Jump to content

Chronopolis

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    838

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

 Content Type 

Blog Comments posted by Chronopolis

    *anoyoruniyakusokushita

    Posted · Edited by Chronopolis

    Quote

    I recognize that most people see some assumptions as necessary or preferred, and that's why I try to make people realize they aren't. The problem with those assumptions is that they cause a lot of issues. For example, when most people see a manly guy, they assume he's straight. And that makes things a lot more difficult for him to come out, as he would be breaking everyone's expectations. If people didn't assume that and asked the guy's sexuality if they were curious, things would be a lot easier. 

    So when you say 'Don't assume someone's gender', it's not because the assuming itself is particularly wrong, but because of the additional pressure it could cause a different gendered person, given today's state of relative non-acceptance. (If being differently-gendered was widespreadly accepted, assuming without ill intention, while it would make breaking the truth harder, would not be a huge deal.) Honestly, I did not see this nuance until now. Now I think that 'Don't assume someone's gender' is ill-suited as a opening statement as it leads people to think that you are saying 'assuming makes you wrong' and 'you must stop prematurely using pronouns to resolve this issue'.

    Talking about in practice, if the person does not tell me that they are different-gendered, it's not practical for me to treat everyone as a third class until I get confirmation (which the person might not give because they aren't comfortable). What does "treating like a third class" mean, anyways? What is the objective? If the objective is take considerations in ways we can towards different-gendered people living in this age, then I propose the following:

    1. Not unduly assuming. Referring to someone using the label 'he' has a good reason for it. Assuming gender qualities about them besides from strictly how they act is unnecessary and a good example of something to avoid.
    2. If you suspect a friend might be different-gendered (etc.), you could slip in a remark or few that would reassure the friend that you would be accepting and confide-able, if such were the case.
    Quote

    I don't really get what you mean with 1. 

    Basically, what I was trying to say is that people who are differently-gendered should be aware and try to avoid doing this. And other people should be more tolerant of different gendered people who display that behavior, since, it's basically the same human flaw we see in lots of people. Even more so, they should try to not treat other different gendered people badly because of bad experiences they have had in the past (it's also the case that the 'attention-seekers' are disproportionately visible)

    I suppose the reason why I felt the urge to say #1 was because:

    1. I've seen one cross-gendered person on facebook who was clearly seeking attention
    2. From looking briefly at gender-fluid forums, and also having seen a few people introduce themselves online. 

    About online introductions. Regarding those people, they usually draw too much attention to the fact. For this, tone is important, too. Like others have mentioned, in a forum environment, we usually don't really visualize gender while assessing people, which is why it appears unnecessary and a little baffling that someone would spend more than a line or two talking about their gender. Of course, that's just our impression.

     

    Quote

    But like, if a person with Asperger's Syndrom has difficulty discerning people's feelings based on their facial expressions and such, can't that person ask others to keep that in mind while interacting with them?

    I can't say I know. I, mostly unashamedly have not given much thought on people with such mental disorders.

    Quote

    Different people must be treated differently to reach equality.

    Well, what exactly is equality?

    Looking at wheel-chair parking and accessible buildings. Somebody has decided and today's community agrees that we want to do this. The driving reason being that those people would be severely more disadvantaged otherwise. I suppose you could call this 'for equality'.

    These are concessions supported by the majority, for the benefit of the minority.

    Adjusting to someone with Asperger's Syndrome would be also be a concession, requiring personal effort and perhaps having to bear unpleasantness. I wouldn't doing it once out of courtesy. But most people avoid contact with those people because it is less desirable (more effort, natural human revulsion to disabled people). I suppose we apply our social standards, which are "we choose who we hang out with, and it doesn't matter if someone is left alone". As a nation, we do hire some special aid workers to assist these people in learning and life, so that they aren't severely more disadvantaged, at least in matters of education.

    Everyone using non-gendered pronouns before confirmation would help other-gendered people. But it's not a concession people would want to make.

    Thus, saying "to reach equality" in this sense is obscuring the fact that this is really a concession/benefit problem, which is why I don't like it.

    *anoyoruniyakusokushita

    Posted · Edited by Chronopolis

    Certain things are glamourized in this world. Saying we should include fat characters in our generally idealized stories is basically saying we as a society should shift the set of things we glamorize so that it makes a minority feel better.

    Atm, what we as a society glamorize is mostly depends on what the masses like, and what companies try to propagate to forward their brands and ventures.

    IMO, ideally, you should train people to recognize these societal glorifications for what they are, which is just things to be enjoyed, not reflections of the truth. You shouldn't advocate for a different set of glorifications in order to lull fat people to thinking the reality is some how kinder for it. The reality is what it is.

    I think there was a line of criticism against LN's for glorifying being living an otaku lifestyle. If there was a parallel universe where such otaku-glorifiying LN's didn't exist (that was like 15 years ago), that would be fine, too. I'm sure there were and are a lot of otaku who felt pressure (both external, from people's opinions, and internal, from lack of validation) from the type of lifestyle they chose/fell into.

    The main issue with fat people is not the difference of preference (that should very much be allowed), but existing prejudice. Fat people shouldn't be bullied in school, or insulted anywhere. But those are difficult challenges that revolve around human nature. If your fat and some asshole insults you based on that, that's because they are an asshole, and not particularly because you are fat. Or they have a prejudice. The prejudice, and more importantly, how people act on that prejudice, is the more productive and realistic issue to tackle.

     

    *anoyoruniyakusokushita

    Posted

    25 minutes ago, Snailmusk said:

    The purpose of language is all about communication and clarity. You shouldn't associate the very core of your identity over the definition of a word, because it's totally arbitrary. 

    When my head does loops trying to understand if you're "Proxvir" or "Vocigender" it does nothing but make it harder for us to understand each other as people. 

    If the very idea of something is non-objective, then I don't understand why: > Calling an agender person a "she" feels as bad as calling a cis male a "she".
                                                                                                          and: > a cis male, being taken to a female dorm, with female clothes and called by a female name.
    ...are such cataclysmic social sins.

    If the purpose of gender is to make communication easy, then we should stick to the things that nature has prescribed us, because there IS a level of truth to it.

    if the purpose of gender is something to identify as, it shouldn't be something completely void and meaningless. I identify you as a person by the way you act, the way you think, and the way you conduct yourself. It's what makes us human beings. These identifications and preferences are about as superficial as it gets.

    Feel free to call me a "she" on the street, because the only time my gender really matters is if a doctor is asking to stick his finger up my ass.

    Let's keep language simple, so that we can work towards real problems.

    You. I like your opinion.

    *anoyoruniyakusokushita

    Posted · Edited by Chronopolis

    Quote

    You know, I don't really think you're wrong here. I don't think you should be asking whatever person you see their pronouns or gender, because most might even not have any idea of what you're talking about. I think you should just wait for the person talk about it (usually non-binary people will tell you when they can). Because, honestly, some people we will just meet once or twice, so learning their pronouns will be useless. And the ones that will become part of your daily life will probably tell you at some point. My advice is just to try as best as you can not to assign any gender to anyone.

    That's why I disagree with telling people to be ask people for pronouns. It's an action that catches people's attention (and scoff), but isn't really the important one. It's not really practical to wonder forever (that someone could be any gender-orientation), so I suppose the take-away is to not to unduly assume.

    Quote

    I don't think I understand exactly what you mean. So you think identity is a choice? Well, there's no way to actually be sure if you were born a certain way or if you became that way as a result of environmental stimuli. But either way, it doesn't really matter. It's still not a choice.

    But people's environment is affected by their decisions. Also as a person, you can influence yourself by the lines in which you choose to think. I mean, probably not for gender and sexual orientation, but that could shape the finer things.

    It's possible that a person couldn't help but becoming the person they are. It's also possible that, they had a mental want or desire that influenced their mind, actions, and thoughts, and eventually lead to a different identity. In a way, these people came to possess that identity because doing so makes them feel comfortable. This would sort of be their choice.

    As an outsider, we have no way of knowing whether it was that person's choice. In a ideal world, we should respect people's choices regardless, but to the modern person's sensibilities, there is a big difference between 'choice' and 'had no choice'. People react differently: they are a lot more sympathetic if the person 'couldn't help it'. Just a thought, maybe those two shouldn't be treated as differently as they are now...

    Anyways, I agree that one shouldn't have to change who they are (besides the extreme case of not being able to coexist), even if choice had an effect on that part of their identity.

     

    Quote
    2 hours ago, Chronopolis said:
    What I disagree is giving such thing a label and elevating it to being something that others must always understand.

    No, I don't think others must always understand nor do I expect that to happen. People don't need to understand to respect something. It's like atheism.

    I didn't mean 'significantly understand'. (I agree with what you said in the atheist example, and the acknowledgment part after. I guess I get the impression from the people that present this information, that they are seeking "learn and propagate" out of you, rather than "acknowledge".

    The way I take what you said was "people must make these courtesies/adjustment for these minority groups".  To be able to do that, you'd have to know a something about of what those groups entail. I suppose the purest form of disadvantage minorities have is a lack of understanding. Spreading information (strictly information) in the hopes of increasing awareness, is not a bad thing. Though it's not the the outsider's responsibility to learn about every minority.

    Some assumptions are necessary or preferred. I think the minority groups should acknowledge this, and recognize the other person's perspective. The fact is not that these people are special, it's that they are different and they should be allowed to be different.

    I see consideration from the other side as:

    1. Not acting like you're special. (Ideally, this is the same as doing so without the gender/identity elements.)
    2. Not telling me how someone must treat you differently. (This is different from an atheist leaving in a religious family, as it's not like the other person isn't rejecting who you are or treating your worse for it. Beyond that, I really don't think one should act like people should adjust to you, as that is an effort on their part.)

    Then it's up to the other person's to be open-minded and not to reject that person's identity. This is what I think should be the goal.

    *anoyoruniyakusokushita

    Posted · Edited by Chronopolis

    Your second blog post disappeared, so I'll go reply here.
     
    Firstly, two reasons why people react warily to people who announce the unusual state of their identity, or preach in a SJW manner, is that those two actions can be driven respectively by people seeking attention, and, people wishing to attach themselves to a Great Cause, making themselves feel better by perceiving the rest of the world as 'uneducated' or 'wrong'.
     
    Now actually on to my reply.
     
    The reasons why I don't ask people their pronouns:
    1. By current sensibilities, it feels silly
    2. Inertia
    3. In the current socieity, doing so will lower many people's impression of me.
     
    The third reason is the largest reason. If it was acceptable, after getting over the change, I wouldn't mind saying that as a courtesy. Though imo that's all it is, a courtesy.
     
     
     
    The issue I take with how you present otherkin (thank you google-sensei), etc. is that identity is a lot of things. 
     
    Going off of personal experience, there are things I really liked, that really meant a lot to me, so much that I would consider the state living while 'rejoicing or revering' them part of who I was at that given moment.
    Heck, there was a time where I thought all characters of a series to existed to me. I'm pretty sure that counts as something spiritual.
    I think there's some other forum members who for this kind of thing holds true too. What I'm saying is that identity is who you are at this given moment. None of it is worthless, of course.
     
    What I disagree is giving such thing a label and elevating it to being something that others must always understand.
     
    Your basis of elevation is that for that element of your identity, you did not choose to become that. I'm not sure I agree with that. I think identity in this context is often a process of exploring areas until you find something which feels right to you. When you say "I was meant to be like this \ I'm sure this was how I was born", you really are just attesting to how right it feels, which is a subjective feeling. 
     
    To take a part of one's identity and share it, and tell people to acknowledge it, is basically putting oneself as a topic out there and wanting people to notice you and share (by understanding) in that part of your identity. However, doing this outside the appropriate times is still a social faux paus. Understanding someone is requires time and effort by the other person. It's inconsiderate to impose that on people automatically.
     
    Clephas

    Posted · Edited by Chronopolis

    My list of notables (not to be taken as exclusive, they're just names which I have seen enough of to know for certain, are capable of doing interesting or well-crafted stuff):
    Shumon Yuu pretty much makes you go wow. Even if his style of humour exasperates me to no end.
    Takaya Aya is a hella versatile and generally intelligent.
    Lucle (only data point is 紙の上の魔法使い, but that was skillfully told and put together in a way an average writer definitely could not do)
    Hodaka Nozomu (Enjoy his prose. He likes to write short stories which just entrance you with their atmosphere.)

    Doujin friends
    ts_tassan: Generally knows what he's doing, but always pursuing his own style. I think he stands out most for how good he as at handling teenage girl characters （Can see in 魔法少女, and also in the old novel he has posted on his website）.

    Though, life is too short to just follow these authors.

    Aizen-Sama

    Posted

    Quote

    Is fan-translating Visual Novels even worth it in the first place?

    One saving grace, I think, is that your TL will last forever.

    The person who comes along 5 years later could still potentially appreciate your work the same as someone who read your patch the day it came out. Also, 95%+(?) of the people who read the game won't ever comment. You're gotta remember those people as well, amidst the tomfoolery.

    Aizen-Sama

    Posted

    8 hours ago, Kiriririri said:

    TLDR

    Dear Aizen-sama

    Some people are not very smart and you can't blame them for not knowing everything.

    This. With regards to anime, subs are just all there, like magic. Thus, if one's accustomed to that, without much thinking, it's not too farfetched to imagine that you could just request for some vn titles to be translated. They wouldn't know anything about anime-sub groups, let alone VN translation projects. IMO it's less egregious than say, asking an artist to draw for free.

    As for everything else... is shit, dutifully ignore.

    Darbury

    Posted

    TBH, I didn't realize that tilde was used as sarcasm, and not so chaotically. For the double tilde ~sarcasm~, you can just use asterisks, or italics if possible. People use tilde's probably because they stand out even more.

    Honesty, I would just use the tilde at the end of words and lines.

    Thinking about it, the cutesy sing-song version of ~ may have come from Japan, but the use of ~ to playfully/casually extend a word and soften a phrase "You coming today~?" may have well originated in western messaging. The reason why I think that is that in messaging, there is a real need for that function, and the tilde does that pretty naturally.

    Anyways, I see the point you're making, and I agree that ambiguity should be avoided (within reason).

    My stance is that in TL's~ is that the used as an extender. What is precisely does as an extender depends on the sentence and the word it follows (almost always the last word in the sentence), but it's useful and fairly expressive, which is why I prefer it. Finding a substitute for it takes more brainpower and extending words are ugly. Also, it's not like the likely substitutions aren't ever ambiguous either.

    Quote

    JP: This maggot rice is delicious 〜
    EN: This maggot rice is dee-lish!

    Eww... No comment, otherwise.

    Quote

    JP: I like that shirt on you~
    EN: That shirt is so cute on you!

    Here, in the first version, you can imagine the speaker with a grin/smile as they blissfully hold out the end of the sentence. For the exclamation point, it seems like the speaker is gushing (ie. Wow!). If the speaker is a cutesy energetic character all the time, the exclamation actually might convey it perfectly, since you'll read it out in that tone.

    Quote

    JP: Good morning, sleepyhead 〜
    EN: Rise and shine, sleepyhead!

    The exclamation mark can be read as the person snapping at/scolding the other person. Now, the seperating comma and the fact that 'sleepyhead' is a gentle word helps the remark sound playful. In this case, it's easier if you sub-vocalized.

    Darbury

    Posted

    Quote

    Oh, and also sometimes sarcasm. Oh, and also sometimes singing. So when a reader sees something squiggly at the end of a line, how are they supposed to interpret it? Is it uplift or put-down? Or pop hit?

    I'm saying that the tilde ~ is an english term that's used in pretty similiar ways as the japanese 'wave-dash' ～. And the tilde isn't the only context-sensitive lexical unit in the English language by far. The reader can tell something like this:

    Quote

    For example, if I were to say "Oh, that's so nice~" it wouldn't be sarcastic, just sing-songy. But if I were to say "Oh, that's ~so nice", it would be. I actually don't see it in front like that that often, usually just at the end of a sentence.

     

    Quote

    Besides, you're kind of making my case for me. Your example shows the tilde (which looks a lot like the wave dash, but isn't) being used to indicate casual sarcasm. Then we have the wave dash (which looks a lot like the tilde, but isn't) being used to indicate bubbly joy. Oh, and also sometimes sarcasm. Oh, and also sometimes singing.

    AFAIK, the tilde can be used in all of those situations.

    I can understand if you don't think it should be used in story text because it's a colloquial slang punctuation, but it is an actually used in English, for some time now.

    Random Source: https://forum.blockland.us/index.php?topic=165572.0

    The OP doesn't know what's going on, but the other members seem to be aware of the term. I've also used it as far back as high school in msg'ing (don't know how I picked it up though...), before I even started learning Japanese. Yes, fight me.

    Darbury

    Posted

    You haven't convinced me yet. I'll see what I think in a few months~

    The tilde is actually used in English in casual textual conversation. https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/19moay/eli5_what_is_a_tilde_used_for_and_why_have_people/c8pewhq

    It's not an otaku-stemming punctuation, I think a lot of younger people would recognize it, the people who are familiar with msging/posting on the internet.

    You wouldn't put it in a literary novel, but in a light-hearted visual novel, sure.

    Clephas

    Posted

    Quote

    PS: All the heroines are bisexual.

    What, wow. How bold.

    For me I just spaced out and enjoyed the rhythm of the voiced lines...but my head started to hurt anyways after an hour or so. It's like one of those novelty drinks that are kinda different and cool but disgusting when you consider what flavour's its made of. I kinda would like to see some other games explore more dialogue with a rhythm or feel to it, for dialogue-heavy games. A 雰囲気 game is kind of similiar in a way.

    Darbury

    Posted

    Quote

    I mean, if you could somehow make a MMOVN that writes itself as you interact with others and writes your dialogue based on your actions and increments your behavior based on your interactions with other players - remember, replacing an RPG system with written text as the primary source of information and engagement - it would still be a VN, pretty much.

    I think when you get into the MMOVN thing, the 'VN' part is just the fact that the information given to the player is provided in text form, in a controlled manner. However, once the player is aware that there are players on the other side, it becomes more like a game, practically speaking. But you can play a VN like a game (giving yourself objectives) if you want to.

    The difference is whether the author pre-created what's going to play out, or if the players themselves are going to create the emergent story. The latter would be a text-etc-interface multiplayer roleplaying. It could certainly feel like a VN because of the narrative and how each player sees the information, but I wouldn't call the whole thing a VN.  For prose generated from an underlying game system, what would matter is how much of what happens determined by the author. If it's just the order switching around a bit, then it'd still be author conceived. Otherwise it would be emergent.

    (If you call that type of presentation VN-style, then yes, the game would be a VN-style game, you might even think to call it a VN. But that would overlap with the current notion which has that VN's are something which authors conceive of).

    Quote

    And finally, I believe the framed reading experience to be a symptom of the intrinsic tension between text and other elements rather than a thing on its own. You can still make a visual novels that goes on and on and on without restrictions to the player, i.e. without framing it, but employing other techniques to make reading a ludic act, which is what matters the most (confronting the information it delivers with the voice acting or visuals, for example).

    I suppose an examples of that would be a game where all you do is explore this big manuscript that you view within the game, and when you go to different places you hear different sounds and stuff.

    I have no idea what to call this. It's not quite the same as a set of real letters because you can incorporate sound and visual effects into it. Does controlling the order the player reads parts of the story make the work a VN or not? If you had a series of episodes viewable in any order, that would still seem like a VN. What about if you interacted in a point and click fashion to access the episodes? What about if you walked around a 3-d environment to access those episodes?

    It's just a categorization problem. You wouldn't be able to make a classification for every conceivable thing without being very minute and detailed. You can pick a relatively easy way to categorize works, or you could end up aiming for a categorization that's actually impossible, because our notion of what makes a VN would turn out to be contradictory once you explore the array of things which are possible using text and interaction.

×
×
  • Create New...