Wow, my very first "post too large" error. I feel accomplished.
Same conversation log continued from
part 1 below.
Greywing: if the paying market prefers fetishized Asian women
it will revert to that
but they won't know if the white woman in a group may or may not work
until they try
honestly
it all comes down to $$$
I've never seen otherwise with the K-pop market
Arbitrary Greay: defaulting to "let's see how the financials roll" isn't really an answer to the discussion at hand, though
just another framework
Greywing: but the thing is
Arbitrary Greay: because the financials say something about the social structures underneath
Greywing: if the institution isn't concerned with the social politics
and more concerned with the bottom financial line
it invalidates a lot of concerns
Arbitrary Greay: no
Greywing: because IF the token white woman is more profitable
then why shouldn't they do it?
Arbitrary Greay: like with the continual battle for gender equality in the gaming industry
chicken and egg
Greywing: AND THE INDUSTRY CONTINUES TO IGNORE WOMEN BECAUSE WOMEN BUY THE GAMES ANYWAY
Arbitrary Greay: female protag games aren't given marketing power because of the perception they do badly
but they might do badly because the marketing push isn't there
Greywing: and you know what/
women will buy the games with the male protags too
so
I'm not saying it's right
I'm saying if their eye is always to the $$
they will go where the money is
Arbitrary Greay: but that ignores any chance of changing things
Greywing: and that's why it's not surprising to me
and why it's not about "right" or "wrong" from the industry's perspective
because the problem is
Arbitrary Greay: but the point of having these "right" or "wrong" discussions is because the industry doesn't have them
Greywing: women will buy all those games that are perceived to sell because of male protags
Arbitrary Greay: so you can only discuss it from the customers' end of it
Greywing: if all those women gamers said, "Fuck it, we won't buy."
Arbitrary Greay: try to influence them to demand it from the suppliers
Greywing: then the industry would be forced to sit up
but that doesn't happen
the industry has shown it will ignore all the women's voices
what they want is the wallet
Arbitrary Greay: see, but that doesn't further the discussion that might actually lead to change
all it does is point out the status quo
Greywing: but then they may actually ask then
"Hey, why aren't you buying games?"
you need leverage
Arbitrary Greay: and has the implication of "we should stick to it because this is how it goes down behind the scenes"
so things like the article
are needed to change who has what leverage
Greywing: I don't think the article will change crap
I think the article just makes people angry and/or defensive
which isn't dialogue
that's people yelling at each other
once you get entrenched in, "I am right and you are wrong"
no one listens to each other
the just blather at each other
it's like every gun control discussion I've ever had the misfortune to have had copy pasta'd at me
Arbitrary Greay: and yet being assertive is generally seen as a good trait
Greywing: because you bullhead your opinion through
because people probably stop listening
Arbitrary Greay: I heard a
radio article the other day about how the modern day superman is to be commended vs. wolverine because he is usually diplomacy first
Greywing: the problem is just that
that is
you reacted sympathetically to that article
Arbitrary Greay: with the firepower to force a diplomacy situation
Greywing: but Frank and Mat didn't
Arbitrary Greay: but at the same time
Greywing: they had kneejerk reactions as well
Arbitrary Greay: the iconic superman is still of him punching shit [and Wolverine has
more cool factor being an edgy anti-hero over the Big Blue Boy Scout]
Greywing: and their kneejerk reaction was to be "no no no, this isn't a white privilege racism problem!"
in fact
didn't Frank say to you
"This is exactly unlike your type of opinion, AG"
AS IF TO PAT YOU ON THE HEAD
Arbitrary Greay: nah, I read it as Frank saying that the article's tone is different from the one I usually take
Greywing: because you're so ~rational~?
Arbitrary Greay: not about my agreement with the content
Greywing: for an Asian American?
because you wouldn't be so fired up?
because obviously you should have seen how far short this article fell?
Arbitrary Greay: I just usually leave a lot of room for conceding things, and generally conceding a lot of things, along the way of a discussion
whereas the article is all "come at me, bro"
Greywing: the article takes a stance and it points a finger at someone
and it goes, "You are in the wrong."
and something hit you there
and it struck Frank as strange that it should hit you, I think
Arbitrary Greay: lemme reread it, hold on a sec
Greywing: it's why my own reaction to them was: White male privilege?
"Also thought Patricia, the author, showed no curiosity whatsoever as to what might happen, since she'd already decided in advance what it all meant. Seems like the opposite of you, AG, in this regard. You seem endlessly curious."
but that's the thing
Arbitrary Greay: ha, I was about to paste the quote, too
Greywing: you weren't reacting to "what will happen"
you were reacting to
Arbitrary Greay: jinx
Greywing: "There are structures of power in place and this woman is pointing to them."
and I actually had a very kneejerk reaction to that myself
I was like, "Wow, there is condescension overflowing everywhere here."
whether it was at the author of the article or even you by extension
Arbitrary Greay:
seoulbeats lauds that style
Greywing: I don't care what seoulbeats lauds
Arbitrary Greay: to be brazen about their intellectual stances and not budge on them
Greywing: I'm not saying there's intentional condescention
which itself is problematic
but, yeah
so endlessly curious
and apparently not allowed to get angry on behalf of your ethnic identity
Arbitrary Greay: there's the rub, isn't it
when does " get angry on behalf of your ethnic identity" become condescension
Greywing: I think the article was astute in several palces
invisibility being one of the really good ones
and that that went over their heads
in a way that privilege creates
[Sidebar:
where Greywing and I are personally coming from as Asian Americans and our perception of the presence of Asians in media, primarily Western media. Warning: multiple conversations about as long as this one in the link]
Arbitrary Greay: when/how am I allowed to "get angry on behalf of..." without compromising my supposed curiosity?
Greywing: I don't think you are compromised
I think if you reacted
Arbitrary Greay: the implication is that to be assertive on an opinion is contradictory of rationality
Greywing: something is there
and it shouldn't be obscured
or written off
the thrust of the argument may be misplaced
but the place it comes from is a real one
and it has to do with those complicated issues of representation and identity
it's why I freely admitted that someone like yourself or myself would recognize and empathize with the Asian American stance
but what they want is for her to justify her anger and what she is doing is taking her anger out in a place where it is easy to undermine it
Arbitrary Greay: trying to find that
mini discussion I had with myself on the nature of rationality vs.emotions on your lj in response to a tumblr post
it was def. pre-OB [Orphan Black]
Greywing: ahahahaha
Arbitrary Greay: mid LG watching, I believe [Lost Girl]
Greywing: I think it is dangerous to say you have to have one without the other
that to be one, you must lose the other
but I def was side-eyeing frank's comment
Arbitrary Greay: nah, it was just this one tumblr post complaining about how emotional women get written off as hysterical
and praising being emotional
and I was just like "...but I think that's annoying, too. Rationality FTW!"
it was the same comment where I also linked to a tumblr post pointing out oooold school historical forms of fan squee
EDIT 6/16: What grey says at the end there stood out to me, because I wrote yesterday in the introduction to this conversation that my feelings concerning this stuff were so personal that putting them in essay form would detach them from me in a way that didn't feel right. The detachment of text from article form is much stronger than for freeform dialogue, and is much more vulnerable to "Death of the Author," and therefore demands that the source material be more able to stand on its own against attacks.
And that's what may have happened to the article. Patricia experienced some feelings concerning the issue, but in putting them down in essay form, with clear conclusions and that pointed the finger, created a message that may be a lot more inflammatory than a more casual chat log form that allows for hyperbole in the moment for the sake of conversation flow. A chat flow also leaves things much more open ended, especially in a setting where our spiderweb of connections meant that we leapt from issue to issue without necessarily resolving anything, where the essay form somewhat demands it. By never resting our laurels on anything one potential conclusion, we never formed any points so sharp that they might poke someone in the wrong place. The article form decided to go with a tone that took pride in those sharp points, because it makes for more entertaining writing than a wishy-washy inconclusive piece. If the original article had been a podcast instead, with Patricia playing off of someone else and being able to throw in jokes and minor tangents along the way to temper her message's temper, then would the reactions have been as knee-jerk, both for agreement and disagreement? So I chose to go with a real time conversational discussion, because to me, this is something that derives its strength on a personal level from personal attachments, but once let loose to stand on its own, those same emotions become weak points that are, as Grey said, easy to undermine.
Then again, I have no idea how the reactions will run for this chat log. For all I know, it still might come off as condescending.