Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Frazzled wrote:
what are you talking about? I am on a forum about toy soldiers. It's likely I have miniatures older than you are, maybe even your parents. It's a passion I am not making fun of.

First of all, GenCon is not a toy convention. It is a game convention, and not limited to miniature games (or even games without a physical product, like LARPing). It's an extremely reductionist description to call it a toy convention. I have no problems with toys or toy enthusiasts (big LEGO fan here), but I think gaming is a much more complex beast that deserves to stand as its own thing.

Second, miniatures are somewhat removed from toys. There's very little, if any, imaginative play. Instead, they are very structured in design (they are model kits, assembly required) that are used in structured play (games). I would still consider calling them game pieces to be slightly reductionist, but at least a little more accurate.

Also, the definition of toy is usually something intended for children or trifling, but there's nothing childish or trifling about, for instance, Kingdom Death Monster. Like video games, I think the miniature gaming community has spent a lot of time and effort attempting to leave behind the stigma of it being a childish activity, and to again reduce miniature games to something childish undercuts the adult passion and accomplishment of the genre. A lot of people make full time jobs out of miniature gaming, and some of their accomplishments are culturally significant.

 Sqorgar wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
what are you talking about? I am on a forum about toy soldiers. It's likely I have miniatures older than you are, maybe even your parents. It's a passion I am not making fun of.

First of all, GenCon is not a toy convention. It is a game convention, and not limited to miniature games (or even games without a physical product, like LARPing). It's an extremely reductionist description to call it a toy convention. I have no problems with toys or toy enthusiasts (big LEGO fan here), but I think gaming is a much more complex beast that deserves to stand as its own thing.

Second, miniatures are somewhat removed from toys. There's very little, if any, imaginative play. Instead, they are very structured in design (they are model kits, assembly required) that are used in structured play (games). I would still consider calling them game pieces to be slightly reductionist, but at least a little more accurate.

Also, the definition of toy is usually something intended for children or trifling, but there's nothing childish or trifling about, for instance, Kingdom Death Monster. Like video games, I think the miniature gaming community has spent a lot of time and effort attempting to leave behind the stigma of it being a childish activity, and to again reduce miniature games to something childish undercuts the adult passion and accomplishment of the genre. A lot of people make full time jobs out of miniature gaming, and some of their accomplishments are culturally significant.

I don't think anyone is arguing that your toys aren't important to you.

 Nurglitch wrote:
I don't think anyone is arguing that your toys aren't important to you.

But toys aren't important to me. Games are.

 Sqorgar wrote:

 Nurglitch wrote:
I don't think anyone is arguing that your toys aren't important to you.

But toys aren't important to me. Games are.

Does the distinction make any difference to the core of Frazzled's argument?

 Da Boss wrote:
Also, if we had a matriarchy, I believe that it would be just the same as a patriarchy in terms of sustaining it's position and power.

It'd actually be far worse. Ask women who've worked in shops that consist *entirely* of women (no men at all) how much they enjoyed the experience. Is it sweetness and light? No. My understanding is that it's gossip and passive-aggressive gak that does not stop. Until a man appears. Then gak gets back to normal.

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/01/why-dont-more-women-want-to-work-with-other-women/283216/

 Sqorgar wrote:

 Nurglitch wrote:
I don't think anyone is arguing that your toys aren't important to you.

But toys aren't important to me. Games are.

Okay, lets use the politically correct term 'games' then. I don't think anyone is arguing that your 'games' aren't important to you.

 Disciple of Fate wrote:

 Sqorgar wrote:

 Nurglitch wrote:
I don't think anyone is arguing that your toys aren't important to you.

But toys aren't important to me. Games are.

Does the distinction make any difference to the core of Frazzled's argument?

Nothing wrong with calling them toys. My miniatures are my toys. My hopped up M&Ps and Beretta are toys. My neighbor's chopper is a toy. It's not bourbon. Now that's serious business.

It's a convention about toys. She is just one speaker at said convention. You are not obligated to go or attend her talk.
Calmeth thineself.

 Sqorgar wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
what are you talking about? I am on a forum about toy soldiers.

First of all, GenCon is not a toy convention.

Also, the definition of toy is usually something intended for children or trifling, but there's nothing childish or trifling about, for instance, Kingdom Death Monster.

Sure, it isn't...

There are lots of toys for adults. McFarlane makes bank on it. I strongly suggest that you google "adult toys" when you get into the office.

 Nurglitch wrote:

 Sqorgar wrote:

 Nurglitch wrote:
I don't think anyone is arguing that your toys aren't important to you.

But toys aren't important to me. Games are.

Okay, lets use the politically correct term 'games' then. I don't think anyone is arguing that your 'games' aren't important to you.

Indeed. But her appearing is a non-issue to the enjoyment of his/our games, or even the convention. Roll dice,look at the shiny, and make friends.

My buddies and I had previously decided to skip Gencon this year, and Sarkeesian being a guest of honor has done nothing to change that decision.

But I really hate missing the exhibitor hall.

I guess I should ask, what's the downside for this person appearing?

I really, really wish I hadn't started reading this thread.

I think really this thread needs to be moved to OT. It's digging up some really ugly dirt from the bottom of the pit and exposing a lot of emotional vulnerability, something I would rather not have to see in this section of the forum.

 Pacific wrote:
I really, really wish I hadn't started reading this thread.

I think really this thread needs to be moved to OT. It's digging up some really ugly dirt from the bottom of the pit and exposing a lot of emotional vulnerability, something I would rather not have to see in this section of the forum.

Feel free to avert thine eyes!

 Frazzled wrote:
I guess I should ask, what's the downside for this person appearing?

I would guess the fairly logical answer to that would be:

1. Wasting a seat on someone who is, basically, a paid internet troll when you could actually get someone useful and insightful (it's like whenever Ann Coulter gets an appearance, lots of buzz, little substance).

2. Helping a troll get a bigger megaphone to troll more people.

 Frazzled wrote:
I guess I should ask, what's the downside for this person appearing?

It makes people think about topics that are hard and complex, which requires effort and can lead down paths of thought that aren't pleasant, and they don't want to go to an event where that's a feature.

Sure, there's a small (albeit vocal) contingent out there who have more fanatical negative beliefs about who she is or what she's done and a small contingent who highly support her, but that's the nuts of it.

 Nurglitch wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:
Well these types of threads certainly show the real faces of certain posters. Hard to imagine it stayed open for this long.

It could be a good thing. After all, the only way these things get noticed is by putting them out in the open. Take the notion that feminism is about replacing Patriarchy with Matriarchy. That's, well, I don't quite know what to say about that except it's a kind of fundamental misunderstanding. But at least we know who thinks that, and what else they think. Likewise it'll be good to find out what Ms. Sarkeesian has to say about the tabletop gaming hobby.

But prior it wouldn't have ever come up because it wasn't relevant to anything. No one would know and we'd all just assume that we all had no problem with each others politics. Now you're implying that it somehow makes a difference like maybe now you won't engage with someone about what variation of Leman Russ is the coolest because he has different views on feminism than you. Real world politics have no place in a fictional world and only serves to drive wedges between people who previously got along because there was never a need to talk about this.

And this is what Anita and her ilk brings to tabletop games. She pits people against each other by shoe horning real world politics into places where it doesn't belong.

 Frazzled wrote:
I guess I should ask, what's the downside for this person appearing?

Someone else didn’t is the obvious answer.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Sqorgar wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
what are you talking about? I am on a forum about toy soldiers.

First of all, GenCon is not a toy convention.

Also, the definition of toy is usually something intended for children or trifling, but there's nothing childish or trifling about, for instance, Kingdom Death Monster.

Sure, it isn't...

There are lots of toys for adults. McFarlane makes bank on it. I strongly suggest that you google "adult toys" when you get into the office.

No, you should definitely NOT Google "adult toys" at work.

I feel like real-world politics has every place in a fictional world, and that one of the purposes of politics is to figure out with whom you stand in solidarity.

A large part of my design for Titanomachina, for example, was driven by my feminist political affiliation, and I appreciate comments I get noting that I left out sexist tropes, both positive and negative. I figure there's enough weird sexism in the industry that an alternative is a positive thing for everyone.

Now it does make a difference about how I engage with people. When the opinions they express are sufficiently unappealing to me in one area, then I don't see why I'd want to bother with more of the same in another. I don't want to engage with flat-earthers, homeopaths, creationists, and so on regarding the topic of the sexist Leman Russ because they've already informed me that they're not worth my time.

 Nurglitch wrote:
I feel like real-world politics has every place in a fictional world, and that one of the purposes of politics is to figure out with whom you stand in solidarity.

A large part of my design for Titanomachina, for example, was driven by my feminist political affiliation, and I appreciate comments I get noting that I left out sexist tropes, both positive and negative. I figure there's enough weird sexism in the industry that an alternative is a positive thing for everyone.

Now it does make a difference about how I engage with people. When the opinions they express are sufficiently unappealing to me in one area, then I don't see why I'd want to bother with more of the same in another. I don't want to engage with flat-earthers, homeopaths, creationists, and so on regarding the topic of the sexist Leman Russ because they've already informed me that they're not worth my time.

This is such a closed minded, awful way of thinking it boggles my mind. So I suppose a mechanic's opinion on your car is invalid because he believes in God?

 Sim-Life wrote:

 Nurglitch wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:
Well these types of threads certainly show the real faces of certain posters. Hard to imagine it stayed open for this long.

It could be a good thing. After all, the only way these things get noticed is by putting them out in the open. Take the notion that feminism is about replacing Patriarchy with Matriarchy. That's, well, I don't quite know what to say about that except it's a kind of fundamental misunderstanding. But at least we know who thinks that, and what else they think. Likewise it'll be good to find out what Ms. Sarkeesian has to say about the tabletop gaming hobby.

But prior it wouldn't have ever come up because it wasn't relevant to anything. No one would know and we'd all just assume that we all had no problem with each others politics. Now you're implying that it somehow makes a difference like maybe now you won't engage with someone about what variation of Leman Russ is the coolest because he has different views on feminism than you. Real world politics have no place in a fictional world and only serves to drive wedges between people who previously got along because there was never a need to talk about this.

And this is what Anita and her ilk brings to tabletop games. She pits people against each other by shoe horning real world politics into places where it doesn't belong.

She represents only one side of shoehorning though.

As for relevance. You're right that there is no need for this to come up in the discussions of a fictional universe. But it does have relevance in explaining where someone's views of the fictional world comes from, that is what makes the difference. Underlying motivations about why someone is arguing from a certain point of view become clear. Its not like women in 40K background hasn't come up for discussion on Dakka, its not all about tanks. Whether you think it does or not, those political views tend to bleed partly into the background discussion, and its good to see where the opinion comes from to see if its worth engaging. How many women in 40K threads haven't flamed out because neither side could keep it politically neutral?

 Frazzled wrote:
I guess I should ask, what's the downside for this person appearing?

I wouldn't call it a downside, but there's a good chance Sarkeesian is going to address the thorny issue of six sided dice. It's come up in some of her other addresses to gaming conventions, the ubiquitous racism emerging from a standard gameplay device employed by so many tabletop games.

IIRC, the last time she brought up this topic, her argument was the standard six-sided die is a collection of facings that include a number of tiny black pips surrounded by fields of white. The lower the value of a roll, the more marginalized each pip becomes. And a roll of 1, the most isolated value possible, occurs approximately 16% of the time. It's associated with the worst possible outcome, sending a message that a singular, isolated, dark member of the community of dice facings should be avoided at all costs.

She had a problem with reversing the colors as well. The designers working for the Big Dice industry always opt for maximum contrast, and there are no generally-available dice that are more inclusive of other colors - white is always there. You have to have such dice specially manufactured and face ostracism / social isolation for trying to use them in games. Not to mention charges from opponents that you are selecting dice to gain an unfair advantage.

Fighting systemic racism in dice selection matters. I'm hoping she talks more about the idea, which I support, of replacing six-sided dice with 20-sided dice to maximize the diversity of possible outcomes and equity amongst players. I would personally boycott any tabletop game that does not adopt a d20 dice system in recognition of support for marginalized persons and eliminating systemic racism / sexism in the broader tabletop gaming community.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Da Boss wrote:
Also, if we had a matriarchy, I believe that it would be just the same as a patriarchy in terms of sustaining it's position and power.

It'd actually be far worse. Ask women who've worked in shops that consist *entirely* of women (no men at all) how much they enjoyed the experience. Is it sweetness and light? No. My understanding is that it's gossip and passive-aggressive gak that does not stop. Until a man appears. Then gak gets back to normal.

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/01/why-dont-more-women-want-to-work-with-other-women/283216/

Just to relate to this - my wife used to work in a creche for pre school age children and the entirety of the staff from the boss, managers, staff were female, from the ages of 20ish to mid 40's.

And the a mount of bitching, snippy comments, strops, prettiness was off the chart. My wife worked there for 8 years, and the amount of mud flung from everyone made me wonder if anyone there actually spoke to one another. Funnily enough, due to me earning enough to allow her to be a stay at home mum, she doesn't want to go back into childcare. Wonder why.

She wants to go to a job where its male and female workers, as she herself told me "girls would never act like that in front of boys".

 Sim-Life wrote:

 Nurglitch wrote:
I feel like real-world politics has every place in a fictional world, and that one of the purposes of politics is to figure out with whom you stand in solidarity.

A large part of my design for Titanomachina, for example, was driven by my feminist political affiliation, and I appreciate comments I get noting that I left out sexist tropes, both positive and negative. I figure there's enough weird sexism in the industry that an alternative is a positive thing for everyone.

Now it does make a difference about how I engage with people. When the opinions they express are sufficiently unappealing to me in one area, then I don't see why I'd want to bother with more of the same in another. I don't want to engage with flat-earthers, homeopaths, creationists, and so on regarding the topic of the sexist Leman Russ because they've already informed me that they're not worth my time.

This is such a closed minded, awful way of thinking it boggles my mind. So I suppose a mechanic's opinion on your car is invalid because he believes in God?

No, because God doesn't have anything to do with cars. Now if the well-educated and informed mechanic feels like telling me racist jokes when he's supposed to be telling me about what he did to my vehicle you're quite correct in assuming that I'll disregard his opinion and take my business elsewhere.

I'm not a fan of her myself, because I think she addresses the topic in a divisive and weak manner. But I do think the community has certain issues, as its nothing but a smaller reflection of society overall so it makes sense the issues are reflected and addressing them in anyway is always going to catch flak. Do I think she is the best person to address them? No. Do I think trying to polarize the debate for financial gain regardless of the side it happens on is beneficial? No. Do I think the response about this is in any way proportional to the issue? Hell no.

As Frazzled said, its about Sarkeesian speaking at an event you don't even have to attend.

Well there's been no death threats and for the internet I think that counts as a win! But for me this thread has been an interesting read usually things go down hill a lot harder and faster! That may be because while most people share differing views on what Anita bring to the table they seem to for the most part agree she's about as much use in gaming circles as a nipple on a breastplate!

And yeah there's been a lot of stupidity and hyperbole and of course the usual accusations thrown back and forth but at least this thread got to a place where people pulled some evidence out to backup what they were saying and while no conclusions are ever gonna be reached in an arena like this there was some back and forth and some good points were made. I think its been an interesting one so far.

On the proportionality of it. Its a thread online, one that people can choose to or not engage with. Unless people are making threats or organising a disruption to the event I don't see how it could go to far.

 Nurglitch wrote:

 Sim-Life wrote:

 Nurglitch wrote:
I feel like real-world politics has every place in a fictional world, and that one of the purposes of politics is to figure out with whom you stand in solidarity.

A large part of my design for Titanomachina, for example, was driven by my feminist political affiliation, and I appreciate comments I get noting that I left out sexist tropes, both positive and negative. I figure there's enough weird sexism in the industry that an alternative is a positive thing for everyone.

Now it does make a difference about how I engage with people. When the opinions they express are sufficiently unappealing to me in one area, then I don't see why I'd want to bother with more of the same in another. I don't want to engage with flat-earthers, homeopaths, creationists, and so on regarding the topic of the sexist Leman Russ because they've already informed me that they're not worth my time.

This is such a closed minded, awful way of thinking it boggles my mind. So I suppose a mechanic's opinion on your car is invalid because he believes in God?

No, because God doesn't have anything to do with cars. Now if the well-educated and informed mechanic feels like telling me racist jokes when he's supposed to be telling me about what he did to my vehicle you're quite correct in assuming that I'll disregard his opinion and take my business elsewhere.

But he's still knowledgeable on a subject that doesn't involve his politics and even if he was a massive racist he would still be correct about your car regardless (unless you're black and he's lying to you). If I told you that I'm pro-<thing you dislike> that doesn't effect my opinion on Space Marines because the two topics are unrelated. You're willing to dismiss me as a person entirely because you disagree with a few of my political views which, to bring it back round to the topic, is why people dislike that Anita is speaking at Gencon. She doesn't invite discussion because she notoriously doesn't engage in any. To her and a lot of her followers, this is a zero sum game. Either you fall in line or you're to be black listed as a racist/misogynist/transphobe etc.

Sure, and if you paid attention you'd notice that you could look up why you're being racist, sexist, misogynist, and transphobic. It's engaging with some pretty fundamental stuff, and it's rather like the sunglasses in They Live where you don't want to put them on, and once they're on it's not something you can unsee.

 Sasquatch wrote:

I'm not a fan of her myself, because I think she addresses the topic in a divisive and weak manner. But I do think the community has certain issues, as its nothing but a smaller reflection of society overall so it makes sense the issues are reflected and addressing them in anyway is always going to catch flak. Do I think she is the best person to address them? No. Do I think trying to polarize the debate for financial gain regardless of the side it happens on is beneficial? No. Do I think the response about this is in any way proportional to the issue? Hell no.

As Frazzled said, its about Sarkeesian speaking at an event you don't even have to attend.

Well there's been no death threats and for the internet I think that counts as a win! But for me this thread has been an interesting read usually things go down hill a lot harder and faster! That may be because while most people share differing views on what Anita bring to the table they seem to for the most part agree she's about as much use in gaming circles as a nipple on a breastplate!

And yeah there's been a lot of stupidity and hyperbole and of course the usual accusations thrown back and forth but at least this thread got to a place where people pulled some evidence out to backup what they were saying and while no conclusions are ever gonna be reached in an arena like this there was some back and forth and some good points were made. I think its been an interesting one so far.

On the proportionality of it. Its a thread online, one that people can choose to or not engage with. Unless people are making threats or organising a disruption to the event I don't see how it could go to far.

Its the internet, you can bet there have been death threats by now. And no death threats on Dakka sets the bar extremely low considering we have active moderation against that.

As for how useful she is, its a bit of a bad metric, she might not be knowledgeable, but an outside perspective isn't always bad. Who they invite to speak at the convention is not in my hands,but if they only invited the most knowledgeable people you would end up with a very short list I assume. Just because a person isn't very knowledgeable doesn't mean they shouldn't be allowed to speak out. While that might be a problem regarding the convention which I admit, people have wanted Sarkeesian not to speak out at all regardless of platform, hence the vitriol and death threats.

And while a lot of detractors of Sarkeesian might have a point about profiteering or what not, there is an undeniable undercurrent of pure hate just because of what she says. It stops being objective and becomes an emotional argument, not on the subject at large but about her as a person. And while some might feel she is a terrible spokesperson for women in gaming, she is undeniably effective in breaching the subject as demonstrated here because of how emotional people get.

People have said she is cancer and HIV, you don't think saying those things because of personal feelings is crossing a line? Must be different personal experiences regarding said horrible diseases.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
There are lots of toys for adults. McFarlane makes bank on it. I strongly suggest that you google "adult toys" when you get into the office.

I got fired. Thanks.

 Sim-Life wrote:

 Nurglitch wrote:

 Sim-Life wrote:

 Nurglitch wrote:
I feel like real-world politics has every place in a fictional world, and that one of the purposes of politics is to figure out with whom you stand in solidarity.

A large part of my design for Titanomachina, for example, was driven by my feminist political affiliation, and I appreciate comments I get noting that I left out sexist tropes, both positive and negative. I figure there's enough weird sexism in the industry that an alternative is a positive thing for everyone.

Now it does make a difference about how I engage with people. When the opinions they express are sufficiently unappealing to me in one area, then I don't see why I'd want to bother with more of the same in another. I don't want to engage with flat-earthers, homeopaths, creationists, and so on regarding the topic of the sexist Leman Russ because they've already informed me that they're not worth my time.

This is such a closed minded, awful way of thinking it boggles my mind. So I suppose a mechanic's opinion on your car is invalid because he believes in God?

No, because God doesn't have anything to do with cars. Now if the well-educated and informed mechanic feels like telling me racist jokes when he's supposed to be telling me about what he did to my vehicle you're quite correct in assuming that I'll disregard his opinion and take my business elsewhere.

But he's still knowledgeable on a subject that doesn't involve his politics and even if he was a massive racist he would still be correct about your car regardless (unless you're black and he's lying to you). If I told you that I'm pro-<thing you dislike> that doesn't effect my opinion on Space Marines because the two topics are unrelated. You're willing to dismiss me as a person entirely because you disagree with a few of my political views which, to bring it back round to the topic, is why people dislike that Anita is speaking at Gencon. She doesn't invite discussion because she notoriously doesn't engage in any. To her and a lot of her followers, this is a zero sum game. Either you fall in line or you're to be black listed as a racist/misogynist/transphobe etc.

The mechanic is a false equivalance. We can assume through study the mechanic is an authority on cars. You on the other hand are no more an authority on 40k than any of the guys on this forum. So say if someone turned out to be a misogynist in real life, wouldn't you start second guessing that person when he starts arguing that female imperial guard are not realistic. Whether we like it or not, 40k touches on the subject of women frequently enough and political views bleed through.