Genghis Khan Portrayal: Offensive or Not?

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by Trip
Like this.

now that's someone to be intimidated by, Trip

[Carver]

Originally posted by wrylachlan

Since we don't know what he really looked like, isn't it up to the artist's conception? And do we know that the artist himself isn't Mongolian? I'm not suggesting that he is, but isn't this the assumption you are working on? That he is some white guy who is insensitive to race? Isn't that assumption in itself racist since it assumes that a minority who is sensitive to race couldn't get a position as an artist in a successful game company?

Being someone who is quite concerned with racist portrayals in the media (which includes computer software) I have often had to contend with statments similar to yours. Racism promoted by the media inculcates the minds of the majority population as well as the minds of the minority population. Minority groups themselves can sometimes accept and become desensitized to racist protrayals of themselves, to the extent that they may adopt and mimic some of the racism of the majority population. The race of the artist or artists at Friraxis is irrelevent. If he (or she) was white, he needs a wake-up call. If he was "Mongolian", he needs a wake-up call.

To the "PC Sucks" crowd I say; Fighing racism is not politically correct, it is correct...period. I refuse to be desensitized to racism. I refuse to accept racism. When I see a racist act I will call the culprit on it. When I was younger I wasn't always comfortable making an issue of offensive acts, but being older and more confident I nolonger shy away from the challenge. Legal, institutionalized racism lasted so long in the U.S. largely becuase of good people who remained silent - I do not want to be one of racism's silent partners.

Thank You

[Jon Shafer]

Originally posted by asleepathewheel
now that's someone to be intimidated by, Trip

Isn't it so!

[Carver]

Re: Ugh.

Originally posted by ChaotikVisions

I'm just tired of seeing people yell 'racist' for anything however remote it might be, these are not even close to legitimate concerns that should be taken to Firaxis. Its just picking at something and whining that its racist, with no real purpose. I doubt anyone from Firaxis will ever read this, and any e-mails you send them would probably be laughed at. To find racism in something like this, you have to want it to be there, rather then following common sense that shows it isn't there.

You're tired of seeing people yell racism, well there are people out there who are tired of experiencing racsim. This cartoonish image, which is akin to something from Spike Lee's Bamboozled , is an entirley legitimate concern. The purpose is for the media to cease its racsist infestation of pop culture.

And beleive me, I do not want the racism to be there.

[Mr. President]

Is it racist for all the little white girls like Britney to go on stage mostly naked since it might make white women look like harlots?

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by Mr. President
Is it racist for all the little white girls like Britney to go on stage mostly naked since it might make white women look like harlots?

if it is, I'm a racist


(note: I don't dance on a stage, at least not when I'm nearly naked, I just appreciate it )

[notyoueither]

Man. Yo'all get a grip.

OK. Ghengis is quite ugly. Is he all Mongolians? BTW, Katherine is very disturbing to me, especially since I share some German ancestory with her. Where is the racism? If the depiction of the Khan is racist, so then is that of Kathy.

How about Alex. I can only imagine all the experiences behind that pinched face. Is Mark on here screaming about Greek oppression?

I will grant you something. Yes, stereotypes that pit virtuous ideals against ugly evil ones are racist. But that is not how civ 3 depicts these things. They are doing a fair job of sharing the ugly stick around.

[DhulKhidr]

This picture looks much better.

[wrylachlan]

I'm not saying this is racist or it isn't. Like many difficult subjects, I haven't fully made my mind up.

I would like to ask those who think it is racist the following questions:
1. Is it racist because he is ugly?
2. Is it possible to depict an ugly person of minority race in a non-racist way?
2b. If I am doing a historical painting of a group of white people meeting a single minority, and I know from historical record that that minority is "ugly" (broken nose, scars across his face, lazy eye, the works), am I beholden to "pretty him up" so that future generations will not see my work as racist?
3. What "Real" picture of Ghengis are you using for the baseline to judge how "charicatury" this picture is?
4. This is the hard one. A thought experiment. You sit down with the portraitist and have a discussion on race. He/she prooves to you through the informed discussion of other racially stereotypical images that he/she is indeed sensitive to race, but believes this image is not racist. Is your opinion more valid than his/hers?
4b. If you have a panel of judges who are all sensitive to race, and they look at a painting and split down the middle as to whether or not it is racist, what do you do? Who decides? Who has the power to decide? Who granted that power?

The point I'm making is that most of you who are arguing that it is offensive are assuming that if you don't find it offensive you are generally insensitive to race. But I think I am fairly sensitive to race and I don't think it is a cut and dry case of racism.

[civman2000]

PC is bad, because it makes it look as if everyone is tolerant when they're not. It hides the racism of their thoughts from the language. I'm not saying I support NOT being PC, but forcing people to be PC just makes it look as if they are not racist even if they are. IMO, it would be better if we taught people reasons to be PC rather than forcing them to be PC.

[godinex]

THe portrait is really ugly and offensive for the stupid look like, like Ghandi, like Lincolnl in the ancient ages...

[siredgar]

Of course, if all of the non-European great leaders were ugly and animal-like there would be accusations of racism. We're not idiots, most of us at least. Yes, Montezuma is quite good-looking and normal acting overall. But let's look at the truly ugly and animal-like caricatures.

It looks like the only ones that are really ugly are Genghis and Ghandi. Nobody comes even close to these two. Catherine is unattractive, but that's because she is just plump. She does not look like an animal.

Also, who has the most outlandish behavior? Mao and Ghandi. Have you noticed that all of the European great leaders generally appear civilized and "normal"-looking?

All I have to say is, let's see how the Viking great leader turns out compared to Genghis. If he is equally grotesque in appearance and chimp-like in behavior, then I will "shut up" as you have all demanded.

Honestly, I am appalled by the lack of sensitivity from many of you. I was shocked when I saw the depiction of Genghis and everyone here seems to think it is normal.

[Jon Shafer]

Considering that most people from around the world in the past aren't exactly considered "attractive" by western culture doesn't mean they should make them so just for a game... What do you want them to make Ghandi look like? That is how he looked. Do you want them to pick out some handsome Indian man now and model him for the role? Come on guys, seriously now. I can see an argument over Ghengis Khan, especially considering no one knows what he looks like, but I doubt he was anywhere near a handsome fellow. Like others have said, he'll probably be in a nice business suit with his hair slicked back with gel and some nice dental work in the modern age, just like a Mongolian these days would.

[siredgar]

Ghandi did not look like a dried up elephant-like creature.

[Jon Shafer]

So you're saying that every leaderhead was supposed to look like the actual person 100%?

I don't really notice all that much of a difference, other than his cheeks being sagged a little. Ghandi was not a pretty fellow.