The thing is, the bigots in that clip will think that everyone's just like them.

And that's the thing, we tend to think everyone is just like ourselves.


I tend to assume most RPGers I meet are commie pinko liberals, not bigoted right wingers like me.  Personally I'm highly Islamophobic these days, I've come to hate the mosques, Islamic centres and giant overgrown Islamic schools that dominate much of my neighbourhood and much of London.  I'm disgusted by the face-veiled niqabis on the street, especially the young ones in modern Islamist fetish wear (the older tribal women I can tolerate), and by various other aspects of the advance of political Islam here.  I would never assume any of my players shared my views though, unless maybe I had some Hindu* players.  Even then, middle class Hindus make a great display of tolerance and a sort of puzzlement: "India is so peaceful, I don't know why they attack us...", as if attacking its neighbours to convert or subdue them wasn't a core tenet of Islam within the Koran.

*Unlike Hindus, most Jews seem to have a suicidal commitment to multiculturalism.  Even the Jewish neocons combine "Invade the World" with "Invite the World" in their ideology.  Which I think is a real shame because I'm pro-Jewish and I don't want to see them being wiped out or persecuted again, as seems likely will happen.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Koltar on August 28, 2008, 08:22:54 am
As for running into gamers who act like "dicks'/jerks ? Of either the Liberal or Conservatibve slant - its practically the same percentage.

 Now remember, working at a game store I might meet a bigger sampling of the gaming population than you guys do on average.  Of the gamers that turn out to be jerks - I've not noticed a higher percentage for either right wing or left wing types.


- Ed C.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Kyle Aaron on August 28, 2008, 08:52:04 am
Quote from: S'mon;241000
I tend to assume most RPGers I meet are commie pinko liberals, not bigoted right wingers like me.
Well, it's all a matter of contrasts. In contrast to a racist fuck like you, most people in civilised societies in the West are indeed commies. It's like how Obama next to McCain looks like a black man, but next to one of his many half-brothers he looks pretty fucking white.

But in fact the mainstream is merely passively prejudiced, not blatantly prejudiced like you.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: S'mon on August 28, 2008, 09:02:14 am
Quote from: Kyle Aaron;241019
Well, it's all a matter of contrasts. In contrast to a racist fuck like you, most people in civilised societies in the West are indeed commies. It's like how Obama next to McCain looks like a black man, but next to one of his many half-brothers he looks pretty fucking white.

But in fact the mainstream is merely passively prejudiced, not blatantly prejudiced like you.


I dunno, I don't think they resemble vicious Gramscians like you, either.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: David R on August 28, 2008, 09:13:36 am
I think S'mon is attemtpting humour in response to your vid Kyle.

Regards,
David R
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: gleichman on August 28, 2008, 09:59:13 am
Quote from: Kyle Aaron;241019
Well, it's all a matter of contrasts. In contrast to a racist fuck like you, most people in civilised societies in the West are indeed commies. It's like how Obama next to McCain looks like a black man, but next to one of his many half-brothers he looks pretty fucking white.

But in fact the mainstream is merely passively prejudiced, not blatantly prejudiced like you.


The above quote was in response to S'mon, not myself.

Boy, does Kyle toss racist around freely. Basically at everyone who disagrees with him an much of anything. And that Mainstream is passively prejudice line...

Off in Jackalope country that is.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: David R on August 28, 2008, 10:35:26 am
So if S'mon wasn't "joking" you would consider Kyle's description of him wrong ? Interesting.

Regards,
David R
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: gleichman on August 28, 2008, 10:41:58 am
Quote from: David R;241059
So if S'mon wasn't "joking" you would consider Kyle's description of him wrong ? Interesting.


I'd consider S'mon's self-description to be accurate. If S'mon calls himself Islamophobic, then he is.

But Islamophobic is not racist anymore than hatred of Christianity (very common on this board) is racist. Islam covers many races.

And I find the fact that you seem to accept Kyle's blanket statement that the mainstream is passively racist while attempting to object to a detail interesting myself.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: David R on August 28, 2008, 11:02:23 am
Quote from: gleichman;241061
I'd consider S'mon's self-description to be accurate. If S'mon calls himself Islamophobic, then he is.

But Islamophobic is not racist anymore than hatred of Christianity (very common on this board) is racist. Islam covers many races.


Well that's a nice technicality that racist normally hide behind when expressing their racism. Because surely the distinction between religion and race of the various communities that practise Islam are observed by these racists. But I like the way you justify bigotry, Gleichman. It's always nice to watch.

Edit: And if you are comfortable with someone refering to himself as a bigoted right winger it tells me a lot about the company you keep.

Quote
And I find the fact that you seem to accept Kyle's blanket statement that the mainstream is passively racist while attempting to object to a detail interesting myself.


I made the same comment upthread. Socially acceptable prejudices.

Regards,
David R
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: gleichman on August 28, 2008, 11:13:38 am
Quote from: David R;241066

Well that's a nice technicality that racist normally hide behind when expressing their racism. Because surely the distinction between religion and race of the various communities that practise Islam are observed by these racists. But I like the way you justify bigotry, Gleichman. It's always nice to watch.


The definition of bigotry includes religion, so S'mon can't really object to that label, and it isn't one I was concerned with, and certainly wasn't defending.

The charge was racism, which is specific to race. What race are YOU thinking of? After all, you're the only one besides Kyle who have made that leap.



Quote from: David R;241066

Depends on where kyle meant by mainstream.


So Kyle gets the benefit of the doubt when tossing words like "mainstream" around? Just like one should give anyone on the Left the benefit of the doubt about what the meaning of 'is' is.

Very interesting.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: CavScout on August 28, 2008, 11:14:24 am
Quote from: David R;241059
So if S'mon wasn't "joking" you would consider Kyle's description of him wrong ? Interesting.

Regards,
David R


Didn't you post (http://www.therpgsite.com/showpost.php?p=241029&postcount=81) saying he was posting humor?
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: HinterWelt on August 28, 2008, 11:17:18 am
Quote from: Kellri;240990
Tell me if I'm wrong, but this kind of intolerant gamer is almost always an American. Brits + Aussies are for the most part able to handle themselves with a whole lot more good humor than Yanks. I guess I just wish my countrymen weren't such a bunch of insufferable knobgoblins.

Interesting theory. Having run for literally hundreds of different people in a great deal of culturally diverse places in the course of my stores and cons, I would disagree. This, of course, framed in the context of my own experiences.

Bill

Edit: Ah, Ed mentions the same point as well in the same context.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Will on August 28, 2008, 11:26:25 am
Gleichman is completely right. It's not racism.

His point is completely unimportant, too; bigotry is just as vile in one form as another.

Don't have a particular preconception on Gleichman's 'reputation,' but he's successfully made a point in favor of his detractors. Kudos!
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: David R on August 28, 2008, 11:27:17 am
Quote from: gleichman;241068
The definition of bigotry includes religion, so S'mon can't really object to that label, and it isn't one I was concerned with, and certainly wasn't defending.


Oh I think you were making a case for S'mon's possible bigotry or at the very least attempting to minimize it.

Quote
The charge was racism, which is specific to race. What race are YOU thinking of? After all, you're the only one besides Kyle who have made that leap.


And I said that racists in reality do not make the distinction between race and religion esp when it comes to Islam.

Quote
So Kyle gets the benefit of the doubt when tossing words like "mainstream" around? Just like one should give anyone on the Left the benefit of the doubt about what the meaning of 'is' is.

Very interesting.


I edited my response here Gleichman. I'm sure you find it objectionable, so I'll reply when you have read the edit.

Cavscout : I think S'mon was joking but I've been wrong before. This little derail is about something else.

Regards,
David R
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: gleichman on August 28, 2008, 11:41:30 am
Quote from: David R;241076
Oh I think you were making a case for S'mon's possible bigotry or at the very least attempting to minimize it.


In no way was I attempting to minimize it. He said what he said, and unless he was joking- that's likely the end of it.

I only object to the use of the term racist, which is overused and misapplied. And while 'bigot' fits, I don't much care for the term myself as it's too wide and includes racism as well as religion. It's difficult to tell what a person is referencing.


He labeled himself, and I can't understand why that specific label (Islamophobic) isn't enough. It's almost as if you feel that isn't EVIL enough, but surely it should be shouldn't?


Quote from: David R;241076

And I said that racists in reality do not make the distinction between race and religion esp when it comes to Islam.


And your proof for this?

And isn't your willingness to apply this as a cover-all blanket, without respect to the individual and the details of his belief, as great a crime as the one you're labeling them with?


Quote from: David R;241076

I edited my response here Gleichman. I'm sure you find it objectionable, so I'll reply when you have read the edit.


So rather then saying that they are passively prejudice as Kyle did, you want to use the term "Socially acceptable prejudices"?.

Really?
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: gleichman on August 28, 2008, 11:45:34 am
Quote from: Will;241075
His point is completely unimportant, too; bigotry is just as vile in one form as another.


You don't think that calling something by the correct name is important? That any vile word is fine?

I guess very typical of people today. How disappointing.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Will on August 28, 2008, 11:50:47 am
Distractionary tactics are a very suspicious sign. Getting hung up on minutiae when the basic point stands leads one to suspect the motives. Either the person is obsessive about details, or trying to mislead from the essential point.

I expected better out of someone posting here, gleichman. What a shame.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: gleichman on August 28, 2008, 12:00:51 pm
Quote from: Will;241094
Distractionary tactics are a very suspicious sign. Getting hung up on minutiae when the basic point stands leads one to suspect the motives. Either the person is obsessive about details, or trying to mislead from the essential point.


So you're willing to assume that my interest in not in labeling people with the correct crime, but with... what? How could I be distracting when all I'm doing is highlighting what they actually did?

Joe Smith is not a racist! He's a Murderer! is hardly a winning defense of Joe Smith.

All I'm seeing here is people reaching for vile labels because there are either ignorant, or for some reason they think the correct ones aren't vile enough. Nothing more. And you defending either of those does not reflect well upon you.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: One Horse Town on August 28, 2008, 12:08:20 pm
off-topic.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Grimjack on August 28, 2008, 12:16:28 pm
Quote from: gleichman;241104
Joe Smith is not a racist! He's a Murderer! is hardly a winning defense of Joe Smith.


Not a winning defense!!!! Ah crap, I was gonna use that one!!!!
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: David R on August 28, 2008, 12:38:20 pm
Quote from: gleichman;241084
In no way was I attempting to minimize it. He said what he said, and unless he was joking- that's likely the end of it.
I only object to the use of the term racist, which is overused and misapplied. And while 'bigot' fits, I don't much care for the term myself as it's too wide and includes racism as well as religion. It's difficult to tell what a person is referencing.
He labeled himself, and I can't understand why that specific label (Islamophobic) isn't enough. It's almost as if you feel that isn't EVIL enough, but surely it should be shouldn't?


I think you were trying to minimize it. Linking it to Christian bigotry - which to be fair is only evident when the Pundit goes off on the Pope - was a way of lessening the impact of his bigotry. Making it more acceptable.

I don't have a problem with the word bigot esp when someone self identifies as one.

Yeah I really do feel that Islamophobia isn't evil enough. I think it is a watered down term, used to hide something even more malicious. If fact I believe that the term has made bigotry against Islam and the people who practice it more acceptable.

Quote
And your proof for this?


That racist don't separate religion and race ? Attacks against members of non-Muslim communities...simply because said members look like those adherents of that particular religion. "All people who look like that must be of the same faith who want to destory our way of life". Of course maybe they just don't like non-whites and religion has nothing to do with it.

Quote
And isn't your willingness to apply this as a cover-all blanket, without respect to the individual and the details of his belief, as great a crime as the one you're labeling them with?


Not at all. Racism is not rooted in any kind of rationality or logic. It's hate pure and simple.  Now, of course people can have concerns about how their community relates to another  community but I think the way how they express this concern is important. I mean far to often , what defines the discourse are concepts like Islamophobia for example, something which is considered legitimate.

Quote
Really?


Yes. Some prejudices are acceptable. Taking shit about Christians for instance is way more acceptable than talking shit about race. Gender and homosexuality are also pretty acceptable prejudices. I mean nobody would accept a racist....but a misogynist....maybe .

(S'mon if you were indeed joking, this is like the most surreal derail evah)

Regards,
David R
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: GrimJesta on August 28, 2008, 01:34:22 pm
Um...

*raises hand*

...I like pie.

-=Grim=-
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: HinterWelt on August 28, 2008, 01:39:47 pm
Quote from: GrimJesta;241154
Um...

*raises hand*

...I like pie.

-=Grim=-


Ahh, but what kind of pie?!?! Are you a pie bigot? Do you have pie-o-phobia? I have noted how people are quick to decry pie on this board but imply cake is somehow inferior. I did not expect anything more from you.

Bill
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: gleichman on August 28, 2008, 02:00:56 pm
Quote from: David R;241126
I think you were trying to minimize it. Linking it to Christian bigotry - which to be fair is only evident when the Pundit goes off on the Pope - was a way of lessening the impact of his bigotry. Making it more acceptable.




Yes. Some prejudices are acceptable. Taking shit about Christians for instance is way more acceptable than talking shit about race.


Ah, so this is it.

You want to be able to bash Christians and have it considered acceptable. But doing the same to Muslims is by far a greater wrong so you have to replace terms.

Yes, I can see now how enlightened and fair you are. Thinks for clearing that up.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Spike on August 28, 2008, 03:10:12 pm
Quote from: David R;241126

Yes. Some prejudices are acceptable. Taking shit about Christians for instance is way more acceptable than talking shit about race. Gender and homosexuality are also pretty acceptable prejudices. I mean nobody would accept a racist....but a misogynist....maybe .


Regards,
David R


I think thats an untenable position, Davy boy. At a minimum its hypocritical.

My position is a bit more tenenable, but less acceptable. See, I don't care enough about other people's beliefs to praise or decry them... to include their hatreds.

You want to be a bigot? A misogynist? No skin off my nose. I won't agree with you, and I'll certainly keep it in mind when you give me your opinions about shit.

But condemning you flatly for thinking its acceptable to hate one group while not allowing another group to hate someone else is...

... well, its simply trying to force you to think a certain way.

As unpleasant as certain realities can be to face, I feel that if we can allow people to like or love whomever they want, we also have to allow them to hate whomever they like.  We don't have to agree with it or support it, or allow them specific rights regarding that hatred (or love for that matter...).

Thus, while I may think S'mon (and Gliechman for that matter) are extremely limited in their thought processes on this topic (Islam) and undereducated about what they hate, I don't think less of them in other ways.  I will never attempt to engage either one is a rational discourse on religion or islamic culture since their minds are utterly shut on the topic... but I respect their right.

Of course its not without problems. Make that 'problems'... in quotes. If enough people close their minds on the same thing they can band together to do things that I am, and many other people are opposed to. They can attempt to deny the personhood of people they hate, they can disenfrachise a group.  

No one denies that. But can we honestly tell them they are not allowed to think that way?  Can we do that to them without risk of violating their rights, without disenfranchising them? Can we justify mob violence against someone 'because they are a bigot' or 'because he was a racist'?

If the answer is no, then ask yourself: Can we justify mob violence against someone just because it is the internet and therefore less 'real'?  


But more relevant to your post: Who decides what bigotries are acceptable? You find an 'islamophobe' untenable. But you live in a muslim country. You don't mind misogynists... but lets ask Shewolf if she feels the same?  You don't mind a bit of anti-christian bigotry, but let's ask Malleous Allinoreum if he feels the Pundits anti-catholic bile is acceptable.

Who decides, David? Who are we allowed to hate and who gets to decide that?

I've given my answer.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: gleichman on August 28, 2008, 03:13:11 pm
Quote from: Spike;241247
Thus, while I may think S'mon (and Gliechman for that matter) are extremely limited in their thought processes on this topic (Islam) and undereducated about what they hate,


A nice post all in all Spike, and one I agree with.

But I've never said I hate Islam. Please don't say that I do.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: S'mon on August 28, 2008, 03:18:13 pm
Quote from: David R;241029
I think S'mon is attemtpting humour in response to your vid Kyle.

Regards,
David R



I was admittedly engaging in hyperbole.  But I pretty much agree with those supposed 'evil racist fucks' in Kyle's video, anyway, that didn't want a giant mosque in their nice neighbourhood (NB: 'racism' - Islam - not a race).  And I'm not too keen on the religion of Islam, though I like a lot of the (many, many) individual Muslims I've met, even some of the more devout "Free Speech is a Conspiracy Against Islam" ones.  I grew up with terrorists trying to kill/subdue/ethnic cleanse my kind, so a bit of terrorism doesn't bother me.
I don't like the niqab, a Saudi Salafist garment which Pakistani girls are now made to wear by their radicalised brothers & cousins.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: S'mon on August 28, 2008, 03:20:00 pm
Quote from: David R;241066
Well that's a nice technicality that racist normally hide behind when expressing their racism. Because surely the distinction between religion and race of the various communities that practise Islam are observed by these racists.


Well my main objection to Islamists is that they want to kill, convert or subdue me.  I couldn't care less what race they are.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: S'mon on August 28, 2008, 03:23:51 pm
Quote from: David R;241076
Cavscout : I think S'mon was joking but I've been wrong before. This little derail is about something else.


I was joking about being bigoted & prejudiced, since Kyle thinks everyone to the right of our former mayor Ken Livingstone is bigoted & prejudiced.  Ten years ago I had a favourable impression of Islam but didn't know much about it.  Now thanks to learning more about it and seeing its effects, ie the empirical evidence, I have a very negative impression of it.  I'm aware that most people have no interest in evidence one way or the other.

Edit: Just to clarify, I don't actually hate any people, which I seem to be accused of.  I hate a garment, the niqab.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: HinterWelt on August 28, 2008, 03:32:41 pm
Quote from: Spike;241247

If the answer is no, then ask yourself: Can we justify mob violence against someone just because it is the internet and therefore less 'real'?  

Spike, I agree with much of what you said...except where pie is concerned. ;)

Still, I think we need to be careful here when you start talking of violence. It is inaccurate and provocative. All we can do on the internet is disagree and voice that disagreement (excluding illegal activities). That should not be confused with violence, an anti-social and criminal offense in most parts. I disagree strongly with Christians. I mock them openly, but I would never even consider saying they should not be allowed to worship as they please. The big caveat being "within the confines of lawful action" so no sacrificing, burning crosses on my yard or tar and feathering those who disagree with them.  So, I would amend (from my POV) your above statement to say, how is this thread even remotely related to RPGs anymore? Off topic? ;)

Bill
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: gleichman on August 28, 2008, 03:38:32 pm
Quote from: HinterWelt;241271
So, I would amend (from my POV) your above statement to say, how is this thread even remotely related to RPGs anymore? Off topic? ;)

Bill


I think the moment Kyle tossed the racist label, he derailed the thread. And did so likely on purpose.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Spike on August 28, 2008, 03:54:14 pm
Gliechman:  If I've misunderstood your overall stance on Islam, my apology, but you have, to my knowledge, expressed a fairly closed minded opinion of Islam, if not on par with the naked admission of S'mon.

Hinterwelt: Do we not deny a voice to people we disagree with on the internet?  Where is Nox, then?  We have, by means of exclusion, disenfranchised them, removed their voice. In a way, we have killed the 'poster', if not the person who originated it.  Insamuch as we have the ability, we have done 'internet violence' to 'internet persons'... in the form of mob justice.

Don't get me wrong. I don't miss Nox.  I didn't like him or agree with him.  Be can we honestly tell ourselves that we have the right to tell him he wasn't allowed to have those opinions? To force him to adapt or be exiled?

I know that there have to be confines on expression. You express it well by bringing up the cross burning.  This is why I point out the danger of too much like minded thinking, because it creates an air of permissiveness. If everyone agrees that Nox isn't allowed to hate, we are justified in destroying him.  If everyone agrees....

... fill in the blank yourself. Its not hard, and history has given us any number of acceptable and unacceptable targets that have been harmed because everyone agreed they were bad.   No one wants to side with the bigots.  Not even when the bigots are the targets.  I don't want to side with the bigots... not even now. The problem comes when people start trying to parse out which bigots are 'okay'... or to put it another way: Who is it okay to hate?

Who am I not allowed to hate?
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Spike on August 28, 2008, 03:55:28 pm
Quote from: gleichman;241278
I think the moment Kyle tossed the racist label, he derailed the thread. And did so likely on purpose.


To be honest, I think S'mon beat him to the punch with his admission. It's one of those things that is garaunteed to alter a conversation.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Will on August 28, 2008, 04:01:14 pm
Quote from: gleichman;241104
All I'm seeing here is people reaching for vile labels because there are either ignorant, or for some reason they think the correct ones aren't vile enough. Nothing more. And you defending either of those does not reflect well upon you.


Of course that's what you see.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: gleichman on August 28, 2008, 04:03:33 pm
Quote from: Spike;241293
Gliechman:  If I've misunderstood your overall stance on Islam, my apology, but you have, to my knowledge, expressed a fairly closed minded opinion of Islam, if not on par with the naked admission of S'mon.


I seriously doubt that I ever said anything about hating Islam. I merely pointed out their growing power in some parts of the world. I made no judgement on it as such.

Now Liberals, Liberals I hate.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: gleichman on August 28, 2008, 04:05:23 pm
Quote from: Spike;241295
To be honest, I think S'mon beat him to the punch with his admission. It's one of those things that is garaunteed to alter a conversation.


S'mon's admission wasn't one of racism. It was one of bigotry.

The difference is important to me.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Spike on August 28, 2008, 04:22:45 pm
True, but a naked admission of Bigotry, certainly in this era, and most certainly in this format (the internet... bastion of love for everyone and everything under the sun.... except celebrities and politicians of any stripe....)....


... its pretty much a bomb drop moment.

Then again, most conversations I've had where someone made just such a naked admission pretty much went south the same way, at the same speed.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: CraigLee on August 28, 2008, 04:27:13 pm
Quote from: The_Shadow;240976
Mate, forget worldviews, I'd oust you just for writing in a different coloured font!


Piss off.

Quote from: Koltar;241011
Of the gamers that turn out to be jerks - I've not noticed a higher percentage for either right wing or left wing types.

- Ed C.


Well in this context "jerks" is a personality trait and separate from religion/race/politics/size of penis/what have you. So is it really surprising that there is no preponderance of ass hattery on one side or the other? Though in a way I pity you working in a gaming store...I couldn't do it without killing someone.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;241019
It's like how Obama next to McCain looks like a black man, but next to one of his many half-brothers he looks pretty fucking white.


Kyle I found this much, much more amusing than I should have...
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: gleichman on August 28, 2008, 04:27:51 pm
Quote from: Spike;241319
True, but a naked admission of Bigotry, certainly in this era, and most certainly in this format (the internet... bastion of love for everyone and everything under the sun.... except celebrities and politicians of any stripe....)....


... its pretty much a bomb drop moment.


I'd like to agree, but as others have pointed out to me- it's very acceptable to admit Bigotry against Christians.

And I have to admit, what are we going to do about it? Forgive you?
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: S'mon on August 28, 2008, 04:28:02 pm
OK, I was silly using the B-word jokily while making a fairly serious point later in the same post.  I'm not sure it's even possible to be bigoted against an ideology?
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: CraigLee on August 28, 2008, 04:29:19 pm
Quote from: Spike;241247
Who decides, David? Who are we allowed to hate and who gets to decide that?


This needs it's own thread.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: gleichman on August 28, 2008, 04:31:15 pm
Quote from: S'mon;241329
OK, I was silly using the B-word jokily while making a fairly serious point later in the same post.  I'm not sure it's even possible to be bigoted against an ideology?


It is.

Bigotry is a blanket term that includes race, religion, creed, lifestyle, etc.

Thus if one would object to a Culture that practices ritual killing of female children followed by eating them- one is a a Bigot.

Which is why I don't find it very useful. In practical terms, it's a label hurled at people you don't like. Which makes the hurler a Bigot if you think about it...
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: CraigLee on August 28, 2008, 04:31:44 pm
Quote from: gleichman;241328
I'd like to agree, but as others have pointed out to me- it's very acceptable to admit Bigotry against Christians.


I'd say it's less acceptable and more fashionable...Christian bashing is one of the tasteless pastimes of our current age...and pretty offensive to those of us who are Christian.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: CraigLee on August 28, 2008, 04:34:54 pm
Quote from: gleichman;241334
It is.

Bigotry is a blanket term that includes race, religion, creed, lifestyle, etc.

Thus if one would object to a Culture that practices ritual killing of female children followed by eating them- one is a a Bigot.

Which is why I don't find it very useful. In practical terms, it's a label hurled at people you don't like. Which makes the hurler a Bigot if you think about it...


This is painted in broadstrokes and loses too much focus...calling out someone for being a bigot doesn't make you a bigot. If someone walks down the street shouting 'Nigger' and you call them a bigot, you are not suddenly bigoted against those who want to shout nigger...
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: gleichman on August 28, 2008, 04:38:41 pm
Quote from: CraigLee;241339
This is painted in broadstrokes and loses too much focus...calling out someone for being a bigot doesn't make you a bigot. If someone walks down the street shouting 'Nigger' and you call them a bigot, you are not suddenly bigoted against those who want to shout nigger...


You give that a good old America try when the guy shouting that is black and speaking to his buds. And yeah, you'd get slammed with the label Bigot mighty fast and hard.

Beyond that, it's not my fault that the term is too broad. It's the reason I don't care much for it.

Call someone racist. Call them anti-Islamic. Call them Anti-Semitic. That is- be specific. Don't use a half-baked term like bigot. It's lazy and non-descriptive.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: HinterWelt on August 28, 2008, 04:42:46 pm
Quote from: Spike;241293

Hinterwelt: Do we not deny a voice to people we disagree with on the internet?  Where is Nox, then?  We have, by means of exclusion, disenfranchised them, removed their voice. In a way, we have killed the 'poster', if not the person who originated it.  Insamuch as we have the ability, we have done 'internet violence' to 'internet persons'... in the form of mob justice.

I disagree. You are forming a false and extreme conclusion and analogy. Nox could be here if he wants. He chose to come to a community that did not embrace his views and express. Part of being a member of a community is understanding what that community will and will not tolerate. Nox, when he spoke of games, was quite reasonable and fit well. When he spoke of matters of race, he deviated from the "norms" of this community and thus met with derision and scorn. These are forms of disagreement. He was not banned to my knowledge. Now, however tenuous, you could at least draw some sort of parallel to violence through banning although I would still disagree.

Again, I believe you confuse violence with disagreement. One can disagree without anger or offense. One can also disagree with plenty of offense intended. I am more of your view, if you want to do/worship/believe/hate someone in the privacy of your own home (with the conditions and possible consequences you mentioned) then go to it.
Quote from: Spike;241293

Don't get me wrong. I don't miss Nox.  I didn't like him or agree with him.  Be can we honestly tell ourselves that we have the right to tell him he wasn't allowed to have those opinions? To force him to adapt or be exiled?

O.k. Watch that. You are confusing some important lines. Telling someone their opinion is not welcome, either in the community or to your own attention, is different from not allowing them to hold that opinion. Now, I will fully admit there are plenty of people, even on this board, that will tell you you are sub-human for the opinions/beliefs you hold. Some might even go as far as to say "Thou shalt not believe that" (see mythusmage).

Now, as to forcing them to adapt or be "exiled", well, yes. Most communities are that way. There is different tolerences but it comes down to "can you fit within the community or are you by definition outside the community". Some people can't. Some cannot help themselves. If you have a world view that does not fit with the group, is it fair to ask all of them to adapt to accept you and your views?

So, you could easily turn the above into "No tolerance !!!!!1!1!" but hopefully you will give me a more charitable read than that. Tolerance is important as well. I am not talking about a right leaning individual in a left of center forum. I am talking about the guy who preaches the inferiority of a race, relentlessly, to a muti-cultural multi-racial board. IMO, you can hold that view, be a valued member of a community, so long as you keep it to yourself (and yes, that means not acting on it).
Quote from: Spike;241293

I know that there have to be confines on expression. You express it well by bringing up the cross burning.  This is why I point out the danger of too much like minded thinking, because it creates an air of permissiveness. If everyone agrees that Nox isn't allowed to hate, we are justified in destroying him.  If everyone agrees....

And I agree with your points on reinforcement of a thought/belief/hate. The last part is what I have issue with. We did not "destroy Nox". He exists somewhere on the ether. Perhaps he is happily posting at StormFront. Perhaps he was just a persona of Pundit. The point is, he is free to express himself. Heck, he was free to express himself here. He chose to leave. Why? Was it because we banned him? Or was it that he ceased to get enjoyment out of talking to people who did not share his views? We may never know but I can say with some confidence that it was his decision.
Quote from: Spike;241293

... fill in the blank yourself. Its not hard, and history has given us any number of acceptable and unacceptable targets that have been harmed because everyone agreed they were bad.   No one wants to side with the bigots.  Not even when the bigots are the targets.  I don't want to side with the bigots... not even now. The problem comes when people start trying to parse out which bigots are 'okay'... or to put it another way: Who is it okay to hate?

Who am I not allowed to hate?

Well, now I hope you are speaking generally. You can hate whoever you want. Do not expect me to listen when you spew hate speeches about how the jew is using the black man as muscle. Also, fully expect me to mock you. Hell, I will mock Christian left and right. I would never ask them to stop believing what they do. I would fight, and yes, give my life for their right to worship as they please. That does not mean I believe their sky fairy and his hippie son are anything more than wishful thinking and a sad pathetic form of a crutch. It does not mean I will give them respect. It has never been earned in my experience.

So hate who ever you wish. Do not expect others to embrace your hate if you express it to them nor to validate your beliefs. It is enough, for me, that you are allowed to hate who ever you wish.

Bill
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Engine on August 28, 2008, 04:53:35 pm
I find the issue of intolerance toward the intolerant to be a fascinating one, full of half-truths, self-deception, and a healthy dose of plain old hypocrisy. This thread, while seemingly a discussion of the principle, has succeeded famously in also being an example of the principle, and by that standard, I find it fascinating.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Spike on August 28, 2008, 04:57:41 pm
Oh, I agree that if I were to say something offensive to you, you have the right to hate what I said, or even hate me.  You even have the right to voice that hate.

That's the beauty of it.

We denied Nox his opinions by forcing silence upon him. Offensive as they were, they were his and he had the right to them.

I'm leery of 'community standards' for reasons I've go into in just the last couple posts.  We have, as a community, decided it is alright to hate bigots.  Not only is it okay to hate them (which, by my view is perfectly acceptable...) its okay to silence them.

Once we've done that to the acceptable targets (the bigots), who do we turn on next? The pundit hates Catholics, so he'd probably be okay with banning them eventually. Maybe the conservatives, they are sort of in the minority here...

Where does it stop? Community standards is a really shakey way to decide what's appropriate or not, because as you start weeding out the bad elements eventually the group thought gets narrow enough that... well... anything can be viewed as outside the 'standard'.

You don't have to go far. Most of us came here from RPG.net for a reason. Community Standards, after all....
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: CraigLee on August 28, 2008, 05:05:57 pm
Quote from: gleichman;241340
You give that a good old America try when the guy shouting that is black and speaking to his buds. And yeah, you'd get slammed with the label Bigot mighty fast and hard.


Speaking in a non offensive way doesn't count. But I assure you there is a profound amount of black on black bigotry out there...
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Silverlion on August 28, 2008, 05:11:27 pm
Holding one person responsible for the ills of another--whether it is creed, color of skin, sexual orientation? All that is just damn silly.  In the end, I find myself more likely to laugh and shake my head at someone holding my religious faith up as a reason not to talk with or interact with me. In the end, that is a sad loss, both to their benefit and mine, but it is NEVER my choice.

I've gamed with Wiccans, pagans, Christians, Jews, Hispanics, gay men, lesbian women, Indians, Native Americans, Canadians, Americans, Japanese and on and on. In the end, I think I just don't care. People are people. Who they are and how they act towards me, is what I try and deal with. Making choices based on things done by the person, will be where I stand (as best I can) rather than on the prior actions of others. It isn't always easy. I've plenty of reasons given to me to have prejudice, but I will fight tooth and nail against it.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: HinterWelt on August 28, 2008, 05:47:39 pm
Quote from: Spike;241355
Oh, I agree that if I were to say something offensive to you, you have the right to hate what I said, or even hate me.  You even have the right to voice that hate.

That's the beauty of it.

We denied Nox his opinions by forcing silence upon him. Offensive as they were, they were his and he had the right to them.

I disagree. We did not "force" anything on him. We did not ban his account, we did not scramble or blank his posts. We disagreed with him. If you are going to respect his "right" to hate then why so hard to respect ours to hate what he professes to represent?

Fundamental here is that no one "forced" anyone to do anything. Heck, we did not even ignore him.
Quote from: Spike;241355

I'm leery of 'community standards' for reasons I've go into in just the last couple posts.  We have, as a community, decided it is alright to hate bigots.  Not only is it okay to hate them (which, by my view is perfectly acceptable...) its okay to silence them.

Unless Pundit has changed his stance, no one can silence a bigot. If a bigot wishes to show up and begin professing his hatred of hair dressers and goes on in length in every post, people will most likely ridicule, argue, ignore and mock the individual but no one will silence him. They are free to speak their mind.
Quote from: Spike;241355

Once we've done that to the acceptable targets (the bigots), who do we turn on next? The pundit hates Catholics, so he'd probably be okay with banning them eventually. Maybe the conservatives, they are sort of in the minority here...

Spike, you almost had me there. The slippery slope argument. Really, does that still work?

Look, no one is saying that we will be banning a group, bigots or otherwise. Just like everyone else, they need to defend their point. Most bigots have very convincing arguments to other bigots of the same ilk. However, as I have seen, most true hate groups come down to "We hate them! and you are against us if you do not hate them as much!"

So, don't worry, I will stand up for the Pika when the come for you if your will do likewise for the game designers. ;)
Quote from: Spike;241355

Where does it stop? Community standards is a really shakey way to decide what's appropriate or not, because as you start weeding out the bad elements eventually the group thought gets narrow enough that... well... anything can be viewed as outside the 'standard'.

You don't have to go far. Most of us came here from RPG.net for a reason. Community Standards, after all....

Sigh. First off, it is not Community Standards. There is no book here where "that which is appropriate" is written. By community standards I mean pressure from the community as to what they find acceptable. So, detailed accounts of child rape? Probably not going to get a warm welcome. Maybe on the NAMBLA site but not here. Talk about your latest Trav game? Yeah, you will get enthusiastic buy in.

Tolerance is good. I do not wish to paint a picture that it is not. However, to take the position to the absurd is a childish view on life. We do not tolerate child molesters, both legally and socially. Why? Is it our need to tell someone how to think? Is it that we are prudish and intolerant of their needs? Or could it that we believe such individuals to be harmful to our young, to our society? I believe int he last one.

Now, if you want to talk about RPG.Net. Yeah, this is a good example of an attempt to codify Community Standards. I do not endorse that.

Bill
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Spike on August 28, 2008, 06:02:06 pm
My understanding is that we topic banned him, and in fact banned him from off topic all together. Therefore, yes, we silenced his opinions we didn't like.

As for the slippery slope arguement: I knew that would come up, but there are plenty... in fact sadly too many... examples of this.exact.slope. in recent memory.

Thus I brought up RPG.net.  They didn't start out trying to silence all dissent to any given point of view, but at their worst that was exactly what happened, and to an extent still happens there. There is a single 'community standard' that you cannot stray to far from before you are warned, then banned... and even insiders are not immune.

I've been avoiding touchier examples, particularly Real world ones, because at the end of the day we ARE talking about the internet here.

I've been a part of one community that used Community Standards as a reason to target 'acceptable hates'.  I'm not TOO worried about here, but I AM worried about the overall trend to think there is something valid to legitimizing targets.

I should point out that YOU are the one who brought up Commmunity Standards as an excuse, not I.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: David R on August 28, 2008, 06:14:05 pm
Quote from: Spike;241247
I think thats an untenable position, Davy boy. At a minimum its hypocritical.
Who decides, David? Who are we allowed to hate and who gets to decide that?


Of course it's hypocritical....I was not endorsing it. Just stating a reality. That's why for instance, tossing around faggot jokes won't get one into as much trouble as tossing around nigger jokes. Again I'm not endorsing this kind of behaviour and it certainly is not my position. Will asnwer S'mon later.

Regards,
David R
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Spike on August 28, 2008, 06:29:03 pm
Quote from: David R;241400
Of course it's hypocritical....I was not endorsing it. Just stating a reality. That's why for instance, tossing around faggot jokes won't get one into as much trouble as tossing around nigger jokes. Again I'm not endorsing this kind of behaviour and it certainly is not my position. Will asnwer S'mon later.

Regards,
David R


If you are willing to tolerate misogyny while calling S'mon on his Islamophobia, or even just to insist that Islamophobia be lumped with Racism while allowing misogyny be given a pass (or lumped with the slightly less egregious sounding bigotry) then, in essense, you ARE endorsing that hypocracy.

I HOPE I've never called anyone out on behavior like this. I will certainly condemn, in blanket terms, just about any form of bigotry, but I don't think I've ever tried to really establish a merit list for tolerableness, not even to point it out.

I think he's wrong, but I think a lot of people are wrong on a lot of things.  I'm the only perfect person I know. Its a bit lonely sometimes, but once you learn to tolerate other people's failings it gets easier.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: David R on August 28, 2008, 06:35:49 pm
Quote from: Spike;241407
If you are willing to tolerate misogyny while calling S'mon on his Islamophobia, or even just to insist that Islamophobia be lumped with Racism while allowing misogyny be given a pass (or lumped with the slightly less egregious sounding bigotry) then, in essense, you ARE endorsing that hypocracy.


Exactly my point. We should not accept any form of bigotry but we do. I speak out when folks - Jackalope for instance goes on about women (and he admits he's misogynist) - but we still allow him here ,while Nox was topic banned. So why is it acceptable ? That was my whole point. Attacks against certain groups are excluded from sanctions, because the bigotry expressed aginst them are not considered as vile as some. It's tolerated.

Regards,
David R
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Spike on August 28, 2008, 06:44:21 pm
Well, my position, rough as it can be at times is to allow people to believe, and say what they will, no matter how offensive.

I certainly won't allow them to act on it... not unopposed.  I don't call Jackalope on a lot of shit other than to poke fun at him, I won't call S'mon on his crap either, though I disagree strongly.  The Pundit's screeds against Catholicism irritate me just as much, and I keep my mouth shut for the same reason: he's entitled to his ideas, and the right to speak his mind, regardless of my appreciation, or lack.

Obviously I wouldn't want this place to become a haven for NAMBLA types, or closed minded bigots, but there has to be a middle ground between dogpiling on those we disagree with (approved or not) and...er... 'making them feel welcome'.

I find simply acknowledging that there is more approved forms of bigotry to be actually encouraging rather than discouraging this sort of behavior.  When the misogynists can say 'well, at least we're not racists and Islamophobes' you've started down a dark path.  

BUt I'm not doing as well at this as I'd like so I'll leave it at that.


EDIT::: Added a few missing words to clear up a line
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: David R on August 28, 2008, 07:05:55 pm
Quote from: Spike;241417

I find simply acknowledging that there is more approved forms of bigotry to be actually encouraging rather than discouraging this sort of behavior.  When the misogynists can say 'well, at least we're not racists and Islamophobes' you've started down a dark path.  

BUt I'm not doing as well at this as I'd like so I'll leave it at that.



Exactly, I feel the same way, now fuck off, I don't want to be seen agreeing with you in public anymore.

Regards,
David R
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Kyle Aaron on August 28, 2008, 07:53:37 pm
Quote from: David R;241066
Well that's a nice technicality that racist normally hide behind when expressing their racism.
Certainly. By which reasoning, when the Germans and Europeans killed 6 million Jews, it wasn't racist.

Ahem.
Quote from: David R
Because surely the distinction between religion and race of the various communities that practise Islam are observed by these racists.
Exactly. Those bigoted against Moslems are commonly unaware that not all Moslems are Arab, for example. Ethnic and religious background are commonly muddled in the bigoted person. In any case bigotry tends to run together; we do not often find that a rabid Protestant anti-Catholic has no negative views about gender or race, that the UDA received funds from the Nigerian Anglican Church; nor do we find that one asserting a world Jewish conspiracy is rather keen on affirmative action for women. Bigotry tends to run together.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Kyle Aaron on August 28, 2008, 08:00:30 pm
Quote from: Spike;241407
If you are willing to tolerate misogyny while calling S'mon on his Islamophobia, or even just to insist that Islamophobia be lumped with Racism while allowing misogyny be given a pass (or lumped with the slightly less egregious sounding bigotry) then, in essense, you ARE endorsing that hypocracy.
I've done my best to mock all bigots equally. I'm sure I've missed quite a lot, but in the end I'm here to post my own nonsense rather than sort out other people's nonsense.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: CavScout on August 28, 2008, 08:04:05 pm
Quote from: Kyle Aaron;241445
Certainly. By which reasoning, when the Germans and Europeans killed 6 million Jews, it wasn't racist.


Fuck me if Afolf didn't think they were a race....

Quote
If the international Jewish financiers . . . should again succeed in plunging the nations into a world war the result will be . . . the annihilation of the Jewish race throughout Europe.
Adolf Hitler, Speech to Reichstag in Berlin January 1939

Quote
Don't think you can fight racial tuberculosis without taking care to rid the nation of the carrier of that racial tuberculosis.  This Jewish contamination will not subside, this poisoning of the nation will not end, until the carrier himself, the Jew, has been banished from our midst.
Speech delivered by Hitler in Salzburg, 7 or 8 August 1920. (NSDAP meeting)

Quote
"We won’t waste much time on the Jews. It’s great to get to grips with the Jewish race at last. The more they die the better… We want to put half to three-quarters of all Jews east of the Vistula. We will crush these Jews wherever we can. … Get the Jews out of the Reich… We have no use for Jews in the Reich. Probably the line of the Vistula, behind this line no more. We are the most important people here…"
Heinrich Himmler, 25 November 1939

Not need to mention the "purity" tests to join the party, which excluded those who had Jewish "blood".
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: David R on August 28, 2008, 08:11:01 pm
Quote from: Kyle Aaron;241451
I've done my best to mock all bigots equally. I'm sure I've missed quite a lot, but in the end I'm here to post my own nonsense rather than sort out other people's nonsense.


Yeah, I was about to reply to S'mon's BS but have decided not to. Of late I'm been cruising around OT too much anyway. I now know the douchebag for who he is. I'm not going to make the same mistake - thinking some guy is just making a joke -again.

I do want to acknowledge Spike for making me clarify my position about  my remarks about the social acceptability of certain kinds of bigotry/racism. I hope I have done so.

My next post will about my GMing style Edit: Apparently I don't have much to say about my GMing style....

Regards,
David R
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: HinterWelt on August 28, 2008, 09:38:20 pm
Quote from: Spike;241395
My understanding is that we topic banned him, and in fact banned him from off topic all together. Therefore, yes, we silenced his opinions we didn't like.

It was my understanding that he was banned because he spewed nonsense in an effort to disrupt threads. Much like a spammer. I could be wrong. These are far from topics I keep track of.

Regardless, his first disappearance was of his own accord (according to Pundit) then he returned at which time he was banned.
Quote from: Spike;241395

As for the slippery slope arguement: I knew that would come up, but there are plenty... in fact sadly too many... examples of this.exact.slope. in recent memory.

Thus I brought up RPG.net.  They didn't start out trying to silence all dissent to any given point of view, but at their worst that was exactly what happened, and to an extent still happens there. There is a single 'community standard' that you cannot stray to far from before you are warned, then banned... and even insiders are not immune.

And I have said, I do not approve or endorse RPG.Net's moderation methods.

I still think that "they will come for you last" arguments are weak in this case. I do not see official power being used in this mode here. I see people being beat down because they have poorly expressed thoughts in a venue unsympathetic to them. This is different from "forcing" people to silence.
Quote from: Spike;241395

I've been avoiding touchier examples, particularly Real world ones, because at the end of the day we ARE talking about the internet here.

Good. I am talking about the internet and specifically this site. If we are to broaden the scope the discussion will have to change from my side.
Quote from: Spike;241395

I've been a part of one community that used Community Standards as a reason to target 'acceptable hates'.  I'm not TOO worried about here, but I AM worried about the overall trend to think there is something valid to legitimizing targets.

I should point out that YOU are the one who brought up Commmunity Standards as an excuse, not I.


WHOA TEX! That's community standards and it is not codified. What I was speaking of was the culture of the site you are posting to, not some rules list of imagined Decency. I am saying the culture determines what will be tolerated and it changes. There may be a point in the future where race hate speech is cool and accepted here. I wont know because I wont be here. That would not be my culture. So, today, they tolerate pika and game designers along with a lot of others. Boy lovers and racists not so much. Why? Because it is not a site about boy lovers and racism. It is not the cultural norm for this site.

Bill
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: John Morrow on August 28, 2008, 10:31:55 pm
Quote from: David R;241400
That's why for instance, tossing around faggot jokes won't get one into as much trouble as tossing around nigger jokes.


Can someone please explain to me why it's acceptable to toss those terms around to make a point like this that could easily be made using other less inflammatory words?  And that question isn't just directed at David R but at the other people who have used those terms in similar contexts here and elsewhere.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Jackalope on August 28, 2008, 10:33:58 pm
Quote from: Kyle Aaron;240396
That's awesome! As in the "awesome stupid" way. I was just saying to a gamer friend yesterday that while I am greenish, action heroes are not very green, because being an action hero is all about killing people and blowing shit up, but that's all good. There's fantasy, and then there's reality, it's not good to have them overlap a lot. :)


You need to read Neal Stephanson's Zodiac.  Total green action adventure story, and it's really good.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: HinterWelt on August 28, 2008, 10:54:02 pm
Quote from: John Morrow;241498
Can someone please explain to me why it's acceptable to toss those terms around to make a point like this that could easily be made using other less inflammatory words?  And that question isn't just directed at David R but at the other people who have used those terms in similar contexts here and elsewhere.

Because they are being referenced and not used against a person or race. Also, I imagine for effect. It is much more effective, rhetorically and at instigating an emotional response, to use those words than to say, for instance, "Throwing around scat jokes wont get you in as much trouble as pedophile jokes". Finally, it might have been as simple as the first thing to come to mind.

Bill
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: John Morrow on August 28, 2008, 10:55:53 pm
Quote from: CraigLee;241339
This is painted in broadstrokes and loses too much focus...calling out someone for being a bigot doesn't make you a bigot. If someone walks down the street shouting 'Nigger' and you call them a bigot, you are not suddenly bigoted against those who want to shout nigger...


I'm going to ask you the same question I asked in response to David R's message.  Is there a reason why you couldn't make this point without using that word?
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: CavScout on August 28, 2008, 10:58:01 pm
Quote from: John Morrow;241507
I'm going to ask you the same question I asked in response to David R's message.  Is there a reason why you couldn't make this point without using that word?


It seems to have quite the prominent place in music these days. Maybe he's listening to rap or something.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Jackalope on August 28, 2008, 11:04:21 pm
Quote from: gleichman;241176
You want to be able to bash Christians and have it considered acceptable. But doing the same to Muslims is by far a greater wrong so you have to replace terms.

Yes, I can see now how enlightened and fair you are. Thinks for clearing that up.


Criticism of Christianity from people who have grown up in Christian societies and been affected by Christian supremacy is significantly different than criticism of Islam from people who have grown up in Christian societies and been affected by Christian supremacy.

Likewise, the grumbling and mockery of the super-minority of atheists in this country who have to live under the thumb of the Christian super-majority is really not at all in the same class as the grumbling and mockery of Christian super-power with the ability to crush the Muslim world under it's heel.

You speak of fairness, and compare actions to show how their is no fairness, but you refuse to consider contexts of those actions, and the real effects of those actions.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: CavScout on August 28, 2008, 11:07:35 pm
Quote from: Jackalope;241510
Criticism of Christianity from people who have grown up in Christian societies and been affected by Christian supremacy is significantly different than criticism of Islam from people who have grown up in Christian societies and been affected by Christian supremacy.

Likewise, the grumbling and mockery of the super-minority of atheists in this country who have to live under the thumb of the Christian super-majority is really not at all in the same class as the grumbling and mockery of Christian super-power with the ability to crush the Muslim world under it's heel.

You speak of fairness, and compare actions to show how their is no fairness, but you refuse to consider contexts of those actions, and the real effects of those actions.


Ahh.. more of Jack's "bigotry is ok if you are on the right side". Coming from the guy who proposes racism to fight racism, it's not surprising.

PS: Someone remind him of just how powerful the "Muslim world" is.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: John Morrow on August 28, 2008, 11:09:03 pm
Quote from: HinterWelt;241505
Because they are being referenced and not used against a person or race.


I don't think those words (and words like them) can be used without evoking negative sentiments toward a group of people or a race.  That's their purpose.

Quote from: HinterWelt;241505
Finally, it might have been as simple as the first thing to come to mind.


That's kinda my problem.  Those aren't words I use in any context and seeing people use those words like that makes me wonder how casually and often they use those words normally.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Jackalope on August 28, 2008, 11:17:09 pm
Quote from: CavScout;241511
Ahh.. more of Jack's "bigotry is ok if you are on the right side". Coming from the guy who proposes racism to fight racism, it's not surprising.


And more disingenuous trolling from CavScout.

Get bored and go find some other forum to troll.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: John Morrow on August 28, 2008, 11:19:53 pm
Quote from: Jackalope;241510
Criticism of Christianity from people who have grown up in Christian societies and been affected by Christian supremacy is significantly different than criticism of Islam from people who have grown up in Christian societies and been affected by Christian supremacy.


How about Bruce Bawer's First They Came for the Gays (http:// http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/first_they_came_for_the_gays/)?  Bigotry or legitimate criticism?
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: CavScout on August 28, 2008, 11:30:05 pm
Quote from: Jackalope;241515
And more disingenuous trolling from CavScout.


Better go back and read what you wrote. Criticism of Islam, bad. Criticism of Christianity, good.

No, I was right on target.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: John Morrow on August 28, 2008, 11:38:35 pm
Quote from: CavScout;241519
Better go back and read what you wrote. Criticism of Islam, bad. Criticism of Christianity, good.


This article (http://www.dissentmagazine.org/article/?article=598) sums up the problem pretty well:

   (4) The sense of not being entitled to criticize anyone else: how can we live in the United States, the richest, most powerful, and most privileged country in the world-and say anything critical about people who are poorer and weaker than we are? This was a major issue in the 1960s, when the New Left seemed to have discovered "oppression" for the first time, and we all enlisted on the side of oppressed men and women and failed, again and again, to criticize the authoritarianism and brutality that often scar their politics. There is no deeper impulse in left politics than this enlistment; solidarity with people in trouble seems to me the most profound commitment that leftists make. But this solidarity includes, or should include, a readiness to tell these people when we think they are acting wrongly, violating the values we share. Even the oppressed have obligations, and surely the first among these is not to murder innocent people, not to make terrorism their politics. Leftists who cannot insist upon this point, even to people poorer and weaker than they are, have abandoned both politics and morality for something else. They are radical only in their abjection. That was Sartre's radicalism, face-to-face with FLN terror, and it has been imitated by thousands since, excusing and apologizing for acts that any decent left would begin by condemning.

[...]

Not blaming anyone else: The world (and this includes the third world) is too full of hatred, cruelty, and corruption for any left, even the American left, to suspend its judgment about what's going on. It's not the case that because we are privileged we should turn inward and focus our criticism only on ourselves. In fact, inwardness is one of our privileges; it is often a form of political self-indulgence. Yes, we are entitled to blame the others whenever they are blameworthy; in fact, it is only when we do that, when we denounce, say, the authoritarianism of third world governments, that we will find our true comrades-the local opponents of the maximal leaders and military juntas, who are often waiting for our recognition and support. If we value democracy, we have to be prepared to defend it, at home, of course, but not only there.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Jackalope on August 28, 2008, 11:41:50 pm
Quote from: John Morrow;241516
How about Bruce Bawer's First They Came for the Gays (http:// http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/first_they_came_for_the_gays/)?  Bigotry or legitimate criticism?

I'd definitely call that legitimate criticism, especially since it seems to be criticism of European policy and hypocrisy, rather than criticism of Islam.

I'm not one who believes that all criticism of Islam is bigotry, nor am I defender of Islam.  There is most definitely a politically viable faction within the Muslim community that is hostile to the freedoms of Western society, and I definitely think that a certain amount of caution towards the Islamic community is reasonable given the current events of the world.

I'm referring to the difference between a person raised in the Christian church describing the Christian faith as being "lies and hatred disguised as love for God" and a person raised in the Christian church describing the Islamic faith as being "lies and hatred disguised as love for Allah."

Likewise, someone raised in the Muslim faith (or society) describing Christianity in ignorant and hateful ways would be guilty of something worse than if they described Islam is a disparaging way.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Jackalope on August 28, 2008, 11:50:10 pm
Quote from: CavScout;241519
Better go back and read what you wrote. Criticism of Islam, bad. Criticism of Christianity, good.

No, I was right on target.


No, I only said that criticism of Christianity from people who live in Christian societies is not the same as criticism of Islam from people who live in Christian societies.  I didn't say either was good or bad, only that they are of a different nature.

But god forbid you let a nuanced argument get in the way of your trolling ambitions.  Carry on with the fuckwittery, good sir.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Kyle Aaron on August 29, 2008, 12:00:34 am
Quote from: Jackalope;241510
Criticism of Christianity from people who have grown up in Christian societies and been affected by Christian supremacy is significantly different than criticism of Islam from people who have grown up in Christian societies and been affected by Christian supremacy.
Well, the thing is that the S'mons and gleichmans of the world aren't actually criticising Islam. They're just frightened of it, and have lots of misconceptions about it. They're bigots. And bigotry isn't criticism.

Like, "no single man can hear the voice of God exclusively, that is for all people to hear as well or badly as others" - that's a criticism of the Catholic church and the structure of the Papacy. That's criticism.

But "I don't want a mosque in my neighbourhood, but churches are okay" isn't criticism, it's simple bigotry.

The Islamic world is generally in a big fucking mess, and Islam is a part of that. So plainly it needs criticism. They need some kind of Reformation - Christianity had one, they got a century or two of hideous bloody conflict out of it, but the faith came out overall much better and a more productive part of society as a result. It was a process of critique.

But "I don't like 'em" isn't a critique, it's just useless bigotry. And that goes with ignorance, like in the youtube I posted the woman saying that she didn't think the minarets looked very islamic. In general education is a good thing, countering ignorance, but I don't know that it helps much with such bigotry, since it's wilfull ignorance we're talking about. I mean, these sorts of people are lucky to know where their own faith came from and how it differs from similar faiths, let alone having any fucking clue about the shitloads of different factions of other faiths. And then you mix ethnicity in with the faith, and so on... it's complicated stuff even for a person who is interested, and isn't bigoted.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: gleichman on August 29, 2008, 12:08:09 am
Quote from: Kyle Aaron;241524
Well, the thing is that the S'mons and gleichmans of the world aren't actually criticising Islam. They're just frightened of it, and have lots of misconceptions about it. They're bigots. And bigotry isn't criticism.


I wish to hell you would just try actually back up this Slander you son of a bitch.

Even Walkerp retracted it after being called on it- but you, oh no. You have no respect for truth or anything.

Instead you hide like a coward behind's Pundit's suggestion that you put me on Ignore and spew lies.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: CavScout on August 29, 2008, 12:20:45 am
Quote from: Jackalope;241522
No, I only said that criticism of Christianity from people who live in Christian societies is not the same as criticism of Islam from people who live in Christian societies.  I didn't say either was good or bad, only that they are of a different nature.

But god forbid you let a nuanced argument get in the way of your trolling ambitions.  Carry on with the fuckwittery, good sir.


Oh, I get the "nuanced argument" that's why you saying they are just "different" is really you saying one is allowed and acceptable while the other is not.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: CraigLee on August 29, 2008, 12:46:37 am
Quote from: John Morrow;241507
I'm going to ask you the same question I asked in response to David R's message.  Is there a reason why you couldn't make this point without using that word?


Quote from: CavScout;241509
It seems to have quite the prominent place in music these days. Maybe he's listening to rap or something.


Well first, CavScout, I appreciate your humor but I think John has a fair question.

Forgive me for being brief but I am about to get myself permabanned on rpg.net for calling out some cheap shots cessna made against me, so I am short on time...

I could indeed make the point without using any offensive words John, and if I have offended you I am genuinely sorry, as such was not my intent. However, sometimes the use of a jarring word helps to frame an argument in a way that polite banter simply cannot. I was attempting to demonstrate how vulgar and offensive the action in question would be. Simply saying 'a guy walking down the street saying offensive things' lacks an emotional punch.

Now, if you want to accuse me of exploiting emotion to make a logical point, I am fully guilty of that. ;)

Anyway, I would not consider it an undue restriction of my free speech to not use that word, IF it really bothers you that much. Let me know. No promises, but I will make an effort. If it is not a major issue for you though, I'd rather just keep it as part of the arsenal, as it were.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: David R on August 29, 2008, 01:05:52 am
Quote from: John Morrow;241498
Can someone please explain to me why it's acceptable to toss those terms around to make a point like this that could easily be made using other less inflammatory words?  And that question isn't just directed at David R but at the other people who have used those terms in similar contexts here and elsewhere.


Morrow, you are correct. Bill's explantion is pretty spot on....at least as far as what I was aiming for, but you are correct, I should not use those vile terms for affect.

With regards to legitimate criticism of Islam or even American foreign policy, I'm all for that. In one of my responses to Glienchman I said as much. I don't think what we have here - S'mon remarks - falls under legitimate criticism.

Regards,
David R
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: S'mon on August 29, 2008, 01:32:55 am
Quote from: David R;241537
I don't think what we have here - S'mon remarks - falls under legitimate criticism.


True - I was just giving my feelings, which have been inculcated by contact with Islam.  I could criticise it as a belief system, but that's not the point.  My fear - "Islamaphobia" is inculcated by eg the BBC news story yesterday about non-Muslim councillors in Tower Hamlets council being forbidden from eating during Ramadan - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2638808/Councillors-told-not-to-eat-during-Ramadan-meetings.html - this one example is trivial, but there has been a constant deluge of this for 8 years.  Very often it's non-Muslims leftists forcing Islam on everyone else, as when my wife was told to remove a toy pig from her work desk "to respect" the Muslim working nearby (who was fine with it).  I'm aware that most Muslims just want a quiet life, and leftists like Kyle may be deliberately inculcating Islamaphobia for their own agenda.  I mean, why go to an Australian suburb and threaten them with a giant mosque "to reveal their prejudice"?  What that actually does is create the very emotion it's supposed to reveal.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: David R on August 29, 2008, 01:45:49 am
Then deal with it S'mon by expressing your "fears" in a rational way taking into consideration that Islam and Muslims are not a monolithic entity. If you got problems with "lefties" speaking for Islam, articulate these problems, don't blame Islam or maybe it's easier to fall into the blame game and not really address the cause of your anger. I was born , raised and live in a Muslim country. I can tell you firsthand that Islam is not out to get you (like you mentioned in an earlier post), but there are people (like there are in every religion or ideology) with malicious intent. Your focus should be on them not the religion and the majority of it's adherents. And yeah if you feel that the actions of certain lefties are causing the very effect they claim to want to stop, focus your anger on them (the lefties) instead of you know acting in the very way they (lefties) accuse some of.

Regards,
David R
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Kyle Aaron on August 29, 2008, 01:58:55 am
Quote from: S'mon;241544
I'm aware that most Muslims just want a quiet life, and leftists like Kyle may be deliberately inculcating Islamaphobia for their own agenda.  I mean, why go to an Australian suburb and threaten them with a giant mosque "to reveal their prejudice"?  What that actually does is create the very emotion it's supposed to reveal.
Those weren't leftists, they were comedians. Comedians create comedy by revealing the human absurdity of people. For example, the absurdity that someone dressed as an Arab is a "security risk" but someone dressed as a white American tourist is not - so it seems (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=McB9tsabPn0). I guess those silly terrorists would never think of dressing like American tourists.

In this case, the absurdity is, "I'm not racist, but -" and of course, as with everything else, we know that everything before the "but" is bullshit.

The bigotry is already there. Australia has Moslems in the country, and we have freedom of religion, therefore the mosques must be built somewhere. If the comedians don't bring it up in that suburb, people will seriously bring it up in another suburb.  

So what you're really saying is that people wanting to build mosques creates bigotry against Islam. Which is like saying that homosexuals actually having homosexual relationships creates homophobia, Jews wearing yarmulkes creates antisemitism, women speaking creates misogyny, and African-Americans playing rap music creates racism.

Horseshit. The bigotry was already there. Turning over the stone just reveals the slime living underneath, it doesn't create it. In fact the slime dies when exposed to the light and heat of scrutiny. Everyone who showed up on that tv clip, now that they realise a good part of the country is laughing at them, is going to be rethinking what they choose to say out loud; and opinions unexpressed don't last long, or at the least can't be passed on.

It's a common tactic of the bigot to blame the victim of their bigotry and those defending the victims for their bigotry. "I'm not racist, but -"

No, you are racist. And your bigotry is your fault.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: S'mon on August 29, 2008, 04:05:56 am
Quote from: David R;241546
And yeah if you feel that the actions of certain lefties are causing the very effect they claim to want to stop, focus your anger on them (the lefties) instead of you know acting in the very way they (lefties) accuse some of.


Yes - but those lefty Muslims are the worst... :p

As I've said repeatedly, I don't hate or even dislike individual Muslims, neither in general, nor my neighbours, those I meet professionally, etc.  In fact I seem to get along better with them than the lefties do, because I respect them as equals,  whereas the lefties often take a craven lickspittle attitude that inspires contempt.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: S'mon on August 29, 2008, 04:08:21 am
Quote from: David R;241546
I was born , raised and live in a Muslim country.


Which one?  They vary a lot.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Engine on August 29, 2008, 08:49:34 am
Quote from: John Morrow;241498
Can someone please explain to me why it's acceptable to toss those terms around to make a point like this that could easily be made using other less inflammatory words?

Context matters. While it is socially unacceptable to use these slurs in anger or discrimination, I believe it should not be unacceptable to use them in reference or discussion. Part of the power of these pejoratives comes from the fact that they're only spoken [by whites/straights, in this case] by those who are using them with hatred implied; I would rob the words of their power by refusing to be cowed by them. That said, I'm surrounded by like-minded people, who have chosen to "take back" the word nigger from those who would use it in hatred, and I'm certain my view has been influenced by theirs.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: David R on August 29, 2008, 09:16:08 am
Quote from: S'mon;241570
Which one?  They vary a lot.


Malaysia.

Regards,
David R
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Engine on August 29, 2008, 09:22:32 am
Quote from: David R;241608
Malaysia.

You're okay with us hating you for living in a prettier place than we do, right?
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: David R on August 29, 2008, 09:24:59 am
You have visited my country, Engine ?

Regards,
David R
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Engine on August 29, 2008, 09:40:44 am
Quote from: David R;241614
You have visited my country, Engine ?

Oh, I wish! No, I've not been that far East [or West] yet. But years of National Geographic pictures of it speak volumes. Sure, there's that whole flooding problem, and sometimes the weather isn't the greatest, but you've got plants that eat animals, clear blue seas, a couple of UNESCO World Heritage Sites [Kinabalu and Gunung Mulu], a tropical rainforest, and it's the only place in the world you can find the Kinabalu Giant Red Leech!

Not enough lakes for my taste, though; I like about a 50/50 distribution of land to inland water, but what with the whole "surrounded by water" thing, I guess that's okay.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: John Morrow on August 29, 2008, 10:08:37 am
Quote from: CraigLee;241530
I could indeed make the point without using any offensive words John, and if I have offended you I am genuinely sorry, as such was not my intent. However, sometimes the use of a jarring word helps to frame an argument in a way that polite banter simply cannot. I was attempting to demonstrate how vulgar and offensive the action in question would be.


The two problems that I have with that are that (A) the reaction that people have to those words is unpredictable and they can undermine your point as much as helping to emphasize it and (B) using those words in that sort of context generally gives me a creepy feeling about the person using them because it suggests a casual familiarity with those words.  I accept what you and David R were trying to do but I just think it can also undermine your messages.

Quote from: CraigLee;241530
Simply saying 'a guy walking down the street saying offensive things' lacks an emotional punch.


"A guy walking down the street tossing out racial slurs," would do it, I think.  That's how I would write it and I think people are familiar enough with racial slurs to fill in the blanks and for that to have punch.  

Quote from: CraigLee;241530
Anyway, I would not consider it an undue restriction of my free speech to not use that word, IF it really bothers you that much. Let me know. No promises, but I will make an effort. If it is not a major issue for you though, I'd rather just keep it as part of the arsenal, as it were.


Obviously this is a lightly moderated site so you can say whatever you want.  I'd simply remind you that words mean things, they can create emotional responses in others which you may not be able to predict, people will judge you by the words you use, and that liberty works best when practiced with responsibility rather than being abused.  In short, I don't think you are helping yourself by using those words.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: droog on August 29, 2008, 10:47:52 am
Motherfuckin cocksucker!
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Engine on August 29, 2008, 10:50:47 am
A very wise man once said, "'Love' can be a much more offensive word than 'skullfucker,' depending on the context."
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Malleus Arianorum on August 30, 2008, 07:08:43 am
Quote from: John Morrow;241498
Can someone please explain to me why it's acceptable to toss those terms around to make a point like this that could easily be made using other less inflammatory words?
It's a very effective way to hijack minority status and intimidate minority persons. You can say all your favorite racist phrases but plead disassociated bigotry if you get in trouble. You can interlope as a minority person and use their history and culture to further your goals. Best of all, you can create an atmosphere so hostile to minority persons, few will dare confront you, and those who do will be so insulted that you can talk circles around them. (And hey a couple of crazies might actually like that you're pretending to be them!)
 
I don't think it's acceptable, it's just that we don't have any black people here who are willing to challenge it. Contrast that with the state of the Catholic Church before and after I showed up. Or the state of Girls before and after Shewolf started tearing giblets out of people. Or, I suppose the state of Forge-foolery before and after Pundit sprung from the forehead of Zeus.
 
I mean, honestly, who's the blackest roleplayer we have here? Koltrar? Of course disassociated bigotry is acceptable here: THIS PLACE IS A FREAKING WEISSWURST-FEST!!!
 
Edit: :)
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: David R on August 30, 2008, 07:21:06 am
Quote from: Malleus Arianorum;242035
It's a very effective way to hijack minority status and intimidate minority persons. You can say all your favorite racist phrases but plead disassociated bigotry if you get in trouble. You can interlope as a minority person and use their history and culture to further your goals. Best of all, you can create an atmosphere so hostile to minority persons, few will dare confront you, and those who do will be so insulted that you can talk circles around them. (And hey a couple of crazies might actually like that you're pretending to be them!)


That's what I do, create hostile enviroments for minorities.

Regards,
David R
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Kyle Aaron on August 30, 2008, 07:38:00 am
Quote from: Malleus Arianorum;242035
I don't think it's acceptable, it's just that we don't have any black people here who are willing to challenge it.
I think that rather than worrying about words used in conversation - as distinct from words used abusively - you ought to worry about actions, actions still happening today. A century and a half on, African-Americans are still pickin' cotton down South. Of course, they're desperate criminals (http://www.truthout.org/article/slavery-haunts-americas-plantation-prisons), apparently. Because we know that no-one in the US is ever imprisoned for non-violent crimes, or found guilty more often and sentenced for longer because they're male, poor, black or nearly retarded or anything like that. Or you could think about how New Orleans, three years on, still has 72,000 vacant or ruined houses - in the black districts, of course. Or maybe how your poorest people are so neglected by you and your government that even fuckin' Venezuela is giving heating oil aid to them.

Actions speak louder than words - both good and bad actions. We worry more about words to excuse our lack of action.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: droog on August 30, 2008, 07:56:12 am
Quote from: David R;242036
That's what I do, create hostile enviroments for minorities.


You would, you honky.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Koltar on August 30, 2008, 07:57:38 am
Quote from: Malleus Arianorum;242035


I mean, honestly, who's the blackest roleplayer we have here? Koltar? Of course disassociated bigotry is acceptable here: THIS PLACE IS A FREAKING WEISSWURST-FEST!!!
 
Edit: :)


Okay, corrected your spelling. (and I really did, unlike the usual reason for saying that)


Malleus Arianorum, I believe there are at least 2 posters on this forum who are either African-American or black - they just don't announce it when they post or discuss things. Also, their avatars are borrowed images or cartoon-type caricatures.


- Ed
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: RPGPundit on August 30, 2008, 08:49:39 am
Quote from: Spike;241395
My understanding is that we topic banned him, and in fact banned him from off topic all together. Therefore, yes, we silenced his opinions we didn't like.


No, we silenced him because he wouldn't control his activity, not his speech. He was banned from off-topic because he wouldn't stop spamming that board with threads about his islamophobia and crap on the threads of others with the same, and didn't cut down when asked to.
He could just as easily have been posting dozens of threads about his hatred of citrus fruits; it wasn't his choice of topic that got him sanctioned, it was his obsessive behaviour and the disruption it was causing to the functioning of off-topic as a subforum.

Gleichman, for example, seems to have some concerns about Islam, but he doesn't start six threads a day on the subject, or post crude anti-islamic pictures on other people's threads.  Hence he's had no problem.

RPGPundit
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Malleus Arianorum on August 30, 2008, 09:31:48 am
Quote from: Kyle Aaron;242037
I think that rather than worrying about words used in conversation - as distinct from words used abusively - you ought to worry about actions, actions still happening today.
Obviously actions speak louder, but I was responding to John's question which was about words.
 
Quote
A century and a half on, African-Americans are still pickin' cotton down South. Of course, they're desperate criminals (http://www.truthout.org/article/slavery-haunts-americas-plantation-prisons), apparently. Because we know that no-one in the US is ever imprisoned for non-violent crimes, or found guilty more often and sentenced for longer because they're male, poor, black or nearly retarded or anything like that. Or you could think about how New Orleans, three years on, still has 72,000 vacant or ruined houses - in the black districts, of course. Or maybe how your poorest people are so neglected by you and your government that even fuckin' Venezuela is giving heating oil aid to them.
I'm no Mother Theresa but I went without Christmas presents my whole life so I could exchange them for African American dolls and action figures and ship them to the poor kids in the South. The only exceptions were a toy stage coach and a miniature hockey foosball table that were from some unknown store in Canada and so on, but I'd rather not play "some of my best friends are..." online. You're correct that I haven't lifted them out of dire poverty yet so make of that what you will.
 
Quote
Actions speak louder than words - both good and bad actions. We worry more about words to excuse our lack of action.
My actions are inaudiable online. The "inaction" that causes me to post here is not one of shame but one of opportunity. Sometimes I have a computer and some time to kill. ;)
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Malleus Arianorum on August 30, 2008, 10:00:08 am
Quote from: Koltar;242040
Okay, corrected your spelling. (and I really did, unlike the usual reason for saying that)
rArrrrgh! rSorrrry. :blush:
 
Quote
Malleus Arianorum, I believe there are at least 2 posters on this forum who are either African-American or black - they just don't announce it when they post or discuss things. Also, their avatars are borrowed images or cartoon-type caricatures.
 
- Ed
I understand. I'm Japanese American but I don't advertise it either.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: HinterWelt on August 30, 2008, 11:53:03 am
Quote from: Malleus Arianorum;242035

I mean, honestly, who's the blackest roleplayer we have here? Koltrar? Of course disassociated bigotry is acceptable here: THIS PLACE IS A FREAKING WEISSWURST-FEST!!!
 
Edit: :)


I am black in Alabama. Does that count?

Bill
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: CavScout on August 30, 2008, 12:33:21 pm
Quote from: Kyle Aaron;242037
I think that rather than worrying about words used in conversation - as distinct from words used abusively - you ought to worry about actions, actions still happening today. A century and a half on, African-Americans are still pickin' cotton down South. Of course, they're desperate criminals (http://www.truthout.org/article/slavery-haunts-americas-plantation-prisons), apparently. Because we know that no-one in the US is ever imprisoned for non-violent crimes, or found guilty more often and sentenced for longer because they're male, poor, black or nearly retarded or anything like that. Or you could think about how New Orleans, three years on, still has 72,000 vacant or ruined houses - in the black districts, of course. Or maybe how your poorest people are so neglected by you and your government that even fuckin' Venezuela is giving heating oil aid to them.

Actions speak louder than words - both good and bad actions. We worry more about words to excuse our lack of action.


Australian Exceptionalism for the win.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Vaecrius on August 31, 2008, 02:02:27 am
Put me down for another point in the "Who gives a shit whether Islam is a race" column.

Meanwhile, if no one minds my necromancing points that were brought up back when this thread was in the single digits or so...


Quote from: ColonelHardisson;240525
When the hell did Cracked Magazine - Cracked-Fucking-Magazine! - become so insightful? That has to be one of the, if not the, most poignant and (in my experience and estimation) spot-on articles I've read about why the internet is engendering antisocial and (perhaps) sociopathic behavior. It nails the subject of this thread right to the wall. Thanks for the link.
Read his Monkeysphere (http://www.cracked.com/article_14990_what-monkeysphere.html) article too - it's the other piece of his I find myself going back to again and again.


Quote from: jgants;240828
Agreed.  Gaming night at NAMBLA would be right up there with putting my arm into a meat grinder.  :eek:
I dunno, is it really that different? I mean, as long as pedophilia doesn't ever come up I don't see how playing with NAMBLA members per se is that different from anyone else. (That said, given the stigma of even being associated with such people I'd probably decline the offer - but if I'm in a game and the guy next to me turns out to be one of them I'll just shrug and keep going.)


Quote from: S'mon;241000
*Unlike Hindus, most Jews seem to have a suicidal commitment to multiculturalism.  Even the Jewish neocons combine "Invade the World" with "Invite the World" in their ideology.  Which I think is a real shame because I'm pro-Jewish and I don't want to see them being wiped out or persecuted again, as seems likely will happen.
Given the history of the Jewish diaspora I wouldn't call it "suicidal" exactly. I mean, this is a culture that has spent the vast bulk of its modern history as a - the - distinct ethnic minority that the majority blames for its problems. Unless there's some huge worldwide Jewish movement to all move back to Israel or some other crazy whatnot, I can't help but see a good bit of rational self-interest (in the best sense) in favouring multicultural policies.


As for my experience... well, first off as both a West Coast urbanite and a Canadian talking about how much Bush sucks is about as safe a talking point as discussing the weather. :D More hot-button are Islamophobia (compared with which the respondents in that WOE video are quite tame) and abortion - which I know well enough when to shut up about, or at least agree that the act is bad and frame my honest beliefs in enough small-government terms not to set off alarm bells.

I've probably gotten into far more nasty arguments and falling-outs with liberals than with conservatives, simply because there's no unspoken "agree to disagree" social contract when dealing with the former.

Not much for gaming, though, since everyone I've played anything resembling an RPG with is either apolitical or well left of Obama. That said, I used to play the Infiltration UT mod a lot, and the forums were, save for a few commies and apparently apolitical people, about a notch right of the Bush Administration.

In theory, though, I'd never knowingly game - or socialize - with someone who did not believe spousal rape is possible, or has no shame in holding a sexual double-standard based on gender, or unironically uses the word "slut", or believes a man can only be a "faggot" if he is penetrated, or thinks a woman who got raped was "asking for it" by the way she dressed, or otherwise casually treated women as men's property. I freely admit to harbouring the vilest and most intolerant bigotry against that sort of culture that spreads such ideas: I've known people of both genders who buy this sort of shit, but none whose presence I'd been happy to tolerate for any amount of time.


EDIT: Come to think of it, I'm not sure I'd game with a creationist either. The very thought of such creatures (heh) makes me slightly ill, frankly.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: S'mon on August 31, 2008, 05:08:56 am
Quote from: Vaecrius;242310

Given the history of the Jewish diaspora I wouldn't call it "suicidal" exactly. I mean, this is a culture that has spent the vast bulk of its modern history as a - the - distinct ethnic minority that the majority blames for its problems. Unless there's some huge worldwide Jewish movement to all move back to Israel or some other crazy whatnot, I can't help but see a good bit of rational self-interest (in the best sense) in favouring multicultural policies..


Yeah, you're right - I think I was 'tired & emotional' when I posted that whole post.  Kyle does that to me, so he's joined CavScout on my ignore list, which is nicely symmetrical.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Thanatos02 on September 01, 2008, 10:44:01 pm
Quote from: Kellri;240518
Sure, but I've never seen that kind of talk on a gaming site or anywhere else, really. Have you?

(points to self)
I don't hold other people's political opinions against them on a gaming site in any serious way, though. I'll talk about politics, but at the end of the day, if I'm doing it on an rpg site, I don't have a lot invested in it.

I'm fairly dramatically a leftist. I'm radically left where I live, in the united states (though just a bit less so since I've moved to Seattle from St. Louis). On the other hand, since I'm kind of a moral relativist, I feel that my viewpoint doesn't come from a distinctly 'correct' place, but simply represents the kind of world I'd like to work towards and live in. As long as the person I'm talking to has a well-founded viewpoint that's represented well, I respect that. It's good to get along and be civil.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Vaecrius on September 02, 2008, 02:53:44 am
Quote from: S'mon;242361
joined CavScout on my ignore list
Sometimes I read stuff out loud just for the hell of it. I've found it to be a huge improvement to read his posts in a goofy falsetto court jester voice. :) (For the record, John Morrow is really gravelly and low, while Jackalope sounds like a hyperactive stoner and J Arcane sounds super-tense and angry at everyone.)
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Thanatos02 on September 02, 2008, 03:06:43 am
I always wonder how I sound to others, and how well it matches up with how I sound in real life.

I honestly would bet that I sound more animated on forums.
Title: Testing my tolerance level
Post by: Jackalope on September 02, 2008, 03:19:45 am
Quote from: Vaecrius;242959
while Jackalope sounds like a hyperactive stoner

That's because I am a hyperactive stoner.  In real life, I'd say I sound like Owen Wilson after a few too many coffees.