Yes, MCU and Star Wars are losing fans, that's why Avengers sold like crazy and I'm sure Star Wars is doing fine as well. *sighs* It's an extremely minority problem from altright sexist/homophobic/otherwise bigoted nerds that aren't worth catering to. If it really was causing financial devastation then companies would stop doing it. Surprisingly it is more profitable to expand your overall customer base than to appeal to a very small niche group.
Promoting your product to more people is always good, but you still have to be careful that you do not alienate your product to an existing crowd, just to replace them with others ; and putting in question how long term these new people are, or if they just jump on the next train and leave you stranding.
Is pathetic, insulting and completely rips any chance of discourse out of your argument, no matter what it is about.
Insulting people in any argument is a no-go , you wont get any results in life if you insult people based on their opinion or believe , especially if you think your arguments are just or right, you have to argue for them, not against the people.
A weak and shallow argument is often pushed by insulting and attacking people, as the argument cannot deliver on its own.
----
Diversity is troublesome topic as its always pushing and attacking existing boundaries and basic principles of believe, which is an attack on some people you cannot just ignore ; and if you do, you do your own arguments for diversity a disfavor by valuing some people over others, instead of making them all equal, if both sides think themselves as superior and morally justified, its a fight nobody can win anything in, its all out bloodshed and someone bleeds out faster than the other. Its even more of an issue if attacks become personal, hurt family, friends, reputation and result in real life consequences that some people are even embracing and they celebrate themselves for destroying actual human beings, destroying families and lives, and they do all that under the mantle of "Social Justice" which is despicable and pure malicious (and downright borders to insanity and reality loss).
Simply put, the vast majority of people have opinions and all of them have to be somewhat respected, without insulting them.
Pushing this kind of "diversity" into a product is doomed to produce controversy, backlash and introduce a growing hate in people against that group that is tried to be pushed into the product, its so sensible that it can easily produce more problems than not doing it in the first place.
Good intentions can often lead to terrible mistakes, the question is if its worth doing it, or weighting the issues simply means you shouldnt do it.
At this point in time you have people that rally and embrace topics of diversity so much that they lost all connection to reality and want to push it and especially replace existing lore and characters with their ideology ; and they just demand that people accept and embrace these things as much as they do, and everyone that does not is insulted and attacked on a personal level.
Everyone is allowed to like or dislike anything, and based on that nobody should be insulted, attacked or any other way be argued on a personal level.
Discuss the topic, not the people discussing it.
Yes, MCU and Star Wars are losing fans, that's why Avengers sold like crazy and I'm sure Star Wars is doing fine as well. *sighs* It's an extremely minority problem from altright sexist/homophobic/otherwise bigoted nerds that aren't worth catering to. If it really was causing financial devastation then companies would stop doing it. Surprisingly it is more profitable to expand your overall customer base than to appeal to a very small niche group.
Promoting your product to more people is always good, but you still have to be careful that you do not alienate your product to an existing crowd, just to replace them with others ; and putting in question how long term these new people are, or if they just jump on the next train and leave you stranding.
Is pathetic, insulting and completely rips any chance of discourse out of your argument, no matter what it is about.
Insulting people in any argument is a no-go , you wont get any results in life if you insult people based on their opinion or believe , especially if you think your arguments are just or right, you have to argue for them, not against the people.
A weak and shallow argument is often pushed by insulting and attacking people, as the argument cannot deliver on its own.
----
Diversity is troublesome topic as its always pushing and attacking existing boundaries and basic principles of believe, which is an attack on some people you cannot just ignore ; and if you do, you do your own arguments for diversity a disfavor by valuing some people over others, instead of making them all equal, if both sides think themselves as superior and morally justified, its a fight nobody can win anything in, its all out bloodshed and someone bleeds out faster than the other. Its even more of an issue if attacks become personal, hurt family, friends, reputation and result in real life consequences that some people are even embracing and they celebrate themselves for destroying actual human beings, destroying families and lives, and they do all that under the mantle of "Social Justice" which is despicable and pure malicious (and downright borders to insanity and reality loss).
Simply put, the vast majority of people have opinions and all of them have to be somewhat respected, without insulting them.
Pushing this kind of "diversity" into a product is doomed to produce controversy, backlash and introduce a growing hate in people against that group that is tried to be pushed into the product, its so sensible that it can easily produce more problems than not doing it in the first place.
Good intentions can often lead to terrible mistakes, the question is if its worth doing it, or weighting the issues simply means you shouldnt do it.
At this point in time you have people that rally and embrace topics of diversity so much that they lost all connection to reality and want to push it and especially replace existing lore and characters with their ideology ; and they just demand that people accept and embrace these things as much as they do, and everyone that does not is insulted and attacked on a personal level.
Everyone is allowed to like or dislike anything, and based on that nobody should be insulted, attacked or any other way be argued on a personal level.
Discuss the topic, not the people discussing it.
“There are very fine people on both sides.”
I’ll say this for Trump, the normalization of bigotry has made it far easier to spot.
You do realize though that when you're arguing with people who are gaslighting through the whole conversation this isn't healthy discourse either. Sometimes it is completely fair to call people exactly what they are and not continue to waste your breath responding to bad faith arguments. I've grown so tired of the false equivalencies between bigots/racists/homophobes/fascists/etc. and those that would call them out. It is everywhere now. Just this morning a CNN tagline about the Straight Pride Parade and counter-protesters read "A Clash of Values". No. Hate isn't a value. Just like Pride isn't just about being proud of how gay we are--which is another false equivalency I read all over the comments about this event ("If gay people can be proud of it, why can't straight people?").
"Simply put, the vast majority of people have opinions and all of them have to be somewhat respected, without insulting them."
Simply put, no. Not all opinions are respectable and sometimes what you're calling an insult is merely a statement of fact. For instance, if someone jumps to the defense of a poster who stated:
"In this age you cant even say if this isnt a women ....if we are lucky, the character quickly dies ; count on you Garruk, time to grind your axe, theres a lot in magic to clean up." (queue the gaslighters exclaiming "he never even mentioned LGBTQ!") then that poster and the person gaslighting to defend them are indeed transphobic at a minimum and it isn't insulting them to say so--its a statement of fact.
Woah woah woah! Who told you you could bring logic into this?
I guess that's why mr smarter than everyone don't answer me but continues talking to himself. I have yet to understand what so different between Oko and Puck/Oberon.
It's really fun how the anti sjw act all mighty and strong, yet get offended by the most ridicolous *****. How can you really be offended by a shirtless fairy?
Yeah characters suck, they sucked before shirtless fairies and will continue to suck after shirtless fairies. It's just called bad writing, it existed before sjw and can be done by everyone, white or nonwhite, straight or homo.
Hard to do with mr "i guarantee i'm smarter than you"
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
How i feel about competitive players and casual players in EDH: The competitive are german tourists, the casual are italian tourists, both in a italian beach. The italians asking themselves "why are the germans here?" make a legitimate question, the answer is because the beach is beautiful, no matter the country you came from. The italians wanting to ban the germans are dumb, because if the germans pay for their stay and follow the rules like everyone else, they have the right to be in the beach. Hovewer, if the germans started to ask themselves "why are the italians here?"... they would be dumb as hell.
Lmao bigotry is so normalized that black actors have to hire other black actors to assault them. You guys live in a bubble thats full of emotion and make believe oppression.
Theres so much oppression that Caitlyn Jenner was on the cover of vogue.
So much oppression that Jazz Jennings has a show for being who she is.
So much oppression that movies are made of famous lgbtq ppl and everyone is supportive of it. (Bohemian rhapsody was a great movie and no one can deny it.)
You are so wrapped up in the belief that oppression exists that you dont even realize how poisoned your mind has become.
You literally hold rallies where you can walk around naked and cities allow what would otherwise be illegal to show you how accepting ppl are.
Are we still talking about the fairie's sexuality? I personally don't care about that. My problem is that we finally have a non human planeswalker that is being humaninsed just to fit the human agenda, so people can relate to him, instead of getting the variety.
Lmao bigotry is so normalized that black actors have to hiring other black actors to assault them. You guys live in a bubble thats full of emotion and make believe oppression
Everything you add to the conversation just confirms all of the unpleasant things we already know about you at this point. You really should have left when you stood to maintain some small modicum of respect, infinitesimal as it might have been.
If you really want to bow out of the conversation (for the 5th or 6th time) then please, go. I’m sure there’s a Discord server somewhere for you to catch up with your 8chan buddies in, and we certainly won’t miss your trolling.
Bigotry is so normalized that bigots openly suggest that the case of Jussie Smollet is somehow representative of hate crimes in America meanwhile hate crimes against every minority group in America are on the rise since 2016. I'll say this for you, at least you stopped gaslighting us. Now we can see your true intentions on full display rather than you continuing to hide behind the discussion of male body image as though that has been what you've been on about all along.
Lmao bigotry is so normalized that black actors have to hire other black actors to assault them. You guys live in a bubble thats full of emotion and make believe oppression.
Theres so much oppression that Caitlyn Jenner was on the cover of vogue.
So much oppression that Jazz Jennings has a show for being who she is.
So much oppression that movies are made of famous lgbtq ppl and everyone is supportive of it. (Bohemian rhapsody was a great movie and no one can deny it.)
You are so wrapped up in the belief that oppression exists that you dont even realize how poisoned your mind has become.
You literally hold rallies where you can walk around naked and cities allow what would otherwise be illegal to show you how accepting ppl are.
Youre so up your own a** that its insane.
Some images from wikipedia regarding Oberon and Puck
So are you telling me that this sjw conspiracy that use shirtless fairies to make the frogs gay started way back in 1600?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
How i feel about competitive players and casual players in EDH: The competitive are german tourists, the casual are italian tourists, both in a italian beach. The italians asking themselves "why are the germans here?" make a legitimate question, the answer is because the beach is beautiful, no matter the country you came from. The italians wanting to ban the germans are dumb, because if the germans pay for their stay and follow the rules like everyone else, they have the right to be in the beach. Hovewer, if the germans started to ask themselves "why are the italians here?"... they would be dumb as hell.
Bigotry is so normalized that bigots openly suggest that the case of Jussie Smollet is somehow representative of hate crimes in America meanwhile hate crimes against every minority group in America are on the rise since 2016. I'll say this for you, at least you stopped gaslighting us. Now we can see your true intentions on full display rather than you continuing to hide behind the discussion of male body image as though that has been what you've been on about all along.
I especially like the part where he tries to defend thousands of everyday acts of hate with half-a-dozen examples of diversity in pop culture.
I swear, same-sex marriage becomes the law of the land in the U.S. and some GLBT people experience public success in the last couple decades and it's "Problem solved!" to you, as if gay people still can't be fired for being gay in most states, as if trans people didn't just have our own president bar them from serving our country, as if state prosecutors don't continue to announce they don't prosecute same-sex domestic violence since they don't recognize their marriage. I mean I could go on and on....even on a personal level, I don't even feel safe holding my husband's hand in public (people have yelled f***** from their car) and don't get me started on the things I endured just after coming out as a teenager. So please spare me the "your oppression is imagined" BS. You have no appreciation of the history that got us to the place we are today and the challenges we still face.
"On Saturday afternoon, a collection of self-described free speech advocates brought the own-the-libs internet into the real world, marching through historic Boston. Purportedly intended as parody of an LGBTQ Pride Parade, the march featured Pepe the Frog cosplayers, members of the far-right street gang the Proud Boys, and alt-right troll Milo Yiannopoulos as grand marshal riding atop a Trump 2020 float. It ended with a confrontation between attendees and counter-protesters and law enforcement armed with batons and pepper spray."
Bear in mind this is the news organization (and I use that term ever-so-lightly) that seemingly exists for no other purpose than to help you discover which member of the Friends cast you're most like.
So sad to see a thread completely derailed by phobia. I would much rather have had a thread discussing the actual topic. Since we have this however, I'll applaude FlossedBeaver, Blackwaltz3, ilovesaprolings and others earlier in the thread for fighting the good fight.
On topic: His character's motives reads very red to me, and I associate shapeshifting with blue (although I could see them doing a non-blue shifter). On the other hand, his artwork screams green and black. So neither Temur, Jund nor Grixis would suprise me. Sultai seems off to me.
So sad to see a thread completely derailed by phobia. I would much rather have had a thread discussing the actual topic. Since we have this however, I'll applaude FlossedBeaver, Blackwaltz3, ilovesaprolings and others earlier in the thread for fighting the good fight.
On topic: His character's motives reads very red to me, and I associate shapeshifting with blue (although I could see them doing a non-blue shifter). On the other hand, his artwork screams green and black. So neither Temur, Jund nor Grixis would suprise me. Sultai seems off to me.
Now that more people are starting to connect the dots between Oko and Puck, can we finally admit that he's more Temur than Sultai?
Fae + chaotically mischievous + forest-dwelling = Blue / Red / Green
@schnerbst: I agree. I knew as soon as I saw the Forbes article we were in for another Rakish Heir type thread here (that thread was also derailed by rampant homophobia also in large part masked by faux concern about the presentation of male sexuality). I was honestly relieved at the beginning that the discussion was centered on what colors the card may be and the connection to Shakespeare's Puck and so on, but it was only a matter of time. The mods should have stepped in long before now as the thread completely derailed. I regret my part in that, but I don't regret calling out hate speech. I would like to get back to talking about the character introduced here as was the original intent of this thread and just letting the bigots yell into the wind as we ignore their attempts to continue to derail this thread.
Also, FlossedBeaver he's totally Sultai....let's argue about that for a long time. LOL. That's what I came here for.
There's no way he isn't part black, the things described go way beyond simple mischief and into straight-up sadism. Sultai it is.
Is it actually sadism, or lashing out indiscriminately against a universe that's wronged him? Impassioned revenge is very much a red quality, targeted or otherwise.
There's no way he isn't part black, the things described go way beyond simple mischief and into straight-up sadism. Sultai it is.
Is it actually sadism, or lashing out indiscriminately against a universe that's wronged him? Impassioned revenge is very much a red quality, targeted or otherwise.
Sure, we don't know much, but to me, it sounds more like carefully planned psychological torture than lashing out against everything. Besides, sultai fits the colors in the art.
For me it is that purple thorny light beam in the art along with the green and blue ones. Purple light has often been used for black spells (e.g. Beacon of UnrestFinale of Eternity) and I think the purple beam along with the blue and green beams is obvious color pie signalling. If I'm wrong my next best guess is that it will be one of the color pairs between green, blue, and black.
Is pathetic, insulting and completely rips any chance of discourse out of your argument, no matter what it is about.
Insulting people in any argument is a no-go , you wont get any results in life if you insult people based on their opinion or believe , especially if you think your arguments are just or right, you have to argue for them, not against the people.
A weak and shallow argument is often pushed by insulting and attacking people, as the argument cannot deliver on its own.
That would be true if there was a chance for discourse in the first place, but it should be pretty clear that was never possible in this thread. As someone else stated, for discourse to proceed both sides must conduct themselves in good faith, among other intellectual norms. When one side blatantly engages in bad faith, it is futile to try to reason or make arguments with them. If someone states as their opinion something that's truly heinous, it should be called as such. Not doing so instead lends a measure of legitimacy to that opinion, as though it's okay to have that opinion and agree to disagree. But it's not okay, because actual gay people are victims of violence for being gay. Anyone whose opinion makes light of that is a bad person, full stop. Giving them serious treatment by engaging with their arguments is exactly what they want (so that they can further obfuscate the discussion as can be seen in this case) and exactly what they don't deserve.
Since you're talking about getting results, in a situation where your interlocutor is being intellectually dishonest at best, it's much more effective to address their character than to address their so-called arguments. This is because if you do the latter, they will pull you along in an endless trail of sophistry--this is not effective. Such a person can never be convinced to amend their opinions, they are arguing not from a position of clarifying an issue but for the sake of eristics. It's best to end the discussion. However, other people who are an audience to that discussion ought to know what is wrong with your interlocutor so that they wont behave in the same way--it can be effective to convey social information in this way. And as long as our only concern is practicality, this guy keeps on bowing out when people make accurate statements about him, so doing so is an effective way of silencing him, and this is much preferable than allowing him to spread his views online.
Diversity is troublesome topic as its always pushing and attacking existing boundaries and basic principles of believe, which is an attack on some people you cannot just ignore ; and if you do, you do your own arguments for diversity a disfavor by valuing some people over others, instead of making them all equal, if both sides think themselves as superior and morally justified, its a fight nobody can win anything in, its all out bloodshed and someone bleeds out faster than the other. Its even more of an issue if attacks become personal, hurt family, friends, reputation and result in real life consequences that some people are even embracing and they celebrate themselves for destroying actual human beings, destroying families and lives, and they do all that under the mantle of "Social Justice" which is despicable and pure malicious (and downright borders to insanity and reality loss).
I'll refer you to Karl Popper's arguments on tolerating intolerance.
This is a situation where people are taking issue with WotC creating an effeminate male character who is perceived as being queer or trans. By the own admission of the people who don't like this character, it's okay for WotC to make a queer or trans character so long as their queerness is not perceptible (it's okay for Ral to be gay because he can pass as straight). If a character's queerness is perceptible, then they're a "token gay" created purely for the sake of diversity at the expense of the quality of the story. Nevermind that no causal relationship has been established between making diverse characters and the quality of the story.
As others have pointed out, no where has WotC officially stated that Oko is LGBTQ. If his existence was really diversity as the first and only priority, they probably would have stated very explicitly that he's queer. Instead the article addressed his backstory in a way that Leslak rightly notes seems metaphorical to the queer experience. Further, his artistic representation ties back to incredibly ancient tropes on trickster figures and androgyny. If MTG's traditional audience finds such a character alienating, maybe they should work on that and sit with their discomfort rather than try to rationalize it.
Simply put, the vast majority of people have opinions and all of them have to be somewhat respected, without insulting them.
No, opinions normalizing violence against entire groups of people can't be respected whatsoever. Lending any such respect to such opinions is itself a complicit act.
I considered addressing that poster as you have, but then I realized that they, too, were not arguing in good faith and were otherwise unworthy of a cogent rebuttal. Surely you must have realized that yourself. So, I have only one question for you...
Sadism is actually more a red trait than it is a black one, simply because it entails enjoying the suffering caused to others. Black tends to focus on pragmatism over pleasure. No denying plenty of black characters exhibit sadistic qualities, but those who do, tend to have a red bent to them to begin with.
As for Oko himself...well, first of all the name reminds me of a brand of wood-based cat litter I promoted last year at Petsmart...but besides that, I'm bugged that society thinks it's okay for men to wear such revealing clothing and to look "glamorous", but not women. If Oko had been a woman, there would be cries of sexualization and indecency from page 1 to now. But since he's an effeminate male, and therefore "subversive", he's allowed to show his midriff and even a good portion of his chest. If women are expected to dress sensibly in MtG, so should men. And if anyone tries telling me that "it's just part of Oko's character" or that "he can use magic to protect himself, so he doesn't need armor", I say try using those excuses for female characters with skimpy clothes and glamorous appearances. The one female planeswalker who wears anything remotely so skimpy is Liliana, and even then only sometimes.
I don't give a flip about Oko's identity, just the double standards that apply to designing characters like him.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
MTGS Wikia Article about "New World Order"
Every time I read a comment about "Well if this card had card draw/trample/haste/indestructible/hexproof/life gain...", I think "You're missing the point." They're armchair developer comments that fail to take into account the card's role in the greater Limited and Standard environment. No, it may not be as good as whatever card you're comparing it to. There's a reason for that. Not every burn spell is Lightning Bolt, nor does it need to be or should be.
PSA to everyone who keeps forgetting about the Reserved List:
You're on a website dedicated to talking about MtG. You're only a few keystrokes away from finding out what cards are on the Reserved List. You're also only a few keystrokes away from finding out why some cards on the Reserved List got foil printings in FtV, as Judge promos, or whatnot, as well as why that won't happen again. Stop doing this.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Promoting your product to more people is always good, but you still have to be careful that you do not alienate your product to an existing crowd, just to replace them with others ; and putting in question how long term these new people are, or if they just jump on the next train and leave you stranding.
Calling everyone you disagree on :
Is pathetic, insulting and completely rips any chance of discourse out of your argument, no matter what it is about.
Insulting people in any argument is a no-go , you wont get any results in life if you insult people based on their opinion or believe , especially if you think your arguments are just or right, you have to argue for them, not against the people.
A weak and shallow argument is often pushed by insulting and attacking people, as the argument cannot deliver on its own.
----
Diversity is troublesome topic as its always pushing and attacking existing boundaries and basic principles of believe, which is an attack on some people you cannot just ignore ; and if you do, you do your own arguments for diversity a disfavor by valuing some people over others, instead of making them all equal, if both sides think themselves as superior and morally justified, its a fight nobody can win anything in, its all out bloodshed and someone bleeds out faster than the other. Its even more of an issue if attacks become personal, hurt family, friends, reputation and result in real life consequences that some people are even embracing and they celebrate themselves for destroying actual human beings, destroying families and lives, and they do all that under the mantle of "Social Justice" which is despicable and pure malicious (and downright borders to insanity and reality loss).
Simply put, the vast majority of people have opinions and all of them have to be somewhat respected, without insulting them.
Pushing this kind of "diversity" into a product is doomed to produce controversy, backlash and introduce a growing hate in people against that group that is tried to be pushed into the product, its so sensible that it can easily produce more problems than not doing it in the first place.
Good intentions can often lead to terrible mistakes, the question is if its worth doing it, or weighting the issues simply means you shouldnt do it.
At this point in time you have people that rally and embrace topics of diversity so much that they lost all connection to reality and want to push it and especially replace existing lore and characters with their ideology ; and they just demand that people accept and embrace these things as much as they do, and everyone that does not is insulted and attacked on a personal level.
Everyone is allowed to like or dislike anything, and based on that nobody should be insulted, attacked or any other way be argued on a personal level.
Discuss the topic, not the people discussing it.
WUBRG#BlackLotusMatterWUBRG
👮👮👮 #BlueLivesMatter 👮👮👮
RUAffinityUR
GMono Green StompyG
CEldrazi TronC
URWJeskai GeistWRU
WRBoros BurnRW
BRWMardu PyromancerWRB
“There are very fine people on both sides.”
I’ll say this for Trump, the normalization of bigotry has made it far easier to spot.
---
#BLM
#DefundThePolice
"Simply put, the vast majority of people have opinions and all of them have to be somewhat respected, without insulting them."
Simply put, no. Not all opinions are respectable and sometimes what you're calling an insult is merely a statement of fact. For instance, if someone jumps to the defense of a poster who stated:
"In this age you cant even say if this isnt a women ....if we are lucky, the character quickly dies ; count on you Garruk, time to grind your axe, theres a lot in magic to clean up."
(queue the gaslighters exclaiming "he never even mentioned LGBTQ!") then that poster and the person gaslighting to defend them are indeed transphobic at a minimum and it isn't insulting them to say so--its a statement of fact.
I guess that's why mr smarter than everyone don't answer me but continues talking to himself. I have yet to understand what so different between Oko and Puck/Oberon.
It's really fun how the anti sjw act all mighty and strong, yet get offended by the most ridicolous *****. How can you really be offended by a shirtless fairy?
Yeah characters suck, they sucked before shirtless fairies and will continue to suck after shirtless fairies. It's just called bad writing, it existed before sjw and can be done by everyone, white or nonwhite, straight or homo.
Hard to do with mr "i guarantee i'm smarter than you"
Theres so much oppression that Caitlyn Jenner was on the cover of vogue.
So much oppression that Jazz Jennings has a show for being who she is.
So much oppression that movies are made of famous lgbtq ppl and everyone is supportive of it. (Bohemian rhapsody was a great movie and no one can deny it.)
You are so wrapped up in the belief that oppression exists that you dont even realize how poisoned your mind has become.
You literally hold rallies where you can walk around naked and cities allow what would otherwise be illegal to show you how accepting ppl are.
Youre so up your own a** that its insane.
RUAffinityUR
GMono Green StompyG
CEldrazi TronC
URWJeskai GeistWRU
WRBoros BurnRW
BRWMardu PyromancerWRB
Everything you add to the conversation just confirms all of the unpleasant things we already know about you at this point. You really should have left when you stood to maintain some small modicum of respect, infinitesimal as it might have been.
If you really want to bow out of the conversation (for the 5th or 6th time) then please, go. I’m sure there’s a Discord server somewhere for you to catch up with your 8chan buddies in, and we certainly won’t miss your trolling.
---
#BLM
#DefundThePolice
Some images from wikipedia regarding Oberon and Puck
So are you telling me that this sjw conspiracy that use shirtless fairies to make the frogs gay started way back in 1600?
I especially like the part where he tries to defend thousands of everyday acts of hate with half-a-dozen examples of diversity in pop culture.
---
#BLM
#DefundThePolice
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/ryanhatesthis/straight-pride-parade-far-right-meme-boston
"On Saturday afternoon, a collection of self-described free speech advocates brought the own-the-libs internet into the real world, marching through historic Boston. Purportedly intended as parody of an LGBTQ Pride Parade, the march featured Pepe the Frog cosplayers, members of the far-right street gang the Proud Boys, and alt-right troll Milo Yiannopoulos as grand marshal riding atop a Trump 2020 float. It ended with a confrontation between attendees and counter-protesters and law enforcement armed with batons and pepper spray."
Bear in mind this is the news organization (and I use that term ever-so-lightly) that seemingly exists for no other purpose than to help you discover which member of the Friends cast you're most like.
---
#BLM
#DefundThePolice
On topic: His character's motives reads very red to me, and I associate shapeshifting with blue (although I could see them doing a non-blue shifter). On the other hand, his artwork screams green and black. So neither Temur, Jund nor Grixis would suprise me. Sultai seems off to me.
UR Mizzix of the Izmagnus ~~~ Build your own win-condition: Finite Spellslinging
UR Brudiclad, Telchor Engineer ~~~ We are the Borg. We will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own.
WUB Oloro, Ageless Ascetic ~~~ A Guide to dying slowly
UBR Marchesa, the Black Rose ~~~ Marchesa's undying Marionettes
RGW Mayael the Anima ~~~ All Hail the Big Chungus
GWU Chulane, Teller of Tales ~~~ Permanents Only ETB Shenanigans
BGU Sidisi, Brood Tyrant ~~~ Sidisi's Restless Servants
WUBRG The Ur-Dragon ~~~ Dragons eat your face
Now that more people are starting to connect the dots between Oko and Puck, can we finally admit that he's more Temur than Sultai?
Fae + chaotically mischievous + forest-dwelling = Blue / Red / Green
---
#BLM
#DefundThePolice
Also, FlossedBeaver he's totally Sultai....let's argue about that for a long time. LOL. That's what I came here for.
Defend your opinion, please.
---
#BLM
#DefundThePolice
Is it actually sadism, or lashing out indiscriminately against a universe that's wronged him? Impassioned revenge is very much a red quality, targeted or otherwise.
---
#BLM
#DefundThePolice
Sure, we don't know much, but to me, it sounds more like carefully planned psychological torture than lashing out against everything. Besides, sultai fits the colors in the art.
That would be true if there was a chance for discourse in the first place, but it should be pretty clear that was never possible in this thread. As someone else stated, for discourse to proceed both sides must conduct themselves in good faith, among other intellectual norms. When one side blatantly engages in bad faith, it is futile to try to reason or make arguments with them. If someone states as their opinion something that's truly heinous, it should be called as such. Not doing so instead lends a measure of legitimacy to that opinion, as though it's okay to have that opinion and agree to disagree. But it's not okay, because actual gay people are victims of violence for being gay. Anyone whose opinion makes light of that is a bad person, full stop. Giving them serious treatment by engaging with their arguments is exactly what they want (so that they can further obfuscate the discussion as can be seen in this case) and exactly what they don't deserve.
Since you're talking about getting results, in a situation where your interlocutor is being intellectually dishonest at best, it's much more effective to address their character than to address their so-called arguments. This is because if you do the latter, they will pull you along in an endless trail of sophistry--this is not effective. Such a person can never be convinced to amend their opinions, they are arguing not from a position of clarifying an issue but for the sake of eristics. It's best to end the discussion. However, other people who are an audience to that discussion ought to know what is wrong with your interlocutor so that they wont behave in the same way--it can be effective to convey social information in this way. And as long as our only concern is practicality, this guy keeps on bowing out when people make accurate statements about him, so doing so is an effective way of silencing him, and this is much preferable than allowing him to spread his views online.
I'll refer you to Karl Popper's arguments on tolerating intolerance.
This is a situation where people are taking issue with WotC creating an effeminate male character who is perceived as being queer or trans. By the own admission of the people who don't like this character, it's okay for WotC to make a queer or trans character so long as their queerness is not perceptible (it's okay for Ral to be gay because he can pass as straight). If a character's queerness is perceptible, then they're a "token gay" created purely for the sake of diversity at the expense of the quality of the story. Nevermind that no causal relationship has been established between making diverse characters and the quality of the story.
As others have pointed out, no where has WotC officially stated that Oko is LGBTQ. If his existence was really diversity as the first and only priority, they probably would have stated very explicitly that he's queer. Instead the article addressed his backstory in a way that Leslak rightly notes seems metaphorical to the queer experience. Further, his artistic representation ties back to incredibly ancient tropes on trickster figures and androgyny. If MTG's traditional audience finds such a character alienating, maybe they should work on that and sit with their discomfort rather than try to rationalize it.
No, opinions normalizing violence against entire groups of people can't be respected whatsoever. Lending any such respect to such opinions is itself a complicit act.
I considered addressing that poster as you have, but then I realized that they, too, were not arguing in good faith and were otherwise unworthy of a cogent rebuttal. Surely you must have realized that yourself. So, I have only one question for you...
Sultai or Temur?
---
#BLM
#DefundThePolice
As for Oko himself...well, first of all the name reminds me of a brand of wood-based cat litter I promoted last year at Petsmart...but besides that, I'm bugged that society thinks it's okay for men to wear such revealing clothing and to look "glamorous", but not women. If Oko had been a woman, there would be cries of sexualization and indecency from page 1 to now. But since he's an effeminate male, and therefore "subversive", he's allowed to show his midriff and even a good portion of his chest. If women are expected to dress sensibly in MtG, so should men. And if anyone tries telling me that "it's just part of Oko's character" or that "he can use magic to protect himself, so he doesn't need armor", I say try using those excuses for female characters with skimpy clothes and glamorous appearances. The one female planeswalker who wears anything remotely so skimpy is Liliana, and even then only sometimes.
I don't give a flip about Oko's identity, just the double standards that apply to designing characters like him.
Every time I read a comment about "Well if this card had card draw/trample/haste/indestructible/hexproof/life gain...", I think "You're missing the point." They're armchair developer comments that fail to take into account the card's role in the greater Limited and Standard environment. No, it may not be as good as whatever card you're comparing it to. There's a reason for that. Not every burn spell is Lightning Bolt, nor does it need to be or should be.