News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Assassin’s Creed: Valhalla and the Unfortunate Implications by gwd on Friday November 20, 2020 @01:02PM (#25163039)
Let's try your formulation in a different context and see if it works. Imagine someone saying this in the '50s:

> There's a lot of media that uses caricatures to vilify [Blacks], but there is relatively little uproar from [Blacks] about it. They don't seem to be very sensitive apart from a small handful...

I assure you, Christians are aware of how poorly they're portrayed by the media, and aren't happy about it. It seems to me that this is one of many factors that led many Christians to support Trump.

"Representation matters" -- indeed it does; and I'm not sure I've seen anyone on TV or in movies that looks like me or the people in my church. Even when they're trying to put people in a positive light, you can tell that it's someone trying to guess what it's like from the outside, not someone who understands it from the inside.

Re:Assassin’s Creed: Valhalla and the Unfortunate Implications by teachrdan on Friday November 20, 2020 @01:30PM (#25163331)
The actual lived conditions matter, too. In the 1950s, Black Americans were harassed, beaten and killed for registering to vote; no such discrimination against Christians has ever existed in the US, or even in North America or Europe, where the games we're talking about are largely developed and marketed.

I agree that Christians are sometimes treated more critically in popular culture. But this is simply criticizing those in positions of power. It's hard to argue that ethnic or other minorities enjoy those levels of power in any of the places these games are made or marketed.

To quote a certain comedian: "Christians won the world. The Christians won everything. If you don't believe me, let me ask you a question. What year is it?"

https://vimeo.com/215910765

Re:Assassin’s Creed: Valhalla and the Unfortunate Implications by throwaway894345 on Friday November 20, 2020 @02:34PM (#25163987)
> The actual lived conditions matter, too. In the 1950s, Black Americans were harassed, beaten and killed for registering to vote; no such discrimination against Christians has ever existed in the US, or even in North America or Europe, where the games we're talking about are largely developed and marketed.

I quite agree. There can be no meaningful comparison between Blacks in the 50's and Christians in recent history.

> no such discrimination against Christians has ever existed in ... Europe

Well, it hasn't for a very long time, but it was pretty bad for quite a while: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Christians_in_t...

Mostly I share this as an interesting historical tidbit; not to refute any of your points.

> I agree that Christians are sometimes treated more critically in popular culture. But this is simply criticizing those in positions of power.

Of course, like all groups (be they religious, racial, ethnic, gender, etc), Christians are incredibly diverse such that there are no real criticisms that generalizes well, and all of these criticisms depend on caricature and stereotype which are (by definition) inaccurate and hateful. Moreover, to target a group for being "powerful" when that power is merely "numerousness in a democracratic context"--without any sort of evidence that the group behaves as a class, conspiring to increase or preserve the power of the group and to distribute that power throughout the group (to give privileges to constituents merely for being part of the group)--is lazy at best and hateful at worst (theories of a Jewish conspiracies spring to mind).

> To quote a certain comedian: "Christians won the world. The Christians won everything. If you don't believe me, let me ask you a question. What year is it?"

Maybe this is an amusing joke, but I don't think it supports your point very well. Lots of different cultures have given us different conventions and standards. We tell time using a Babylonian counting system, but we wouldn't say "Babylonians won the world". Similarly, we use a semitic alphabet but we wouldn't say "Semites won the world". We use Arabic numerals but we wouldn't say Arabs won the world. I could go on and on and on.

Re:Assassin’s Creed: Valhalla and the Unfortunate Implications by bigbubba on Friday November 20, 2020 @04:31PM (#25165243)
Germanic paganism won. Don't believe me? Let me ask you, what day of the week is it?
Re:Assassin’s Creed: Valhalla and the Unfortunate Implications by coredog64 on Friday November 20, 2020 @02:16PM (#25163828)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umayyad_conquest_of_Hispania

Or, if we want more recent history, the Bosnian war or even the currently ongoing dispute between Armenia and Azerbaijan.

If you squint, you might even be able to include sect-on-sect violence which seems like several hundred years of European history, to the point that a group of religious practitioners crossed an ocean to escape it.

Re:Assassin’s Creed: Valhalla and the Unfortunate Implications by mcphage on Friday November 20, 2020 @01:34PM (#25163368)
> I assure you, Christians are aware of how poorly they're portrayed by the media, and aren't happy about it. It seems to me that this is one of many factors that led many Christians to support Trump.

"I don't like how I'm portrayed, so I'll validate their criticisms through my actions" doesn't seem the best solution. If they don't like their portrayal, it seems they would be better off to make the portrayal better instead of making themselves worse.

Re:Assassin’s Creed: Valhalla and the Unfortunate Implications by throwaway894345 on Friday November 20, 2020 @03:35PM (#25164645)
People lash out at their bullies for catharsis, not for prudence. In any case, Christians are very charitable people by any metric, and that didn't spare them any bullying or earn them any favor, so why be surprised when some people behave according to the incentive structure we put around them? It's also worth noting that Christians as a collective didn't vote for Trump, rather they were pretty evenly split.
Re:Assassin’s Creed: Valhalla and the Unfortunate Implications by mcphage on Friday November 20, 2020 @03:58PM (#25164856)
> so why be surprised when some people behave according to the incentive structure we put around them?

I guess a basic level of self-respect? It's one thing to be criticized, but one could say "that's not who I am". And it's not like Jesus didn't warn them they'd be prosecuted for him; there are many, many verses about this very thing. But once they start performing destructive behaviors themselves, suddenly: that is who they are.

Re:Assassin’s Creed: Valhalla and the Unfortunate Implications by throwaway894345 on Friday November 20, 2020 @04:24PM (#25165155)
Jesus also said there would be a lot of people who called themselves Christian but few who actually lived the life. As far as political polls go, they are happy to consider anyone a Christian irrespective of whether they practice any of the traditions or aspire toward the ethics, so we probably shouldn't expect generalizations about "Christians" to be very useful or intuitive. Anyway, I try not to criticize the bullied for how they manifest their scars--it doesn't help them and anyone whose opinion matters is only going to think less of me for it.
Re:Assassin’s Creed: Valhalla and the Unfortunate Implications by mcphage on Friday November 20, 2020 @06:10PM (#25166240)
I’m not aware of any tests that distinguish “true” Christians from those merely claiming to be Christians.
Re:Assassin’s Creed: Valhalla and the Unfortunate Implications by throwaway894345 on Friday November 20, 2020 @09:33PM (#25167472)
I’m just saying that you oughtn’t be surprised that a lot of “Christians” don’t exhibit the ethics when you define “Christian” in such a way that it includes people who don’t try to adhere to the ethics.
Re:Assassin’s Creed: Valhalla and the Unfortunate Implications by mcphage on Sunday November 22, 2020 @09:23AM (#25177652)
> when you define “Christian” in such a way that it includes people who don’t try to adhere to the ethics.

There is no other way to define “Christian”.

Re:Assassin’s Creed: Valhalla and the Unfortunate Implications by throwaway894345 on Sunday November 22, 2020 @01:09PM (#25179525)
Of course there is. The obvious counter example is "people who try to adhere to the ethics". But that's hardly important, the important thing is that you now understand why "Christians" don't behave according to Christian ethics--notably because you're defining "Christians" in such a way that it includes a lot of people who don't practice Christian ethics. Mystery solved.
Re:Assassin’s Creed: Valhalla and the Unfortunate Implications by gwd on Friday November 20, 2020 @04:10PM (#25164985)
> "I don't like how I'm portrayed, so I'll validate their criticisms through my actions" doesn't seem the best solution. If they don't like their portrayal, it seems they would be better off to make the portrayal better instead of making themselves worse.

You're preaching to the choir, as they say. :-) I think Evangelical support for Trump is incredibly foolish for a number of reasons.

Re:Assassin’s Creed: Valhalla and the Unfortunate Implications by throwaway894345 on Friday November 20, 2020 @01:38PM (#25163420)
> Let's try your formulation in a different context and see if it works. Imagine someone saying this in the '50s

There are a number of enormous, relevant differences between these two groups, but more importantly I don't see any good, enlightening dialog coming out of a comparison between the plights of Jim Crow era Blacks and anyone else. It's like the converse of Godwin's Law (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law).

> I assure you, Christians are aware of how poorly they're portrayed by the media, and aren't happy about it. It seems to me that this is one of many factors that led many Christians to support Trump.

I don't think they're "happy" about it, per se, but rather they're not offended enough to object publicly to it. And to be clear, I'm merely observing that Christians aren't as offended (or don't express offense as much) as I think other groups would be. I'm leaving it up to the readers to interpret this as thick-skin or weak-will or something else (I'm certainly not intending to imply any particular interpretation).

Re:Assassin’s Creed: Valhalla and the Unfortunate Implications by mike_d on Friday November 20, 2020 @02:02PM (#25163687)
> Christians are aware of how poorly they're portrayed by the media, and aren't happy about it. It seems to me that this is one of many factors that led many Christians to support Trump.

Christians are facing the same problem Muslims had to face post 9/11. Some of the people in your religion are so absolutely terrible you become hated as a whole for it. Is that fair or right? Of course not. But like any other community with rotten apples, you need to work on shunning and expelling these people... not voting for them.

Re:Assassin’s Creed: Valhalla and the Unfortunate Implications by throwaway894345 on Friday November 20, 2020 @03:20PM (#25164511)
I don't know what good can come from comparing Christian "bad apples" (presumably the 'judgmental hypocrite' caricature) to brutal mass murderers. Similarly, this reads like you're suggesting Christians are uniquely bad at shunning/expelling their "bad apples" or perhaps that they are unique in that they are actively voting them into some office, and perhaps even suggesting that this discrepancy justifies their mistreatment:

> But like any other community with rotten apples, you need to work on shunning and expelling these people... not voting for them.

I'm sure you didn't mean any of those things, but it might be good to clarify.

Re:Assassin’s Creed: Valhalla and the Unfortunate Implications by dragonwriter on Friday November 20, 2020 @10:20PM (#25167647)
> I assure you, Christians are aware of how poorly they're portrayed by the media, and aren't happy about it

I assure you that Christians are not, as a rule, unfavorably portrayed in the media, and many Christians are excessively tired of those members of the single most favored, and socially and politically powerful, subset of America's dominant religion pretending to be persecuted whenever they experience the slightest criticism or restriction in imposing their ideology on others.

> It seems to me that this is one of many factors that led many Christians to support Trump.

Probably not significantly; it's more likely the reason that white evangelical protestants overwhelmingly supported Trump and white Catholics and white non-evangelical protestants also did so, though less overwhelmingly (whereas Hispanic Catholics supported, and Black evangelical protestants overwhelmingly supported, Biden) is that white Christians consistently have more to do with the correlation between views on race and religious affiliation. It's perhaps telling that the share of White Evangelical Protestant (78%) and, White non-evangelical Protestants (52%), and White Catholics (53%) that supported Trump (in an October survey, [0]) are very similar to the share of each (72%, 56%, and 53%, respectively, in an August survey [1]) that believed “police killings of Black men are isolated incidents”.

[0] https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/10/13/white-chris...

[1] https://www.prri.org/research/racial-justice-2020-george-flo...