It’s 2019 and someone in my mentions is talking about how game reviews should be “objective.” God help me.
-
-
... as if offering up an analysis that DELIBERATELY IGNORES any concerns about, say, sexism or racism is “objective” and apolitical rather than what it actually is: deeply political and invested in normalizing sexism/racism/etc.
Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
lol that is in fact what it seems like, yes. “If you’re a normal, standard person—y’know, a cis straight white able-bodied male—this game’s a 9.5. If your perspective is BIASED by you being some OTHER kind of person, then it might be more like a 6.5 but that’s really your fault.”
- Show replies
-
-
-
Good grief. Didn’t they pay attention in English class? “Objectivity” is a dog whistle for “the perspective of the hegemonic class.” >.< unbiased perspectives don’t exist because of structural systems of inequality.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
This is actually incredibly funny. I would try to make a couple of comical reviews like this. It's similar to an idea I had buzzing in my head for a while, but I have zero time and probably zero talent to pull it off.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The people saying that usually want to split not just feminism, but *all of morality* away in a separate score bin. They're autonomists, so they don't believe it matters aesthetically. (Oddly enough, ChristCenteredGamer already has a system like that, but for Christianity.)
-
"Objectivity" is probably a misnomer. They want an autonomist, Wilde-style "games are either well made or poorly made... that is all" approach, which used to dominate utterly.
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.