Leatherface masks removal
Comments
-
She points out that in no Leatherface movie or in the real life history of Ed Geins do either ever wear a black face and why because people kept saying "but it's OK because the lore." Asking "but what if Ed Geins mom was black?" is just trying to find a way through what if scenarios that don't exist to make the blackface mask acceptable.
If you're going by Ed Gein lore there's no arguing there would be other masks hence her bringing up the IRL inspiration for Leatherface.
If you're going by the movie lore he never once wore a mask that wasn't a white person and there's alot of movies where he could've. First movies were probably implicit bias but the more recent they didn't do it because a white man wearing a black face would bring up the racist history of blackface.
In the DBD universe they made the masks but they didn't fit his lore outside "he wears faces" since even in the DBD lore it says each face has a role - he never took on a survivor role wearing a survivor face.
Milady Confetti doesn't handwave away the historical context or symbolism of blackface. She literally says you are on YouTube and can go watch numerous videos or read scholarly articles, she just personally isn't going to do it in her video when there's already so many resources out there.
2 -
BHVR took multiple individual complaints of the blackface mask being used to harass players and amplify racism in their game so they are removing the mask to prevent anymore incidents of racist harassment with the mask.
2 -
The masks do fit his lore because nowhere in the lore does it state he would spare a black person because they are black. So yes, the argument can be made that the fictional character leatherface would do the same to anyone and not discriminate based on skin color. If leatherface wore the face of a black person, it would not bring up the history of black face. It would only do it to people who try to find racism where racism doesn't exist. As I said, not all black people think alike and share the same views and opinions as each other. Not all of them want to be continually victimized and excluded from creative work because some find offense to certain things.
3 -
In the lore he does not discriminate when he kills, he will kill anyone to protect the family. As for faces he takes on the roles of the faces he wears - he never took on the survivor role while wearing a survivors face, he was always a killer.
2 -
I'm not normally the type to post on message boards but this debate caught my attention and I felt compelled to weigh in and ask some questions.
First, the definition of intrinsic is belonging naturally, or essential. Blackface was a medium by which racist stereotypes were spread to a wide audience. It was a powerful way of controlling a narrative that depicted a group in a negative way. Racism is inherent in the history of blackface. That's regardless of the intent on the behalf of a modern-day wearer. This makes racism is an intrinsic element of blackface. The act of a non-black person dawning a black face - using make up or not, I'm not sure the distinction truly matters except at a semantic level - is close enough to blackface as to be indistinguishable. I'm not sure what the argument is here.
Further, regardless of a personal stake in the mask, the developers saw their creation used in a way that hurt people and decided to take remedial action. That seems like the responsible thing to do. In doing this, they only blamed the people using the cosmetic for ill means. In reading about this, I haven't seen the developers call into question the motives of any other users. This seems incongruous with the backlash, where players seem to feel the need to proclaim themselves as not racist. If Behaviour didn't call you out specifically, no one called you a racist, and this argument seems irrelevant.
What I'm really interested in is why Behaviour taking a step they felt morally compelled to do to safeguard the playing experience of some of their players - regardless of the size of that audience - bother some so much? This is a game, it is designed to be enjoyable, and Behaviour seems like they're trying to keep it enjoyable and protect their brand image. Does this cosmetic contribute significantly enough to your gameplay experience that you should be able to keep it even though it can be used to torment others? If Behaviour is no longer comfortable with this cosmetic being available because it is being used to do harm to others, should they be forced to leave it in at the expense of their feelings even if just some members of the audience want it? And do you really feel that their moralistic decision should be up for the debate of the community if their work is being used to hurt people in a way they don't like, and they took what they felt was the best action they could to prevent others from being targeted? It doesn't mean they're telling anyone how to think or feel, but removing a tool to be used by some to hurt others.
5 -
Actually, you're using a falacy... basically your statement is the following "because X says that LF mask is blackface then that means it's true" which is not, it's like saying you're right just because you're the president... that's appealing to the authority and it's a falacy.
5 -
Don't handwave away my argument because you're too lazy to talk about it.
We are talking about a general archetype here: If a child was abused by a mother, and their mistreatment from their mother resulted in a mental structure leading them to killing women and wearing their faces, would you classify that as racism or a mental disability?
Using that archetype in a generic setting does allow for scenarios created in which it may overlap with a topic that has a heavy relation to racism, such as the perceived symbolism of blackface, and that is why I have no qualms with this change. However, calling Ed Geins, (and Leatherface) racist is incorrect.
The core issue here is blackface, and its negative impact on people, NOT LEATHERFACE OR ED GEINS.
Stop trying to convince people that Leatherface and Ed Geins are racists. (It really comes across as such)
Convince people that Blackface has a significant historical association with racism, and that while on an individual level, Ed Geins/Leatherface may not be racists, but how they are portrayed in media with the inclusion of an extremely similar cosmetic option to blackface in a widespread medium keeps a fresh reminder of that in people minds which doesn't help with moving on and overcoming those old connotations.
1 -
Thats a far stretch in your argument there. If were going to assume things about a fictional character then at least be consistent with the fiction of the character. And being consistent with the fiction of the character means regardless of the color of the person he kills, he'd wear the face too. That also does not make him or the idea of it racist or black face. That is literally just being consistent with his character. You can drag this out as long as you want, but every time I will tell you you're wrong because you are wrong. There are black people of all walks of life in this world. To make changes to accommodate some because something is considered racist is the wrong approach. You keep trying to argue that this is a good thing for black people but who are you to speak on behalf of them? Have you ever considered that maybe there are black people in this world that are sick and tired of being told they're a victim all the time and just want to be treated like everyone else? Well this cosmetic along with the others leatherface could unlock would be just that. It would be everyone being treated equally.
3 -
The problem is that this is not an individual 1 to 1 relationship of DBD (the game) with you (yourself).
This game is shared in a social setting, and these fictional characters are used as entertainment. Much as they were used for such in their movies/mediums.
White man wearing a black face has generally been a tool to depict blacks during a time in which it was generally just shitting on them and as such has been the generally associated connotation.
Had everyone played nice and not perpetuated this connotation of only jackasses using a symbolic similarity to blackface things might have been different. But here we are, with it having a disproportionate use with targeted harassment. Sometimes children need to be treated like children.
1 -
You are creating hypothetical what if situations which are just a distraction from the issue of the Claudette mask being blackface. Even in your scenario you only give option of this or that when it could be both. I tend to not bother arguing hypotheticals because people will continue changing the scenario by adding what ifs just to fit their narrative.
It seems like you have completely misread my comments. I never argued Ed Gein or Leatherface are racist - I said they both only ever wore white faces and why and why their actual histories (not hypotheticals) aren't an excuse for keeping the masks in DBD. I originally brought up the video on not using lore as an excuse to keep a blackface mask in the game when someone tried to use lore as an excuse - you commented on that and I responded to you. I've literally said Leatherface the character isn't racist, it's the players using a mask to harass others and amplify racism. I have repeated multiple times throughout this post that BHVR has said the mask is blackface, that historically blackface is racist, and the mask is being used to harass players and amplify racism.
1 -
I still say its finding racism where racism doesn't exist. If the actions of a few trolls are going to change things for everyone, this is a problem. Its a problem for creative developers. Its a problem for story writing. Its a problem for the future of gaming and entertainment in general. People need to take a more reasonable approach to this. Excluding content because some people used it in a bad way is not the answer.
3 -
Read the DBD lore, no where does it say he wears all the faces of his victims. What it does say is he kills anyone that he feels threatens his family and that the faces he does wear he takes on the roles of those faces.
The removal is to prevent further harassment through the amplification of racism from use of the blackface mask to those that are offended.
2 -
Listen, I agree with you, but this is a cosmetic with very little mechanical impact and significant social connotations.
Post edited by Rizzo on1 -
I've never experienced/been the target of racism in my life so all it is are hypotheticals to me. You do understand that people who are lucky enough not to experience it literally are having their hypotheticals shot down but are told that other hypotheticals are valid, right?
1 -
Also, responding more directly to your comment:
"Read the DBD lore, no where does it say he wears all the faces of his victims. What it does say is he kills anyone that he feels threatens his family and that the faces he does wear he takes on the roles of those faces."
This means that Leatherface wearing a black person's face isn't a racist action in a closed system.
"The removal is to prevent further harassment through the amplification of racism from use of the blackface mask to those that are offended."
This is the point. Leatherface using a marginalized persons skin like that isn't (in isolation), racist, rather the larger system in which it is presented in (media) is where it starts to draw parallels to racism due to more available historical connotations.
Cheap and easy statements like: "Using Blackface bubba is racist." Is reductive and buzzwordy and any following or preceding explanation doesn't matter if that's the conclusion drawn.
0 -
- Its not a black face mask. Its a mask of Claudette who is a fictional character in a fictional world. You're going to regurgitate the same things you've said as to why you think it is, and I will ignore them because it is all irrelevant to the fact that it is not intrinsically racist.
- The DBD lore of him has nothing to do with the overall lore of the character and idea of the character which is what I was arguing the whole time. Again, you're stretching because you're losing the argument every time you make a post here.
- The fact you keep calling it a blackface mask instead of what it really is, a Claudette mask, shows you do in fact have a bias view of this.
Whats wrong with Claudette being viewed in the same way as all the other survivors? An individual and a human like everyone else in the story. Why does her face have to be viewed as being black face if its used by leatherface. Because he's white? Again, this is finding racism where it doesn't exist and the fact its now being found in fictional stories where it doesn't exist shows had bad this has gotten.
3 -
Again, I avoid arguing in hypotheticals because when you argue in hypotheticals you are able to change the scenario to fit your narrative.
Players are giving actual experiences of racist harassment in DBD - they are not giving hypotheticals. If you've been lucky enough to not experience racism that's great for you, others have not been lucky though and are giving actual experiences that others are trying to invalidate.
Again, reread my comments. I have said blackface is racist. I have said racist players have used the blackface mask to harass others and amplify their racism. I have not said just using blackface Bubba is racist.
2 -
You're literally calling it a blackface mask. How the hell do you think people are going to take it when you say things like that? Of course they're going to assume thats what you're saying about smartface being used on him.
1 -
Thats not the point. The point is these are causing unnecessary changes in gaming and entertainment that is only going to get worse every time someone says something offends them.
Post edited by Rizzo on2 -
I refer to it as blackface because the BHVR devs have said the mask they created in their game is blackface. Racist players are able to use it to amplify their racism while harassing others because it is blackface. It's nice you are able to ignore it, the players being harassed aren't so lucky and that is why BHVR is doing the right thing to remove it.
Overall lore in the movies Leatherface still takes on the role of the faces he wears, it's why he wears entire outfits with them. In DBD - where there are 4 survivor masks - he does not take on the role of survivor while wearing the masks meaning that they are not lore accurate either by DBD lore or movie lore.
3 -
In this case there exists historical precedent and it's not just people being little bitches.
Brain in a Vat Argument, The | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy (utm.edu)
I don't think we'll be able to see eye to eye. (And I do understand the hypocrisy this presents, I am tired and short on time).
0 -
And it wouldn't be blackface if no one came out and said it offended them, would it? I already said they can do whatever they want with their game, it doesn't mean it was the right choice or a good one. I'm not ignoring anything. First of all I have close to 2000 hours played in this game as survivor. I have been matched with hundreds of leatherface players and not once have I even seen any of the survivor face cosmetics used on him. If this is happening, I don't see how it is happening a lot. A few instances of it happening are not enough to consider it a problem and make a change like this. This whole thing feels like an overreaction. I am all for reasonable and rational efforts to reduce any kind of hate that goes on in video games. However there needs to be a line drawn on the measures being taken so it doesn't go too far.
2 -
I agree with the point that the black face was rarely used.
i have never seen any leatherface using it before this patch.
In these days there are plenty! Obv! If something is forbidden it become fascinating!
The mask was used only for racist purpouses by a minority fo haters.
This is the reason it should be removed, it is noa a necessary or a beloved cosmetic.
I simply would have appreciated something like 50-80 auric cells as rewatd instead of iridescent, that's it...
0 -
"I have been matched with hundreds of leatherface players and not once have I even seen any of the survivor face cosmetics used on him."
Then those Leatherface players hopefully won't miss the cosmetics they weren't even using in game.
BHVR saw enough instances of it being used as blackface to harass players and amplify racism that they have made the decision to remove the masks. You are trying to invalidate those players experiences by saying you never personally saw it and claiming it was only a few. Removing the masks - which you said you never saw in your 2k hours of play - is a small thing for BHVR to do to help prevent further instances of racial harassment in their game.
2 -
Literally... not the point... I was making... You're very good at not making an argument or staying on point. Not trying to be mean but how many times now have I said something and you said something completely off point to what I said. The point I was making was that in my experience (which is worth considering as well as others) I have not even seen this happen. in fact I had never even heard of it happening until I heard that they were being removed. I've been playing online games for over 20 years. I have seen more racist things happen in them than you can imagine but never have I seen such an overreaction to it than I have seen in recent time. People are way too sensitive these days.
3 -
BHVR has received enough complaints with proof to warrant the removal of the masks since there were players using a blackface mask to harass other players and amplify their racism. It's great for you that you have been able to avoid experiencing the racism in DBD but just because you personally didn't see it doesn't mean it wasn't a problem that needed to be addressed. BHVR has seen the harassment since they are sent proof from more than just one player's perspective and would rather remove a cosmetic that is being used to harass a portion of their player base.
3 -
You can have your opinion, but even if it's "in his lore" or w/e, but a white man changing their face, whether it's through makeup, excessive tanning, or skinning a black person and putting a black person's skin on his face makes him appear to be wearing blackface. You claim to not be racist but the fervor with which you are defending the inclusion of what any average person would look at and call blackface leads me to believe otherwise. I hope you'll reexamine your beliefs to reconsider why defending blackface might make you look racist. Have a nice day. Feel free to respond, but I won't be reading it or this thread anymore.
4 -
I 100% agree that if they really insist on removing them then the compensation should be the Auric Cells (Paid Currency) simply for the fact that Leatherface is a Pay to Obtain DLC only and cannot be bought with in game currency you earn by simply playing.
I'm sure we can agree that "IF" the Survivor faces were never obtainable by getting X Kills on them they would have eventually made each mask for each survivor cost probably 100 Auric Cells each for that cash grab. So it makes sense taking away the 4 masks we should be getting along the lines of 400 Auric Cells but nope gotta ensure it's the currency where we need just over double that to even get a piece of a skin (7,200 Iri Shards just for 1 cosmetic piece).
1 -
Honestly I don't want someone who thinks I'm a racist to read or respond to me because your ignorance isn't worth my time. To think such a thing about someone you've never even met but only read a few forum replies about a topic around a fictional character is beyond ignorant.
And by the way, if leatherface ever did wear the face of a black victim I highly doubt he'd be doing it for blackface. Intent matters in all things and the last thing I would be thinking about with a deranged killer running at me wearing someone's face is if they are doing it to be racist. I'm not sure what your idea of the "average person" is but I'm sure many people would look at a character like leatherface and think that regardless of who's face he's wearing that it makes sense for who he is. This is why fictional characters can't be fictional characters anymore with certain elements about their character. Someone somewhere out there will be offended by something. I'm not defending blackface as you ignorantly claimed. I'm defending a fictional character and a cosmetic made for it that fit the character. If you can't discern the difference between fiction and reality then you wasted your time even replying to me. I'll leave this reply here for those who do care to read it to see how wrong you were since you said you won't be reading it.
3 -
There will always be a racist person trying to hurt someone else, but I find it INCREDIBLY stupid, just ban the toxic racist from the game and keep the mask in. BEFORE anybody gets butthurt about it, i do not support any racist actions but for a company to just snap like a twig and make the rash decision to remove content from the game like it will fix anything.
Getting rid of masks are only a temporary solution, you'll still have killers that will target survivors of color and the harassment will still continue.
The best course of action is to just outright perma ban any hate/racist towards players.
3 -
This is not a rash decision this is something that's been under discussion for quite some time...we also do ban the people that racially harass others. Removing a tool that's used by people to racially harass others is something that's important to us. We do not want something in our game that we have control over, to be used to attack others in this manner.
2 -
You don't ban racist people. Every week I face someone that call me a monkey on chat or leave a comment on my profile saying that I'm a "FAVELA KILLER". I report them all, open a ticket, and save their profiles to check if they were banned. After 1 year of playing the game and doing this, only 1 guy was banned. And he was a cheater, not a racist.
We brazilians face this kind of chat every single week: https://imgur.com/a/HcveKUB (If you don't understand the first one, he called me: brazilian monkey, shadow with legs and slave.)
And BHVR doesn't do nothing about it. But yeah, ok, remove Leatherface's mask. That'll do it, right?
3 -
While I disagree with the removal of a cosmetic that isn't inherently racist (through lore or by definition of what blackface is), instead of continuing to to ban those that are racist regardless of whether they're wearing the mask or not and improving the reporting/banning systems.
Note:
This is not an impossible problem to moderate, banning on the few occasions where hateful activity crops up would mean to reoffend with the mask said racist would not only have to rebuy the game and the leatherface DLC but also have to not only matchmake with but also sacrifice one of the original characters 25 times each as leatherface to unlock the masks only to play one or two matches being racist and then get banned again,
and that's if they're not straight up IP blocked.
I can understand the need as a company to not have such a grey area exist in the game at all as its bad PR.
But could you not just remove or edit (just make smartface Claudette's glasses?) the smartface cosmetic?
Or if you really are going to remove cosmetics that came part and parcel with a paid only DLC and required large amount's of peoples time to unlock could you please make the compensation less pitiful? 6000 iridescent shards wont even buy a head cosmetic that is available for shards,
personally I'd like to see 400 auric cells so people can buy a different leatherface mask (or something else of they're choice).
4 -
While yes its basically impossible that the Devs will revers there decision (at least on the smartface cosmetic) right or wrong because the negative PR from all those news sources jumping on it saying "Dead by daylight keeps blackface in game" would be massive.
that video makes a pretty bad argument, it basically boils down to 'your not allowed to defend that cosmetic because its not cannon that he wore a black persons skin in real life or the movies' despite the fact she points out herself that leatherface wears masks of people because in his own twisted way he admires them and wants to be them, its a controversial take I'm sure but following that logic him refusing to don the skin of Claudette would make him more racist not less.
it'll be interesting to see peoples reactions if the character on the far right ends up becoming a mask in the upcoming Texas Chainsaw Massacre Netflix film.
Post edited by madminer95 on0 -
Top is what I think is the best comment here. Right under one of the worst.
But hey, let's talk about it. If Ed Gein was born to an abusive black woman, instead of an abusive white woman, would wearing black faces be racist?
You said people don't want to talk about it. I do, specifically I want to ask if you know how race works, or if you think white people are commonly born to black parents. Every argument I've seen you make here only makes sense in a void where society doesn't exist, but for this, you're also ignoring basic biology.
So to answer your question, no, if Ed Gein wasn't white, then it wouldn't be considered blackface to wear another non-white face.
1 -
The end-goal is "social blindness" of skin-color, disregarding biological statistics as that shouldn't matter in social discourse, rather only in matters of biological health.
However, while it's still a huge social aspect and people apparently can't make a distinction between biology and social discourse regarding skin color:
If Ed Geins, a white Child, was adopted by an abusive black Woman, and instead targeted black Women instead of white Women, is he racist?
1 -
First, some reading that will really help you.
Secondly, you are again trying to fit an old square peg in a round hole, . (Considering the Atlanta Race Riot actually happened the same year Ed was born) as a matter of fact, it would have been illegal in most states for a black woman to have adopted a young Ed, which again, goes back to my point about trying to ignore reality, history and society when you make your arguments.
1 -
will the report system be improved upon, or is the removal of the masks, just it?
1 -
So, we should interact with people differently in social situations based on skin-color?
I am NOT DENYING that racism is still a problem and exists and happens.
That is why I support the removal of this, because of the historical context of a white man wearing a black face and the currently easily associated connotations to Blackface.
However, it should be observed that the END GOAL is social blindness.
Fuck, I'm aware of my own hesitation when interacting with people of a different culture/race purely because they're different and I've basically been living in a monoculture my entire life.
And it's the understanding that I shouldn't have that reaction that I try to improve myself.
0 -
Yes. You absolutely should always take someone's history, including the history of their race relations to your race, into account when dealing with them. That's just showing empathy. If I talk to white or black people the same way I talk to my family, they'd both probably be offended, because of the way both races have dealt with each other and with mine. I've heard white people say ######### to each other that would never be kosher to say to a black person, and vice versa. Social awareness is taking everything you can into account.
2 -
Isn't making assumptions about people based on external factors called implicit bias? Or stereotyping?
1 -
Yes, and slapping people at random is assault. Neither really had to do with what I had said.
1 -
"Yes. You absolutely should always take someone's history, including the history of their race relations to your race, into account when dealing with them."
So, what assumptions should I make about a black man in Detroit?
0 -
Why do you think taking history into account means you have to assume anything at all?
1 -
Population demographics and social/historical history?
0 -
Am I not supposed to assume that they have a black culture, whatever that means?
Or do I initially approach them as I would approach myself? And alter my interactions based on what I learn from them in the moment, rather than making assumptions based on stereotypes?
0 -
So a history of white people assuming things about Detroit, and using it to somehow encapsulate black America, makes you believe you should have to make assumptions yourself?
1 -
If I am literally not supposed to make assumptions, I won't. That includes not thinking about what the hell skin-color means. I will learn about you when talking to you.
0 -
Wait, do you believe that those are literally the only 2 options?
You didn't actually read the article I linked for you. You should, theroot.com also has some wonderful stuff that may help you. As for me, I've got to work at some point today.
1 -
What I'm getting from you and this article is that only perceived positive stereotyping is allowed.
0
