What do people actually want male gamers to be like?

[FFMaster]

Doesn't work like that. You can't extend privilege to others, because privilege refers to a preferential treatment. Extending the same treatment to other groups means the original isn't being favoured anymore. Raising another group up is removing privilege.

In any case, that is what is being talked about anyway. People want (for example), more female representation in games, nobody is suggesting taking an axe to the industry and cutting out all the male-dominated games.

Exactly that was my point just worded in a longer winded way, rather than pulling one group down we should be pulling the other group up, giving them the same privilege, thus nullifying it while both parties have the advantages.

However unfortunately there are people suggesting that some games are taken away, they shouldn't be doing this IMO as it should be a simple case of "if you don't like it don't play it, let others enjoy it", which isn't always the case.

Jim Sterling likes to say "people are not taking away your games", this is however false in my eyes due to things mentioned earlier on the in thread (using terms to class items as immoral in peoples eyes). While people who don't like game X will never say that they shouldn't make it, what they will do is say its wrong and write negative articles about it, thus having the same effect as saying "you can't do this" without having to actually use the words (as marketing departments will push for not having X if it causes a backlash). hell they could even just ignore it and blacklist the dev like has happened to a couple of indie devs , once because they didn't like the title art.

Its gonna be a interesting "test" for the media in a few months time with Final Fantasy XV, currently its looking like its a all Male playable cast, and its being hinted that a female playable character would be difficult for story reasons (obviously this might just be translation issues from the JP interviews). If the story reason is valid will be interesting to see how they handle it or if they will take shots.

As if they do it would kinda show that the press still wants to wield that axe!

 

[Thaluikhain]

However unfortunately there are people suggesting that some games are taken away, they shouldn't be doing this IMO as it should be a simple case of "if you don't like it don't play it, let others enjoy it", which isn't always the case.

Jim Sterling likes to say "people are not taking away your games", this is however false in my eyes due to things mentioned earlier on the in thread (using terms to class items as immoral in peoples eyes). While people who don't like game X will never say that they shouldn't make it, what they will do is say its wrong and write negative articles about it, thus having the same effect as saying "you can't do this" without having to actually use the words (as marketing departments will push for not having X if it causes a backlash). hell they could even just ignore it and blacklist the dev like has happened to a couple of indie devs , once because they didn't like the title art.

How is that different from any other complaint, though? People write negative articles about games in regards to all sorts of game elements.

Game has poor combat, game has bad writing, game has sexist elements. I don't see much difference there, and it's not like games with poor writing have stopped being made due to complaints about them.

 

[Something Amyss]

You remove something, you get a push-back, its basic human nature.

You elevate others, people push back because they feel they're still losing something. Trying to rephrase the issue doesn't change it, it just pushes it back a notch.

 

[Something Amyss]

Game has poor combat, game has bad writing, game has sexist elements. I don't see much difference there, and it's not like games with poor writing have stopped being made due to complaints about them.

In fairness, gamers often react poorly to these criticisms when they feel it threatens "their" game. This is justr a broader 9and evidently more vitriolic) version of the same old.

 

[Thaluikhain]

So you think society treats the races differently, and the solution is to treat the races differently, not exactly the most sensible plan of action.

We should acknowledge that those differences exist. It doesn't really matter that they are artificial ones, they exist regardless of their source. Pretending that they don't doesn't help.

Yea, eventually it could happen actually. It's certainly not going to be tomorrow, but maybe if racism, sexism, and other prejudice were actually viewed as a bad thing, like i remember it being not to long ago, and i still think is very true, than eventually yes, the prejudicial people would get fewer and fewer and maybe 500 years down the line one or two countries could finally get there. We were well on our way until this positive racism bullshit reared it's ugly head.

What? At some point in the near past society really was opposed to prejudice? Yeah, that is not a defensible position to take. Why are nations still struggling with issues like gay marriage, why wasn't it legalised back in the good old days when people cared?

The idea that prejudice had mostly disappeared, only to be brought back by people concerned about prejudice is laughable.

 

[Barbas]

(Snip).

I don't think people really know what it is that they want from you. They're probably as tired and confused as you are.

It really is as simple as being a decent human being, but being a decent human being is not simple. You can't do it in five minutes, it takes years. If it means anything, you seem to be doing all right to me. Better to be too self-conscious than callous and cruel, but if you're being painted with a broad brush, you can ignore the uninformed opinions of the people who are doing the painting. It's a shame that accusations and generalizations are still being thrown about, but at least having had enough of it puts you in pretty good company.

 

[BiscuitTrouser]

Times like this is when I wish we still have the draft, I'd like to see these people spend a year in the shitholes of Afghanistan and then try to talk about the fucking male privilege.

Im signing up as a medic with the army, doctors without borders or the red cross at some point so ill let you know if i stop being a feminist after i serve (gimme some years to finish the medical degree though). I still accept theres vestiges of a patriarchy. The idea men cant raise kids is the result of a patriarchy that says men work and women raise and thus both are inept at the other. Seeing there is an imbalance in responsibilities in my view is understanding that when the patriarchy declared men superior to women in the past it expected them to do more to make up for the weak simpering women.

To destroy the notion men CAN and thus SHOULD do more than women is to attack the remaining pieces of patriarchal notions. Im all on board for that.

Having privilage in some arenas doesnt mean you cant have a shitty life. I mean fuck you GOTTA admit being a woman in a ghetto with a rape rate through the roof is a huge disadvantage. Not having that is a privilege in my view and i aint ashamed to say that, i feel privileged as fuck that i dont have to put up with that stuff and ive been through some shitty stuff.

 

[Sonic Doctor]

I know I'm late to the party with this thread, but this section of your original post really got to me.

-snip-

Whether a purchase makes me look like a creep is an actual factor in my game and movie buying decisions for fear of someone taking a photo of me and putting it on some tumblr blog along with my contact details so they can make my life hell for buying a guardians of the galaxy comic that could've done with far more thought put into the front cover. For the past year or so, anytime I've gone outside, I've lived by the rules that have been set down for me lest I be doxxed, shamed, and exiled from any nerd community.

-snip-

Are you a well known personality and/or famous. If the answer is no, then chances are that your whole line about the chance of being doxxed and whatnot is means nothing. Nothing it that the chances of you being doxxed and all that, even being taken a picture of for some site, is slim to none.

Really, the only things that should come to your mind when making a purchase is:

1.) Can I afford this(meaning money).
2.) Do I have room for it(depending on size).
3.) Is my interest in the item enough to warrant a purchase.
4.) Anything else about making the purchase that has nothing
to do with what people think of you.

With stuff like this, especially nerdy stuff, people put way too much stock at what others think of them making such purchases. If the item passes the four criteria I've listed above, make the purchase. Who cares what others think of the cover of a comic.

I've not once been looked at strangely or had rude comments made about the things I purchase, people either say nothing with normal looks about them(if they says something later about me without me knowing, who the hell cares, I don't), or they are very polite and ask and seem interested in what I'm interested in.

Just the other day I was at a Barnes & Noble and I would say I bought some nerdy stuff. A Doctor Who comic, and Vol.5 and 6 of the manga of Spice and Wolf(which of course has that "Adult Content Warning" on the cover), which on the Vol.6 cover the character of Holo, she is naked(though covered). It turned out to be a very pleasant purchasing experience as the cute girl that rang my purchase up at the counter looked at the Spice and Wolf manga and asked if it was any good because she was wondering about it. I gave my positive recommendation of it and then I went about my day.

If you constantly weigh your purchases on the social ramifications, you will miss out on so much you could have experienced.
You should buy what you want, you might get bonus experiences when you find people that are interested in such things as well, then if you ever get someone making rude comments about what you like, just ignore them, they don't matter.
I find it amazing how many people don't make purchases because random people that don't know them or aren't a part of their lives will think of them. Like I've seen people on the internet, on youtuber videos where they are trying to sell nerdy shirts and whatnot to fans, comment that they can't buy the shirt from said youtuber because it is too nerdy and they can't wear things with nerdy references out in public, because of ridicule or people not getting it. To which I say, "Who cares, wear what you want to wear. I wear nerdy shirts all the time out in public, I don't get ridiculed and if anything I get compliments from everyday people."
People need to just suck it up, and buy what they like, have fun.

Doclector, buy the things that make you happy, not the things that will make others happy or think good of you. I guarantee that you will have a lot less stress and have more fun/entertainment.

Build yourself, your identity, on what you want and like and the positive ways you view yourself, not on what others want and like and how they view you.

 

[KrystelCandy]

Wow, ok, i never implied we were close, just that we were on the right track a few years ago, like say the 90s/200s, before "cultural appropriation", "privilege" and "social justice" were taken seriously (because they're racist), and you were viewed as a monster if you judged someone based on their race(because that's racist). When the idea that race didn't have to be a thing if we don't want it to was more popular, and the progressive world was in favor of doing away with race as a whole. There was still a fuckton of prejudice, sure, but at least the general concept of prejudice was frowned upon by the educated world. And i'm more talking western nations, like Europe and America, the rest of the world is a totally different story. Point is, racism is bad no matter what race you're trying to promote. Sure, pretending disparity doesn't exist isn't the way to go, but when you work towards equality, and weed out the racists, you might make a step in the right direction.

How is your method any more realistic anyway? You think if you make a group lobbying for, say, African american rights, they'll stop lobbying if a moment comes when we hit racial equality? No, they won't. Because the job they were assigned was not to promote equality, but to promote a specific race. The idea that with enough special interest groups and competing racism, competing stereotypes, and competing prejudice we can get them all to somehow cancel each other out and promote equality is completely absurd, because nobody is lobbying for equality, the thing that we actually want. So someone is just going to end up being the winner at some point, and that group gets unfair treatment for that time. At no point does your hypothetical and unrealistic method get us equality, at least my hypothetical and unrealistic method has a light at the end of the tunnel.

Wat. Are you serious? Do you know how long these movements have been going, and just how RECENT some of the changes/acceptance has been? privilege is a term given to things that CURRENTLY exist, not some made up word made up so that we can be rebellious for the sake of being rebellious. Holy smokes, there's SO much prejudice in the 90s-00s, absolutely tons and its better now than it was. Heck it's more frowned on TODAY than back then.

Also, you're kind of suggesting thought control, people can think whatever they like, it's when it impacts peoples lives in terms of job hunting and the like that it becomes an issue. If you want a videogame example of racism done well, Kenny on Lee in the first season of walking dead, he assumes Lee can break into places because he's black, and when he's called out on it he goes "oh shit, I'm sorry! Stupid stuff just comes out of my mouth sometimes." It's not about weeding out, it's about educating in order to get past preconceived notions regarding race and/or gender.

Jeez, even if thats the case, are you seriously suggesting they do nothing? It took a long time for black people to get real rights. "No colours allowed" was a thing not THAT long ago, what, 2 generations? I don't think you understand what racism is seeing as how you conflate it with so many different things, including positive differences regarding culture and identity. And it's debatable if we even want pure equality, but we sure aren't going to get it if people do nothing, because people default to the status quo without some pushed form of change either way. One step at a time, you need to acknowledge and fix issues and then work towards equality. And even then, I don't really care for a society that cannot celebrate the differences between our heritages, our cultures, and our beliefs.

Your hypothetical and unrealistic method is just that, a hypothetical that is unrealistic. It won't happen. You're advocating a position of stagnation rather than progression. Nobody would have issues with anyone if we were all happy living with the status quo of 1888.

 

[carnex]

Guys, girls, insert label here.

We are not equal. Women are better at some things, men are better at some things. Women enjoy some thing more, men enjoy some things more.

Men liking tits, ass, lobbing heads off, hearing gravely voice, hearing female seductive voice etc in his games is not oppression, it's not privilege, its something men wants to see and is willing to spend required amount of money to get. it's not hurting anyone.

Not all games are as attractive to stereotypical men just like not all games are attractive to stereotypical women.

Point is, most males want to have something specifically tailored for them and also think that women therefor deserve something specifically tailored to their sensibilities. It's that bloody simple. And if company has interest (projected profitability) in satisfying anyone's taste they will do it in a heartbeat.

Why do you think anime started featuring ridiculous levels of fanservice and girls of questionable ages in 50% or more of yearly production? Because people who throw most money at anime and are most avid watchers and truly loyal consumers that will eat up even shlock that helps studios survive high budget products are people who eat up that crap. And that crap can be made on cheap.

Market doesn't give a F about gender, race, color, ability, body type etc. It cares about the taste of the source of money.

 

[KrystelCandy]

Guys, girls, insert label here.

Market doesn't give a F about gender, race, color, ability, body type etc. It cares about the taste of the source of money.

It does actually. An example is the show Young Justice, a western cartoon about superheroes. It was cancelled because it had too many women watching the show and the producers thought they couldn't sell toys to girls. Paul Dini and Kevin Smith had a nice rant together about it, you can find the interview easy enough with a simple search. Which is funny since the "barbie" market heavily dwarfs the boys action figure market, and us gals will gladly buy tons of shit that ISN'T toys. Shirts? Hell yes.

The issue is they see "gender, race, color, ability, body type etc." outside the normal "straight white dude" as increasing the risk of a product. This may or may not be true, but it's what's led to so much stagnation. This is because the market is focusing HEAVILY on a single audience and isn't diversifying due to the increased risk of losing the "core" market they've had all this time in order to seek new pastures.

So actually no... industry, publishers, tv execs GLADLY pass up money if they don't think it will work, and tend to double down and sabotage the shit out of a product just to be proven right. Hello Firefly. Hello Last of Us publisher not wanting to hire female game testers to hear their opinions. Hello Bioshock Infinite.

The market is the group right now that's saying to them "WE WANT MORE DIVERSITY IN OUR STUFF" and it's the publishers who are going "No we can't do that, it's too RISKY to deviate from what we've done for 20 years." Heck look at Legend of Korra, nickelodean has been AFRAID of putting any real backing behind the show despite how amazing it's been year after year. Little to no advertising, putting it in bad timeslots, refusing to commit to a full season. That's why the show has been only miniseries and why it tries to cram so much into a short time frame, the producers just don't want to put any backing behind it. Could it possibly be because of the female main character? I mean the show is amazing in every way, and the last airbender is a damn amazing show, why would you be AFRAID of a followup to something like that? Even if it was garbage it would do well.

Food for thought.

 

[Panda Pandemic]

Uh seriously, what the hell is this? Rules set down for you? Who told you that you can't buy certain comics or even stand near a woman? It sounds like paranoia on your part, not rules laid down by anyone else.

And then you have this bizarre expectation that listening to what everyone says (or what you think they said) is going to lead to a coherent way to live? You do recognize that not a single one of them expects you to listen to everyone, right? You have to pick who you listen to by first developing your own sense of right and wrong and so on. If you don't then it's no one else's problem bit your own. You can't just listen to everyone else and not think it through for yourself then complain.

 

[Thorn14]

Guys, girls, insert label here.

Market doesn't give a F about gender, race, color, ability, body type etc. It cares about the taste of the source of money.

It does actually. An example is the show Young Justice, a western cartoon about superheroes. It was cancelled because it had too many women watching the show and the producers thought they couldn't sell toys to girls. Paul Dini and Kevin Smith had a nice rant together about it, you can find the interview easy enough with a simple search. Which is funny since the "barbie" market heavily dwarfs the boys action figure market, and us gals will gladly buy tons of shit that ISN'T toys. Shirts? Hell yes.

The issue is they see "gender, race, color, ability, body type etc." outside the normal "straight white dude" as increasing the risk of a product. This may or may not be true, but it's what's led to so much stagnation. This is because the market is focusing HEAVILY on a single audience and isn't diversifying due to the increased risk of losing the "core" market they've had all this time in order to seek new pastures.

So actually no... industry, publishers, tv execs GLADLY pass up money if they don't think it will work, and tend to double down and sabotage the shit out of a product just to be proven right. Hello Firefly. Hello Last of Us publisher not wanting to hire female game testers to hear their opinions. Hello Bioshock Infinite.

The market is the group right now that's saying to them "WE WANT MORE DIVERSITY IN OUR STUFF" and it's the publishers who are going "No we can't do that, it's too RISKY to deviate from what we've done for 20 years." Heck look at Legend of Korra, nickelodean has been AFRAID of putting any real backing behind the show despite how amazing it's been year after year. Little to no advertising, putting it in bad timeslots, refusing to commit to a full season. That's why the show has been only miniseries and why it tries to cram so much into a short time frame, the producers just don't want to put any backing behind it. Could it possibly be because of the female main character? I mean the show is amazing in every way, and the last airbender is a damn amazing show, why would you be AFRAID of a followup to something like that? Even if it was garbage it would do well.

Food for thought.

Yep, lot of old fashion old guard conservative business people with outdated views who think they "know better" out there.

But that doesn't mean the market cares, just the people in charge with mistaken beliefs.

Uh seriously, what the hell is this? Rules set down for you? Who told you that you can't buy certain comics or even stand near a woman? It sounds like paranoia on your part, not rules laid down by anyone else.

And then you have this bizarre expectation that listening to what everyone says (or what you think they said) is going to lead to a coherent way to live? You do recognize that not a single one of them expects you to listen to everyone, right? You have to pick who you listen to by first developing your own sense of right and wrong and so on. If you don't then it's no one else's problem bit your own. You can't just listen to everyone else and not think it through for yourself then complain.

Doesn't Anita have a presentation that says LISTEN AND BELIEVE?

 

[Panda Pandemic]

Guys, girls, insert label here.

Market doesn't give a F about gender, race, color, ability, body type etc. It cares about the taste of the source of money.

It does actually. An example is the show Young Justice, a western cartoon about superheroes. It was cancelled because it had too many women watching the show and the producers thought they couldn't sell toys to girls. Paul Dini and Kevin Smith had a nice rant together about it, you can find the interview easy enough with a simple search. Which is funny since the "barbie" market heavily dwarfs the boys action figure market, and us gals will gladly buy tons of shit that ISN'T toys. Shirts? Hell yes.

The issue is they see "gender, race, color, ability, body type etc." outside the normal "straight white dude" as increasing the risk of a product. This may or may not be true, but it's what's led to so much stagnation. This is because the market is focusing HEAVILY on a single audience and isn't diversifying due to the increased risk of losing the "core" market they've had all this time in order to seek new pastures.

So actually no... industry, publishers, tv execs GLADLY pass up money if they don't think it will work, and tend to double down and sabotage the shit out of a product just to be proven right. Hello Firefly. Hello Last of Us publisher not wanting to hire female game testers to hear their opinions. Hello Bioshock Infinite.

The market is the group right now that's saying to them "WE WANT MORE DIVERSITY IN OUR STUFF" and it's the publishers who are going "No we can't do that, it's too RISKY to deviate from what we've done for 20 years." Heck look at Legend of Korra, nickelodean has been AFRAID of putting any real backing behind the show despite how amazing it's been year after year. Little to no advertising, putting it in bad timeslots, refusing to commit to a full season. That's why the show has been only miniseries and why it tries to cram so much into a short time frame, the producers just don't want to put any backing behind it. Could it possibly be because of the female main character? I mean the show is amazing in every way, and the last airbender is a damn amazing show, why would you be AFRAID of a followup to something like that? Even if it was garbage it would do well.

Food for thought.

Yep, lot of old fashion old guard conservative business people with outdated views who think they "know better" out there.

But that doesn't mean the market cares, just the people in charge with mistaken beliefs.

Uh seriously, what the hell is this? Rules set down for you? Who told you that you can't buy certain comics or even stand near a woman? It sounds like paranoia on your part, not rules laid down by anyone else.

And then you have this bizarre expectation that listening to what everyone says (or what you think they said) is going to lead to a coherent way to live? You do recognize that not a single one of them expects you to listen to everyone, right? You have to pick who you listen to by first developing your own sense of right and wrong and so on. If you don't then it's no one else's problem bit your own. You can't just listen to everyone else and not think it through for yourself then complain.

Doesn't Anita have a presentation that says LISTEN AND BELIEVE?

Wtf are you on about? What does Anita have to do with anything? Why would I know and what would such a presentation have to do with anything?

 

[KrystelCandy]

I'm not suggesting thought control, social pressure and thought control are not the same thing actually. Just having an opinion and expressing it are a form of social pressure. Is the fact that racism has become less popular "thought control"? Or is it because over time people have started to wise up and be a little more educated?

And of course we're doing better now than we were back then, because these things take time. But suddenly deciding racism is a good thing is total shit. And what exactly is "progress" to you? What, just making specific groups more and more powerful? Face it, at some point, if we can do this right, equality is going to start to become visible off in the horizon, and at that point, "progress" does need to give way to "stagnation". In other words, we need to be ready to stop if we finally manage to somehow get it right.

I don't think YOU know what racism is. It's just a discrimination based on race. So yea, your "positive difference" which i've asked you 3 times to explain what that is now and still never gotten a straight answer, is just racism, passing judgement based on race alone.

If you want to try and strive for some magical land where cultural differences exist and magically don't create tensions and problems when conflicting cultures meet, instead of recognizing that we don't have to be defined by our race, or our culture, and that, holy crap, there are other ways we can meaningfully draw identity for ourselves, and we won't become clones just because race stops mattering, because, holy shit, there are other, more important features that set up apart and make us unique.

You said yourself you're against preconceived notions, you said we need to educate ourselves above them, and that's what i'm trying to do right now. You have preconceived notions of how certain people should act based on their "culture" or their "privilege", and i'm trying to educate you that these preconceived notions are wrong. People should be allowed to define themselves however they like, not be forced to exist in some box you and society have made for them, regardless of how "positive" this particular box might be.

I'm not suggesting we "do nothing". I'm suggesting we work towards equality, not prejudice and segregation.

I don't think you understand what prejudice and segregation and racism mean honestly.

Here is what racism is, it's the belief that someone is biologically inferior due to their heritage. This is looking at someone as biologically inferior due to their birth.

Celebrating someones differences based on culture has no such basis, that's going and say "you're belief system is neat, as are your celebrations and other things." Racism is saying "you are inferior to me based on my preconceived notions about you based on your appearance."

These are very different and seeing as how you keep saying that is "segregation, prejudice and racism", I am pretty certain you don't know what these things mean. Educating yourself about someone and acknowledging they are different from you does not mean you feel that they are inferior in any way, it's just being SMART and realizing people are individual human beings.

Part of living in a world where we can be different individuals with our own cultures and beliefs is acknowledging that tension may sometimes exist, but accepting that its WORTH it because of the positive benefits that such things can bring. Nor do I say anyone has to be defined by anything, I work with people who are from places as far away as South Africa, France, Australia etc in my workplace and I treat them all the same. However I also find their culture and history fascinating and I talk to them about their homes and ask them how they feel it's different working with people around the globe while on secondment. People have different thoughts and experiences based on where they've been and enjoy different kinds of environments, and that's super neat to me. However I don't treat them differently when we talk about things or work.

Prejudice is believing someone is inferior to you based on preconceived notions. Segregation is keeping someone seperate based on things that individuals do not have control over (skin color, gender), and racism is a combination of prejudice and segregation. You believe someone is inferior and should be kept away from you based on biological things a person has no control over.

Also wut, preconceived notions of how people should act based on privilege? That's not what privilege is.

National examples - Australians tend to be a bit more outspoken and more open in their speech, Russians tend to be a bit more conservative and do not smile at strangers as much (it is considered insincere to smile for no reason), Canadians are more predisposed to apologize as it is considered the 'appropriate' response to given situations of hardship, Japanese people will refuse a gift twice and accept on the third (to prove a gift is sincere). These are just cultural things that are not necessarily shared elsewhere and have NOTHING to do with segregation, prejudice or racism and it's cool that that's how it is. These are cultural things that just are, and of course, they arent hard set in stone RULES, so of course if people do things differently from person to person, but you can expect a large number of people to adhere to certain cultural norms from their home.

 

[KrystelCandy]

Since when does culture = race? Sure, there are different cultures, i'll celebrate most, and i'll oppose the ones that are amoral (like the cultures that force women to cover their faces). But nobody should be forced onto a culture based on their race. I honestly think discrimination based on culture is somewhat justified in light of cultures that promote religious law or extreme sexism like some of more backwater parts of the middle east and africa (hell, even america). Race isn't a choice, you're stuck with it, and it doesn't reflect who you are, so clearly it shouldn't matter at all. Culture and belief is something else entirely, it reflects something actually important about yourself, It doesn't really have much to do with race, and it's perfectly legitimate to pass judgement based on culture or belief. If you believe gay people should be killed because your god said so, and your culture treats women like slaves, then yea, i'm gonna oppose that. Culture and belief are a choice, and actually reflect who you are, race does not.

You have a very narrow minded view of racism and prejudice, you define it as specifically meant to demean, but even trying to raise people up is racism. Or if you don't want to accept that definition, than whatever you want to call making any judgement whatsoever based on race, that's what i'm against and you're trying to promote. For example, saying "man, that white guy is probably really smart because he's white" Is clearly prejudice, but under your definition it wouldn't be, since it's not "demeaning".

>People have different thoughts and experiences based on where they've been and enjoy different kinds of environments, and that's super neat to me. However I don't treat them differently when we talk about things or work.

Exactly, people have different thoughts and experiences based on where they've been and enjoy different kinds of environments, NOT the color of their skin. Kindof the point i've been trying to make this whole time.

>Educating yourself about someone and acknowledging they are different from you does not mean you feel that they are inferior in any way, it's just being SMART and realizing people are individual human beings.

I'm the one trying to advocate this, you're the one saying we all need to be defined by our race and not realizing people are individual human beings defined by things much greater than race.

And for the fourth time now. What do you mean by "positive differences"?

I have said celebrating differences. Many peoples race have a shared culture Jamaican's tend to have a shared cultural history for their race, race is not skin color. Vietnamese, Japanese and Chinese all have similar features, but they are not the same race. What seperates peoples is their culture that they choose to identify with. Racism and race tie together, you have preconceived notions based on what you see. That persons black so therefore I believe x and y about them.

Kenyans are better runners and have a natural advantage over others. Is this racism? Sure. Is it bad? Not really. There's scientific proof of it, due to the fact they live at high altitudes their bodies have adapted to better deliver oxygen to their muscles. This means in most marathons where they are in more oxygen rich altitudes for the run, their bodies are better at delivering oxygen and it gives them an advantage compared to others. It is a natural advantage they have for living there, and there's nothing wrong with it.

Some african people are predisposed to certain heart conditions that white people aren't, and thus have certain medication that is more targetted to help them rather than generic prescriptions. Is this racism? Sure, is it negative? Not really.

The norse vikings were better at building boats than everyone else. They made their life on the sea and adapted new technologies to better sail on the sea. Racism for believing the norse were better at building boats than others? Sure. Also provable (they had more advanced compasses than others at the time and coudl reliably sail to iceland/greenland and their boats were damn masterpieces).

Acknowledging and celebrating differences and reacting accordingly. I don't go "this white person is smart cause hes white!" there's no basis in that belief. That's belief that he is superior based on his appearance/birth. There's no evidence to support such a thing so why would I support it? Nor would I go up to an individual Kenyan and say "you're great at running right!" Because individuals are individuals. It just means they have a natural advantage for a thing and may have cultural dispositions reflecting certain attitudes. I don't take preconceived notions about anyone into a conversation.