this post was submitted on 28 Nov 2024
965 points (94.7% liked)
Microblog Memes
5885 readers
3815 users here now
A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
Rules:
- Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
- Be nice.
- No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
- Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.
Related communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I’ve got a few concerns with Chris’ post, particularly the use of logical fallacies that undermine his main argument. Let’s break this down:
Straw Man Fallacy #1:
This statement misrepresents the position of those who critique "wokeness" in media. It assumes that everyone in this group shares a simplistic, uniform, and flawed perspective on history, which is neither fair nor accurate.
Isn’t it ironic to advocate for inclusivity while reducing the opposing view to a stereotype? For example, I personally dislike overt "wokeness" in games, yet I don’t fit the imaginary box you’ve described. My position isn’t rooted in a denial of history but in the belief that games, music, and films are creative, self-contained domains to be enjoyed on their own merits—not as platforms for political messaging.
It’s not about rejecting inclusivity or denying the contributions of diverse creators. Rather, it’s about questioning why politics should take center stage in these art forms. Why must every creative work be a vehicle for ideological statements? Art can reflect politics naturally when it’s intrinsic to the story or setting, but forcing it risks alienating audiences who value the escapism and creativity of the medium.
Straw Man Fallacy #2:
Who exactly is denying the existence of diverse creators? This statement uses vague, accusatory language aimed at a generalized “you” without specifying who or what is being addressed. This lack of specificity makes it difficult to engage with the argument constructively.
If the intent is to highlight the contributions of diverse creators, that’s absolutely valid and worth celebrating. But framing the point as an assumed rebuttal to an undefined group of people not only creates unnecessary division but also fails to advance the discussion meaningfully.
When addressing criticism, it’s more effective to engage with specific ideas or individuals rather than casting a wide net over an entire group. Otherwise, this risks becoming the very thing being criticized: stereotyping and marginalizing others based on assumptions.
The issue here is that every time I see someone complaining that a game is "woke" is when suddenly there are gay people, or people of colour, or women not looking like a hooters waitress in the game. And the reality here is that this isn't being woke, it's that the game is being based on reality. Gay people exist, always have, so do people of colour, and women of all types and men too. The people that make it political are the people that don't want to see the real world and the people in it.
Now, I don't know what you feel is "woke" and I'm not saying this is directed at you, but just because there are people that don't fit some preconceived mold, and they are included in a game, doesn't make it magically political.
A combination of: Marxian economics—specifically the framework of oppressor and oppressed—applied to social categories such as gender, race, and sexuality + Critical Theory from the Frankfurt School.
I know you're not directing this at me but still, I respectully disagree. This sudden overcompensation of swapping the gender, sexuality or race of characters in movies and games, under the guise of "celebrating diversity," often feels less like a meaningful or thoughtful inclusion and more like a superficial, performative gesture. This trend is widespread and politically charged, driven not by genuine artistic intent but by a desire to align with current cultural trends. Some people call it "tokenism".
Oh look, the Cultural Marxism conspiracy theory.
I think you've been consuming too much Jordan Petersen.
That whole theory was rooted in anti-semitism and some weird mistrust that Jews were imposing culture on them. It's the biggest load of baloney.
I believe you’ve misunderstood my point. I wasn’t discussing ‘Cultural Marxism’ as a conspiracy theory, nor was I making any claims tied to anti-Semitism. What I was explaining is the historical and intellectual roots of certain frameworks, like the oppressor-oppressed dynamic, which can be traced to Marxian economics, Critical Theory, and intersectionality. These are well-documented academic concepts, not fringe ideas.
As for Jordan Peterson, I didn’t reference him or his views, but even if I had, dismissing someone’s argument based solely on perceived influences doesn’t address the substance of what they’ve said. If you disagree, I’d be happy to discuss the specifics of where you think my understanding of these concepts is incorrect.
bro who is putting that in video games
Hey, andros. I was replying to the quoted part above. I never said they put this definition into games.