Deckstats Forum
English-language Forums => General Magic => Topic started by: Aetherium Slinky on June 11, 2020, 08:46:22 am
-
https://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/news/depictions-racism-magic-2020-06-10
How do we feel about the topic?
I'm a little torn on this. Thus far WotC has managed to make the matter worse:
- The price on the cards has spiked and will likely remain high due to them being effectively on the restricted list.
- A lot of people didn't know about the cards...but now they do. This could have been a silent edit. Virtue signalling much?
- It's a bit of a slippery slope in terms of values. In some ways they're now saying racism is worse than (mass) murder (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Murder). I mean if a layman took a look at Invoke Prejudice (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Invoke+Prejudice) and said it's racist then surely that same person would see Murder (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Murder) as pro-murder? Or something like Kindred Dominance (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Kindred+Dominance) being very genocide-friendly. Anyway they're now pitting society's values against each other and saying one is better than another.
I have no idea how they're going to dig themselves out of this. I feel angry at them for doing it this way. I'm sure they're trying to be more inclusive but this just feels like someone started panicking at the office and they started banning cards and even promised they'll ban some more (https://twitter.com/wizards_magic/status/1270825048241135616)...instead of actually thinking about the ramifications of doing so.
-
On the surface, this looks like an incredibly silly move. If they were actually interested in doing this, wouldn't it make sense to just print functional reprints of the cards with different names and art, then explain why the old versions were considered banned cards? They basically just removed cards from people's collections, some of which have been talked about for literal years, without compensating players in any way for a mistake they've known about for a long time.
EDIT: Not to mention, are they going to do this to old cards depicting sexism? They've moved away from the women in skimpy clothing fantasy art style in recent sets, but what about old cards? Are they going to ban Gwendlyn Di Corci (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Gwendlyn+Di+Corci) because she's essentially a half-naked woman who tempts men with sex and then kills them? What about cards like Elvish Ranger (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Elvish+Ranger), who's literally a tan lady in a leather bikini?
I think they should either accept that their game has a long history, parts of which might not be particularly flattering, or make an effort to actually go back and work on past cards that could be offensive. I don't know. This just seems like they tried to do something before people started calling out MtG.
-
Personally I'm all for the change.
I think the ramifications of the effect on peoples collections and the price of the cards is secondary to a much more important issue.
These specific cards are above and beyond normal gameplay pieces and have connotations that can cause genuine offense and upset to people. As a white person that hasn't experienced systemic racism my whole life, it would be very easy for me to say it's just a game and the whole thing is being blown out of proportion, but I think here it is important to listen to those affected by this.
There is a good twitter thread that contextualises each card in turn and highlights why it is problematic compared to other similar cards:
https://mobile.twitter.com/MerfolkMagic/status/1270874078836998146
Cards like Crusade (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Crusade) and Cleanse (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Cleanse) use language widely associated with white supremacist groups, which is why they are a problem compared to cards like Mass Calcify (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Mass+Calcify). In a vacuum, the cards are fine, but when we take a look at the bigger picture and contextualise them within our society and the connotations and allegory that come with them, they start to appear as more than just game pieces.
While WotC are entirely doing this as a response to a media backlash (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Backlash), I think any action that attempts to oppose or steer away from racism, no matter how unintentional or deliberate, is worth taking.
I think in time it would be fair to offer some sort of compensation for collectors along the lines of a trade in or amnesty, but for now, given the wider political climate across the world, being seen to be standing against racism is a good start. The effect on peoples collections can be addressed later, but it is not what is important right now.
-
Hello,
MerfolkMagic tweeds some interesting stuff.
For Invoke Prejudice (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=de&card=Invoke+Prejudice) especially I totally agree. All the other cards too.
This Gypsie word for instance become non-pc a while after the card was designed but today it is the same like the N-word.
For cards like Jihad (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=de&card=Jihad), I wonder (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=de&card=Wonder) that nobody upsets before. (Hope some remember Charlie Hebdo.)
I think it is totally right to ban this special cards for the reasons MerfolkMagic explained. They can easily print some functional cards.
Exept for Invoke Prejudice (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=de&card=Invoke+Prejudice) I won't burn the cards from my collection.
I am an educated male white german. What do I know about racism and how it feels?
-
Invoke Prejudice (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Invoke+Prejudice) is worth over $100. But ok. My point was that the price spike means these cards have more demand now which - I think - is the exact opposite of what WotC tried to achieve.
Just to be clear about this: I think these cards are problematic and the underlying cause is important. Problematic cards don't really belong in Magic in my opinion. It's just the way they went about this that irks me somehow.
About the the specific bans: some cards (reference to "gypsies", for example) were designed in a time where they were completely ok and I feel like retroactively saying they're not ok is just hypocrisy. They should have said "these cards aren't ok" and leave it at that instead of trying to say they were wrong all along and apologise for something that used to be ok. It's like they're admitting to being racist on purpose which is probably worse than being racist by accident since it implies malicious intent (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Malicious+Intent).
Furthermore there's an important question to be asked about politics in Magic. I say the cards and arts shouldn't be political or religious in any way but on the other hand I definitely understand some of the historical references. For example Crusade (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Crusade) doesn't have to be racist, it could also just be a depiction of what went on in the past without implying whether it was right or wrong. Wrath of God (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Wrath+of+God) is a card name I've always disliked but I understand it's a pretty common Judeo-Christian based reference so I would let it pass as a historical reference and not as religious propaganda (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Propaganda).
What I'm saying is that it's ok to talk about issues and depict them in art, practising such acts is not. I guess the line between historical references, negative connotation "-isms" and politics is sometimes very ambiguous. Such a line does exist, though, because I'm sure most people would burn straight up white supremacist propaganda (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Propaganda) and wouldn't burn a history book that talks about white supremacist propaganda (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Propaganda) as a historical fact.
---
I'm going to use some words most people find disturbing. Please read at your own discretion.
BoBWiz (and everyone else, too): "nigger" is a very offensive word but there's no reason to omit that if you're talking about the word itself and its impact. If you talk about the word "gypsy" in a similar fashion and you think it's about as bad as "nigger" but you omit it as "the N-word" you should probably reconsider omitting "gypsy" as "the G-word", too. Same goes for "eskimo" which I rarely see referred to as "the E-word". We're not going to get very far if we keep omitting words we just don't happen to like. Plus, none of these are the most offensive words in the English language - yet we rarely talk about "the C-word" i.e. "cunt" which happens to be the most offensive word in the English language.
Sorry I'm a little touchy on the subject but I just hate it when talking about a subject is so taboo that you're not allowed to use words to describe it. I think that in this context it's necessary to talk about the word "gypsy" since it's a derogatory word that is in the title of a card. You literally couldn't explain the card or the problem with it without using the word itself.
As a final note: all the aforementioned words are very ugly and nobody should ever call anyone by those names. I really hope this disclaimer is unnecessary.
-
My point was not that the cards should be allowed to remain. Of course, Invoke Prejudice (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Invoke+Prejudice) is obviously offensive. My point is, why not make a card with the same effect, call it Prismatic Barrier or something, and make the art a rainbow wall. The effect isn't the problem, and people who want it could play it without needing to deal with the racism inherent to the original. WotC should address this in a better way.
-
I completely agree that WotC handling of the situation has been shitty.
The big point on this is that people have been complaining about these cards for years, and only now when there is a particular focus on racism do they feel the need to address it. That is a poor show.
If we are giving them then benefit of the doubt, then it probably comes from a place that many of us will have experienced (myself included) of it simply not registering as we haven't been on the receiving end of the prejudices that make these cards offensive. As has been reported, a vast majority of WotC is made up of white Americans. I doubt very much that most, if any, of them are racists or white supremacists or anything of the sort, just that the connotations don't jump (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Jump) out at them because their own life experiences haven't been inline with what causes these cards to offend. The same is certainly true of myself. A couple of the cards on the list required me to take a second look or do a bit of research as to why it was problematic as I couldn't see it at first glance.
These cards were particularly problematic because of their real world connotations, but also specifically because of all of the elements of the card as a whole. The name of the card, the art, the effect, the flavour text all contribute to this. The card Cleanse (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Cleanse) would be fine if had a different name. Or a different effect. Even a card with a name like Invoke Prejudice (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Invoke+Prejudice) could be fine with appropriate design and art.
Similarly, I think cards like Wrath of God (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Wrath+of+God) have been fine as they are clearly referencing in game lore and effects and nothing else. Wrath of God (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Wrath+of+God) has only ever depicted in Universe Gods (such as Heliod) or a generic "deity in the sky". Had it depicted a specific God from a real world religion, it could be seen as problematic. I think that distinction is the important part. Nomenclature isn't inherently the problem, but when it combines to make real world references to things that caused people to suffer, it is a problem.
Time will only tell if WotC decide to create functional reprints with more acceptable design for those effected by these. I suspect not. The cards aren't prevalent in any formats and that requires effort on their part without the promise of making a lot of money so they probably wont bother. I'd like it if they did, but I can't see it happening.
I've always found the Warner Bros. handling of topics such as this to be graceful and appropriate. They have a disclaimer before some of their older films which I will share below. Personally, I feel like adding this kind of disclaimer to the cards, while still preserving their record on Gatherer and the like, would probably have been the best. Blanking over their existence doesn't help anyone. Frankly, it looks incredibly dishonest. It's akin to people who idolise Churchill for his war efforts without also acknowledging his bigotry and racism. You have to have the whole picture. Erasing history serves no purpose for anyone other than the people who are erasing it, and usually it's because they want to paint themselves in a better light.
----
Edits for spelling and grammar.
----
-
There is a good twitter thread that contextualises each card in turn and highlights why it is problematic compared to other similar cards:
https://mobile.twitter.com/MerfolkMagic/status/1270874078836998146
The mentioned Invoke Prejudice (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Invoke+Prejudice) is a clear cut case.. everything else is somewhat debatable and this seems like a slippery slope. MerfolkMagic makes a case for Crusade (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Crusade) being a racially insensitive card but claims that Honor of the Pure (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Honor+of+the+Pure) is ok. Personally I could see the purity (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Purity) aspect in HotP misconstrued as racial purity (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Purity) and thus being majorly more offensive than Crusade (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Crusade) for example.
Who's to say what's offensive enough to deserve a ban and whether or not a ban is even necessary. As has been suggested I think that reprinting and changing the flavor texts around and maybe banning certain depictions of the card would be fine if something has to be banned. There are always going to be people who are trying to find certain meanings within the cards but as long as the original design doesn't heavily hint at something nefarious I think it should be left alone.
There are plenty of cards that may be considered offensive in their own right like Village Cannibals (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Village+Cannibals) , Virtue's Ruin (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Virtue%27s+Ruin) or Extinction (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Extinction)
-
I totally agree of what WotC did. It's a pity that it didn't happen before.
@MustaKotka
OK I see your point but english is not my native language. For instance I never mentioned this "c-word" thing. Here in germany swear words aren'd restricted but non-pc words. (Of course you don't say bad words to kids!) :)
I'm guessing nobody understand what "G-Word" stands for. It's no excuse just an explanation. I am sorry.
@Invoke Prejudice (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=de&card=Invoke+Prejudice):
If it's right that the card's painter is at least a sympathizer of white pride ideology relating to this artwork and this old reference number (1488) and the code it stands for, then it should be burned.
A lot of bad stuff get prizy cause of being bad once it starts being bad. Unfortunately, we humans are predisposed that way.
In general I think the respective minority has to decide whether something is politically correct or not.
regards
-
I completely agree that there is an amount of interpretation to any card. However I do feel that there are some key differences between the ones actually banned and the ones highlighted as potentials.
Crusade (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Crusade) is a problem because the Crusades were a thing that actually happened. A long period of history of war founded in religion and racism that "had the objective of recovering the Holy Land from Islamic rule". The Crusades are something that a lot of white supremacists call for reenacting. It is a real part of their end goal.
Every card that was banned has some real world connotation that sets it apart from simple game mechanics.
I do agree that Honor of the Pure (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Honor+of+the+Pure) could easily fall into this list. "Purity (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Purity)" is a key part of the rhetoric of a lot of the groups that advocate these kinds of things. For me it has the same merit for banning as Cleanse (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Cleanse). The effect and the use of language prevalent from the supremacist's rhetoric are applicable to both cards in my opinion. Village Cannibals (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Village+Cannibals), Virtue's Ruin (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Virtue%27s+Ruin) and Extinction (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Extinction) fall less into this category for me. While they each have some real world undertones, they are far less specific to a particular event or type of person. There is only really one aspect of each card that could be seen as problematic as opposed to the others where the name of the card and the effect (and often the art) contribute to its negativity.
Like you say though, it is all subjective. Those opinions are my own. I think what is particularly relevant is that the cards that have been banned all have a history of complaints against them. I personally think the correct way to handle such matters would be to sincerely listen to peoples complaints about the cards and judge each one individually, and based on the list of cards that have actually been banned, it seems like that is roughly what has happened.
Personally I don't see it as a slippery slope so long as WotC engage in appropriate discourse. Sure, there is the argument that this sets a precedent that people can abuse. They could complain about a card that they don't like even though to a wider audience the card is fine with the hope that it gets banned. By listening to the people directly effected by these prejudices and considering their point of view before making any decisions, WotC could easily avoid this getting out of hand.
-
For me this is just a cheap way for getting some positive PR.
I agree on prejudice, be ready to talk about jihad (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=de&card=Jihad), but the others? Err nope.
While I understand that some people have a problem with certain cards, words (or whatever else), but if we want something everyone agrees with, we ending up in hello kitty magic. Wait, even hello kitty is meant to be sexist.
I have a big problem with discrimination and racism, but I think there is often a small but very loud part that claims all rights for themselves and everyone not agreeing with them is a racist/sexist etc.
The best example for this, at least here in Germany, is saying something against Israel or their policies. It is damn hard to argue that there is a difference between what happened in ww2 to Jews and what the Israeli government does today. Usually you get branded very fast as antisemite and/or nazi.
At some point we have to agree that there is a history and not every part is that fine in the light of current events. We can't nuke everything unpleasant out, unless we want to end up with a department of truth like Orwell described in 1984.
-
There were several crusades and some of those crusades went North towards Germany, the Baltic states and Finland for example. Granted the first ones aimed at Jerusalem are the biggest and most famous ones. The iconography has been adopted to a certain extent by right wing extremists but the same is true for much of Viking culture. Just personally just because something bad happened doesn't mean that everything linked to it is polluted and I feel these extremist groups are given more power if we begin shunning things they try to appropriate. Crusades were also directed against "my people" but I feel the term is a fairly generic one, depicting an act of "just" war by an ideology towards people not subscribed to that ideology.
Anyhow as we established it's not about subjective views but about how it's generally perceived. I still think that this could've been handled better and hope that they don't get overzealous (pun intended) with the bans. Good discussion in general!
-
I could list a whole boat load of cards that could be racists, sexists, religious, and so forth. I am playing a game where I am casting spells.
I don't look at the art much or read into the interpretation of the wording of the cards much. I just want to know what the spell does in this fantasy game. I will put an example which this particular card was brought to my attention as racist. God-Eternal Oketra (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=God-Eternal+Oketra) is one of my commander decks. A white creature that puts out and controls black creatures. Yet as playing this spell I just see it as a god sending out a zombie horde in a fantasy world. I could go as far as saying that the zombies believe in this diety which then is religious and can be considered wrong.
Again I just want to enjoy this fantasy of a game as simplistic as possible without bringing reality into such fantasy
-
Your point about crusades is totally fair. I guess that ultimately the cards chosen should come as no surprise to us given that the action was only taken as a direct result of the social and political pressure of the world currently. It will be interesting to see if they do perform a full review of their cards as they have promised and if any other cards are removed as a result, and if so, what reasons they give to justify it. I think that will be telling as to whether or not they are trying to remove cards that people find genuinely offensive or if they are pandering to social pressures.
-
I can see both sides.
As people have said, Invoke Prejudice (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Invoke+Prejudice) definitely should be removed and acknowledged as racist, not right, etc. I can see how people would want to, out of respect, remove certain obviously racist cards, especially now.
That said, somebody did link the Warner Bros disclaimer, and I prefer that way of handling it over this way. They acknowledged their stuff as racist, but the most important thing they did was say that if they got rid of the racist parts, that would be akin to claiming these horrible prejudices never actually happened.
I do want to discuss one card in particular: Cleanse (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Cleanse). I really dislike that they included this card. The art obviously shows a bunch of demonic type figures being "cleansed" by light. I have a hunch that the combination of the name and what it does (destroy black creatures) made them ban this card. That pisses me off, though. It's very obvious that black creatures, in this context (as it is in most contexts) means literally black creatures (demons, shades, skeletons, etc.), and I don't see how that would be likened to ethnic cleansing (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Cleansing). There are so many cards in Magic's history that destroy a specific color of creature. Are we going to ban all of them? I would honestly hope not, as color rivalries are a core part of Magic and are most definitely not tied into racist beliefs. White and black in Magic are about good vs. evil, yin and yang, etc. It's not some hidden poke at a very serious topic.
Otherwise, I agree with the cards they banned, even if I disagree with the execution. Like others have said, WotC calling attention to these cards have jacked their price up and will make them highly desirable for any white nationalists, etc. in the MTG community.
-
I don't really care about WtC decision since that those cards are their products and they can do whatever they want with their image. I just hope deckstats and other sites decide to not censor (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Censor) or remove those cards from their databases. That would be fucked up, just leave the company in charge (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Charge) feel good about pushing their current political agenda.
I think the major part of the playerbase won't be affected by those bans since most of us play casually following the group rules, be it EDH, modern, cube or casual.
-
Like others have said, WotC calling attention to these cards have jacked their price up and will make them highly desirable for any white nationalists, etc. in the MTG community.
And collectors. The cards are now not only rare but also difficult to get and have a special story attached to them. I can definitely see the appeal. From what I've understood there is an entire market revolving around banned and restricted cards even though you can't really play with them anywhere. Actually I think most people buying those cards right now are not supremacists but rather people from the MTG finance community and other collectors.
That would be fucked up, just leave the company in charge (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Charge) feel good about pushing their current political agenda.
Be careful there. Racism is an ongoing social issue, it's not a political agenda - by definition. I think you mean to say they're overreacting and taking this too far? I know I said Magic shouldn't be political but I didn't mean that racism is a political issue. Thus far I think WotC has managed to steer clear of the political discourse which is a good thing (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=A+Good+Thing). I think there are a lot of opportunities for political satire in our current situation but WotC has chosen to ignore those opportunities.
-
To keep this conversation in one place, I'll just add this in this thread...
The Commander RC has also banned the cards in Commander (which was expected).
Commander Rules Committee
@mtgcommander
The RC supports the message Wizards of the Coast are sending through this action, and stand with them in attempts to foster (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Foster) a more inclusive and positive culture. We will be following suit in Commander.
https://twitter.com/mtgcommander/status/1270824139331301376
-
https://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/news/depictions-racism-magic-2020-06-10
How do we feel about the topic?
I'm a little torn on this. Thus far WotC has managed to make the matter worse:
- The price on the cards has spiked and will likely remain high due to them being effectively on the restricted list.
- A lot of people didn't know about the cards...but now they do. This could have been a silent edit. Virtue signalling much?
- It's a bit of a slippery slope in terms of values. In some ways they're now saying racism is worse than (mass) murder (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Murder). I mean if a layman took a look at Invoke Prejudice (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Invoke+Prejudice) and said it's racist then surely that same person would see Murder (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Murder) as pro-murder? Or something like Kindred Dominance (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Kindred+Dominance) being very genocide-friendly. Anyway they're now pitting society's values against each other and saying one is better than another.
I have no idea how they're going to dig themselves out of this. I feel angry at them for doing it this way. I'm sure they're trying to be more inclusive but this just feels like someone started panicking at the office and they started banning cards and even promised they'll ban some more (https://twitter.com/wizards_magic/status/1270825048241135616)...instead of actually thinking about the ramifications of doing so.
I totally agree. To stand against the racism is a good thing (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=A+Good+Thing), but that's not an excuse for acting silly.
Besides your point that racism is banned but sexism and violence in general are fair game, I think (as a non-English person) some references are very far fetched.
- Invoke Prejudice (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Invoke+Prejudice): is there something I don't get in the name or it's just because the hooded men in the artwork resemble the ku klux clan? So pointy hoods are banned altogether? Really?
- Cleanse (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Cleanse): ok, maybe the flavor here is slightly more explicit but, as pointed out in a twit in the thread you've posted, what about Virtue's Ruin (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Virtue%27s+Ruin)? Is reverse racism ok?
If black color implies black people, shall we assume white color implies caucasian? And does red imply native americans?... And green extra-terrestrials from Mars? Oh! Come on... - Stone-Throwing Devils (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Stone-Throwing+Devils): this one I don't get it. I just see some devils throwing some stones. Devils are not humans, where's the racist reference?
- Pradesh Gypsies (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Pradesh+Gypsies): what's wrong with gypsies? Is that inherently negative to belong to Rom/Sinti ethnicity or what? Are we just banning names?
I strognly suggest you to watch this video of the great Frank Zappa arguing about censorship (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Censorship) in music during the 80's: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ISil7IHzxc - Jihad (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Jihad): so, this tells me people inside Wizards of the Coast are ignorant. Jihad (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Jihad) doesn't hint to racism but to religious fanatism, which is another thing.
Muslims are not a race, period. Or are we going back to II World War, when the nazis thought jews were a race? Lame. - Imprison (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Imprison): is this racist just because the guy is dark-skinned? So, were he white-skinned, everything was ok? Really?
Are they telling us this card is an apology to slavery (and again, slavery and racism are different things)? Are they kidding?
Talking about a concept doesn't necessarily imply making apology to it. I'd say this policy dangerously blurs into deliberate censorship (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Censorship)... - Crusade (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Crusade): is this card implying white men are superior or what? So Bad Moon (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Bad+Moon) would hint that black people are better (same for Gauntlet of Power (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Gauntlet+of+Power) and native americans)? Are we banning color-based anthems altogether?
Or is this another example of mistaking religions with races? Ok, let's assume crusades were a bad thing (and they were indeed), then why don't we ban Celestial Crusader (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Celestial+Crusader) and all card with "Crusade (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Crusade)" in their name?
All this stupidity (let's call things with their name, shall we?) makes me remember those times were Wizards of the Coast were accused to be satanist and all kind of silly things happened (like the guy in Unholy Strength (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Unholy+Strength) switching from feeling full of evil power... to just feeling a bit sleepy).
-
Invoke Prejudice (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Invoke+Prejudice): is there something I don't get in the name or it's just because the hooded men in the artwork resemble the ku klux clan? So pointy hoods are banned altogether? Really?
(https://i.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/030/710/dd0.png)
-
Invoke Prejudice (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Invoke+Prejudice): is there something I don't get in the name or it's just because the hooded men in the artwork resemble the ku klux clan? So pointy hoods are banned altogether? Really?
(https://i.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/030/710/dd0.png)
I'm sincerely asking if the reference were to ku klux clan. Please, understand that the world doesn't end beyond USA borders.
In Italy we didn't have the ku klux clan, not everybody knows about it (and banning this card doesn't help explaining anything).
-
I figured as much, but it's not like you don't have an internet connection. One of the advantages to a forum site versus talking in person is that you have to think about what you write before voicing your opinion. You don't risk shooting your mouth off, as I often do. You could have easily chosen to look into why this card is racist, before drawing assumptions. Especially considering that this is the most egregious offender. Here's the gist of it.
- The artist for this card is a known racist.
- The people in the picture are absolutely klanmen; an organization dedicated exclusively to white supremacy, and responsible for many deaths of colored people.
- The name "Invoke Prejudice (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Invoke+Prejudice)" means to discriminate against someone based on factors outside their control (color, sexual orientation, disabilities). Prejudice is derived from "pre-judge". In short, you're choosing to dislike someone before you get to know them.
- The multiverse ID is 1488, although this is likely a coincidence, as cards are assigned a multiverse ID based on their release. Both 14 and 88 are associated with neo-nazis.
Whether WotC made the right call in choosing to get rid of these cards is up for debate. It does nothing to stop police brutality, and this could very well just be an attempt to show that they care. But is Invoke Prejudice (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Invoke+Prejudice) racist? Undeniably.
I leave the rest of the cards for you to look into.
-
I'm sincerely asking if the reference were to ku klux clan. Please, understand that the world doesn't end beyond USA borders.
In Italy we didn't have the ku klux clan, not everybody knows about it (and banning this card doesn't help explaining anything).
Seriously, one doesn’t have to be born in the US to know what the KKK looked like and what their modus operandi was. The intentions of the artist might not (apparently) have been to reference the racist organisation, but the combination of the name of the card and the art makes the link more than obvious.
As for the other cards, you’re entitled to disagree, but in some of those cases you seem to be purposefully ignoring why there are issues with the card or going out of your way to find excuses.
I don’t like making such extreme comparisons, but I’ll just make one warning (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Warning): be careful, even when your intentions aren’t inherently racist, your actions or your words can be. The revisionist stance is racist* and antisemitic even though its adherents might not explicitly state anything else outrightly racist. Defending acts of bigotry is arguably just as bad as practicing them because it validates and encourages them.
* there is one human race. Racism refers to acts of bigotry targeting one or kore specific culture(s) and has no basis on so-called race...
-
I'm sincerely asking if the reference were to ku klux clan. Please, understand that the world doesn't end beyond USA borders.
In Italy we didn't have the ku klux clan, not everybody knows about it (and banning this card doesn't help explaining anything).
Yea dude, it's a fair question if it's not something you're overly familiar with.
Here is why Invoke Prejudice (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Invoke+Prejudice) is a problem.
- The imagery is indeed very resemblant of the KKK. I'm sure none of us need to explain what the KKK are or why that's a bad thing.
- This, in conjunction with the name, sends a very clear message. It's similar to Imprison (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Imprison) in that regard. There are many, many ways of portraying that within the art of a fantasy game without using real world references that are, at the very least, incredibly controversial and for many people, deeply upsetting. But there's more still.
- The artist for this piece has strong ties with white supremacist groups and is known for using racist and Nazi imagery in his works. So much so that WotC stopped working with him years ago, before all of the current events.
- And the icing on the cake is that this cards Multiverse ID is 1488, which is a figure hugely associated with Neo-Nazis and white supremacist groups. The reasons for this can be found here: https://www.adl.org/education/references/hate-symbols/1488.
Of course, that last point could well be pure coincidence, but all of those things combined, no matter how innocent the intentions, have some significant implications.
Personally, for me, Invoke Prejudice (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Invoke+Prejudice) and Imprison (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Imprison) were the worst offenders on that list for the reason I touched upon in the second point. There were a million different ways those ideals could have been portrayed in their art that would be in-keeping with the fantasy setting of the game and would have kept them as merely game pieces. The decision to use those arts specifically sets them apart for me.
Re Imprison (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Imprison): This could have easily been an image of a Goblin in a cage surrounded by soldiers that had captured him. While most of us could look at that and think "who cares that the guy has dark skin?", that comes from a place of being a decent human being and not caring about that kind of thing. For a lot of black people, the stigma and connotations of "The black guy goes to prison" is so deeply ingrained in their culture and their upbringing and their real world experiences that this depiction of this card could, and does, offend them. It's grossly unnecessary, and while those of us who don't experience that prejudice every day (myself included) could easily shrug it off, I think it's important to listen to those who do experience that prejudice with a sincere ear, attempt empathy and consider why it could cause such offence.
Also, I strongly urge you to take a look at an earlier post of mine in this thread that points towards a twitter thread that goes into more analysis as to why each card is problematic. If some of these aren't immediately obvious to you because your own experiences, this thread will help clarify why they are to others.
With this sort of thing, it's important to remember that everyone has different experiences in their lives. Something not being obvious or relevant to you doesn't mean it's not deeply upsetting to someone else, and there is absolutely no reason anyone should be made to feel like shit because the company that makes the pieces of cardboard they like to play with didn't do their homework or listen to their player base.
-
I really dont get the point (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=de&card=Get+the+Point): "The artist for this piece has strong ties with white supremacist groups"
So what?
The piece of art on "Invoke Prejudice (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=de&card=Invoke+Prejudice)" has nothing to do with the political views of its creator.
Should we label every piece of art with the political views of its creator?
So we can avoid looking at art from "bad people"
For me the bannings are a strange and scary thing. "Entartete Kunst" (Degenerate art) comes to mind.
On the other hand WotC can do whatever they want with their game.
just my 2 cents
-
I figured as much, but it's not like you don't have an internet connection. One of the advantages to a forum site versus talking in person is that you have to think about what you write before voicing your opinion. You don't risk shooting your mouth off, as I often do. You could have easily chosen to look into why this card is racist, before drawing assumptions. Especially considering that this is the most egregious offender. Here's the gist of it.
- The artist for this card is a known racist.
- The people in the picture are absolutely klanmen; an organization dedicated exclusively to white supremacy, and responsible for many deaths of colored people.
- The name "Invoke Prejudice (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Invoke+Prejudice)" means to discriminate against someone based on factors outside their control (color, sexual orientation, disabilities). Prejudice is derived from "pre-judge". In short, you're choosing to dislike someone before you get to know them.
- The multiverse ID is 1488, although this is likely a coincidence, as cards are assigned a multiverse ID based on their release. Both 14 and 88 are associated with neo-nazis.
Whether WotC made the right call in choosing to get rid of these cards is up for debate. It does nothing to stop police brutality, and this could very well just be an attempt to show that they care. But is Invoke Prejudice (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Invoke+Prejudice) racist? Undeniably.
I leave the rest of the cards for you to look into.
I’ve been playing Magic since ‘96, so it’s been a while since I was aware of the card’s existence.
You can believe me or not, but I did make the connection with the ku klux clan only now that Wizards has banned the card.
Of the other things you’ve pointed out, I was totally unaware of and I’m safe to say many people from outside USA are in the same situation.
As I said, please understand the world doesn’t end beyond USA borders and people from abroad don’t have to be aware of your stuff.
We already have to go after our countries’ stuff and, after all, we’re here just to play cards.
-
The piece of art on "Invoke Prejudice (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=de&card=Invoke+Prejudice)" has nothing to do with the political views of its creator.
How can someone look at a piece of art by a known white supremacist on a card called invoke prejudice (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Invoke+Prejudice) depicting KKK members and think "yea, this has nothing to do with their political views"?
Should we label every piece of art with the political views of its creator?
Yes, absolutely. Creating art is a very personal thing and to look at art without considering the context in which it was created and the motivations behind it is missing the point entirely. You may well be able to remove yourself from the implications of the art, but that's not something everyone is able to do.
That's not to say that "bad people" aren't capable of creating beautiful art, and erasure of peoples art because of who they are isn't something I'd ever encourage, but art should absolutely be considered within the context of its artist. And in this, I'm talking about art in general.
WotC is a company that's looking to sell a product. It makes absolutely no business sense whatsoever to keep cards that X number of people don't give a shit about but Y number of people find deeply offensive. Why would you piss off a subset of your audience for no reason? If people are living this shit and dealing with these stereotypes everyday, then coming home to escape into their card game and experiencing the same shit there too and are fed up of it, why keep that up? Who gives a shit about "well it was a sign of the times" or "nothing bad was meant by it" or "we had good intentions". No one gives a fuck about these shitty cards from a gameplay perspective, so why subject your customers to the implications that they have?
-
I'm sincerely asking if the reference were to ku klux clan. Please, understand that the world doesn't end beyond USA borders.
In Italy we didn't have the ku klux clan, not everybody knows about it (and banning this card doesn't help explaining anything).
Yea dude, it's a fair question if it's not something you're overly familiar with.
Here is why Invoke Prejudice (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Invoke+Prejudice) is a problem.
...
Very thanks for your explaination.
As for Imprison (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Imprison), I have to point out that my objection isn’t: “who cares if he’s dark-skinned.”
You said: “what if he was a goblin?”
What I’m saying is: “what if he was white-skinned?”
Think about it: was he white, nobody would have raised an eyebrow. So what we have to infere from this? That slavery towards black people is banned, but slavery towards white people is totally fine?
As I said, to stand against the racism is a good thing (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=A+Good+Thing), but that doesn’t justify people for acting silly.
-
I'm sincerely asking if the reference were to ku klux clan. Please, understand that the world doesn't end beyond USA borders.
In Italy we didn't have the ku klux clan, not everybody knows about it (and banning this card doesn't help explaining anything).
Yea dude, it's a fair question if it's not something you're overly familiar with.
Here is why Invoke Prejudice (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Invoke+Prejudice) is a problem.
...
Very thanks for your explaination.
As for Imprison (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Imprison), I have to point out that my objection isn’t: “who cares if he’s dark-skinned.”
You said: “what if he was a goblin?”
What I’m saying is: “what if he was white-skinned?”
Think about it: was he white, nobody would have raised an eyebrow. So what we have to infere from this? That slavery towards black people is banned, but slavery towards white people is totally fine?
As I said, to stand against the racism is a good thing (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=A+Good+Thing), but that doesn’t justify people for acting silly.
Yea dude, I get what you are saying, but it's because he is dark skinned that it is a problem.
Across the world, and particularly in America, people of colour are disproportionately represented as criminals and have been since the abolition of slavery. This stigma follows them in all aspects of their lives and is deeply ingrained in many countries social doctrine. It is this stigma that many people consider the driving force behind the disproportionate levels of police brutality they face. Had the card been portrayed as a white person or a goblin, it would not have had the same impact as those stigmas do not exist to the same degree for white people or goblins.
Furthermore, had the card portrayed someone with white skin and people had have taken offence to it, they would have been well within their rights to do so. If they feel that it implies and unfair stigma against themselves personally, they absolutely should complain about it. Slavery still exists in the world today in many forms and effects people of all colours. Where I'm from in Europe, white people are being kept as nothing more than slaves. Had this card depicted a white man, and those poeple who have lived through that complained about it, their complaints would have been just as valid as the current complaints against the current card.
Think about it: was he white, nobody would have raised an eyebrow. So what we have to infere from this? That slavery towards black people is banned, but slavery towards white people is totally fine?
This for me is an incredibly bad take. It completely disregards the real world ramifications that contribute to the reason Imprison (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Imprison) was removed. Obviously slavery is never OK no matter who it impacts, but slavery against people of colour is what a vast majority of people will immediately think of when slavery is mentioned. Additionally, we'll never know if people would have been upset if he were white, because he wasn't. Someone somewhere decided that the best way to depict imprisonment is to show a black man in chains. That is a problem all of itself.
-
As for Imprison (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Imprison), I have to point out that my objection isn’t: “who cares if he’s dark-skinned.”
You said: “what if he was a goblin?”
What I’m saying is: “what if he was white-skinned?”
Think about it: was he white, nobody would have raised an eyebrow. So what we have to infere from this? That slavery towards black people is banned, but slavery towards white people is totally fine?
As I said, to stand against the racism is a good thing (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=A+Good+Thing), but that doesn’t justify people for acting silly.
You're doing it again. You're not looking into why this card was singled out. And you can't use the "not from USA excuse" again, I already told you to look this stuff up. As an aside, I'm not from the US either, but that doesn't matter. Anyone can understand why this card is racist if they just looked into it.
The mask that the person in this picture is wearing is called an iron bit. It was used as a form of punishment by slave owners. I won't go into details (it may disturb some readers) but this was used as a form of torture (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Torture) and slave capture.
Knowing this info, it's hard to not see this as a reference to oppression (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Oppression). An iron bit on a black person does have a strong connotation. I truly do believe that if it was a goblin it would be different, because then it's not a direct reference to real world suffering. Which is why these cards are out. Death and torment (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Torment) is common in MTG lore, but these cards depict real-world events. Real-world oppression (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Oppression).
So please, stop jumping to conclusions. You are fully capable of seeing for yourself why these 7 cards were singled out. Whether or not this was a good action or just virtue signalling is still anyone's guess.
-
...
* there is one human race. Racism refers to acts of bigotry targeting one or kore specific culture(s) and has no basis on so-called race...
I also want to point out that, although I agree there is some debate upon it, the concept of race denotes animals within the same species (i.e. humans in this case) that have similar morphological characteristics.
I can understand in USA the topic is kind of more "sensible", but technically speaking religion, socio-economical status etc. don't denote a race.
Notably, jews and muslims are not a race, but caucasian, black people, redskins and asians are. At least that's how I've studied it in Italy.
This is very important (at least here in Europe) because the nazis spent 30 years trying to justify the holocaust by saying the jews were "contaminating" their pure "Arian" race.
We now know there is no such a thing as the "Arian" race and the nazis were wrong.
Races aren't inherently a bad thing, it's when people try to give them a negative connotation that we get to racism.
Again, I'm not willing to "teach" anything to anybody, I'm just trying to give a vison from outside USA.
-
As for Imprison (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Imprison), I have to point out that my objection isn’t: “who cares if he’s dark-skinned.”
You said: “what if he was a goblin?”
What I’m saying is: “what if he was white-skinned?”
Think about it: was he white, nobody would have raised an eyebrow. So what we have to infere from this? That slavery towards black people is banned, but slavery towards white people is totally fine?
As I said, to stand against the racism is a good thing (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=A+Good+Thing), but that doesn’t justify people for acting silly.
You're doing it again. You're not looking into why this card was singled out. And you can't use the "not from USA excuse" again, I already told you to look this stuff up. As an aside, I'm not from the US either, but that doesn't matter. Anyone can understand why this card is racist if they just looked into it.
The mask that the person in this picture is wearing is called an iron bit. It was used as a form of punishment by slave owners. I won't go into details (it may disturb some readers) but this was used as a form of torture (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Torture) and slave capture.
Knowing this info, it's hard to not see this as a reference to oppression (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Oppression). An iron bit on a black person does have a strong connotation. I truly do believe that if it was a goblin it would be different, because then it's not a direct reference to real world suffering. Which is why these cards are out. Death and torment (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Torment) is common in MTG lore, but these cards depict real-world events. Real-world oppression (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Oppression).
So please, stop jumping to conclusions. You are fully capable of seeing for yourself why these 7 cards were singled out. Whether or not this was a good action or just virtue signalling is still anyone's guess.
Here in Europe, when you speak about an "iron mask" the first connection you make is this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_in_the_Iron_Mask
Again, you can believe me or not, I don't deny any of these cards depict unpleasant topics, I'm just saying from a non-USA point of view they're not that evident to justify a banning.
In my first sentence I used the term "far-fetched", I didn't say "false", "arbitrary" or whatever.
I just want to stick to my comment when speaking about Imprison (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Imprison): "Talking about a concept doesn't necessarily imply making apology to it."
By talking about things, you get to know them better and judge them for what they are. By censoring them, you only increase ignorance.
In this, maybe Wizards has taken the correct step, i.e. spreading the word and push people to talk about these topics.
I personally know many more things now than just a couple of hours ago, and I'm glad of it.
Anyway, I still think they could have just posted a message saying they were sorry for printing those cards in the past and they'd have got the same positive result.
The banning is plain silly, at least to me.
-
...
* there is one human race. Racism refers to acts of bigotry targeting one or kore specific culture(s) and has no basis on so-called race...
I also want to point out that, although I agree there is some debate upon it, the concept of race denotes animals within the same species (i.e. humans in this case) that have similar morphological characteristics.
I can understand in USA the topic is kind of more "sensible", but technically speaking religion, socio-economical status etc. don't denote a race.
Notably, jews and muslims are not a race, but caucasian, black people, redskins and asians are. At least that's how I've studied it in Italy.
This is very important (at least here in Europe) because the nazis spent 30 years trying to justify the holocaust by saying the jews were were "contaminating" their pure "Arian" race.
We now know there is no such a thing as the "Arian" race and the nazis were wrong.
Races aren't inherently a bad thing, it's when people try to give them a negative connotation that we get to racism.
Again, I'm not willing "teaching" anything to anybody, I'm just trying to give a vison from outside USA.
Dude, this is such a bad take. This has absolutely nothing to do with why WotC decided to remove these cards from their game.
Why are we debating semantics? Who gives a shit about what technically constitutes race? Races (as people understand them) ARE given negative connotations, that's literally the whole point of the problem.
"Yea, actually it's not racism because we're all technically one race. It doesn't matter that you're singled out because of your skin colour because we're the same".
"But we're not treated the same by society".
"Well, my treatment is fine so I don't know what you're talking about".
I'm from Europe. I've likely studied very similar things to you. This is not an issue that is localised in America, and this pedantic attitude doesn't help. Real people are getting unfair treatment across the world for things that are way outside of their control, and the society we live in has normalised this. That's not OK, no matter what the root cause is.
A company recognised the part they have played in it and tried to do better. Regardless of how intentional the initial incursions were or the motivations behind their decisions to change, the fact that change is happening is a good thing (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=A+Good+Thing).
This attitude of "I don't find it problematic so it's not a problem" will never cease to blow my mind.
WotC: We're removing these cards from our game. They depict or are indicative of real world prejudices that many of our players experience and are causing those people upset or offence.
Magic Players: But it doesn't impact me specifically. It's fucking stupid. It's political correctness gone mad. Who cares? I'm not black so I don't know what it's like, so why can't I play with these little bits of cardboard anymore?
I'm just saying from a non-USA point of view they're not that evident to justify a banning
What more justification do you need? I'm not from the USA, but I completely understand it. People told WotC that these cards portray sentiments or imagery that upsets or offends them. They listened to them and decided that there was merit to their argument and decided to remove them. Why would the voices of people who don't experience these things carry more weight than those that do?
-
I think I've already answered in my last post.
By the way, let's say I was living under a rock all this time (it could be), if everything was so “straightforward” and “obvious”, why during these 25 years everything was fine to everybody then?
-
I think I've already answered in my last post.
By the way, let's say I was living under a rock all this time (it could be), if everything was so straightforward and obvious, why during these 25 years everything was fine to everybody then?
They weren't. Many people have gone on record to say that they have complained about these cards repeatedly for years. The difference is that WotC only took action amidst pressure brought about by the global situation. That's on them, but it doesn't invalidate why people felt these cards were problematic.
-
In defense of a lot of companies, it can be difficult to show that you care, especially if there really is nothing you can do. My favorite example:
(https://i.redd.it/kj0ss6efm2451.png)
But Magic was aware of these cards. I knew of a few of them before, but not all 7. Clearly this was something WotC had been sitting on. I think it was good of them to address it. I'm still not sure if this is actually helpful.
Also, not gonna lie, Invoke Prejudice (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Invoke+Prejudice) was a pretty good stax piece. Oh well. It sucks, but I'll manage.
-
Kind of OT in a way but...
Notably, jews and muslims are not a race, but caucasian, black people, redskins and asians are. At least that's how I've studied it in Italy.
That term is actually becoming a hot button topic in the US at the moment to some degree. Native Americans for many years have complained about the term being racist and offensive. Now in light of all the attention to racial insensitivity in the country this has been given more attention. The Washington Redskins (an American pro football franchise) are being pressured more than ever before to change their nickname. So much so that they're getting financial pressure from companies such as FedEx, who owns the naming rights to their stadium as well as 10% of the team, to do so. Rumor is other companies (Nike and Pepsi among others) are privately applying pressure as well.
ETA- Nike has now removed all Redkins merchandise from their online store and the mayor of Washington, DC has publicly stated that if the team wants to build a new stadium in the location they were looking at that they would have to change the name first.
-
I think we're looking at this topic in the wrong way.
It doesn't matter whether or not if you specifically are not insulted by it/think those cards should be banned. It does not matter one bit. It's impossible for some groups to understand what goes on with other, more oppressed groups. We can sympathize, we can fight with them, but we will never truly understand what they have had to go through.
If they say that this small list of cards makes them uncomfortable/is inappropriate in this time, then those cards should be removed. End of story.
Note: I personally do not agree with the banning of Cleanse (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Cleanse) but if a wide group of people all want that card removed, then who am I to disagree?
Also, I recently read something I found very interesting. A lot of people have been hating on these big companies like Hasbro for making statements in support of BLM, LGBTQ+, and other groups fighting for equality, saying that they are only doing so to look better in the eyes of their customers. While this may be true, that indicates something very healthy for the state of the world. These big companies won't say these things unless it is "safe" to do so. These statements indicate that people on a wider scale are ready and willing to be a part in these issues. If most people are against these groups, then these companies wouldn't be saying what they are saying.
-
The history of WoTC mishandling things largely comes from two different angles: Lack of transparency and over-reacting to outside influences around the company.
1) The company needs to learn that taking no action can be a valuable thing. If some card from 20+ years ago is racially insensitive, don't draw attention to it by acting on it. If someone is screaming out their lungs on some issue they have personally with the way the company is run, don't go out of your way to ban them. Those people are fringe at best and don't represent the majority of people playing.
2) They need to redo the entire play design system. There's nothing wrong with powerful cards, but powerful cards that are open in terms of interaction in a game with thousands of cards available is playing with fire. It allows organic growth, but at the same time also makes it very easy for deck builders to break the game in tournaments. If they want to work with planeswalkers as the focal point for deck theme, than build powerful, useful cards that are tied to the mechanic of that walker. Even if this means we end up having to sub-type spells as (Fire) or (Ice), and then have creatures or walkers that specifically interact with those kinds of keyword cards.
-
I thought a good exercise to look for other “racist” cards.
I still think this ban is stupid (of course it is), I just want to go with it and see where it gets me.
It could be interesting, regadless of everyone’s opinion, so I invite others a to join me in this.
Army of Allah (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Army+of+Allah)
I honestly don’t understand why Jihad (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Jihad) is banned and this is ok.
I mean, they have a card with Allah in its name, that’s a huge sin for muslims. Many companies have fallen in big troubles for this kind of things.
In fact, when I was younger, I even remember some of my friends complaining about Wrath of God (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Wrath+of+God) because it was “disrespectful to Christianity” (I’m actually atheist but - hey! - I do have friends that are truly observant nonetheless).
While I honestly was unaware of Invoke Prejudice (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Invoke+Prejudice) and other cards, this and Jihad (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Jihad) have always baffled me: how can be that nobody complained about them? (Maybe because it wasn’t that big of an issue after all?)
-
Tormod’s Crypt (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Tormod%27s+Crypt)
This card (in its The Dark version) depicts the celtic cross, which is a well known nazi symbol.
In fact, in Italy and Germany, the depiction of symbols attributable to nazi-fascism are allegedly forbidden.
In practice, however, nobody applies this norm because the “fascio” originally was from the roman empire (you can see it even today in the coat of arms (https://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?utf8=1&lng=en&card=Coat+of+Arms) of the spanish “guardia civil”) and the swastika is a protection rune in I don’t know which far-east religion.
https://www.google.com/search?q=swastika+temple&rlz=1CDGOYI_enES887ES887&hl=it&prmd=imvn&sxsrf=ALeKk037ZaXa-VFa7IJzySxx2CQl6B-fMg:1593857051128&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjdruuarLPqAhV07OAKHWf5BvQQ_AUoAXoECAwQAQ&biw=375&bih=640
The same is true for the celtic cross, which has (as the name implies) more ancient origins than the nazi-fascism.
You could always say you were referencing the other stuff, not the nazi-fascist symbols, and bribe the law.
For the very same reason, I think MtG’s banning is stupid.