Twilight of the White Boy Club

Jackwraith wrote: Just to provide an alternative perspective:

I fully support the idea of not continuing to support people who simply refuse to understand that the world has changed and we want the gaming world to change with it. I'm frankly done with a number of designers for that reason. However, as Davidjc points out, there's a certain aura of book burning that's beginning to accompany this. People are free to make their own choices about what art they enjoy and what they do with said possessions that embody that art, but the classic example is Richard Wagner.

Wagner was a pretty prominent anti-Semite and racist who wrote openly about excluding Jews from music and his distaste for "miscegenation", among other things. His music was also adopted by the Nazis as emblematic of their vision for Germany. That said, he's also one of the most prominent composers of the Romantic era and there's a solid argument to be made that his music is the foundation of modern film scores. No one is compelled to buy his music, but at the same time, I'm extremely uncomfortable about the prospect of shaming people for enjoying it, given that even his operatic themes had little to do with his personal perspectives on race (i.e. it's not like his music was adopted because it's an early version of Aryan rock.) Also, just for a little counterpoint, there are many possible socialist themes in Wagner's work...

If your personal distaste for people like Eklund or Petersen has grown to the point where you don't want their games any longer, that's fine. That's your choice. I would personally recommend to everyone that they no longer purchase the output of people like that. But when it comes to looking down on people for continuing to enjoy Cthulhu Wars or Pax Porfiriana, I'm not interested in doing that anymore than I am disdaining someone because they enjoy Wagner's music. It's just not constructive, IMO, and it certainly doesn't help what should be the real focus, which is normalizing the ideas of diversity and inclusion within the gaming world and promoting the work of people who haven't been included for a long time.

I disagree with almost all of this.

It's hypocritical, plain and simple, and I don't prescribe to this weak idea of "to each their own." These are games and people are problems, problems we do not need anymore and they should be cut out. Not only are you broadcasting to folks who come into your home that these things are not deal breakers to you, you continue to celebrate and acknowledge their work and should be recognized as just as guilty as they are and you will continue to be part of the problem. There is no middle ground here, to think otherwise is to benefit only yourself. This is not a "Lovecraft was just a person of his time" argument, this is 2021, these games are not that old. Throw them the fuck out.

Josh, you gonna apply that attitude to everything in your life? Probably EVERY film, piece of music, book (ok, maybe not all books), etc has been touched by someone "problematic". Be it an artist that took advantage of groupies, a manager that made their employees work without proper compensation, or that chinese made phone you are looking at right now that most likely had AN ACTUAL SLAVE (in the modern context) working on at least some part of it.

Its ALL problematic if you dig deep enough.

Be a good person. Try to help others. Realize that as a consumer you are absolutely benefiting from the suffering of others to some degree.

Pax Porfiriana is the only affordable pax game left worth playing. That complicates things.

CranBerries wrote: Pax Porfiriana is the only affordable pax game left worth playing. That complicates things.

I sold my copy. Still have Pax Ren though, and despite Eklunds declining rep wont sell it or bin it yet. Not sure ill buy another Serria Madre title though

Urgh. Pax Porf hits hard for me, because it is my favourite game and not much comes close to what it does and what I enjoy about it.

I have thought about it a fair bit and examined it fairly closely; the game itself I think can be read any number of ways, including ways in direct opposition to Eklund's own views - the notes and essays etc are where the problems are.

Pax Ren I am not so sure about, I feel there's some problems inherent in the gameplay (east/west deck composition etc).

Either way I won't recommend Eklund games any more. I haven't bought any for several years because originally my thoughts were, well, if the viewpoints are not being pushed via the gameplay, it's fine, and then they started to get in there much more overtly in my view, I drew the line there, yep, okay, no more money in that direction then.

Recently I'm thinking, well, I'm not going to evangelise those earlier games, encourage others to play them etc. Stop offering to play them on yucata/vassal or whatever.

When I do play it i'm generally playing with people who are of a mind with me and who understand the background and context.

Giving up my favourite game altogether is a hard prospect and one I'm still thinking about. Well.Hang on. This is all small potatoes in the scheme of things. I'm not after any sympathy or advice, who the fuck cares, such a first world problem in the face of everything. If I chuck the games tomorrow it's fine, and maybe I should. But just trying to vocalise (write) out the process for myself more than anything else. It's not "hard", really, at all.

Anyway, thanks for the discussion everyone on this, and thanks to uba, gary, barnes et al for the clear editorial policy. Hopefully it's giving people at the very least pause for thought about it all. Actually. Scratch that. Hopefully it's doing a hell of a lot more than that.

Eklund did High Frontier. That game is never leaving my collection. I dont understand it but one day i will, kinda like Fields of Fire

Heated topic, but please focus the discussion to the topic at hand as opposed to assessments of each other's qualities. I'll let what has been said stand, but let's refocus from here on out or I'll start moderating.

I applaud the new review criteria of the site. "Historical accuracy" is a nonsense argument. Games are fantasies, one and all. Everyone deserves a seat at the table, and it doesn't take much research to find stories of kids being amazed at Into the Spiderverse, seeing themselves reflected as super heroes.

Diversity is the only way forward.

As for the sins of the past and present, those are for each person to decide for themselves. Everyone has a different level of tolerance. I personally think the bare minimum is to do no further harm.

I'll confess a sin of my own. I love the Smiths, and Morrissey's music. He fucking sucks. HE FUCKING SUCKS. But you know what? Life, by any measure, is hard. The Smiths make my life a bit easier. I will never give that man another dime. But I'm keeping those songs. Life without them is the definition of cutting my nose to spite my face.

This is a complex topic.

I can’t possibly know all the things that may make someone feel excluded. All I can do is try not to exclude others and promote inclusion. I try to listen to what people are telling me.

I don’t always understand, or I don’t always see the problem. Sometimes it even makes me a little uncomfortable. That doesn’t matter. These are normal, human reactions.

But I ask myself these simple questions. Does it hurt me or anyone else to try to be more inclusive? Does it make others feel better or happier or safer? Does changing make any actual difference in my life?

If the situation was reversed, would I like you to consider me?

Forget what I was taught growing up or what has been social norms or whatever. Just think about it.

And understand that this is a journey for all of us. We are all biased. We are all learning.

I don’t hold it against people who are ignorant of their biases. It takes time to unlearn and to be educated and to change.

I do hold it against people that embrace their biases, that love them, that want to spread them, that want to inflict them on others.

And I’m not going to judge people for embracing creative works or loving something or being a customer without context. I just make those choices for myself.

Do I throw away Dungeon Degenerates because the artist is a middle-aged child that thought it was edgy to draw hidden swastikas in his art? I don’t actually know yet.

Do I decide not to buy Robert Burke game because he’s human trash? Yeah, that’s easy.

But do I stop reading Lovecraft? Do I avoid old Hollywood movies? Do I stop appreciating historical people for their accomplishments because they were also assholes in other ways?

These are really tough calls to make. I’m not sure that there is a clearly right answer most of the time. I really don’t.

I want to be forgiven for my mistakes. I think I should extend that to others, too, when they have learned better.

Teach others acceptance and forgive them their mistakes and reward them for positive changes.

Several years ago when it was becoming very obvious that the NFL was covering up the severity of head injuries, and after some particularly ugly issues in college football, I went through a pretty extensive period of searching whether or not I wanted to really follow American football anymore. I had, and still have, a lot of real ethical issues with the sport. But I've stuck with it, partially because I'm not the type of fan who buys a lot of merch, and I can't even attend games when I live abroad. But the much bigger reason was that it's proven to be such a connection point between me, my father, and at the time my grandfather. (He's since passed away.) I did the mental calculus that the good brought into the world by having that connection point probably outweighed whatever good would come from me deciding I was through with football. Now that I live abroad I'm thankful I made that choice, because man, I've really appreciated the NFL as a way to feel anchored in another culture. I totally get why a lot of people would turn their back on it, and I respect and support that decision. I hope they would do the same for me.

My point is that each person has to decide for themselves what the moral course is. I am fully in support of de-platforming bigotry and hatred, and I applaud the new review policies and Michael's column. I cannot believe that somehow people find it controversial that minority representation should be emphasized, or that we should be aware of the damaging past of things like racism, colonialism, misogyny, etc. It's absolutely appropriate to call out abusers as well, and people should be held accountable for their actions. There absolutely comes a time when we need to decide that yes, it's time to move on from stuff.

But no one else can decide when that time is for anyone else. I applaud people like Josh and Michael taking the time to rid themselves of games that they find ethically suspect. But I'm not sure how much good it's going to do to imply that anyone who doesn't do the same is somehow not committed to the justice. I mean...that makes the litmus test super easy to actually be committed to justice doesn't it? It could entirely be performative and no one would know the difference. (Not that the people talking about it here are doing that.)

But more than that I confess that I get pretty defensive when someone says, "you need to get rid of this or that" because it reminds me very much of growing up in an evangelical youth group. I've known too many people who were shamed for listening to "secular" music, or who were told that He-man or D&D was satanic, and let me tell you, that warps people. Even today, I don't let on that I play RPGs around certain people because it's just going to start a conversation that will end badly. Many of those people are people with whom I NEED to still be in relationship, and it's just not a discussion worth having. And the worst part is, the human cost was pretty much the ONLY effect, near as I can tell. Telling people that the need to do the right thing AND that the only way to prove they have done the right thing is to get rid of this or that...well that's fundamentalism, and I can never go back there. Not that that's what some folks here are talking about, but it sets off my fundie alarm big time, and believe me, it has had to become a very fine-tuned alarm.

I really cannot emphasize this enough: I agree with Michael's column, and I am on board with moving the hobby forward to make sure representation and diversity goes up, and hatred, misogyny, and bigotry go down. We need to listen to the voices of minorities, and those of us from privileged backgrounds need to either use our voices to speak up for them, or more constructively, kindly step out of the way. It will cause uncomfortable conversations, but discomfort is hardly the worst thing. It will require us to rid ourselves of some things. But as a community we can only get so specific in how that looks, stuff like the review policy and so forth. In the end it will come down to individuals determining what that commitment to being a safe space means for them individually. No one else here can make that decision for them.

This topic always makes me uncomfortable ebcause, one you get past the agreeable surface, it's clear the whole understanding of the subject and what "diversity" entails is defined exclusively in an ethnocentric way.

The whole discussion on whether Russians were "white" or if Dumas (Niece) was "black" or "technically biracial" is a good example. It's applying American racial classfications to the rest of the world and even the past and future, which is then taken as a basis to judge them. If Russians are white, then they are not diverse but privileged and otherwise equivalent to White American Anglosaxon Protestants as far as the moral judgement goes. Depending on which"Boardgame celebrity" you ask, I'm either yet another White Man or a dirty Spic. Which one I am depends on what's more convenient to the racist on the other side, which is often the same person.

To Americans, the people who were enslaved for centuries and considered subhuman by Hitler and the British and genocided as part of Generalplan Ost are "too white" and "privileged" when they make games aboud their own history like The Witcher III but Americans are "diverse" and "progressive" if they are gay, no matter how rich and privileged they are otherwise. And while saying a slur is crossing the line, racially classifying people isn't. Neither are terms like "trailer trash", for some reason.

Let's use another example. Barnes has criticized game companies for not showing support for Black Lives Matter. To him a company not weighting on the issue makes it complicit. But, to me, the idea that for-profit companies are moral agents that not only can but ought to have an opinion on police brutality is downright fascistic. It's corporativism. Conversely, to Americans Tabarni getting the boot is an example of "doing the right thing". To me it's an example of worker rights being trampled as whatever he says on Facebook is not the concern of his employers. The companies he works for cannot demand an apology of him, either, much less a public one.

The "White boy club" might be coming from an end, but the American grasp on the medium isn't. And that's a larger barrier to diversity and the fight against bigotry than some random youtuber saying something racist. Truth to be told, it's scary. There's a real pressure to bow to American cultural norms on every subject and deviance is punished extremely strongly.

Many creators I follow online have been harrassed for "culturally appropiating Spanish", posting their work when "something important" is happening in the United States or not sharing whatever cultural war crap is raging over there. It's asphixiating. All the artists I know have been hounded by Americans who think nudity is sexist or drawing thin characters is fatphobic. I'm not kidding and I'm tired of it.

san il defanso wrote: It's absolutely appropriate to call out abusers as well, and people should be held accountable for their actions.

To me the issue is: To be held accountable by whom? A mob of internet weirdos and for-profit corporations?

This is most likely going to end up not being about the topic at hand, but I need to say it because I need some sort of closure so that I can go back to my life.

I woke up this morning, after a night of tossing and turning, just feeling completely destroyed. Even after consulting with various people my age about the issue and all of us being agreement that Mark's response is characteristic of the things we all detest in older generations (a restrained very telling response of outrage, speaking down to younger generations from a position of privilege, self-appointed wisdom for welding a forgive and forget attitude and an overall complacency that contributed to the reasons why our generation and generations to come will continue have to wage these battles), he still got to me.

I've been battling a losing mental health battle this year. Trying to come to grips with being a new father, bringing a child into a world I don't feel comfortable with leaving to her, then being thrust into the pandemic, still trying to provide yet being isolated and without the help we thought we'd have, the last year has broken me time and time again. As an essential worker I have to endure watching huge swaths of folks go on with life as normal, planning big celebrations and having to enable them to do so because the corporation I work for values their dollar over my safety. Everyday I come home and wonder, "Is this it? Is this the day that I finally bring this virus home, endangering the lives of my wife and child?" All because folks rallied around a man who politicized a health crisis, who were brought into his fold because his racism either was a feature or not enough of a deal breaker and liked that he pissed people like me off. An adult life in retail conditioned me to the truth the maybe people do need to be told what to do for the sake of the greater good a long time ago; this past year cemented it. My anger, sadness and "raw emotion," as Mark put it, is because people my age are tired of feeling powerless against all of this. We have on one side 50% of the country that acts without any real care to morals or policy, only to antagonize, and on our own side generations of people who felt that a peaceful approach gave them some sort of moral high ground when in reality served only to enable to the other side to run rampant and put us into this very situation that we are in. I'm not sure if we'll ever recover.

It's broken me. I've gone through so many spells of depression and at times pure, raw anger. All the while I have this little girl and it's supposed to be the wonderful time, and at times it is, but there's also this neverending anxiety, fear, rage and hopelessness that's always scratching away in the back of my brain. I have access to help, I'm making use of it, but I'm not sure it working.

What I do know is one of the few things older generations passed on to us that I believe to be true, and that is that racism starts at home. However, I will not be complacent and can say that not only does racism start at home, but the rejection of racism also starts at home. I'm not completely irrational, I know that there are individuals who were a product of their time and that bigger works pass through many hands, but we all know the difference and can identify when those two situations do not apply. The media that we are talking about here is of the last 20 years at the most, we all knew better but many of us are just coming around to just how much we should have known better.

I'm not sure where to go from here. On the one hand, I feel like I've dug myself quite a hole but when looking at my reasons, I still don't think I'm wrong. On the other hand, this has brought something to the surface that has been brewing for awhile now and that's that I don't want to talk about games anymore. A conversation with Uba years ago lead to the launch of ICFTT. Frustrated with the direction of game discussion as a whole she encouraged me to "be the change" and to "put forth the discussion I want to have." Best case scenario, what I got in return was, "Another great episode!" Worst case was, well, the above. This might be quite a jump, going from a long rant about my last year, the topic at hand to walking away from discussing games, but I guess that's par for the course for a hyperactive child. That's fine, it doesn't need to fit anyone's desired narrative but my own. The fact of the matter is that it's making me unhappy.

I've given this site a break many times in the past, and I knew better than to make a big I'M LEAVING announcement, in part because I knew that I wasn't but also because I didn't want that cry for attention. I still don't. But I don't know what my course of action from here is. I think I'm done. Posting here, elsewhere, the podcast, all of it. I'm not happy and I ask that anyone who did care about what I had to say to please respect that. I need to get better, and maybe just playing games and not being a voice for them will help.

Erik Twice wrote: This topic always makes me uncomfortable ebcause, one you get past the agreeable surface, it's clear the whole understanding of the subject and what "diversity" entails is defined exclusively in an ethnocentric way.

Great post and perspective.

This started with a americans hot take on an italian game designers version of a mad max norway (as far as i can tell). And it was (apparently) done without the courtesy of an email to the designer to offer him a chance too explain some card art. Hell, i looked at the card art available online and in 5 minutes found 3-4 examples of minority representation. And lots of female representation (just lacking 1 more in the leader position, i guess?). Not for nothing, but has anyone looked at the pics of the ENTIRE writing staff and contributors to this site? It also takes 5 minutes at the "authors" tab and is kinda illuminating.

So put up the standards and we can all move on. Throw games with an art design like this into the "dudebro" pile because yeah, that art aesthetic with chicks in skin tight leather pants and plunging neckline is totally dudebro and worthy of critque.

And i LIKE dudebro. Its he-man, comicbook art design, Lara Croft wrapped up with Arnold Schwarzeneggar and painted by Frazetta. But i get that it isn't for everyone, doesn't have to be for everyone, and excluding it from some spaces is ok.