Identity politics is not about laws. It’s often a bludgeon white guys tend to use when they encounter something they don’t want to hear and the idea of people discussing things without them suddenly becomes unbearable. They want the world to think that if there are a few moments in history where they’re not in charge of everything and can’t be a part of everything suddenly it’s the same thing everyone else experienced, but it’s not.
We’re talking about some women who want an opportunity to express themselves without the toxicity of some of the guys who make that almost impossible to do now without some sort of weirdo attack from guys who are both in gaming and play games.
This is Riot Games and the individuals pushing back the hardest against what they call Identity Politics is which group, perhaps the one that has the default voice, the one whose point-of-view is always considered?
Yes, also homophobic. These three things go together quite often. There are several employees and articles about not just Riot Games but how they deal with the toxicity within their gaming community.
It also accurate. This push against identity politics, surrounding events you don’t know anything about couldn’t possibly read up in 1 minute, is a push primarily lead by white guys, in this case also straight white guys, who really don’t want to address the problem, so they try to use word salads to distract from the actual problem and try to make the fact there is a problem the fault of the people who are talking about it and trying to address it instead of the fault of the people who created it. Suddenly we get to talk about why the approach isn’t right instead of the fact they created this really horrific work environment that is bleeding into their gaming culture and shows these individuals really can’t handle adulting well.
It’s not uncommon for white individuals to try and claim reverse racism when others talk about race. If you want to call it racism, that’s up to you. It’s not something we’re not familiar with dealing with. If that’s how you want to take it, take it that way. I won’t be changing your mind. You won’t even read about the topic we’re talking about.
Nesrie said a thing, I responded to it. I don’t think we got much closer to understanding each other, but it’s still a discussion by most measures, and at least as productive as what came before it.
Edit: nevermind, I don’t think I was making my point any clearer than before. And I’m just prolonging another somewhat political tangent after warning someone else off of doing the same thing. I stand by everything I said, but I apologize for keeping the thread going off topic.
I’m not sure why when Nesrie talks about the horrible ways people of color and women are treated that people react like it’s all in the past and she’s trying to get compensated / retaliate for the past. It’s pretty obvious certain groups are treated worse in general then white men. She lives this. In my personal like I don’t see a lot of it first hand, but I damn well believe her when she says she experiences it.
I found the description from @Perky_Goth’s link quite good:
identity politics which is supposed to represent the interests of minority or marginalised groups, by tracing politics to the foundation of a group identity, generally defined according to abstract categories of race and gender. The problem with this identity politics is that it does not account for intra-group differences, it does not provide a basis for forming coalitions and solidarities across groups, and it reduces politics to gaining recognition rather than transforming the social structure.
