IRL racial stereotypes in fantasy setting?

[TheGrammarBolshevik]

but of course only for cultures which you've decided have to get the kid gloves.

No. You've reversed causality. The standard is not selectively applied according to whether I have decided that a subject needs to be treated with nuance. The standard is what governs that decision.

the people who want to play as such characters generally like the culture in question or at least their image of it.

Which is irrelevant to whether their image of the culture is harmful.

[broken_escalator]

Educate yourself about european history.
Famines every couple of decades(with the occasional massive one killing millions) often due to greed and mismanagement of the nobility , entire peoples systematically wiped out or subsumed into others, rebellions would be delt with by armies wading in and slaughtering vast numbers of people to make an example, religions cultures and peoples systematically oppressed, subjugated or erased over the course of centuries etc etc .

Cool story. Would you agree that the genocide of the Jewish people was bad? Well, holocaust experts¹ have stated "in terms of the sheer numbers killed, the Native American Genocide exceeds that of the Holocaust." Everything you described with serfs definitly happened to Native Americans, and worse. But you knew that right? It's not like you're being insensitive or ignoring history to try to make your point.

Do I even have to bring up examples like the Trial of Tears where they estamate 17,000 Cherokees were forced marched out of their homes? Or disease warfare?

_{1 - David Cesarani, Holocaust: Critical Concepts in Historical Studies}

[snip]

[HungryHobo]

Just no

[Jessica]

Some people want to play the role of a native american style character.

For an answer to the rest of what you're talking about, see everyone else. But as for your privilege, this is it in spades. Wanting to "play at being native" is extremely privileged. There isn't a monolithic native culture in existence that can be played, and there are actual natives who exist today who have their own culture. It would be like me wanting to play at being American, and putting on a fat suit, yelling at black people and throwing money around. "What? It's the special American attack - Money shot. That's how Americans work."

The fact that our culture views this idealized, wrong mish-mash as something to dress up as (digitally, or physically) is offensive. These are real people, real people who've actually exist today. People who are stereotyped as if they still hunt buffalo, and throw tomahawks, as if they are a noble savage people trying to hold on to their antiquated primitive ways. People who've gone through a lot of hell because our western culture dehumanizes them with this stereotype. And, we think it's ok to then go and "play at being natives".

That's the problem. I know that you won't understand what I'm saying, and will disagree, thinking that I'm wrong. But, that's the issue in plain english as best as I can explain it.

[Oregonaut]

Educate yourself about european history.
Famines every couple of decades(with the occasional massive one killing millions) often due to greed and mismanagement of the nobility , entire peoples systematically wiped out or subsumed into others, rebellions would be delt with by armies wading in and slaughtering vast numbers of people to make an example, religions cultures and peoples systematically oppressed, subjugated or erased over the course of centuries etc etc .

Cool story. Would you agree that the genocide of the Jewish people was bad? Well, holocaust experts¹ have stated "in terms of the sheer numbers killed, the Native American Genocide exceeds that of the Holocaust." Everything you described with serfs definitly happened to Native Americans, and worse. But you knew that right? It's not like you're being insensitive or ignoring history to try to make your point.

Do I even have to bring up examples like the Trial of Tears where they estamate 17,000 Cherokees were forced marched out of their homes? Or disease warfare?

_{1 - David Cesarani, Holocaust: Critical Concepts in Historical Studies}

[snip]

I need to take a look at population statistics here, determine total population vs. number of dead. 1,000,000 dead out of 1,500,000 total is bad. 1,200 out of 1,300 dead could be declared worse. Simply because 100 people isn't enough to sustain and replenish a population.

[Belial]

Cool story. Would you agree that the genocide of the Jewish people was bad? Well, holocaust experts¹ have stated "in terms of the sheer numbers killed, the Native American Genocide exceeds that of the Holocaust." Everything you described with serfs definitly happened to Native Americans, and worse. But you knew that right? It's not like you're being insensitive or ignoring history to try to make your point.

And even putting all of that aside, "Serfs" don't still exist as a recognizable ethnic and racial group separate from "nobility". Especially not in the US. We're all white people now, rocking the white privilege.

Native Americans (and many of the individual tribes thereof) absolutely fucking do. So do Jews. Which makes the comparison inaccurate from the get-go even before you start comparing magnitude and concentration.

[HungryHobo]

Cool story. Would you agree that the genocide of the Jewish people was bad? Well, holocaust experts¹ have stated "in terms of the sheer numbers killed, the Native American Genocide exceeds that of the Holocaust." Everything you described with serfs definitly happened to Native Americans, and worse. But you knew that right? It's not like you're being insensitive or ignoring history to try to make your point.

Do I even have to bring up examples like the Trial of Tears where they estamate 17,000 Cherokees were forced marched out of their homes? Or disease warfare?

and? I'm quite aware of those events.
hell when settlers first arrived those who didn't die quickly from the native diseases thought there were only small local populations but it was likely that the diseases they brought with them simply wiped out large portions of the local populations without them ever knowing about it.

your point?
that genocides have happened in europe and in many other cultures?

[snip]

[broken_escalator]

Be that condescending and insulting again and you'll be taking a leave of absence not only from this thread but from SB entirely.

- Az

[HungryHobo]

Especially not in the US. We're all white people now, rocking the white privilege.

Check, so subcultures cultures/religions or groups which have been successfully wiped out or subsumed into others are game for caricaturing.

Wanting to "play at being native" is extremely privileged.

Or wanting to play as a chinese soldier, never mind that it may be a mishmash of different dynasties and groups never mind the crap the west put china through.
Or wanting to play as a samurai, never mind that the movie samurai never really existed as anything like they were portrayed and the crap the west put japan through.
Or wanting to play as a roman style gladiator never mind the crap the subjugated cultures around rome went through .
Or wanting to play as a soldier in a historical war, never mind the kinds of deprivations that the real soldiers went through and what atrocities were commited in the wars in question.
Or wanting to play as a Scottish highlander never mind inaccuracies and the centuries of oppression by the english.
and so on and so on and so on unto infinity.

HungryHobo, you don't seem to understand what privilege even is. It's obvious you bristle at its use, so I'm guessing people have used it against you before. Are you even capable of intelligent discourse?

Oh it has a meaning but you like most who use the term use it as nothing more than a magic "I'm right" automatic win argument which has no counterpoints which don't automatically confirm it.
You on the other hand seem utterly ignorant of how many European people and cultures were systematically oppressed or in some cases wiped out entirely.
it is possible to be European and from such cultures and such ignorance on your part does make me bristle.
My ancestors language was almost wiped out,(some would was it was, now it only exists in a corrupted form with it's old alphabet and even original names turned into badly translated versions in another language) millions upon millions dying due to an oppressive neighbours mismanagement and oppression, religion systematically suppressed and people pushed into the least hospitable areas or killed to make way for settlers from the conquering power.

but I'm white(though not American) so I'm automatically privileged. (or at least I am if I in any way disagree with you since that appears to be your only criteria for applying the label)

[Jessica]

HH: what part of living culture do you not understand?
Roman soldiers don't exist as real people RIGHT NOW
Samurai don't exist as real people RIGHT NOW
people in historic wars don't exist as real people RIGHT NOW
Native americans do exist right now.

It's the same as putting on a sombrero and mustache and saying you're mexican. Or putting on a fu-man-chu and a silk gown and saying you're asian. Or a bone in your nose and saying you're a headhunter. These ARE offensive to REAL PEOPLE. Because they exist right now, today.

Serfs existed, as part of our past, but minimizing their problems doesn't hurt real people right now.

[broken_escalator]

I don't mean to belittle European history, so if that is the message I'm extending I apologize.

What I was trying to convey is that I think it is unfair to compare the Native American genocide with your serf example. The serfs are not a race in your example, and while they are being oppressed and murdered it isn't the same thing. That doesn't mean its okay what happened to the serfs, just to be clear. But since there aren't any serfs, they don't get the same backlash that Native Americans get when they are stereotypically portrayed.

This plays back into that Asian example I mentioned. I think they mentioned how stereotypes can effect living members of the group, even if the stereotype isn't "bad". Asians are good at math is one of the more dominant stereotypes, so the effect it has on asians that aren't good at math may be bad even though being good at math seems like a positive stereotype.

[Azrael]

Hobo and Escalator: Neither of you are doing a particularly good job maintaining a Serious Business appropriate decorum.

Fix it. Quickly.

[HungryHobo]

HH: what part of living culture do you not understand?

so as long as the entire culture was successfully burned to the ground and wiped out entirely it's ok then?
If that's your position it seems fairly reasonable.

Also, I'm curious what modern living cultures still practice head hunting?

The serfs are not a race in your example

That's true, I was trying to make the point that "european" does not automatically mean "not descended from oppressed or enslaved people" or" automatically the oppressor historically" though people who complain most about homogenising any other culture often seem the fastest to do so for Europeans.
This idea that European people represent a unitary group is just wrong.
Celts/Irish/Scottish, the basque and countless smaller groups in various parts of Europe were stamped all over and even after emigrating often enjoyed second class status in the countries where they ended up.

[broken_escalator]

I'm not sure I understand the point you're making. Can you expand your serf example for me? I only ask because I can't recall you describing them in any detail and now I feel like you're trying to call me out on generalizing. I don't mean to generalize the serfs, but as far as I know they're just serfs in some medieval setting and that leaves a lot of possibilities open.

Also I completely agree with your point that European people represent a unitary group is wrong. If this was your point with the serfs then you don't have to expand it, but I don't want to assume since I'm a little confused. I mean, if you agree that representing Europeans as a unitary group is wrong then why would you argue that representing Native Americans as a unitary group isn't wrong? Because I definitely agree with you on this point, but now I'm unsure of your stance.

[HungryHobo]

I'm not sure I understand the point you're making. Can you expand your serf example for me?

The entire serf system is just an example of slavery/subjugation in europe.
generally by some neighbouring power and continuing for long enough that it simply gets called a caste system if you ignore that the cultures of the ancestors of the guys in charge and the ancestors of the serfs used to be very different until the cultures of the serfs ancestors were actively suppressed by punishing people for speaking their native language, putting in place property laws which bar followers of the native religion from inheriting land or barring people with native names from living in certain places or owning land

The speaking of the Irish language had been illegal since 1366. Also made illegal at that time was the teaching of school by Irish, ownership of land, and holding titles. For much of that period it was punishable by death to speak Irish. After 1831 the punishment for speaking Irish to that of caning (or beating with a stick).

France, germany, poland, italy, the UK. wherever you look you'll find groups which were wiped out or subjugated, often successfully eradicated or subsumed.

[Jessica]

HH: what part of living culture do you not understand?

so as long as the entire culture was successfully burned to the ground and wiped out entirely it's ok then?
If that's your position it seems fairly reasonable.

Also, I'm curious what modern living cultures still practice head hunting?

I had to think about it for a bit, but yeah - if a people no longer exist in a meaningful way, then yeah, it's ok. Because there aren't any living repercussions of that.

As for the head hunter, I meant more the southern pacific islander look. I should have clarified that. Sorry.

But there are tribal cultures, like the Hewa who preform some strange-to-us things, and look quite tribal and weird. But, they do exist still today. In very low numbers.

[HungryHobo]

I had to think about it for a bit, but yeah - if a people no longer exist in a meaningful way, then yeah, it's ok. Because there aren't any living repercussions of that.

As for the head hunter, I meant more the southern pacific islander look. I should have clarified that. Sorry.

But there are tribal cultures, like the Hewa who preform some strange-to-us things, and look quite tribal and weird. But, they do exist still today. In very low numbers.

that seems reasonable though it could be extremely debatable what counts as a surviving culture.
Do people still have to be practising that exact lifestyle or merely descendent who are aware of how their great great grandfathers lived?
The samurai or Chinese soldiers examples I gave would fall under the latter along with most actual headhunting or dressing *kinda native-ish* while the clumsy WoW take on native american culture would be the former.

[Jessica]

The Samurai and Chinese soldier example is a sticky one, and I also admit that. There are certain depictions of feudal china and japan which are appropriate, and some which are not. It would depend on how much that specific depiction relates to the real people today.

Example: Dressing up as a samurai in a cosplay isn't really an issue in my opinion, because it's generally done if not respectfully, then at least with foreknowledge of the culture. But, things like dressing up as an asian stereotype can be much more problematic. A lot of the stereotypes are still applied, at least in small part, to real people, and that can be bad.

I mean, for another blizzard example: The Pandarans - samurai panda bears. Yeah, that's really silly, and is horribly stereotypical, but I wouldn't say it's as bad as the Tauren race. Of course, they were meant to be a joke, and weren't fleshed out. They probably would get worse if they applied more stereotypes to them - like faux asian accents, or making them all ninjas, samurai or sumo wrestlers.

It's about how real people today are affected by these stereotypes and images. If people still think that all asians know martial arts, or have samurai swords and sport conical hats, then putting those stereotypes into something can be a problem.

[Oregonaut]

Err...The Pandaren in the tower defense mission in WC:3 had faux horrid asian accents, were considered to be masters of drunk-fu, and wore horribly mismatched rice hats and Shaolin outfits.

[Belial]

Yeah, I'm pretty not okay with the pandarans, I figured we were just picking the tauren to focus on for the purposes of narrowing scope.

[Oregonaut]

//shrug// Just pointing it out for Jessica.

[Jessica]

I had forgotten about that. Fucking hell Blizzard, why must you do these cultural appropriations! *sighs*

Personally I view that as a problem, but I'm generally against widespread cultural appropriation. Not sure how much that would hurt real people today, but the bad accents really don't help.

[HungryHobo]

If people still think that all asians know martial arts, or have samurai swords and sport conical hats, then putting those stereotypes into something can be a problem.

The root of the marital arts one could be considered a little unusual as it's largely due to the popularity of martial arts films in many asian countries... so a lot were made... so a lot of the films exported were asian martial arts films. A grain of truth- the actual real popularity of martial arts in those countries leads to a wide stereotype.

as for people taking it seriously the "uncanny vally" comes into play.
something reasonable and close to reality can be bad while some stereotypes can diverge so far from reality that they cease to be harmful and pass into hilarious.
example: I once encountered someone who actually believed ireland was how it get's portrayed in old american movies.... my friends and I of course played along for more hilarity

"yes, we don't have electricity but we do have a TV, we have to save up and buy batteries whenever we take the milk to the creamery to watch it"
"really!?"

if however it's something genuinely plausible which gets believed by more than a tiny number of people you may have a problem.

Blizzard, why must you do these cultural appropriations

ok I'm converted, blizard is getting worse and worse... they don't happen to have a wee little guy with a shamrock in his hair wearing green, pulling a cart and getting drunk somewhere in the game as well do they?
A few shaky shaky matches like the extremely tenuous goblin-jew thing would be fine but stereotypes seems to be all they can do.

[Oregonaut]

What are the Zerg, then?

[Jessica]

example: I once encountered someone who actually believed ireland was how it get's portrayed in old american movies.... my friends and I of course played along for more hilarity

"yes, we don't have electricity but we do have a TV, we have to save up and buy batteries whenever we take the milk to the creamery to watch it"
"really!?"

Heh. Reminds me of a segment on a Canadian TV show, called talking to Americans, where Rick Mercer would talk to random Americans and try and convince them of stupid things about Canada. I'm pretty sure that, and his rants, made him the Canadian celebrity he is today.

Then again, it's funny because Americans aren't really coming across the boarder and slaughtering us wholesale...

[Oregonaut]

It could be stated that it is funny because you're poking at the USians.

Take the same thing and go to Mexico to convince Mexicans of stupid things about Americans.

Then it is hubris.

[Shivahn]

Example: Dressing up as a samurai in a cosplay isn't really an issue in my opinion, because it's generally done if not respectfully, then at least with foreknowledge of the culture. But, things like dressing up as an asian stereotype can be much more problematic. A lot of the stereotypes are still applied, at least in small part, to real people, and that can be bad.

I think you can make a pretty important distinction here, between someone who's dressing up as a samurai and someone who's dressing up as a Japanese guy who's a samurai. It might be better to use a geisha here, actually, so let's say someone's dressing up as a samurai and someone dressing up as an Asian person who happens to be a geisha.

I don't think it's at all problematic if someone dresses up as a samurai or a geisha, as long as they're dressing up as professionals. That is, they're not stereotyping Japanese people or Asians, they just find the entities cool. On the other hand, someone who dresses up as geisha and squints all the time isn't dressing up as a geisha. Even their costume isn't a geisha costume, it's an Asian costume. The fact that they're squinting (or saying "me love you long time" or purposely screwing up their speech with funny accents and mixing up L and R or whatever they're doing) indicates to me (and everyone else) that they consider their costume not to be that of a professional but that of another race. They've made being Asian (horribly stereotyped Asian, at that) into the main focus of their dress. Yes, up until recently all geisha were Japanese, but that's not an essential feature of a geisha.

So the guy dressing up as a samurai but not using a stupid accent, taping his eyes up, and so on is just a guy dressing up as a samurai. But the girl dressed up as the geisha with her funny accent and such is a girl dressing up as an Asian who happens to be a geisha.

[*bird]

Where, in all of this, is a negative stereotype?

Asians being smart isn't a negative stereotype either. But it's still horrible in the sense that 1) people who don't conform are treated like they're worthless, 2) it's often used to justify Asians not getting leadership positions (because they're only "book smart"), and 3) it can sometimes trigger jealousy leading to violence (that's how Vincent Chin was killed)

So even "not negative stereotypes" can be harmful.

[The Great Hippo]

I need to take a look at population statistics here, determine total population vs. number of dead. 1,000,000 dead out of 1,500,000 total is bad. 1,200 out of 1,300 dead could be declared worse. Simply because 100 people isn't enough to sustain and replenish a population.

There are no accurate totals concerning the number of Native Americans killed by Europeans--via iron, germs, or otherwise. Estimates vary so widely that it's pretty much a crapshoot. The best number anyone can manage is 'a fucking lot' (which is significantly more than 'a metric fuckton', but significantly less than 'a fuckjillion').

Check, so subcultures cultures/religions or groups which have been successfully wiped out or subsumed into others are game for caricaturing.

Yes, absolutely. Why on earth would we think otherwise? If a caricature hurts no one, why the should anyone care? The only humans I care about are the ones who are alive.

I don't think it's at all problematic if someone dresses up as a samurai or a geisha, as long as they're dressing up as professionals. That is, they're not stereotyping Japanese people or Asians, they just find the entities cool. On the other hand, someone who dresses up as geisha and squints all the time isn't dressing up as a geisha. Even their costume isn't a geisha costume, it's an Asian costume.

Wanted to reassert this point, as I think it's an excellent one, and plays into HungryHobo's mention of a blacksmith above; there's a difference between stereotyping a role versus stereotyping a culture, even when the role is exclusive to one culture (although some care should be taken; stereotyping a role that's exclusive to one culture can be a stealthy way of stereotyping the culture without hitting the same flak--i.e., like Shivahn mentioned, playing a Geisha while squinting your eyes).

[Oregonaut]

Yeah, I couldn't find anything even close to verifiable today, so I think you're right Hippo. The Fuckjillion may be closer. Too many is clearly a good answer.

[Azrael]

This thread should not turn into a retelling of which among us is the more stereotyped/oppressed/least privileged.

[broken_escalator]

What are the Zerg, then?

I'm not sure I see any racial stereotypes in the Zerg. The zerg are more of your typical parasite-alien that is controlled by a hive-mind. To me they are more animalistic and less sapient.

I could be wrong though.

[The Great Hippo]

I'm not sure I see any racial stereotypes in the Zerg. The zerg are more of your typical parasite-alien that is controlled by a hive-mind. To me they are more animalistic and less sapient.

I could be wrong though.

Ironically, the Terrans are very clearly portrayed as Confederates. Which I always thought worked wonderfully, comparatively (it gives them just the right balance of Slim Pickins styled 'yee-haw' combined with an over-arching moral dubiousness). But is there a problem with that?

[Zamfir]

What are the Zerg, then?

I'm not sure I see any racial stereotypes in the Zerg. The zerg are more of your typical parasite-alien that is controlled by a hive-mind.

I think this answers the question "who is the most oppressed and least privileged". Head to beat being parasited by a hive-mind.