Recommendations A non-human who has a human pet

[Ilikewaterkusa]

There's probably going to be one smooth brain, asking for these two calm down and state that it's just a minor disagreement and won't amount to much, however this is simply false this is an issue of how they see the world, and how people are to act.

 

[Jemini]

This is what I was responding to. These are your exact words verbatim. I reduced nothing.

Yes, and? Do I really need to break that statement down word for word for you? I'm sorry, but I'm about to become a total dick here. Is your reading comprehension really so poor that you cannot comprehend the plain english I have written there to such an extent that you don't know the meaning of the words?

Ok. I guess we are really doing this.

And, there is one and ONLY one set of ideology that even looks remotely the same as this anti-human attitude we see in so much of fantasy. It is almost 1 for 1 identical to the attitudes expressed by anti-white racists. This raises some questions. Could the Japanese noble goal of combating their xenophobia problem have become somewhat tainted by the ideology of these anti-white racists? It seems entirely possible based on the thematic similarity we are seeing in some of these stories.

The term "This anti-human sentiment" refers back to this. This is from the exact same quoted passage, in fact right below the passage you quoted.

To be clear, the pattern we see in these stories that I and forli are bringing up are as follows.

1. Humans are usually cast as the race in power.
2. Humans oppress the other fantasy races, and in doing so are cast in a very evil light.
3. Occasionally, it will be humans who are the weaker race. In this case, humans will be the ones oppressed. However, when this happens, it will be cast as the humans deserving the oppression they are getting.

So, by "this anti-human sentiment," I made it clear I was not speaking about ALL anti-human sentiment seen in all of fiction. It is very clearly honed in on specifically that pattern of 3 trends seen primarily in "so much of fantasy," which I later clarified was the tolkeinesque high fantasy.

Also, I will raise the additional point. The term "so much of fantasy" is not a totalism. It just means it is a trend widely seen in a lot of fantasy.

Do I need to repeat the rest? No, let's not. I will just quote myself to give you the rest. Clearly you did not read this one the first time, and it rather clearly explains the rest anyway. So, here you go. Actually read this one this time.

@Deeprotsorcerer

Ok, you STILL are not even getting my argument right. I am saying anti-white racism is the only IRL ideology that even remotely resembles the type of racism seen in the majority of Tolkeinesque high-fantasy fiction. Coming up with an example of a sci-fi gaming franchise that uses "white man's burden" racism is not a counter-argument to that at all.

And, do I need to re-itterate it again? What I am talking about is the 3 part trend of

1. Humans are usually cast as the race in power.
2. Humans oppress the other fantasy races, and in doing so are cast in a very evil light.
3. Occasionally, it will be humans who are the weaker race. In this case, humans will be the ones oppressed. However, when this happens, it will be cast as the humans deserving the oppression they are getting.

That 3 part trend is what I am referring to. In recent fiction, you see the first 2 parts of this everywhere, and the 3rd part is by definition a minority representation and in the few cases it happens you usually find that the view on the humans suffering is not portrayed with anywhere near the same level of sympathy as it is when it's the fantasy races suffering at human hands.

Just look at most any of the, and let me repeat it now, "Tolkeinesque high-fantasy fictions" put out in recent years, particularly of web-novel origin. And, if you want titles, I can list "Rising of the Shield Hero" and "Redo of Healer" off the top of my head. And, the only reason the list isn't MUCH longer is because I'm stretching my brain at the moment to think up other high-fantasy themed series with racism as a major theme. However, it is incredibly prevalent.

If you think about it, "Reincarnated as a Slime" does not particularly feature racism, but the church is highly opposed to the monster races. It is only the fact that the MC is a monster and has the ability to easily fight back and just brush that aside that we don't see them facing much cruelty at the hands of humans. You better believe it would have looked a lot like those previous examples if that hadn't been the case.

Now, please, if you are going to respond to this then get it right next time.

1. I am ONLY talking about "Tolkeinesque high-fantasy fictions." None of this warhamer 40K stuff.

2. I am ONLY talking about those 3 points you see in the overwhelming majority of those fictions. Not all, the majority. Yes, you can find specific counter examples. I did not use a totalism when talking about that part.

3. It is specifically those 3 points in the trend that is uncannily similar to the anti-white racism trend. This is the part where I used the totalism. Anti-white racism is the only ideology that bears a resemblance to those 3 points we are seeing these days in the majority of, and I am going to repeat it again because you seem to have trouble with this part, "Tolkeinesque high-fantasy fictions."

Sorry to be a bit of a dick here, but it does kind of set me off when people keep misrepresenting my arguments. Once I can take for a simple miscommunication, but you just did it twice. That's why I went to the effort here of beating it in to such a degree that it would make you look very bad if you misinterpreted my argument again.

Speaking of which, if you DO somehow misinterpret the argument again even after all that effort, I am going to use a fairly dismissive response next time and brush you off as being in no way serious about this subject.

There you go. Do not respond again until you have actually read every word.

 

[Deeprotsorcerer]

Yes, and? Do I really need to break that statement down word for word for you? I'm sorry, but I'm about to become a total dick here. Is your reading comprehension really so poor that you cannot comprehend the plain english I have written there to such an extent that you don't know the meaning of the words?

Ok. I guess we are really doing this.



The term "This anti-human sentiment" refers back to this. This is from the exact same quoted passage, in fact right below the passage you quoted.



So, by "this anti-human sentiment," I made it clear I was not speaking about ALL anti-human sentiment seen in all of fiction. It is very clearly honed in on specifically that pattern of 3 trends seen primarily in "so much of fantasy," which I later clarified was the tolkeinesque high fantasy.

Also, I will raise the additional point. The term "so much of fantasy" is not a totalism. It just means it is a trend widely seen in a lot of fantasy.

Do I need to repeat the rest? No, let's not. I will just quote myself to give you the rest. Clearly you did not read this one the first time, and it rather clearly explains the rest anyway. So, here you go. Actually read this one this time.



There you go. Do not respond again until you have actually read every word.

I read every word. Again. And again, I'm not the one who has failed a reading comprehension check. Or maybe you're defaulting to an attack on my intelligence because you can't actually attack anything else in my posts? The fact that your vitriol-to-content-ratio is tipping further and further makes me fear that this is the case.

You can sling snide almost-insults all you want, I gave you several examples of non-anti-white-coded fictional racism in works that meet the three common tropes you presented in both tolkeinesque high fantasy, and works that lie outside of it. Even if I brought up one example (and I brought up a lot more than one) it would be enough to invalidate your point of there only being one set of ideology that mirrors anti-human racism.

You used The Rising of the Shield Hero to support your point, which has an MC that participates in non-human slavery with the justification that his is a gentler, more just version than that of the natives. Naofumi is Japanese. This isn't an example of anti-white racism, but one of Japanese superiority because the narrative openly acknowledges how awful slavery is but makes an exception for him. Alternatively, the author just dropped the ball on the message or is simply a slave fetishisht/trend chaser (a much more likely conclusion).

I also fail to see what events in Redo of the Healer where's the anti-white sentiment there? It's most certainly not in the slavery angle. Not when Keyaru purchases a hot-ass beastwoman and proceeds to plow her, mold her into a tool, and have her thankful for being enslaved. The narrative doesn't say "oh, look how awful the MC is for perpetuating a cruel system" it says "Fuck yeah, hot sex and black morality vs black morality edgeporn!"

Just... just go back through the thread and read it slowly. Please.

 

[Jemini]

Did you not say this?




This is what I was responding to. These are your exact words verbatim. I reduced nothing, while you made an absurd attempt at invalidating my argument by shifting the bounds



I wasn't saying that the three common tropes you mentioned were nonexistent, they exist. What I was saying was that they aren't nearly as indicative of anti-white racism as you let on, and that the examples of non-white/non-Japanese racism mirrors far outstrip that of examples of anti-white racism.

Ok, you edited since I gave my response. So, I will address this edited version now.

1. I did not shift the bounds. I saw that you misinterpreted my argument on 1 occasion by bringing up warhammer 40K. Which, I might add, does not actually invalidate my point in the first place. But, I saw where you had misinterpreted. So, still being charatable at this point, I stated you interpreted my argument incorrectly and added the clarification that I was specifically talking about tolkeinesque high-fantasy. I had simply said "fantasy" at first. Most people, when they hear the term "fantasy," automatically have tolkeinesque high-fantasy as the very first thing that jumps into their minds. I would not have thought I would need to clarify that at first, but I saw you had misinterpreted so I saw the need to clarify at that point.

That's not goal-post shifting, that's a clarification. The difference is that 1. It is very understandable that my clarification was likely what I'd meant to say in the first place, and 2. My argument has been specifically on that point ever since the clarification.

2. This is finally a somewhat on-point address of the points I'm actually making. So, fine. I'll take it where I can get it.

But, you are saying the 3 tropes I'm referencing exist. But here's the thing. Mirrors for non-white racism are the victims of the humans in these exact same stories. Therefore, every single mirror of non-white racism is a contributor to the overall trend that, in turn, mirrors anti-white racism.

Mirrors for non-white racism are easy to see. They are point-source. You can see it in individual examples. However, the mirror for anti-white racism takes the form of the broader trend, as seen in the 3 common tropes I pointed out. And, the fact that, and I will say it again, most of fantasy (refferencing tolkeinesque high-fantasy, because you have already proven you need that level of hand-holding clarification,) conforms to the 1st trope, often has the 2nd trope, and the rare exception to the 1st trope usually conforms to the 3rd trope, this paints a broader trend of an undercurrent that seems to conform strangely to the exact ideology held by anti-white racists.

Now, I was very precise in the language I used there, because you seem to misinterpret what I say a lot. So, I am going to be very precise with you here so you can't re-interpret what I'm saying in some wild way. I said that these 3 tropes which cover the overwhelming majority of the genre have an alarming resemblance to the ideology held by anti-white racists. I did not say the writers themselves were anti-white racists themselves. Who knows what's motivating them? But, it is strange that this pattern conforms to the same ideology held by these extremist racists. There's an odd pattern there, and it bears exploring into.

You can sling snide almost-insults all you want, I gave you several examples of non-anti-white-coded fictional racism in works that meet the three common tropes you presented in both tolkeinesque high fantasy, and works that lie outside of it. Even if I brought up one example (and I brought up a lot more than one) it would be enough to invalidate your point of there only being one set of ideology that mirrors anti-human racism.

THERE! You just said it! You just said exactly the point where I knew you were always getting me wrong on.

I never said that. That's the point you need to re-read me on.

I, in fact, said exactly the opposite of what you are saying here. I never once said there is only one ideology that mirrors anti-human racism. I said that the specific pattern of anti-human racism we see in a lot of fantasy of the specific sub-genre conforms to a specific 3 step pattern, and that 3 step pattern almost exactly resembles only one ideology.

I did not, even once, say there is no other ideology represented in the anti-human racism we see.

I said there is a pattern of 3 steps. 3 steps I thought you'd understood, but this last post says you obviously didn't. So, I will repeat them again.

1. Humans are usually cast as the race in power.
2. Humans oppress the other fantasy races, and in doing so are cast in a very evil light.
3. Occasionally, it will be humans who are the weaker race. In this case, humans will be the ones oppressed. However, when this happens, it will be cast as the humans deserving the oppression they are getting.

It is THOSE 3 TROPES that resemble anti-white racism, and anti-white racism is the only IRL trope mirrored by those 3 specific ideals being held to almost constantly and repeatedly throughout. (And it is specifically the 3rd that raises the flag, that double-standard part.)

And can you blame me for the increased rate of talking down to you? This argument has not been a debate at all, it has all been nothing but me having to repeatedly clarify and clarify and clarify my argument and you repeatedly getting it wrong at every turn. That's not an intellectual argument at all. I will be civil in an intellectual argument. But, if you can't even get my point right, then it's nothing but me telling you that you are wrong over and over again. Because, in fact, you ARE wrong. You are telling me that apples are the color orange. I ask you to point out an apple to me, and you literally point at an orange. You are flat out wrong, and all I can do is tell you that you're wrong. And yes, I will be a dick about it as I'm doing so.

And, no, I'm not addressing your points. you have no points. Your arguments are wrong because you are not even arguing against the correct subject and need to get it right first before the debate can even begin in the first place.

 

[Deeprotsorcerer]

1. I did not shift the bounds. I saw that you misinterpreted my argument on 1 occasion by bringing up warhammer 40K. Which, I might add, does not actually invalidate my point in the first place.

When you went from here:

And, there is one and ONLY one set of ideology that even looks remotely the same as this anti-human attitude we see in so much of fantasy. It is almost 1 for 1 identical to the attitudes expressed by anti-white racists. This raises some questions. Could the Japanese noble goal of combating their xenophobia problem have become somewhat tainted by the ideology of these anti-white racists? It seems entirely possible based on the thematic similarity we are seeing in some of these stories.

To here:

The term "so much of fantasy" refers to the lion's share of fantasy. If you are going to nit-pick though, perhaps I should be more specific and say "classical Tolkeinesque high-fantasy."

Which effectively shifts the bounds from fantasy as a whole to Tolkeinesque high-fantasy, you shifted the bounds. You're just lying now. And the fantasy genre can include subgenres like urban fantasy, science fantasy (which is what 40K is rather than science fiction), and several others, but again, when you narrowed it down, I brought you Tolkeinesque high-fantasy examples.

But, you are saying the 3 tropes I'm referencing exist. But here's the thing. Mirrors for non-white racism are the victims of the humans in these exact same stories. Therefore, every single mirror of non-white racism is a contributor to the overall trend that, in turn, mirrors anti-white racism.

Mirrors for non-white racism are easy to see. They are point-source. You can see it in individual examples. However, the mirror for anti-white racism takes the form of the broader trend, as seen in the 3 common tropes I pointed out. And, the fact that, and I will say it again, most of fantasy (refferencing tolkeinesque high-fantasy, because you have already proven you need that level of hand-holding clarification,) conforms to the 1st trope, often has the 2nd trope, and the rare exception to the 1st trope usually conforms to the 3rd trope, this paints a broader trend of an undercurrent that seems to conform strangely to the exact ideology held by anti-white racists.

Now, I was very precise in the language I used there, because you seem to misinterpret what I say a lot. So, I am going to be very precise with you here so you can't re-interpret what I'm saying in some wild way. I said that these 3 tropes which cover the overwhelming majority of the genre have an alarming resemblance to the ideology held by anti-white racists.

A person suffering or being owned by a dominant human isn't automatically a example of non-white racism in a story, especially when the narrative portrays the one doing the enslavement in a positive light (Naofumi and Keyaru). The broader trend of the three common tropes describe the set-up of the story, not the message. As a fellow writer, I should not have to explain this to you. Re-read the thread to know why, I won't waste much more of my time saying the same thing in a different way.

I did not say the writers themselves were anti-white racists themselves. Who knows what's motivating them? But, it is strange that this pattern conforms to the same ideology held by these extremist racists. There's an odd pattern there, and it bears exploring into.

Then what did you mean by this?

These days, there is a ridiculous amount of anti-white racism. These racists try to rationalize their way out of it by saying it's somehow not possible to be racist against white people, and it's only racism if it's a white person doing it to someone who's not white, but that very rationalization of theirs is the single most racist thing you could possibly ever hear.

Anyway, the reason for the double standard with humans in these stories is because this exact same bunch of racists are the ones making those stories, and they tend to like making humans out to be "white people," and all the other fantasy races out to be the "minority races."

I am so tired. You're defeating yourself.

1. Humans are usually cast as the race in power.
2. Humans oppress the other fantasy races, and in doing so are cast in a very evil light.
3. Occasionally, it will be humans who are the weaker race. In this case, humans will be the ones oppressed. However, when this happens, it will be cast as the humans deserving the oppression they are getting.

It is THOSE 3 TROPES that resemble anti-white racism, and anti-white racism is the only IRL trope mirrored by those 3 specific ideals being held to almost constantly and repeatedly throughout. (And it is specifically the 3rd that raises the flag, that double-standard part.)

We're using the same steps. Every example I gave you adhered to at least one of those three tropes. Where I disagree with you is your statement that they all imply anti-white racism and not racism of any different kind of shade.

And, no, I'm not addressing your points. you have no points. Your arguments are wrong because you are not even arguing against the correct subject and need to get it right first before the debate can even begin in the first place.

What?

 

[Jemini]

@Deeprotsorcerer

Ok. I am going to talk in extremely simple terms here, since you somehow still don't seem to get it.

This...

And, there is one and ONLY one set of ideology that even looks remotely the same as this anti-human attitude we see in so much of fantasy. It is almost 1 for 1 identical to the attitudes expressed by anti-white racists. This raises some questions. Could the Japanese noble goal of combating their xenophobia problem have become somewhat tainted by the ideology of these anti-white racists? It seems entirely possible based on the thematic similarity we are seeing in some of these stories.

Is a statement that is in reference to this.

To be clear, the pattern we see in these stories that I and forli are bringing up are as follows.

1. Humans are usually cast as the race in power.
2. Humans oppress the other fantasy races, and in doing so are cast in a very evil light.
3. Occasionally, it will be humans who are the weaker race. In this case, humans will be the ones oppressed. However, when this happens, it will be cast as the humans deserving the oppression they are getting.

These 3 common themes among the writers are the thing that is being complained about, and the thing I am saying is suspiciously similar to the way anti-white racists regard white people.

That was LITERALLY the very next thing I said. The only way you can be getting this wrong is if you are somehow separating the 2 in your mind. Stop plucking them apart. Of course you will be getting it wrong if you take the two in isolation like an idiot. They belong together.

And, no. Clarifying a point I see you obviously getting wrong is not shifting the goal posts. I went over that in fine detail, and you literally said me clarifying is shifting the goal posts in the very next statement. I will say it again. I said fantasy, because most people hear fantasy and think high-fantasy. It's the first thing that jumps into their minds.

You are correct. There are other sub-genres, but most people automatically think high fantasy.

I saw you interpreted outside the bounds of what I'd meant to communicate, so I clarified. That's not shifting the goal posts. That's clarifying. I did it once, and I did it early. You are being disingenuous if you want to take that, run with it, and argue otherwise.

And, I will say it again. We are not having a debate over racism right now. We are having a debate about what I said, and what you thought I said. That's what this debate is about, that is all this debate is about, it's stupid, it's wrong, it's idiotic.

I know very well what I said. If you think I said anything different, then you are wrong. Now, you can either be a civil human being and take me at my word I meant to communicate something, try to understand what I was trying to communicate, and go on from there. Or, you can continue to be an absolute idiot and keep arguing about what I said and we will get nowhere. Because, as long as the subject is about what I said, then I'm absolutely right and you're absolutely wrong. It is literally impossible for you to be right if the subject is about what I said. So, either be rational and try to actually understand what I meant to communicate so we can move on from here with the actual debate subject, or continue to be an idiot and just live with being wrong.

 

[Deeprotsorcerer]

@Deeprotsorcerer

Ok. I am going to talk in extremely simple terms here, since you somehow still don't seem to get it.

This...


Is a statement that is in reference to this.



That was LITERALLY the very next thing I said. The only way you can be getting this wrong is if you are somehow separating the 2 in your mind. Stop plucking them apart. Of course you will be getting it wrong if you take the two in isolation like an idiot. They belong together.

And, no. Clarifying a point I see you obviously getting wrong is not shifting the goal posts. I went over that in fine detail, and you literally said me clarifying is shifting the goal posts in the very next statement. I will say it again. I said fantasy, because most people hear fantasy and think high-fantasy. It's the first thing that jumps into their minds.

You are correct. There are other sub-genres, but most people automatically think high fantasy.

I saw you interpreted outside the bounds of what I'd meant to communicate, so I clarified. That's not shifting the goal posts. That's clarifying. I did it once, and I did it early. You are being disingenuous if you want to take that, run with it, and argue otherwise.

Would you mind addressing anything I said rather than going in circles like this? I just wont respond to you until you do, I took the three tropes into account just like you did, but I disagreed with your conclusion. Tell me why I shouldn't, don't just try to dodge my points through an endless stream of technicalities. I get exactly what you're saying, you're just refusing to engage in a meaningful way at this point.

You're hiding behind general statements and words like totality avoid actually discussing any specifics, and it seems like you'll continue to do so for the rest of this conversation. I've harvested your perspective, but I'd like to have an intelligent discussion with you. You don't seem up to it. The disingenuous one is you. Go back and look at all the points you simply refused to address in favor of calling me a fool.

I know very well what I said. If you think I said anything different, then you are wrong. Now, you can either be a civil human being and take me at my word I meant to communicate something, try to understand what I was trying to communicate, and go on from there. Or, you can continue to be an absolute idiot and keep arguing about what I said and we will get nowhere. Because, as long as the subject is about what I said, then I'm absolutely right and you're absolutely wrong. It is literally impossible for you to be right if the subject is about what I said.

A is true because A is true?

This is why we can't have an intelligent discussion.

 

[Jemini]

Would you mind addressing anything I said rather than going in circles like this?

I would like to stop going in circles. I really would. However, that is not possible until you actually understand what I'm actually trying to communicate on this subject, which you still clearly don't.

Those 3 statements.

1. Humans are usually cast as the race in power.
2. Humans oppress the other fantasy races, and in doing so are cast in a very evil light.
3. Occasionally, it will be humans who are the weaker race. In this case, humans will be the ones oppressed. However, when this happens, it will be cast as the humans deserving the oppression they are getting.

Are almost a perfect description of the ideology of anti-white racists.

Somehow, you decided that I was saying this instead.

You can sling snide almost-insults all you want, I gave you several examples of non-anti-white-coded fictional racism in works that meet the three common tropes you presented in both tolkeinesque high fantasy, and works that lie outside of it. Even if I brought up one example (and I brought up a lot more than one) it would be enough to invalidate your point of there only being one set of ideology that mirrors anti-human racism.

I did not, nor did I ever say, that there is only one ideology that mirrors anti-human racism.

I said that the specific 3 point pattern we see in the anti-human racism mirrors anti-white racism.

That is my argument. You are not addressing my argument, you are arguing something completely different. I'm not the one refusing to address your points. You have no points, because your points are based on a false premise.

This is as plain as I can state this. If you don't want to respond anymore, that's fine. I've done everything I can to try to show you how you are getting the point wrong here. If you still refuse to see it, that's on you.

 

[Deeprotsorcerer]

I did not, nor did I ever say, that there is only one ideology that mirrors anti-human racism.

I said that the specific 3 point pattern we see in the anti-human racism mirrors anti-white racism.

Yes. Yes you did. Don't you dare go edit it now.

And, there is one and ONLY one set of ideology that even looks remotely the same as this anti-human attitude we see in so much of fantasy. It is almost 1 for 1 identical to the attitudes expressed by anti-white racists. This raises some questions. Could the Japanese noble goal of combating their xenophobia problem have become somewhat tainted by the ideology of these anti-white racists? It seems entirely possible based on the thematic similarity we are seeing in some of these stories.

Either you misspoke, or your mastery of obscurification is weaker than you initially thought.

You're not even wrong when you say that the pattern can be used to mirror anti-white racism, (I'll refer again to the diffrence between a story's set up and its message) you brought up a few stories that you said are examples, and I responded to them. You refused to continue off of that point and just said that I have no points.

That is my argument. You are not addressing my argument, you are arguing something completely different. I'm not the one refusing to address your points. You have no points, because your points are based on a false premise.

My other points were the examples of non anti-white racism mirrors that still follow the three tropes.

I'm not angry at this point, and I'm not going to call you any names, and I'm not attacking your moral character. I do think I'll wash my hands of you, however. You can PM me or even ring me up on Discord later if you want to have an in-depth discussion, but not now.

 

[Jemini]

Either you misspoke, or your mastery of obscurification is weaker than you initially thought.

Yes, if you take that point in isolation, then it certainly might look like I was saying what you are insisting upon. However, if you would STOP FREAKING QUOTING ME OUT OF CONTEXT and look at THE VERY NEXT PART OF MY POST, then you could clearly see that line was in reference to the 3 points I keep bringing up.

And, no, I will not address a single point until we can agree on what the discussion is actually about. I know exactly what I said, exactly what I was communicating by those words, and you are by definition wrong on that subject. There is literally no means by which I can be wrong about the message I was communicating. I can not have said the wrong thing, you can only have interpreted it wrong.

Now, until we can get that misinterpretation cleared up, all other discussion is utterly pointless. That is why I have not been addressing any of your other points and treating you like an obstinate child. It is because the discussion is pointless if the message is being miscommunicated. And so, I know it is incredibly and vitally important to clear this out before moving on, and I refuse to allow for any distractions until this one single point is cleared up.

 

[Deeprotsorcerer]

Yes, if you take that point in isolation, then it certainly might look like I was saying what you are insisting upon. However, if you would STOP FREAKING QUOTING ME OUT OF CONTEXT and look at THE VERY NEXT PART OF MY POST, then you could clearly see that line was in reference to the 3 points I keep bringing up.

And, no, I will not address a single point until we can agree on what the discussion is actually about. I know exactly what I said, exactly what I was communicating by those words, and you are by definition wrong on that subject. There is literally no means by which I can be wrong about the message I was communicating. I can not have said the wrong thing, you can only have interpreted it wrong.

Now, until we can get that misinterpretation cleared up, all other discussion is utterly pointless. That is why I have not been addressing any of your other points and treating you like an obstinate child. It is because the discussion is pointless if the message is being miscommunicated. And so, I know it is incredibly and vitally important to clear this out before moving on, and I refuse to allow for any distractions until this one single point is cleared up.

Here is that entire post.

As @forli has been raving about, this double-standard on humans very much exists. All I did was explain the reason why the very content he's complaining about exists. And, yes. If you look at the wide swath of fantasy media, the problem he's complaining about very much DOES exist.

You are correct that the SJW writers are a bit of a creativity desert, but they are only the worst example of anti-white racists. However, the anti-human sentiment baked into most fantasy lore out there these days goes to show that there's a low-grade version that is somewhat baked into our society.

Now, you could very much argue I'm going a little far, because this kind of content exists among Japanese writers as well, and their reason for including such content is very different and actually somewhat noble in the mind-set of the writers. It is a poke against the xenophobia expressed within the Japanese culture. However, sometimes it gets a little off-plot for an anti-xenophobia message and gets more into the exact "humans are always evil" double standard that @forli was complaining about.

And, there is one and ONLY one set of ideology that even looks remotely the same as this anti-human attitude we see in so much of fantasy. It is almost 1 for 1 identical to the attitudes expressed by anti-white racists. This raises some questions. Could the Japanese noble goal of combating their xenophobia problem have become somewhat tainted by the ideology of these anti-white racists? It seems entirely possible based on the thematic similarity we are seeing in some of these stories.

To be clear, the pattern we see in these stories that I and forli are bringing up are as follows.

1. Humans are usually cast as the race in power.
2. Humans oppress the other fantasy races, and in doing so are cast in a very evil light.
3. Occasionally, it will be humans who are the weaker race. In this case, humans will be the ones oppressed. However, when this happens, it will be cast as the humans deserving the oppression they are getting.

These 3 common themes among the writers are the thing that is being complained about, and the thing I am saying is suspiciously similar to the way anti-white racists regard white people.

Where did I take it out of context?

 

[Jemini]

Here is that entire post.




Where did I take it out of context?

If you take the parts you highlighted in bold TOGETHER, and realize that they all relate to one another, it very clearly communicates this message.

I said that the specific 3 point pattern we see in the anti-human racism mirrors anti-white racism.

That is my argument. You are not addressing my argument, you are arguing something completely different. I'm not the one refusing to address your points. You have no points, because your points are based on a false premise.

This is as plain as I can state this. If you don't want to respond anymore, that's fine. I've done everything I can to try to show you how you are getting the point wrong here. If you still refuse to see it, that's on you.

However, you take this message out of it.

You can sling snide almost-insults all you want, I gave you several examples of non-anti-white-coded fictional racism in works that meet the three common tropes you presented in both tolkeinesque high fantasy, and works that lie outside of it. Even if I brought up one example (and I brought up a lot more than one) it would be enough to invalidate your point of there only being one set of ideology that mirrors anti-human racism.

The only way you can take that 2nd message out of it is if you are taking the 1st line quoted in bold in isolation and not relating it down to the 2nd part.

 

[Deeprotsorcerer]

Look. I highlighted both parts in bold together because I was indicating that they relate to one another, and that my points were directed against them. Why else would I highlight them? At this point, I'm convinced that the comprehension error is not on my part.

 

[Jemini]

Look. I highlighted both parts in bold together because I was indicating that they relate to one another, and that my points were directed against them. Why else would I highlight them? At this point, I'm convinced that the comprehension error is not on my part.

The phrase I used in the 2nd part literally started with the words "to be clear," and then specifically stated those 3 points relate to the previous paragraph. In other words, I am saying very explicitly and specifically that the combination of those 3 points, taken together, look like the ideology of anti-white racism and only like anti-white racism.

There is no other interpretation you can get out of that. If you can't see that, then I can't help your brain. The 2nd part relates to the 1st. And yet, somehow, you interpret the "It looks like anti-white racism" to apply to ALL racism exhibited in all fantasy, when I was rather specific that it is the combination of those 3 points. That's frankly a stupid and ridiculous interpretation for you to have taken. The only way I can possibly see you are still stuck on this is either you being obstinate or stupid. Maybe both. Either way, it's not worth having this discussion any further if that's how you're going to be.

I am honestly thinking here you decided to deliberately misinterpret my argument and over-generalize it. It's a disingenuous tactic frequently used by people who can't win arguments on their merits. If this is the case, then I'm very glad I focused in on this point. It is endlessly aggravating to argue with disingenuous people, so it is very important to pin people like you down on the points and not let you get away with this kind of crap.

 

[Deeprotsorcerer]

The phrase I used in the 2nd part literally started with the words "to be clear," and then specifically stated those 3 points relate to the previous paragraph. In other words, I am saying very explicitly and specifically that the combination of those 3 points, taken together, look like the ideology of anti-white racism and only like anti-white racism.

You specifically used the word only here, which is why I responded the way I did:

And, there is one and ONLY one set of ideology that even looks remotely the same as this anti-human attitude we see in so much of fantasy. It is almost 1 for 1 identical to the attitudes expressed by anti-white racists. This raises some questions. Could the Japanese noble goal of combating their xenophobia problem have become somewhat tainted by the ideology of these anti-white racists? It seems entirely possible based on the thematic similarity we are seeing in some of these stories.

To be clear, the pattern we see in these stories that I and forli are bringing up are as follows.

1. Humans are usually cast as the race in power.
2. Humans oppress the other fantasy races, and in doing so are cast in a very evil light.
3. Occasionally, it will be humans who are the weaker race. In this case, humans will be the ones oppressed. However, when this happens, it will be cast as the humans deserving the oppression they are getting.

These 3 common themes among the writers are the thing that is being complained about, and the thing I am saying is suspiciously similar to the way anti-white racists regard white people.

That is what I take issue with. How am I supposed to interpret it any other way?

If you'd look back you'd see that I even agreed with you that the three tropes can be used to portray anti-white racism, however, I also stated that when these tropes are present, they're just as often (if not more likely) used to portray different kinds of racism. Then I touched lightly on the difference between the way a story is set up, and the message that it delivers. The simple existence of these three tropes are not, in fact, indicative of an anti-white racist lean, you need to analyze how the story explores these tropes to make that determination, and even then, we're delving into the murky fields of subjectivity unless the author makes an outright statement of their views.

You are again, talking in circles to avoid addressing any other part of any other response to your points. I talked about your Shield Hero/Redo of the Healer example, I talked about how these stories you accuse of indicating an anti-white racist lean by merely having the three tropes would need to assume that the default for humanity is white even in non Western works (which it isn't, we can have a whole other discussion on that alone), and I even said that you may be misinterpreting an anti-white message from stories that lean heavier into fetish fuel rather than anything political. I even addressed your tangent about Japanese portrayals of slavery and xenophobia being a poke against such a problem within their culture.

I am honestly thinking here you decided to deliberately misinterpret my argument and over-generalize it. It's a disingenuous tactic frequently used by people who can't win arguments on their merits. If this is the case, then I'm very glad I focused in on this point. It is endlessly aggravating to argue with disingenuous people, so it is very important to pin people like you down on the points and not let you get away with this kind of crap.

You're not focusing on the point, you're telling me I don't understand the point, or that I've misrepresented the point, or that I have no points against your point because:

I know exactly what I said, exactly what I was communicating by those words, and you are by definition wrong on that subject. There is literally no means by which I can be wrong about the message I was communicating. I can not have said the wrong thing, you can only have interpreted it wrong.

And as long as you keep coming to stuff like this, we won't make progress.

I understand your point. I disagree with the conclusion you are making with your point that

I am saying very explicitly and specifically that the combination of those 3 points, taken together, look like the ideology of anti-white racism and only like anti-white racism.

And my disagreement with your point doesn't mean that I'm misinterpreting you or being disingenuous, or dumb or whatever else you've flung at me up to this point. It just means that I disagree with you, and I have already told you why.