Firaxis stereotyping Orientals

[gettingfat]

Is it just a mere coincidence four Far East Oriental leaders (Mao, Qin, Tokugawa, Wang Kon) are given the protective trait in the Warlord expansion? I don't think so.

Firaxis gives them the protective trait most likely because they perceive these leaders, or more likely, the oriental people these leaders represent, as defenders and isolationists.

If you consider the leaders themselves, OK, Tokugawa adopted isolationist policy when he got old. However, Qin should not have got the protective trait. Qin built the Great Wall does not mean he's a defender or isolationist. In fact, he's the classic example of what an imperialist means - an empire builder. Mao did not befriend Americans does not mean he was an isolationist. It's just his friends were Russians, North Koreans and Vietnameses. He was a philosopher, and he really tried to implement communism, so why take away his philosophy and organized traits? About, Wang Kon, he wasn't even the greatest leader in Korean history. I don't know why he was picked.

In terms of the civs they represent, ancient Chinese were quite open-minded till mid-Ming. Tell me why there was a Silk Road (which I believe it should be made a Great wonder) to start with? Ancient Chinese (and even Chinese today) were about imperialism, high productivity, powerful economy (study showed that Chinese generated 1/4 to 1/3 of total world output till early 1800's), sophisticated bureacratic system. Giving both the ancient and modern time Chinese leaders protective trait is just not right. Except in the Edo period, Japanese were not isolationists. And where is the financial prowness of the Japanese? Their spirituality aspect? Their highly organized and stratified society?

Tokugawa was given the aggressive trait probably because Japanese have attacked the US before. Mongols leaders were imperialistic/aggressive because they attacked the Europeans. Everything is based on the EuroAmerican perspective.

When is Firaxis going to stop this crxp?

 

[AriochIV]

Um.... Winston Churchill has the Protective trait, and he wasn't passive, or isolationist.... or Asian.

You don't think Genghis Khan could be properly described as Aggressive?

 

[Flak]

The people at Firaxis have some of the most screwed up stereotypes and perceptions of history that anybody could possibly have. You'd think they would have bothered to have talked to atleast a few historians or something before programming some of this garbage in. Also, although I'm far-and-hell away from being much of a fan of political correctness, some of the racist stuff in civilopedia descriptions is pretty appalling.

But nobody seems here seems to mind it. I've modded a lot of it out of my games. My cookie cutter mod is mostly done, but I want to get Warlords going and see what I have to do to get that working there as well.

@gettingfat, I suggest you look into modding the game. You'd be amazed at what you can change with relative ease. I like the Silk Road GW idea. You won't find much sympathy here.

 

[FuRRie]

Don't wish to start an argument, but I have my doubts about some of the things you say.
China indeed has a focus on Imperielism, high productivity and powerful economy, the problem with your "study" however is the fact that it's logic that chine generated about 1/4 to 1/3 of the total world production, simply because 1/4 to 1/3 of the people on our beloved planet earth was Chinese... (Statistics say absolutely nothing ...)
You disagree on the fact they have the protective trait, I partly understand, but then yet again, China isn't the country where you can sell all the products you want, you can't walk in and out of China filming everything. They have opened up (a lot) the past few years, which is great, but I must agree on Firaxis to give them the protective trait (Definitly seeing Mao as the leader...)

And indeed it is based on a EuroAmerican perspective, which i find logic, the developer is American and so have a euro/american vision.
You can't always show both sides of the medal (is that an excisting english expression?)
It's just like in history class in High School, the story whe hear about WW2 is much different then the story Russians children hear. You happen to live in a part of the world and you get inprinted with it, it's hard to change all around then

@Flak: Don't be offended about the 'racism' in the civilopedia, it was ost likely not intended to be racism and then again, it's only a game and not a place for religious/political or race discussions.
I haven't looked at the civilopedia closely enough to find any racist comments, but I do believe they are in there.

 

[King Jason]

I personally think you're reading way to much into it.

 

[gettingfat]

Um.... Winston Churchill has the Protective trait, and he wasn't passive, or isolationist.... or Asian.

You don't think Genghis Khan could be properly described as Aggressive?

Out of so many non-oriental leaders, Churchill is the ONLY one who gets the protective trait. ALL four Far East leaders are labeled as protective (if you consider Mongols as Far East people, that's 4 out of 6). What is the odds?

Churchill number 1 historical role was to "protect" UK from the Nazi German. He truly deserves the protective trait. Qin conquered 6 other warlords to reunite China, took out several minority tribes in Southern China, defeated the XiongNu (basically the early version of Mongols) in the north. Mao led a force of fewer than 50000 soldiers of Chinese Communist Party to defeat the Chinese Nationalist Army consisting of a million soldiers. Tokugawa reunited Japan. I'm not too familiar with Wang Kon so I'll hold my comments. One might argue that these leaders have helped defend their countries at some points of their life, but these are certainly not their most important archievements.

 

[FuRRie]

They all did something within the country itself, protecting them from dangers outside the country, so that was protective.
Unlike the Mongols who conquered a lot, so I must say i do for a part understand that Mao/Qin/... get protective while Mongols get Aggressive traits.

 

[DrJambo]

It's a game, get over it. If you don't like it, mod it, but don't start throwing unfounded 'racist this, racist that' comments about...

 

[troytheface]

I think "oriental" is suppossed to be a racist term. Think "Asian" is the accepted word. Yes, racist remarks are still used- in this case by the poster complaining about it.

 

[gettingfat]

It's a game, get over it. If you don't like it, mod it, but don't start throwing unfounded 'racist this, racist that' comments about...

It is a post on a game forum, get over it. If you don't like it, ignore it, but don't tell people what not to comment, and make yourself sound like smart.

 

[AriochIV]

Making accusations of racism is quite a serious matter, actually.

 

[dc82]

I don't find Asians being treated any different than the other civs. If anything, still using the word "Orientals" is more racist.

 

[gettingfat]

Making accusations of racism is quite a serious matter, actually.

There are different levels of racism. It depends on the act. Also it can be intentional or unintentional. In terms of stereotyping, it depends on what type of stereotype label one applies. If I say all Americans are smart no Americans will hit me in my face. Labeling Asians as "protective", which I interpret as being in defensive position and/or a bit isolationist, is at least not too offending. However, it is historically inaccurate and somewhat annoying.

 

[jonpfl]

Is it just a mere coincidence four Far East Oriental leaders (Mao, Qin, Tokugawa, Wang Kon) are given the protective trait in the Warlord expansion? I don't think so.

Firaxis gives them the protective trait most likely because they perceive these leaders, or more likely, the oriental people these leaders represent, as defenders and isolationists.

If you consider the leaders themselves, OK, Tokugawa adopted isolationist policy when he got old. However, Qin should not have got the protective trait. Qin built the Great Wall does not mean he's a defender or isolationist. In fact, he's the classic example of what an imperialist means - an empire builder. Mao did not befriend Americans does not mean he was an isolationist. It's just his friends were Russians, North Koreans and Vietnameses. He was a philosopher, and he really tried to implement communism, so why take away his philosophy and organized traits? About, Wang Kon, he wasn't even the greatest leader in Korean history. I don't know why he was picked.

In terms of the civs they represent, ancient Chinese were quite open-minded till mid-Ming. Tell me why there was a Silk Road (which I believe it should be made a Great wonder) to start with? Ancient Chinese (and even Chinese today) were about imperialism, high productivity, powerful economy (study showed that Chinese generated 1/4 to 1/3 of total world output till early 1800's), sophisticated bureacratic system. Giving both the ancient and modern time Chinese leaders protective trait is just not right. Except in the Edo period, Japanese were not isolationists. And where is the financial prowness of the Japanese? Their spirituality aspect? Their highly organized and stratified society?

Tokugawa was given the aggressive trait probably because Japanese have attacked the US before. Mongols leaders were imperialistic/aggressive because they attacked the Europeans. Everything is based on the EuroAmerican perspective.

When is Firaxis going to stop this crxp?

My fiance is from S Korea and she said using the term 'Oriental' is incorrect. One is supposed to say 'Asian'

And I think you are reading into things. Relax, it is a game.

 

[gettingfat]

I don't find Asians being treated any different than the other civs. If anything, still using the word "Orientals" is more racist.

Wikipedia:

"Major objections to the use of Oriental are chiefly limited to North America. Its use is much less controversial in Europe and Hawaii (despite Hawaii's location, which is east of the Orient), as well as in Asia where, especially in south-east Asian countries, the word is in comparatively widespread usage."

This is not like saying "Chinx". As a Chinese I can guarantee you most Chinese use this term and are not aware of this word being derogatory. Well, since you mention it maybe I shouldn't use it any more from now on, at least when I'm in N. America.

 

[DrJambo]

Words alone cannot be 'racist', although I do agree that due to the way certain words have been used in the past, some now have a derogatory message associated with them. Many people use perceived racist terminology without any racist intent. Is that racist? And what some perceive as racist terminology might not be by others (see above post on 'oriental' being perceived as racist). In the era of political correctness, it's often how things are interpreted that really cause the problems and raise teh eyebrows, rather than the actual intent (benign or mailicious) of the person using the words.

 

[BenniusCaesar]

Welcome to the real world. Western civilisation and ideas have triumphed and thus we get to write the history. Blame your ancestors not Firaxis.

 

[gettingfat]

Welcome to the real world. Western civilisation and ideas have triumphed and thus we get to write the history. Blame your ancestors not Firaxis.

The real world tells me the western civilizations are starting to lose steam and have to listen to the Asians' complaints.

And the real world tells me everyone is entitled to express his/her opinion, and a customer can stop buying a product made by a company. In this case, I won't buy the Warlord expansion. Maybe I'll get a used disc, but I'll guarantee Firaxis won't make more money from me.

 

[Chieftess]

First - it's just a game.
Second - Traits are given based on gameplay, and their UUs, not just what they were historically. Imagine an Aggressive/Protective Rome (with their Praets!). Some traits were given to enhance the UU, too.


Let's not turn this into a flamewar.

 

[ChrTh]

I think that there are currently worse forms of Asian stereotyping in the industry. This is pretty mild comparatively.