Not the best comparison, since you'd have to be almost braindead to not automatically win the game on what most game devs design as the Easy setting, whereas success is still far from guaranteed as a white male - you just have somewhat fewer pitfalls for prospective failure.
I know there were issues with it brought up before, but I still prefer the terminology of talking about other groups as unfairly disadvantaged rather than white men as unfairly advantaged, if only because that makes it easier to actually address such issues in a way that doesn't inherently involve exacerbated self-loathing. If people keep telling you how easy life is as a white man, and life ISN'T freaking easy for you when you're a white man, that doesn't leave you a lot of room for non-destructive emotional responses if you have even a shred of empathy for your fellow human beings. And no, I don't mean 'isn't easy' as in 'I'm rich but couldn't afford that beach home I wanted,' I mean 'isn't easy' as in 'barely getting by with a lot of help from friends.'
Furthermore, I think Guantanamo must be destroyed.Not the best comparison, since you'd have to be almost braindead to not automatically win the game on what most game devs design as the Easy setting, whereas success is still far from guaranteed as a white male - you just have somewhat fewer pitfalls for prospective failure.
Then adjust the difficulties accordingly to fit. The point of the metaphor is that 'white man' is a lower difficulty setting than, say, 'black woman'. Seriously, of all the nitpickery I've seen in this thread, that has to be the most pointlessly pedantic.
Besides, you ever try Ninja Gaiden's Easy Mode? Sheez.
edited 16th May '12 9:11:04 AM by Iaculus
What's precedent ever done for us?Most games are not Ninja Gaiden, and as a gamer, I thought it was a very relevant and central point, thankyouverymuch.
To elaborate in an edit: The overall idea is that you need to leave room for people who want to agree with you already to do so without backing them into an emotional corner that either gets their backs up or makes them feel like they have to hate themselves. If you call their lives Easy mode, that's exactly what you're doing. If you call their lives Normal mode and just say women, Hispanics etc are on Hard, then you're not just taking the comparison up one notch, you're actually changing the overall tone of the message so that it doesn't condescend to people who aren't winning the game of life automatically. It's a meaningful difference, not just a minor tweak in the symbolism.
edited 16th May '12 9:36:19 AM by Karkadinn
Furthermore, I think Guantanamo must be destroyed.
As another gamer, I'd have to disagree.
All they said was that 'straight white male' is the easiest difficulty setting in the game of life. Within those three categories (ethnicity, sexuality, gender), can you think of anyone who has it easier?
The fact that Real Life is Nintendo Hard at even the lowest difficulty setting is irrelevant to the argument.
In regards to your edit, that assumes that all privileges derived from being at the top of the heap are good. The ability to shut people out of conversations, jobs, pay grades, and so on (as an example) is a rather negative aspect of privilege, no? Why does everyone need that?
Whilst the goal of egalitarian movements is to better everyone, it's pointless not to acknowledge that things will get taken away from the people at the very top of the heap.
edited 16th May '12 9:43:05 AM by Iaculus
What's precedent ever done for us?A lack of impediments is not the same thing as the presence of crutches. Not all games HAVE an easy setting - some of them start at normal, and are designed to be reasonably challenging with a significant possibility of death or other failure at that level. For first world countries, white male is, overall, probably as easy as it gets, but that's still not the same as a free ride to Victory Street.
Which is what the vast majority of 'Easy' difficulty settings on games are - you put in your time, and win the game by default, because if you wanted a chance of failure you'd be starting at Normal, which is why that setting is CALLED Normal and is the default setting.
All those negative 'privileges' that you mention seem to be more linked to wealth and company position. I don't have a greater chance to shut someone out of a job or even a simple conversation compared to a black woman who is otherwise identical to me in all respects.
edited 16th May '12 9:51:01 AM by Karkadinn
Furthermore, I think Guantanamo must be destroyed.
I would say that white straight men do have certain crutches, though - it's hard to frame their disproportionate presence in influential, high-paying jobs (for instance) as anything but an advantage.
I don't have a greater chance to shut someone out of a job or even a simple conversation compared to a black woman who is otherwise identical to me in all respects.
As per the testimonies I've read from black women, you very much do.
edited 16th May '12 9:53:27 AM by Iaculus
What's precedent ever done for us?From what I can gather Iaculus is saying that as a white male you do have a higher chance of getting a job over a black woman who is otherwise identical. Simply because due to how society is structured the person making the decision is more likely to favour a while male over a black female, in addition a while male has a higher chance of being in a position where they can apply for a job compared to a black female.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranYou know, every time I try to make what I hope will be an uncontroversial side comment on framing issues diplomatically, it just turns into this huge clusterfuck and accomplishes the opposite of what I intended. It's not even a disagreement about philosophical goals, it's just a disagreement about how to FRAME them, and even that is presenting itself as a seemingly impossible to traverse divide.
It's getting to the point where I'm starting to wonder if it's even possible to disagree with any detail whatsoever that's presented in topics like these without it turning into an argument. But goddammit, I keep trying.
Anyway, I think going into concrete examples might help Iaculus understand where I'm coming from, so I'll offer this anecdote, which I am totally aware is an anecdote and therefore not statistically significant by itself. I'm a writer for hire. My ethnicity doesn't factor into my job at all, in fact my employer probably doesn't even know what race I am in the first place. If you want to say that SOME jobs exist where just being white is an inherent advantage because we still don't have adequate protections against hiring discrimination, then I'm gravy with that, but it doesn't pertain to ALL jobs, and doesn't do anything for me personally given my position. You can't say being a white man is a universal crutch in and of itself if the specific things about being a white man that you're calling crutches aren't also applied as universally.
edited 16th May '12 10:19:33 AM by Karkadinn
Furthermore, I think Guantanamo must be destroyed.Anyway, I think going into concrete examples might help Iaculus understand where I'm coming from, so I'll offer this anecdote, which I am totally aware is an anecdote and therefore not statistically significant by itself. I'm a writer for hire. My ethnicity doesn't factor into my job at all, in fact my employer probably doesn't even know what race I am in the first place. If you want to say that SOME jobs exist where just being white is an inherent advantage because we still don't have adequate protections against hiring discrimination, then I'm gravy with that, but it doesn't pertain to ALL jobs, and doesn't do anything for me personally given my position. You can't say being a white man is a universal crutch in and of itself if the specific things about being a white man that you're calling crutches aren't also applied as universally.
Funnily enough, writing as a career has problems
with racism
too. Three in particular:
- An overwhelming majority of published authors being white (especially true in genre fiction, like sci-fi and fantasy).
- Black writers getting their work published as 'black literature' regardless of genre.
- White authors being more likely to be approached for sequels.
Even when you're working at a distance like that, the colour of your skin can have an impact.
What's precedent ever done for us?![]()
This is a point. The majority of white people do not make hiring decisions and therefore are unable to make discriminatory hiring practices.
Far as the article goes, I kind of prefer to compare privilege to tiers in a fighting game rather than straight difficulty level for reasons kind of similar to what Kark was saying.
There is no difficulty level that everyone wants to be on, because in a video game the challenge is part of the point. However, in a fighting game, there ARE characters that nearly everyone wants to play, because they're just easier to win with. Playing Fox in SSBM or Chun Li in SF 3 carries none of the stigma that comes with easy mode in most other games.

But Congress's whole JOB is to be dull...