this post was submitted on 09 May 2025
68 points (87.0% liked)
RetroGaming
22606 readers
172 users here now
Vintage gaming community.
Rules:
- Be kind.
- No spam or soliciting for money.
- No racism or other bigotry allowed.
- Obviously nothing illegal.
If you see these please report them.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Could you elaborate on that? If I'm understanding you correctly, you're suggesting it's identity politics to say publicly that a piece of media influenced your political views?
Are there cases where that doesn't apply? for example: "There Will Be Blood made me Anti-oil" or "How Nausica Valley of the Winds made me an Environmentalist", or "Grave of the Fireflys made me Anti-war". Are all of those conceptual titles equally verboten?
Yes, because there's literally no reason to make it about political views. And yes, those titles would be just as ridiculous in my book.
Again, discussing themes in a game isn't the issue. The issue is that the title was very specifically written that way to catch clicks. Clicks from similar culture warriors and from those who disagree. It's disingenuous and completely unnecessary.
Interesting, by your guidelines, there's quite some limits on expressing oneself to appease people who can easily avoid and skip over a clearly labeled piece of content.
From my perspective, it's as though someone came into a tavern and, fresh ale in hand, overheard a political discussion happening in a corner booth. Perhaps the subject was particularly distasteful to this theoretical tavern goer, and instead of ignoring it or moving to a seat where they can't hear it, they instead march up to said booth and demand these booth talkers cease their discussion immediately, explaining that they come to the tavern to relax, not have these political ideas pop up everywhere they go.
I suspect the people in the booth would be quite bewildered as to why this theoretical person is going to such trouble to involve themselves in ceasing an activity they could so easily avoid.
That analogy might work if not for the fact that I've attempted to block political discussions from my Lemmy feed through instance blocks, community blocks and word blocks, yet I still see people obnoxiously shoving their political views into everything.
I think the analogy holds up beautifully.
The man proceeds to tell the booth talkers that he's taken great pains to avoid seeing or hearing politics in his daily life, such as quickly muting political ads on TV, requesting his neighbors take down their Trump flags and local candidate election signs in their yard, and taking backroads to avoid seeing a political billboard on the way to work, all in the effort to spare their eyes the misfortune of sliding across disgusting politics. So it's perfectly reasonable that he demand to the booth talkers they cease their discussion immediately, and switch to a topic he approves of, he explains, confident in the knowledge that they will understand the pains he's gone through.
The two people in the booth glance at each other uncomfortably, wondering what terrible fate brought this demanding and oddly entitled man to their booth. Finally, one of them flashes a half-grin and spreads their hands disarmingly "Hey man, I get it that you don't like what we're discussing, but if we give in to your request, wouldn't that mean we'd have to give into any other request you have about topics? What if we were talking about sex amongst ourselves and that too wasn't acceptable since you go to efforts to avoid that topic as well? I don't think we want to live our lives beholden to your feelings on things, that's for us to decide. Have a good day."
Yet again, the analogy fails. This is a community themed after retro games. As is on point for the Fediverse, folks can't resist shoving their political views into everything, then they act as if it's unreasonable for people to say they don't appreciate the attention-seeking, echo chamber nonsense in a totally irrelevant community.
The video is about a retro game, it's just that the retro game has content you don't like and don't want other people talking about.
No. It's an advertisement of political beliefs veiled as a retro games post.
"Look at me, I'm a leftist! Oh, and it's relevant because a retro game made me one, see???"
Give me a break. It's nothing more than an advertisement.
Then go elsewhere.
You don't get to force politics in a non-political community, then tell people who disagree that they need to go somewhere else. Nope, that's not how it works.