Feminism has ruined "guess who" for me

I put that through Translate and it still made no sense at all.

Thanks for that, Nosy

< Looking forward to see how this one pans out...>

CBA to engage with it myself but I know some of you love a good ole debate...

Iask, no, I'm not fighting for human rights - that is a separate cause. I am fighting for women's rights. My feminism is concerned with the systematic oppression, discrimination and violence that women and girls suffer.

Men may benefit incidentally from feminism. I believe that they do. But I don't actually give a shiny shit. In fact, I resent every bastard part of it, because they are so self satisfied, self serving and ungrateful.

If men wish to stand up for their rights, by all means. I would suggest that they already do. If the macho construct of gender that they collectively choose to uphold results in their suffering then no, as a woman, I won't be shouldering the blame.

HTH.

I'm fairly certain that feminism is women standing up for themselves .

Not entirely sure why standing up for everyone else's rights should take precedence over women's rights.

well silver its that some femenist forget that they are not fighting for only womens rights they fight for HUMAN rights for example if a president made it so that all men where slaves and had no human rights nor animal rights would you fight for there rights? also sometimes femenism kinda gives its self a sexist reputatoin one of the reasons is the name why not change it to "humanism" or "equalist'?, not that i have anything against that sometimes they sometimes ingore somethings like jail time no one cares if a woman kills a man well they do but they mostly give a women a lower sentence and if a woman rapes a man no one cares they just think he is a well how do i say this uhm.. a "femenine man?" and speaking of that men that have some type of dilema like pains, emotoinal, or something like that they are forced to "mann up" (video game refrence for any of you who get it :D ) but yea there is somethings that are harder for men and like you said "cant men stand up for themselves"? does that mean women cant stand up for themselves? just a questoin :D

I think you'll struggle to find a general population anywhere on earth that is 81% male.

I should add that Hasbro is a US company, that did half its 2013 sales in the US and a third in Europe, maybe 10% Latin America and 6% Asia Pac, something like that. Lest anyone think I have forgotten about the non white majority in the world.

Here are all the pics for whoever wants to reminisce about Claire and Anita

And while we're at it, where is the outrage that only 5 characters are of an ethnic origin other than white?

In the original game there are 5 BME characters; this is 20.8% of the total number, 24, or 79.2% white. In the 2011 census of the UK, 87.1% of respondents described themselves as white. The US census found that 77.7% of Americans identified as white.

I think you'll struggle to find a general population anywhere on earth that is 81% male.

Now i registered to ask questoins (My name says it all doesnt it?) now the thing is why think its sexist? just ignore the genders just pretend these little figurines DONT have genders! why be all uptight about sexism even if some things actully lean to the balance of women? like jailtime, and other things like if a man is abused.raped,assulted,murdered by a woman thye just brush it off as a femenist i would protest for mens AND womens rights because sometimes you gotta think about the opisitoin in life you know they do say "opistioin makes a true freindship" :)

It sounds wonderfully objective to reduce it to a question of numbers...but why are females automatically in the minority? It's clearly not just about odds and ratios.

It may sound trivial, but when combined with the fact that the majority of characters in children's books and television are male, it does send worrying messages about the place of females in society.

And yes, I also find the dominance of white characters in books/tv/games problematic.

We have the electronic one and, as far as I can remember, it's pretty equal. I haven't played for a while though. There's only so many times you can say, "Are you a man? Do you have red hair? Are your Douglas?"

Agree with fayyive and not just because of their name...

Having any specific characteristic set to 50/50 would certainly ensure asking for that characteristic would be always be the first Q asked since a response of either "yes" or "no" would both allow the asker to eliminate half their possibilities.

The ratios are set the way they are so each time the asker asks a Q they will end up either eliminating a small number or a larger number, which IMO would be more fun than if both a "yes" or "no" response always resulted in halving the remaining number of possibilities

Perhaps the EDL will release their own version in which over time the white male faces start to be outnumbered by ever browner and be-turbaned or hijabi.

What is the proportion of black and minority ethnic in the uk? Does it at least reflect that if not gender?

I'm not saying I agree with this but there is a reason the genders aren't split 50/50:

The ratio of any identifying characteristic is always 1 in 5. So out of 25 total people there are 5 with hats, 5 with moustaches, 5 with glasses, 5 bald people, 5 with dark skin etc etc.

"if you had a female card, you were almost certain to lose"

Not quite. It's like saying if you had a bald person you were almost certain to lose since there are only 5 bald people, or if you had a hat since only 5 wear a hat.

And while we're at it, where is the outrage that only 5 characters are of an ethnic origin other than white?

My very wise DW has just recalled that if you had a female card, you were almost certain to lose. The first question is almost always m/f which narrows the options down massively. There is a clear advantage to being male. Maybe the game is merely holding a mirror up to the world?

Yes, I don't think it's a question of either tackling FGM or Guess Who, is it? And the topic is Feminism Chat, which I think is generally for a range of issues from 'god I hate the Asda Christmas advert' to more serious manifestations of the same basic problem, which is the lack of equality in all areas of life between the sexes. Guess Who is an example of 'othering'. The lack of non-white emojis is another - did Martin Luther King have a dream that one day he'd be able to do 'OMG face' and 'crying face' and 'cross face' in Whatsapp without having to choose white faces to represent his feelings? Well, I don't think it was in an early draft of his original speech but the idea certainly was.

In fact under the equations underpinning Guess Who the only way to prevent one gender from being a characteristic and the other not is either to make all the characters one gender or to make the faces deliberately so androgynous you couldn't tell. Which would rule out facial hair as a characteristic.

Yup Kim, it normalises the othering, depicts them as less than people. People being white, straight men.

I might have a look for that rosy71, thanks. DGD is just getting to the right age for games like this.

We have "Who's Who" which must be another company's copy of the original game. 10 female & 13 male characters, so better.

Danielle..

I kind of see where you're coming from. A bit. However, I'd say that the fact that Hasbro said that being female is merely a characteristic, like blue eyes or wearing a hat or glasses, suggest that they believe that the default is male. You know, like society does. I would suggest that having male as default as the basis of a game for small children isn't teaching them good things about women.

If formative images of women are that they are other than default, then what might that mean for the future? I don't think anyone is suggesting that Guess Who? is some great misogynist conspiracy, targeted at making small boys into rampant MREs, but the small things often build up into a bigger picture, don't you think?

The Robinson's golly was a small thing in the grand scheme of racism, however, when we look at it in the wider context of how people view PoC, then it takes on greater significance.

Plus, of course, most people are capable of being pissed off about the big things, while also recognising that the small things don't help either.