discussion Female model representation in Age of Sigmar

[Yondaime]

I dont get if the problems is female models per se (female heroes/characters/lore)  or the lack of female units (aka eldar howling banshees)

If the problem is the lore, there are a lot of cool female character atm in aos lore (even some god tier models)

if the problem is the lack of units, DOK is an entire female army, SCE have some female models, cities has a lot of female only units too

I think AOS is really diverse as a setting, MUCH more than WHFB, there is no need to push more diversiy.

 

I just want to leave total freedom to the authors creativity, without telling them "this has to be X because diversity"

 

 

[dekay]

51 minutes ago, Enoby said:

Getting back more on topic, people have asked about female Seraphon and how they could be presented - I personally don't think they need new models (well, they need an update but the design doesn't need to be changed), but rather they need to have a few female characters (even just referring to an old blood or a Slann as a 'she' one time). All this would do is confirm that female seraphon exist, which would be nice. 

I personally wouldn't mind to change the language surrounding Seraphon to make them completely gender less. There isn't any other faction like this and it would work well with their general 'otherness'.  But sprinkling some female pronouns into their lore would work as well, especially as they're the one faction where it doesn't need any change in model design. Whatever physical characteristics they might have to signify their sex, they don't need to be in any way recognizable for us (and no one should want lizard ******).

 

 

[JPjr]

16 minutes ago, Yondaime said:

I just want to leave total freedom to the authors creativity, without telling them "this has to be X because diversity"

It's just so weird then that whether its games, comics, models or novels when designers, authors* etc do create whatever they want that also happens to increase visibility of otherwise underrepresented people in some way, they get pushback from the same people and are scolded for only doing it because they're being forced to, or they're pandering to SJWs, or they're just ticking x, y, or z box or some other nonsense.

You'd almost be forgiven for thinking it was a hilarious bad faith argument.

 

 

*who going by their social media presences at least (and the general trend for most young successful, creatives) are overwhelmingly fairly liberal, equality for all, types on some level

Edited September 14, 2020 by JPjr

[Yondaime]

1 minute ago, JPjr said:

It's just so weird then that whether its games, comics, models or novels when designers, authors* etc do create whatever they want that also happens to increase visibility of otherwise underrepresented people in some way, they get pushback from the same people and are scolded for only doing it because they're being forced to, or they're pandering to SJWs, or they're just ticking x, y, or z box or some other nonsense.

You'd almost be forgiven for thinking it was a hilarious bad faith argument.

 

 

*who going by their social media presences at least (and the general trend for most young successful, creatives) are overwhelmingly fairly liberal, equality for all, types on some level

I agree with you in this, but this is not OP point

 

OP says that there are not enought females in aos, thus accusing GW authors to not put enought diversity, thus forcing them (and here's my point) to create diverse character for the sake of it

 

I am ok to diversity, i am NOT ok to force it

[JPjr]

but how do you judge what is "forced" and why do you get to be the judge?

it's just that over the years I've heard this line from thousands of people, whether it's about actors/characters in tv shows, computer games, RPGs, models, music, you name it, even ****** Countryfile, Springwatch or Gardener's World presenters. It's always the same people clogging up comments section and social media with their same  complaints that whilst they've nothing against x, y or z but this particular instance is obviously being forced and so is bad.

they'll always point to something small minor thing from the past that they're so generously ok with and think is valid, but oh no not this new instance, this is definitely pandering and which ever group is it should go away until such time as they've decided that the inclusion of x, y and z (maybe in a minor background, non-speaking role, for a few years just to bed them and make it feel natural) is acceptable and not forced.

Edited September 14, 2020 by JPjr

[Harpo2]

I've wonder how much oversight there is at GW design studios, management seems to be at least in more recent times taking a more hands off approach to the design teams work (though I know that was not always the case).

I know the design team for the models appear to be the ones who get first say on what gets made (from interviews on GW podcast) , since lore writers and rules writers both say that they work from the models first.

Though I don't know how management and marketing (and the other departments I am not thinking of) fit in.

Might be too off topic but there are people behind the scenes making decisions in every company, including what gets made and for what reasons.

[shinros]

8 minutes ago, JPjr said:

but how do you judge what is "forced" and why do you get to be the judge?

it's just that over the years I've heard this line from thousands of people, whether it's about actors/characters in tv shows, computer games, RPGs, models, music, you name it, even ****** Countryfile, Springwatch or Gardener's World presenters. It's always the same people clogging up comments section and social media with their same  complaints that whilst they've nothing against x, y or z but this particular instance is obviously being forced and so is bad.

they'll always point to something small minor thing from the past that they're so generously ok with and think is valid, but oh no not this new instance, this is definitely pandering and which ever group is it should go away until such time as they've decided that the inclusion of x, y and z (maybe in a minor background, non-speaking role, for a few years just to bed them and make it feel natural) is acceptable and not forced.

I can see we are going to veer off topic again. But I'll post this, the new Oscar rules. (I don't even like hollywood.) 

 

Do you see anything wrong with this? I do, because when this rule goes into affect, expect low effort movies where they shove minorities into the film for the sake of it because that director really wants that award. This has now divided hollywood, because if we follow these guidelines some of the best films out there wouldn't have won that award. 

Edited September 14, 2020 by shinros

[Beastmaster]

15 minutes ago, JPjr said:

but how do you judge what is "forced" and why do you get to be the judge?

it's just that over the years I've heard this line from thousands of people, whether it's about actors/characters in tv shows, computer games, RPGs, models, music, you name it, even ****** Countryfile, Springwatch or Gardener's World presenters. It's always the same people clogging up comments section and social media with their same  complaints that whilst they've nothing against x, y or z but this particular instance is obviously being forced and so is bad.

they'll always point to something small minor thing from the past that they're so generously ok with and think is valid, but oh no not this new instance, this is definitely pandering and which ever group is it should go away until such time as they've decided that the inclusion of x, y and z (maybe in a minor background, non-speaking role, for a few years just to bed them and make it feel natural) is acceptable and not forced.

Luckily, the miniature market is a slow one. So even if from now on every second newly designed miniature would be female (it won’t), people have at least a decade to get used to it until all models of today are phased out. No forcing possible. 😄

[Enoby]

10 minutes ago, Harpo2 said:

I've wonder how much oversight there is at GW design studios, management seems to be at least in more recent times taking a more hands off approach to the design teams work (though I know that was not always the case).

I know the design team for the models appear to be the ones who get first say on what gets made (from interviews on GW podcast) , since lore writers and rules writers both say that they work from the models first.

Though I don't know how management and marketing (and the other departments I am not thinking of) fit in.

Might be too off topic but there are people behind the scenes making decisions in every company, including what gets made and for what reasons.

I don't know how much this will answer your question, but I remember one of the authors (either ADB  or Dan Abnett) wanted to put a female custodian in a novel but was told no by higher ups as none of the models are female. Now, I'm not sure if the higher ups told the model designers to make them all male, or if the designers made them all male on their own, but it does at least clarify that lore comes after models (as you mentioned) 

To take a guess, I would imagine GW management says "we need X" based off marketing analysis, then they send a vague brief over to designers, they make the models, and management ensures to keep lore and rules in the loop with the models 

[JPjr]

@shinros no personally I don't for a few reasons.

firstly it's for an award, the people who give that award are entitled to create whatever criteria they want for films to be eligible for that award. every award show has rules to decide what can be included or not, they always have and always will.

secondly it's for just one category within that awards show, best picture. every single other catergory remains the same. Also this doesn't come into affect until 2024.

thirdly to be included in this one category you have to meet 2 out of the 4, what they're calling standards. 

the one you've posted is just 1 of the 4, that relates to on-screen activity (funny that's the one that gets posted around 🤔)

the other 3 categories include representation amongst the crew (such onerous limitations such as must include 6 crew members from under represented groups),  representation amongst people working at the studio (and again a fairly small %) and finally representation amongst. unpaid interns.

If they can't meet these terrifyingly Orwellian requirements then yes they just have to be content with be up for every other award but the best picture category. 

I'm sure Fox or whomever will keep this in mind when they start up production of their next Transformers movie or whatever.

[Yondaime]

27 minutes ago, JPjr said:

but how do you judge what is "forced" and why do you get to be the judge?

it's just that over the years I've heard this line from thousands of people, whether it's about actors/characters in tv shows, computer games, RPGs, models, music, you name it, even ****** Countryfile, Springwatch or Gardener's World presenters. It's always the same people clogging up comments section and social media with their same  complaints that whilst they've nothing against x, y or z but this particular instance is obviously being forced and so is bad.

they'll always point to something small minor thing from the past that they're so generously ok with and think is valid, but oh no not this new instance, this is definitely pandering and which ever group is it should go away until such time as they've decided that the inclusion of x, y and z (maybe in a minor background, non-speaking role, for a few years just to bed them and make it feel natural) is acceptable and not forced.

dude you dont understand (or you dont want to)

 

i am not judging if something its forced or not in a opera, i am against OP's argument to FORCE gw to put female characters.

i am not against the author, i am against who calls for more diverse models (OP)

The point of the post is not "is morathi there because they were forced to"

The point is "have gw to put more diversity?" and the answer is no IMHO, because they are free to put whatever they want, male/female/trans but because THEY want, not because someone asks, and OP is asking

 

Nobody can say "you have to put x because y" in that we agree, right?

[shinros]

20 minutes ago, JPjr said:

@shinros no personally I don't for a few reasons.

firstly it's for an award, the people who give that award are entitled to create whatever criteria they want for films to be eligible for that award. every award show has rules to decide what can be included or not, they always have and always will.

secondly it's for just one category within that awards show, best picture. every single other catergory remains the same. Also this doesn't come into affect until 2024.

thirdly to be included in this one category you have to meet 2 out of the 4, what they're calling standards. 

the one you've posted is just 1 of the 4, that relates to on-screen activity (funny that's the one that gets posted around 🤔)

the other 3 categories include representation amongst the crew (such onerous limitations such as must include 6 crew members from under represented groups),  representation amongst people working at the studio (and again a fairly small %) and finally representation amongst. unpaid interns.

If they can't meet these terrifyingly Orwellian requirements then yes they just have to be content with be up for every other award but the best picture category. 

I'm sure Fox or whomever will keep this in mind when they start up production of their next Transformers movie or whatever.

Right, so we have to put authoritarian measures on talent and flimmaking? 

considering the staggering amount of movies that attend the awards you think it won't affect the movies? Also it doesn't matter when it comes into affect, the issue is that it will. 

Next point, they shouldn't have to make any standard in that list for if a filmmaker makes an amazing historical film they can't get an award. Because the checkbox territory of it. 

You call these standards Orwellian, I call them tyranny on the creative process. Hence why I have my opinion, there is nothing wrong with representation, but it shouldn't come into play when a writer or designer wants to do something. They should be able to hire the best people for the job to get the best result, if that means most of their crew is white? So be it, if that means most of their crew is asian or anything else? That's fine as well.

Overall your view why there aren't many black people in career fields is fundamentally different to mine and I think we will never agree. And I hope GW never listens to you or the people who agree with you. 

Edited September 14, 2020 by shinros

[Enoby]

5 minutes ago, Yondaime said:

dude you dont understand (or you dont want to)

 

i am not judging if something its forced or not in a opera, i am against OP's argument to FORCE gw to put female characters.

i am not against the author, i am against who calls for more diverse models (OP)

The point of the post is not "is morathi there because they were forced to"

The point is "have gw to put more diversity?" and the answer is no IMHO, because they are free to put whatever they want, male/female/trans but because THEY want, not because someone asks, and OP is asking

 

Nobody can say "you have to put x because y" in that we agree, right?

I'm not sure where I'm saying we should force anyone to do anything - though perhaps  I've come off incorrectly My original post was just numbers trying to prompt discussion (I was careful to not draw conclusions from these numbers). My posts afterwards were my own views, which are that I would like to see more female models as I believe it would help women (such as myself) be more invested in AoS. I have tried to provide data where possible, but given the subject, it's challenging.

 

Hope this clears up any confusion

[Yondaime]

1 minute ago, shinros said:

Right, so we have to put authoritarian measures on talent and flimmaking? 

considering the staggering amount of movies that attend the awards you think it won't affect the movies? Also it doesn't matter when it comes into affect, the issue is that it will. 

Next point, they shouldn't have to make any standard in that list for if a filmmaker makes an amazing historical film they can't get an award. Because the checkbox territory of it. 

You call these standards Orwellian, I call them tyranny on the creative process. Hence why I have my opinion, there is nothing wrong with representation, but it shouldn't come into play when a writer or designer wants to do something. They should be able to hire the best people for the job to get the best result, if that means most of their crew is white? So be it, if that means most of their crew is asian or anything else? That's fine as well.

Overall your view why there aren't many black people in career fields is fundamentally different to mine and I think we will never agree. 

This.

We are not talking about some school price, we are talking about a worldwide  premire that is the dream of many film makers

Everything that limitate the creativity of the individual is wrong, for good intention or not

Like when they censored that scrubs/community episode, do you know who did things like that? fascists and nazists?

 

Every kind of extremist/censorcisp is wrong

[Warlordounnet]

6 minutes ago, shinros said:

Right, so we have to put authoritarian measures on talent and flimmaking? ...

Because do you think that there isn't any existing racial or genre discrimination in hiring? And that is a way to counter it?

[Yondaime]

Just now, Enoby said:

I'm not sure where I'm saying we should force anyone to do anything - though perhaps  I've come off incorrectly My original post was just numbers trying to prompt discussion (I was careful to not draw conclusions from these numbers). My posts afterwards were my own views, which are that I would like to see more female models as I believe it would help women (such as myself) be more invested in AoS. I have tried to provide data where possible, but given the subject, it's challenging.

 

Hope this clears up any confusion

Yeah i put your point in a much more political way and i am sorry fo that

Edited September 14, 2020 by Yondaime

[shinros]

27 minutes ago, Warlordounnet said:

Because do you think that there isn't any existing racial or genre discrimination in hiring? And that is a way to counter it?

Of course there is, but if you didn't know people use this as an excuse not to TRY. How about you watch any interview of Denzel Washington, a man who won awards and was nominated during a time when the oscars were apparently more racist? Have you heard anything he has said about the black community and the means of acquiring success? I know, I lived it. I talk to people who outright don't attempt to try and succeed because what you said right here. 

But I'll tell you what, soon as my elder brother became a network engineer people around me went "Oh, maybe I should try and work hard, put down the money and do xyz to get a better job?" 

Edit:The system is ****** for anyone caught in it, but why make it easy for the system? I've been on the job centre, talked to actual criminals both black and white who are stuck on welfare because they can't be hired due to their criminal past. Because their choices, the environment and the bad actors within it, guess what happens? You can't succeed, because then the judge becomes your mother and prison is your father. When you get out unless you start your own business you're ******. Then you have to contend with what you said here AND your criminal past. 

Second Edit:And guess what happens when these people have children? It goes on and on! So when someone said asking people in such situations to pull up the boots is cruel? Well you bloody have to, because life is not going to make it easy, the system is not going to make it easy. Also when the oscars does lists like that it creates ACTUAL RACISTS. Because when a white person feels discriminated enough what do you think they are going to do? What do you think is going to happen to them? 

Third Edit:Also as I said, if GW actually lowered the prices, so people stuck in this situations can join the hobby? Trust me they will be in a much more positive environment, positive environments and positive role-models is important in achieving success. 

Fourth edit: Another point, my Elder Brother encountered racism in the work place when he tried to work up the ladder in another company, but then he decided to shoot for the moon beyond his current job and he did. Now, he gets paid more than the racist manager in his old work place. So what you said is not an excuse. 

Edited September 14, 2020 by shinros

[Sartxac]

7 minutes ago, Warlordounnet said:

Because do you think that there isn't any existing racial or genre discrimination in hiring? And that is a way to counter it?

This is forum of GW and this is the beginning of other political/social discussions. But if you want you could see the Australian experiment with anonimous cv's. Racism appears in specifical areas, not all.

Edited September 14, 2020 by Sartxac

[Harpo2]

Quote

I don't know how much this will answer your question, but I remember one of the authors (either ADB  or Dan Abnett) wanted to put a female custodian in a novel but was told no by higher ups as none of the models are female. Now, I'm not sure if the higher ups told the model designers to make them all male, or if the designers made them all male on their own, but it does at least clarify that lore comes after models (as you mentioned) 

I remember that a while back that one of the Forge World designers was regretful that they did not put any female Goliaths into base Goliath gang due to design decision they made were all the Goliath models in the starter box were to be male to contrast the all female Escher gang (I am going to note that female Goliaths do exist in the lore while male Escher do not). Later the Goliath Forgeborn included female Goliath models.

I thought I'll mention that since it does show that the lore and the models are in the end a two way street, its just models are the first to cross it so to speak.

 

[MaatithoftheBrand]

1 hour ago, Yondaime said:

I dont get if the problems is female models per se (female heroes/characters/lore)  or the lack of female units (aka eldar howling banshees)

If the problem is the lore, there are a lot of cool female character atm in aos lore (even some god tier models)

if the problem is the lack of units, DOK is an entire female army, SCE have some female models, cities has a lot of female only units too

I think AOS is really diverse as a setting, MUCH more than WHFB, there is no need to push more diversiy.

 

I just want to leave total freedom to the authors creativity, without telling them "this has to be X because diversity"

 

 

I broadly agree that AoS is doing better than when it started, I think the issue comes from a lot of those Cities units are... unnaturally gendered in a way that, when they are the only female models, feels weird.
The Daughters of Khaine's gimmick is that they are all women, and that's fine, but when they are the only army that have a strong female presence it looks an awful lot like the only way to join the fight as a woman is to join the LadyCult.
Similarly, the Cities units are often specifically grouped as gendered units - only women can be magical archers, and they cannot be line soldiers. Female wizards are morally dubious, and have some connection to the LadyCult army probably. 

Now I want to make it very clear that I do not think that these armies/units in and of themselves are bad or problematic or any other buzzwords or anything. I love the Daughters, and the Sisters of the Watch, and the Sorceresses - they are all cool. But I think if you want diversity not gimmicks, there needs to be options for women to do what the men are doing - the example of Stormcast is a perfect example.

I am not saying that there cannot be any male-only units, or that every unit needs to be 30% or more women or anything like that. Not every kit/army/unit needs to hit any quotas and I actually think that hard and fast ratios or quotas would be forced and would stifle the designers' creativity. 

However, I do not think there is anything wrong with hoping that GW continues to push towards women being "normal". Being a woman can still be a gimmick for things like Daughters of Khaine and the Sisters of the Watch (just like being a man can be a gimmick for the Fyreslayers), but for that gimmick to not feel hollow, there needs to be an acknowledgement that "woman" is not in and of itself a unique personality trait that sets you apart from the "default".

[stratigo]

 

 

4 hours ago, shinros said:

In my opinion it's always going to exist, how are you going to truly stop it other than policing other people's thoughts? I already gave my opinion on how you can see more Black People in hobby. I would also have you know in my sphere, the elder black people who have seen the worst of racism tell me not talk to white people about our "issues" because they wouldn't "understand". I disagreed, since I feel how would we come to an understanding if we don't talk to one another? Others also tell me I have huge opportunities that exist now since western countries have made such great progress compared to other countries, which I agree with considering the number of successful black people, even in my own family. 

Anyway, painting a model a different colour is a skin deep gesture instead of making actual programs and giving said people means to actually do the hobby. Of course, GW aren't going to do that, they're a business after all. The same business who said warhammer is for everyone and fired a writer because he rocked the boat because he harmed their bottom line, proving GW is still an amoral business. 

 

There are plenty of obvious ways to help black communities. And none of them have to do with fixing the minds of all racists everywhere forever. Mostly it involves spending a scant fraction of the money on black people that we have, and continue to, spend on white people. In aid and benefits. I mean, can you imagine how much better it would be if the government just..... gave black people houses? Just handed them out? Cause that's what the US has done, multiple times, for white people. 

One of the core features of the recent protests was shifting funding from hard enforcement to community services for black communities. 

And, like, we can DO it. Things have gotten better than they were in the past. We, you, are not doomed to be stuck in the current morass. 

 

 

3 hours ago, Enoby said:

Getting back more on topic, people have asked about female Seraphon and how they could be presented - I personally don't think they need new models (well, they need an update but the design doesn't need to be changed), but rather they need to have a few female characters (even just referring to an old blood or a Slann as a 'she' one time). All this would do is confirm that female seraphon exist, which would be nice. 

I, and I think most others, don't want lizard ****** 😛 

Lizardmen females is mostly a case or quirk of gendering pronouns honestly. Though if you want to bring dimorphism in, you could cheekily have female lizardmen be bigger and stronger than male

 

 

2 hours ago, Yondaime said:

I dont get if the problems is female models per se (female heroes/characters/lore)  or the lack of female units (aka eldar howling banshees)

If the problem is the lore, there are a lot of cool female character atm in aos lore (even some god tier models)

if the problem is the lack of units, DOK is an entire female army, SCE have some female models, cities has a lot of female only units too

I think AOS is really diverse as a setting, MUCH more than WHFB, there is no need to push more diversiy.

 

I just want to leave total freedom to the authors creativity, without telling them "this has to be X because diversity"

 

 

If, in total freedom, designers only make dudes, white dudes for the good guys, then is that a problem?

 

Of course the flip side is any time they do make a female model someone, perhaps you, will say "oh it's forced diversity". So the actual freedom isn't important, because no one is privy to the thoughts of designers, and few are privy to the process of models getting made, so any time a model comes out, it's always conjecture about why a model is made.

 

Unless you think GW designers are just super jazzed to make endless amounts of space marines, I can tell you, it's likely a profit motive for all the space marine releases for example. And not, uh, creative freedom.

 

 

1 hour ago, shinros said:

I can see we are going to veer off topic again. But I'll post this, the new Oscar rules. (I don't even like hollywood.) 

 

Do you see anything wrong with this? I do, because when this rule goes into affect, expect low effort movies where they shove minorities into the film for the sake of it because that director really wants that award. This has now divided hollywood, because if we follow these guidelines some of the best films out there wouldn't have won that award. 

Hollywood has always been divided. One of the biggest oscar bait films is, pretty much, the racism biopic. Especially if it boils racism down to the actions of individuals that are bads, and ignores the system, though we still get regular gems from this too. The other biggest oscar bait is, of course, the industry ****** film that's all about how cool the process of making movies is.

 

But the context of this document is that the oscars is run by a collection of old white dudes. Several of whom are not even subtly racist. They tend to throw a bone at one black film at a time and then ignore every other film featuring black people.

Under this document at least the low effort movies with minorities shoved in them will also have minorities among the crew and producers though.

 

1 hour ago, shinros said:

Right, so we have to put authoritarian measures on talent and flimmaking? 

considering the staggering amount of movies that attend the awards you think it won't affect the movies? Also it doesn't matter when it comes into affect, the issue is that it will. 

Next point, they shouldn't have to make any standard in that list for if a filmmaker makes an amazing historical film they can't get an award. Because the checkbox territory of it. 

You call these standards Orwellian, I call them tyranny on the creative process. Hence why I have my opinion, there is nothing wrong with representation, but it shouldn't come into play when a writer or designer wants to do something. They should be able to hire the best people for the job to get the best result, if that means most of their crew is white? So be it, if that means most of their crew is asian or anything else? That's fine as well.

Overall your view why there aren't many black people in career fields is fundamentally different to mine and I think we will never agree. And I hope GW never listens to you or the people who agree with you. 

Representation come into play all the time already. That's the issue. That if the system isn't forced to change, it of course won't.

 

The reason why there aren't many black people in career fields is not because there are no qualified black people for career fields. It's because of racism. The all white crews aren't all white (and the crews are, right now, mostly white) because white people are magically supremely skilled film makers. It's because racism.

 

I mean, I'll urge you to listen to the late great Chadwick Boseman's oscar acceptance speech.

 

 

59 minutes ago, shinros said:

Of course there is, but if you didn't know people use this as an excuse not to TRY. How about you watch any interview of Denzel Washington, a man who won awards and was nominated during a time when the oscars were apparently more racist? Have you heard anything he has said about the black community and the means of acquiring success? I know, I lived it. I talk to people who outright don't attempt to try and succeed because what you said right here. 

But I'll tell you what, soon as my elder brother became a network engineer people around me went "Oh, maybe I should try and work hard, put down the money and do xyz to get a better job?" 

Edit:The system is ****** for anyone caught in it, but why make it easy for the system? I've been on the job centre, talked to actual criminals both black and white who are stuck on welfare because they can't be hired due to their criminal past. Because their choices, the environment and the bad actors within it, guess what happens? You can't succeed, because then the judge becomes your mother and prison is your father. When you get out unless you start your own business you're ******. Then you have to contend with what you said here AND your criminal past. 

Second Edit:And guess what happens when these people have children? It goes on and on! So when someone said asking people in such situations to pull up the boots is cruel? Well you bloody have to, because life is not going to make it easy, the system is not going to make it easy. Also when the oscars does lists like that it creates ACTUAL RACISTS. Because when a white person feels discriminated enough what do you think they are going to do? What do you think is going to happen to them? 

Third Edit:Also as I said, if GW actually lowered the prices, so people stuck in this situations can join the hobby? Trust me they will be in a much more positive environment, positive environments and positive role-models is important in achieving success. 

Fourth edit: Another point, my Elder Brother encountered racism in the work place when he tried to work up the ladder in another company, but then he decided to shoot for the moon beyond his current job and he did. Now, he gets paid more than the racist manager in his old work place. So what you said is not an excuse. 

The success of one or a handful of black people doesn't excuse the system from its efforts to reduce the majority of black people to a lower class status. 

And I mean, trying to avoid hurting racist white people's feelings (and people who lose their minds over the idea of more black people in the oscars are) is a losing proposition. You may as well say we shouldn't have elected Obama because a black president scared white people too much.

 

The bootstrap comment was actually me paraphrasing MLK. It's something he said in the context of government aid for black communities. He was all for people pulling themselves up by their bootstraps, but that in black communities, many people don't even have boots. Metaphorically.

But there's an even deeper context. You see, pulling yourself up by your bootstraps is physically impossible. It doesn't matter how strong or agile you are, no amount of tugging on your bootstraps will lift you into the air. The term was first coined as a mocking impossibility for the poor to reach the heights of the wealthy in Britain without any aid. And the rich in Britain adopted the term and it has become this bizarre core tenet/fantasy of modern capitalism that the only true way to success is to be perfectly self made with no help whatsoever, eg pulling yourself up by your bootstraps. But just as doing that remains physically impossible, no one has ever been perfectly self made. No one who has seen success did so without help, whether they were born into money, or because a generation ago the government gave them free housing, or they got a handout that kept them going in rough times. No one is perfectly atomized.

The best way to help black communities is to start spending money on them. Providing things like housing, offering work programs, increasing school funding, and handing out welfare for those below the margin. And this would only be a scant percentage of the literal trillions (adjusted for inflation) this country has given white people through the years. You can't fix black communities without spending money on them.

[Enoby]

6 minutes ago, stratigo said:

Lizardmen females is mostly a case or quirk of gendering pronouns honestly. Though if you want to bring dimorphism in, you could cheekily have female lizardmen be bigger and stronger than male

To be honest, this would be pretty cool I suppose I'm looking at it conservatively that I can't see Seraphon getting a new main game release anytime soon (though it'd be a nice surprise), so some that were female rather than male would be nice to see in stories or even in Underworlds. I'd also be fine with them all being asexual, though that's not the case at the moment.

[shinros]

16 minutes ago, stratigo said:

 

 

 

 

This does not work either because many are misuing welfare and become trapped on it. Young people are having children younger so they can get a free council house.

Hence why certain issues and mind sets need to be sort out in the black community.

Edited September 14, 2020 by shinros

[stratigo]

7 minutes ago, Enoby said:

To be honest, this would be pretty cool I suppose I'm looking at it conservatively that I can't see Seraphon getting a new main game release anytime soon (though it'd be a nice surprise), so some that were female rather than male would be nice to see in stories or even in Underworlds. I'd also be fine with them all being asexual, though that's not the case at the moment.

Yeah, they're probably not. But you never know about the future.

 

Just now, shinros said:

This does not work either because many are misuing welfare and become trapped on it. Young people are having children younger so they can get a free council house.

Hence why certain issues and mind sets need to be sort out in the black community.

This isn't true. A handful misuse welfare. Statistically VERY FEW misuse welfare. The idea that welfare is regularly misused is a racist one perpetuated as a justification to NOT give black people any money at all. It distresses me that this is a trap you've fallen in to. 

You are literally parroting back talking points invented by racists right here. That black people simply couldn't handle being handed prosperity, they will misuse it. Black people must first change themselves somehow, in some way. But of course, no, there's nothing a black community can do, no action they can preform that would prove to the people who want to withhold welfare that black people are suddenly deserving of benefits.

[shinros]

26 minutes ago, stratigo said:

Yeah, they're probably not. But you never know about the future.

 

This isn't true. A handful misuse welfare. Statistically VERY FEW misuse welfare. The idea that welfare is regularly misused is a racist one perpetuated as a justification to NOT give black people any money at all. It distresses me that this is a trap you've fallen in to. 

You are literally parroting back talking points invented by racists right here. That black people simply couldn't handle being handed prosperity, they will misuse it. Black people must first change themselves somehow, in some way. But of course, no, there's nothing a black community can do, no action they can preform that would prove to the people who want to withhold welfare that black people are suddenly deserving of benefits.

Man so the fact I saw my mom scrambling to keep hers when her sons are paying the bills is a lie? Until we found out and told her to stop. So all the elder black people I talked too are liers as well?

Also I'm sure the family of my adoptive brother on my dad's side is having a wonderful time where his own girlfriend has to deal with her own twin brother who has done prison and drugs, who is willing to punch her in the face.

Man black people are recieving this wonderful welfare yet crime rates amoung us is so high. I'm sure that instead changing the culture and ethical surroundings of our young, won't reduce either. No sir, getting serious and working hard doesn't reduce those rates. Since according to you its impossible.

Man, I can't wait until we get to the argument where I am not black and I have no idea what I am talking about. 

I think some of you people should go to such areas and live there. Let's hope you don't get shot or stabbed.

Edited September 14, 2020 by shinros