342 réponses à ce sujet

[DaringMoosejaw]

I always figured women were targeted for these things because, culturally, women are treated as more valuable than men. Putting a woman under threat of kidnap or rape is a way to instill fear and stimulate those protective instincts and give a sense of danger. Showing a man being murdered as opposed to a woman (extra drama points if they're pretty and young!) invoke reactions of much different levels. Writers are trying to go for those heartstrings and that innate reaction is a well-used tactic.

Modifié par DaringMoosejaw, 24 octobre 2012 - 03:58 .

[Droma]

RinjiRenee wrote...

Droma wrote...

if this is actually how you have been raised, then whoever raised you thatway did a horrible job. kinda reminds me of the lessons from miss choksondik on sex in southpark. And it would make you kind of overly biased which is never a good point for a fair conversation imo. It's like talking about evolution with a pure conservative christian.

I'm so glad that the very real problem of sexual violence in the US is somehow a joke to you.

great example of not getting what I'm talking about. But to play your game, you should never drive a car in your life. EVER. If I would take the time to google your us crime and weapon assault rates, you should also never ever go outside of your house. it's a dangerous world. The point isn't that there aren't any threats in this world (and being raped is one of them), the point is that there are more good things in this world. Anyone should be aware of the threats but nobody should live his/her life only fearing about the next one.

Modifié par Droma, 24 octobre 2012 - 03:57 .

[Joy Divison]

Dhiro wrote...

Joy Divison wrote...

RinjiRenee wrote...

Here, I'll quickly illustrate for you since you are obviously male and don't know any better.

Was this necessary?

Of course. Male privilege means that a man will rarely understand the opppression of many women, unless they decide to study the subject themselves, something that not many do.

I forgot that men are incapable of and unwilling to understand the perspectives of others.

Modifié par Joy Divison, 24 octobre 2012 - 03:59 .

[AlexJK]

Nevara wrote...

AlexJK wrote...

Sejborg wrote...

This is pretty much true. I know it from myself. When me and my friends go out partying and a male friend up and vanishes, we would just assume that he has gone home or something like that. If a female friend up and vanishes we would be worried if someone has assaulted her or something like that. 

I'm slightly concerned for your male friends... vanish without warning and you wouldn't be worried?

Why?  I don't worry about my male friends just as I don't worry about my female friends.  Different perspectives different mindsets.

I'd be concerned about any perspective or mindset where someone's friend (of any sex) could disappear unexpectedly without some kind of (proportionate, sensible) reaction.

My point, insomuch as I have one, is I think the same as yours - different perspectives on life (your upbringing, your personal experiences, the area you live in, etc.) result in different, sometimes quite vastly different, responses to topics such as sexual violence, vulnerability of men vs. women, tolerance to various aspects of violence in the media, and so on.

[Sejborg]

AlexJK wrote...

Sejborg wrote...

This is pretty much true. I know it from myself. When me and my friends go out partying and a male friend up and vanishes, we would just assume that he has gone home or something like that. If a female friend up and vanishes we would be worried if someone has assaulted her or something like that. 

I'm slightly concerned for your male friends... vanish without warning and you wouldn't be worried?

During a night of partying and drinking? No. I wouldn't. Not at all. 

[Emzamination]

Lennard Testarossa wrote...

Emzamination wrote...
Then you're just being willfully ignorant if you can't see how portraying a male degrading and talking down to a female in order to get what they want is sexist.

Sexism...You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

A game could allow you to snatch a dozen women of the street and force them to be sex slaves without necessarily being sexist.

Okay

[Rinji the Bearded]

Droma wrote...

great example of not getting what I'm talking about. But to play your game, you should never drive a car in your life. EVER. If I would take the time to google your us crime and weapon assault rates, you should also never ever go outside of your house. it's a dangerous world. The point isn't that there aren't any threats in this world (and being raped is one of them), the point is that there are more good things in this world. Anyone should be aware of the threats but nobody should live his/her life only fearing about the next one.

No, I don't think you get it at all.

Men never have to worry about being sexually assaulted.  Not that it doesn't happen, but women are sexually assaulted and killed every day merely based on the fact that they are women.  No other reason. 

Modifié par RinjiRenee, 24 octobre 2012 - 04:02 .

[Fiacre]

Droma wrote...


Am I? just because i find it horrible if someone raises a kid in fear of anything? I didn't pick the southpark example for no reason. it greatly illustrates how stupid it is to raise kids with fear. How can a woman ever trust a man and find love in here life if you raise her to suspect a rapist in every man? So you basically reduce her choice in life to become a lesbian (which I don't have anything against, don't get me wrong). The point is you make a lifechanging decision for your kid if you raise it that way and that is never a good thing.

Please, please tell me you're not serious. Sexuality is not a choice. No one is reducing anyone's sexual choices in such a fashion, because sexuality is not a choice.

Incidentally, raising someone to be cautious is not necessarily a bad thing. My parents never let me go home alone when it was late, I assure you, I'm not so scared of man that I will never be able to love one.

[Vandicus]

Xilizhra wrote...

A worthwhile ideal. Question is, how to go about it(which is why I've been asking people to share their solutions after highlighting that the male system is flawed as well). I quite frankly have no idea. Completely original thought is a difficult thing, and my range of inspiration does not include a solution that I can see. This task is beyond my capability to provide a solution for.

Well... I did have one idea, although I don't know how many would be able to live up to it or want to, and that is: write all the characters, but don't assign their gender until they're already written, regardless of the roles they fall into. If you can do it via some random generator, and actually commit to that, so much the better; this'll ensure a random spread of traits across each set of characters, and keep you from writing specifically gender-based roles for any of them.

Quite interesting. I'll keep it in mind if I ever have the opportunity to try it out(I'd try it in my D&D sessions, but due to my poor voice acting abilities unless I've got someone else who can voice a character's gender/race well, they're largely silent, mostly due to a certain incident with a squeaky voiced kobold NPC I made derailing the campaign into five minutes of laughing every time he spoke, frakking players <_<, I didn't think it was that funny).

[syllogi]

Vandicus wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

This is the self-esteem/self-image trap that I'm talking about. The idea seems to be to portray women like men are portrayed by media. The way that men are portrayed isn't exactly perfect either. While it does provide strong heroic imgaes to strive for, its got a lot of problems as well. I know people for whom it serves as a reminder of what they can never be, rather than what they could one day hope to be. Also, it is an unspoken rule that men can never be weak, even in front of friends. Pain? Laugh it off or endure. Crying? Hell no, and if a man were to even show a hint that they might start crying they have to cover/hide their face, and their friends will look away so as to avoid shaming him. Guys who actively try to avoid people assuming that they must be strong, frequently tell people that they're cowardly or weak(which I don't think is great for their self-esteem either).

Again. Balance. Remove the need to be superficially strong for men and remove the victimized portrait from women.

A worthwhile ideal. Question is, how to go about it(which is why I've been asking people to share their solutions after highlighting that the male system is flawed as well). I quite frankly have no idea. Completely original thought is a difficult thing, and my range of inspiration does not include a solution that I can see. This task is beyond my capability to provide a solution for.

I think in order to at least try to prevent Fridged Women and normalized rape/rape threats, the question has to be asked, is the sexual violence being portrayed "casual" in its depiction, or does the writer treat the subject with gravity?   If it would be considered too shocking or sensitive to portray a male in that situation, why is it okay to put a woman in the same scene?  Will characters acknowledge that sexual violence is not "normal" violence, and do they react to it at all?  If we want realism in our fiction, these kind of considerations ought to be made, because realistically, sexual violence is a big deal, hopefully even in a world where people are trying to kill the characters all the time.

[Xilizhra]

RinjiRenee wrote...

Droma wrote...

great example of not getting what I'm talking about. But to play your game, you should never drive a car in your life. EVER. If I would take the time to google your us crime and weapon assault rates, you should also never ever go outside of your house. it's a dangerous world. The point isn't that there aren't any threats in this world (and being raped is one of them), the point is that there are more good things in this world. Anyone should be aware of the threats but nobody should live his/her life only fearing about the next one.

No, I don't think you get it at all.

Men never have to worry about being sexually assaulted.  Not that it doesn't happen, but women are sexually assaulted and killed every day merely based on the fact that they are women.  No other reason. 

Well, in the interests of fairness, men in prison do have to worry about being sexually assaulted, quite frequently.

[CuriousArtemis]

Not going to read the whole thread because I can only imagine what's being said in it. But I feel the only proper response to that brilliantly articulated and researched first post is, well done! And, I totally agree with you!

[Sejborg]

DaringMoosejaw wrote...

I always figured women were targeted for these things because, culturally, women are treated as more valuable than men. Putting a woman under threat of kidnap or rape is a way to instill fear and stimulate those protective instincts and give a sense of danger. Showing a man being murdered as opposed to a woman (extra drama points if they're pretty and young!) invoke reactions of much different levels. Writers are trying to go for those heartstrings and that innate reaction is a well-used tactic.

This is very true. Imagine Texas Chainsaw Massacre with a male lead instead of a female. It would just be straight up weird. 

[Xilizhra]

Vandicus wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

A worthwhile ideal. Question is, how to go about it(which is why I've been asking people to share their solutions after highlighting that the male system is flawed as well). I quite frankly have no idea. Completely original thought is a difficult thing, and my range of inspiration does not include a solution that I can see. This task is beyond my capability to provide a solution for.

Well... I did have one idea, although I don't know how many would be able to live up to it or want to, and that is: write all the characters, but don't assign their gender until they're already written, regardless of the roles they fall into. If you can do it via some random generator, and actually commit to that, so much the better; this'll ensure a random spread of traits across each set of characters, and keep you from writing specifically gender-based roles for any of them.

Quite interesting. I'll keep it in mind if I ever have the opportunity to try it out(I'd try it in my D&D sessions, but due to my poor voice acting abilities unless I've got someone else who can voice a character's gender/race well, they're largely silent, mostly due to a certain incident with a squeaky voiced kobold NPC I made derailing the campaign into five minutes of laughing every time he spoke, frakking players <_<, I didn't think it was that funny).

My idea is probably best suited for games and other media that happen to be interactive and reliant on player preferences, as opposed to novels and suchlike; not that it's impossible there, but since I'd never take the risk of having to write a romance with a man in it, I wouldn't do it for my own stories.

[Xilizhra]

Sejborg wrote...

DaringMoosejaw wrote...

I always figured women were targeted for these things because, culturally, women are treated as more valuable than men. Putting a woman under threat of kidnap or rape is a way to instill fear and stimulate those protective instincts and give a sense of danger. Showing a man being murdered as opposed to a woman (extra drama points if they're pretty and young!) invoke reactions of much different levels. Writers are trying to go for those heartstrings and that innate reaction is a well-used tactic.

This is very true. Imagine Texas Chainsaw Massacre with a male lead instead of a female. It would just be straight up weird. 

Well, it's a horror movie, isn't it? Isn't the point to make you uncomfortable?

[JCAP]

Joy Divison wrote...

Dhiro wrote...

Joy Divison wrote...

RinjiRenee wrote...

Here, I'll quickly illustrate for you since you are obviously male and don't know any better.

Was this necessary?

Of course. Male privilege means that a man will rarely understand the opppression of many women, unless they decide to study the subject themselves, something that not many do.

I forgot that men are incapable of and unwilling to understand the perspectives of others.

And they say men are sexist.

Modifié par JCAP, 24 octobre 2012 - 04:09 .

[brushyourteeth]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

I agree with perhaps the overall tone Maria and others are trying to make, that women are often depicted in a victimized, sensationalized manner in all forms of media (not just Bioware). But I'm really not sure if this couldn't be done with, literally, every single other type of group.

Men are portrayed unfairly and disproportionately as soulless tormentors. A man is the one who storms in a City Elf wedding and who abducts women for rape, killing others with no qualms. A man is the one who betrays the Grey Wardens and commits regicide, throwing the country into chaos. A man is the one blows up the Chantry, causing many deaths and setting off a war that would result in hundreds, if not thousands, dying, all in the name of his political cause. A man uses his influence to keep his mentally ill son out of prison, even though said son kills young children.

To get outside of gender, affluent people are unevenly depicted as callous and elitist in DA games. Arl Howe is shown to be nothing but a greedy, manipulating man who will do anything (or convince Loghain to do anything) to achieve his drive for power, including torture, slavery, betrayal, murder and assassination. The more well-off craftsman of Redcliffe - the inn keeper, the blacksmith and the mercenary leader - are all self centered and unable to help, unless the Warden pushes them into doing so with rewards or with guilt. The noble owner of the mines in Kirkwall kidnaps and beats Ferelden refugees who have stolen money from him, despite the fact that it was to feed his family because said noble doesn't pay the miners a fair wage.

The poor could be depicted in lights of being too complacent. The educated could be depicted as being too aloof and uncaring. The guards... man, don't even get me started on how officers of the law IRL could RAIL against the terrible portrayals of guards in games.


Point being... yes, there is probably an uneven portrayal of EVERY group fitting into certain stereotypes. Its part of the narrative consciousness, after 10,000 years of telling stories, certain concepts, roles and paradigms will be in place. And, despite how hard a writer may want to avoid such stereotypes, it would ultimately be futile, as otherwise, the characters would be so foreign as to be unable to connect to them.

Because as others said, while there are a disproportionate number of "victim" females, there is also a LARGE number of strong female characters, characters which don't take **** from anyone, and which could serve as a model for other media to take some lessons from.

TL;DR: Not saying you don't have a valid opinion, but, at the same time, similar opinions could be applied to nearly every group, across the board. Which doesn't mean you shouldn't state your opinions, but also consider that the writers may not be able to avoid these types of roles in the future, even if they tried.

It's ridiculous how much I agree with this post.

And I think you made some really excellent points too, MC. These gender expectations are so heavily ingrained in our society from so young that I doubt it's something the writers ever intended, but it is there. That's probably part of why the characters that break that mold are so memorable.

 - Morrigan, for instance, isn't going to be anybody's victim.
- Athenril leads the smuggling ring - not a man.
- Serrah Guinness, although a jerk, slaughters those Tal Vashoth like a boss, and takes the place of aggressor over Seamus, who is the helpless male victim. It's essentially a "rescue the princess" quest with the typical gender roles reversed.
- Leaders in the Chantry can only be female. Because, reasons.
- Petrice and Meredith both boss men around regularly.
- Isabela captains her own ship.
- Aveline becomes captain of the guard
- Arguably the most powerful person in Thedas is a woman - Empress Celene.
- In reality, the (likely) most powerful person in Thedas is also a woman - Flemeth.

I also love that we rescue Keran, Emeric, and Cullen from trouble. Female templars appear, but they've so far not been in need of saving.

But the crux of the point you're making still holds a ton of weight, and I'm really glad that you said it. We do tend to expect women to be victims. And I love that you're not saying "Bioware, how dare you?!!", but rather "I'd love it if that trend didn't continue." And I completely agree.

Modifié par brushyourteeth, 24 octobre 2012 - 04:10 .

[robertthebard]

Dirgegun wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

Dirgegun wrote...

Definitely not, but is there a reason media should encourage it? I'm not saying rape and the like should never be looked at from a story telling point of view, but to simply shrug off how women (and men) are treated in media and then claim anyone bothered by it needs a psychologist? That isn't cool. 

Lol.  I realize you're being serious, but this fits into:  My kid wouldn't have been a serial killer if there weren't so much violence on TV and in video games.  You see, this thread is railing against sexism, but the next step, if successful, will be violence.  The line needs to be established between fantasy and reality.  Otherwise, video games will start to be about how we solve all the problems in the world with cookies, not that I don't like cookies, but do you really thing the Archdemon would have bailed from the blight if we offered up enough Oreos?  Maybe he liked chocolate chip cookies better?

We have places like Walmart that won't sell music if it's not edited for language because parents can't be arsed to monitor what their kids are listening to.  We have the ESRB because people were worried about finishing moves in Mortal Kombat.  Where does censorship stop?  When will people be happy with everything that a company puts out?  When it's all as referenced in my first paragraph, where people never say harsh things to eachother, and it's all Hello KItty?

Video games don't set out to "encourage" this type of behavior.  If you believe they do, the the M rating applies to you.  These are mature themes, it's not that there might be an Alien Side Boob for your child to see, and that's the worst thing they can ever see, which is what attitudes like this lead to, but more of a "I don't want to monitor what my kids see, and so they shouldn't be allowed to include it in any way" position, and this is wrong.  The M rating implies that the people playing the game should be mature enough to understand that incidents presented in the game are not how one should approach life.  Some people get it, others don't, evidently, and instead of calling for the industry to cater to those, perhaps they should find other sources of entertainment.  If a medium isn't entertaining, I don't partake of it.  I despise Rap music, but I don't call for it to be eliminated, I don't listen to it, and the same applies to movies, books or games that don't suit my tastes.

......I'm not saying media encourages rape, and if you think I do then you haven't read any of my other posts or just took the above out of context. I think certain brands of feminism can be taken too far, and that there are stories where rape isn't just tact on and, instead, can make a very compelling plot. 

Media can encourage a certain mindset, though, or, at least, desensitise people to a certain mindset to the point that we stop questioning it. I was denfending someone who was bothered by certain issues, and who was replied to by someone saying they need a psychologist because they were bothered.

Edit for better word choice.

There is literally no way for me to take what you said out of context.  You point blank asked why media should encourage it.  I showed that it doesn't.  Portrayal is not encouragement.  Since violence is portrayed in this series, is that the next thing that needs to go?  I mean, if portrayal is encouragement, then violent video games encourage violence against other people, right?  As to desensitizing, yeah, when I hear about somebody I don't know getting killed, or violated in some way, it doesn't bother me as much as when I hear about it with somebody I do know.  This isn't really being desensitized as much as it is "I don't know them".  This doesn't mean it doesn't bother me, just that it's not as personal, and frankly, I was the same way when the most violent game I played was Pong.  I didn't need my parents to tell me that carrying a gun to school and shooting all the students was a bad thing.  Their upbringing taught me that w/out having to go into specifics.  The TV was not my babysitter.  People leave their kids to it now, and then want to blame TV/Music/Video Games for how their children react, simply because they don't want to take responsibility for it.  It's not media that's to blame, it's parenting.

[Nevara]

AlexJK wrote...
I'd be concerned about any perspective or mindset where someone's friend (of any sex) could disappear unexpectedly without some kind of (proportionate, sensible) reaction.

My point, insomuch as I have one, is I think the same as yours - different perspectives on life (your upbringing, your personal experiences, the area you live in, etc.) result in different, sometimes quite vastly different, responses to topics such as sexual violence, vulnerability of men vs. women, tolerance to various aspects of violence in the media, and so on.

That makes sense, it almost sounded like people should have a panic attack because someone went off by themselves.  *shrug*
It's not that I wouldn't care if they wandered off, it's more that I am not going to control every action of every person around.
As for your second point, this is also true.  While you might be more conservative about certain topics, I on the other hand am not.  That doesn't mean that I will be the downfall of man (though that would be an interesting feat) it just means like I said a unique perspective on society.  I grew up knowing that bad stuff can and does happen.  I'm proof of that; I've lived it.  I have four kids that I've taught the same.  I've given them the tools and guidance to cope with whatever may befall them or those around them.  An example:  my kid (who's 9) played DA: O all the way through to its completion.  He didn't play for the violence, or the chance to woe the wuvvly wady, he played it for the story and enjoyed it (except the Fade).
That doesn't diminish who he is because their happens to be sex, or violence.  I use it more of a tool for discussion.  We've always had an open-door policy and I've always been honest with them about everything.
Ya know what I mean?

[Droma]

Fiacre wrote...

Droma wrote...


Am I? just because i find it horrible if someone raises a kid in fear of anything? I didn't pick the southpark example for no reason. it greatly illustrates how stupid it is to raise kids with fear. How can a woman ever trust a man and find love in here life if you raise her to suspect a rapist in every man? So you basically reduce her choice in life to become a lesbian (which I don't have anything against, don't get me wrong). The point is you make a lifechanging decision for your kid if you raise it that way and that is never a good thing.

Please, please tell me you're not serious. Sexuality is not a choice. No one is reducing anyone's sexual choices in such a fashion, because sexuality is not a choice.

Incidentally, raising someone to be cautious is not necessarily a bad thing. My parents never let me go home alone when it was late, I assure you, I'm not so scared of man that I will never be able to love one.

raising to cautious is the way to go and that's what I'm talking about. the point was that someone posted you should fear every man and treat him like a potential rapist. and that has nothing to do with cautious. that is straight out fear. and raising your kid that way goes to far. and i totally agree that sexuality isn't a choice. the point is that if you raise your daughter in fear of men, how should they be able love one?

Modifié par Droma, 24 octobre 2012 - 04:11 .

[Vandicus]

syllogi wrote...

Vandicus wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

This is the self-esteem/self-image trap that I'm talking about. The idea seems to be to portray women like men are portrayed by media. The way that men are portrayed isn't exactly perfect either. While it does provide strong heroic imgaes to strive for, its got a lot of problems as well. I know people for whom it serves as a reminder of what they can never be, rather than what they could one day hope to be. Also, it is an unspoken rule that men can never be weak, even in front of friends. Pain? Laugh it off or endure. Crying? Hell no, and if a man were to even show a hint that they might start crying they have to cover/hide their face, and their friends will look away so as to avoid shaming him. Guys who actively try to avoid people assuming that they must be strong, frequently tell people that they're cowardly or weak(which I don't think is great for their self-esteem either).

Again. Balance. Remove the need to be superficially strong for men and remove the victimized portrait from women.

A worthwhile ideal. Question is, how to go about it(which is why I've been asking people to share their solutions after highlighting that the male system is flawed as well). I quite frankly have no idea. Completely original thought is a difficult thing, and my range of inspiration does not include a solution that I can see. This task is beyond my capability to provide a solution for.

I think in order to at least try to prevent Fridged Women and normalized rape/rape threats, the question has to be asked, is the sexual violence being portrayed "casual" in its depiction, or does the writer treat the subject with gravity?   If it would be considered too shocking or sensitive to portray a male in that situation, why is it okay to put a woman in the same scene?  Will characters acknowledge that sexual violence is not "normal" violence, and do they react to it at all?  If we want realism in our fiction, these kind of considerations ought to be made, because realistically, sexual violence is a big deal, hopefully even in a world where people are trying to kill the characters all the time.

Well I don't think there are any circumstances where rape of any gender should be treated casually. There are novels out there that have male on male as subject matter, and I find that they generally treat it seriously. But I also generally find that male on female rape is treated seriously in novels. I thought that the DA games did treat them fairly seriously, such that the game made it feel justified to kill the rapist(s). Course I joined this whole thing part way through and have mostly being addressing the concept of simply taking the male cultural/media portrayal and using it for females, so I apologize if I'm somehow speaking in a nonrelevant fashion in my responses.

[Aolbain]

Emzamination wrote...

Aolbain wrote...

o

Emzamination wrote...

Lennard Testarossa wrote...

Emzamination wrote...
Oh I see, you've never played Planescape torment. Carry on.

Of course I've played PS:T.

Then you're just being willfully ignorant if you can't see how portraying a male degrading and talking down to a female in order to get what they want is sexist.

But is the other way around sexist? Or male to male? Female to female?

Of course it's sexist and If the Nameless one could of been female I'd still argue the same point.The difference however is that there is a world history of men manipulating and shaming women to get what they want which makes it particularly sensitive.

I have not played PS:T so I cant argue that specific point but if a get your message correctly no fiction can ever portray a man do anything bad to a woman, becaus that woud be sexist. Could the same be said about a white PC abuse a black NPC. Or a rich PC (as they have a tendency to become) trying to mainpulate a poor NPC.
Wouldnt that be racism and classicism?

[Dhiro]

Joy Divison wrote...

Dhiro wrote...

Joy Divison wrote...

RinjiRenee wrote...

Here, I'll quickly illustrate for you since you are obviously male and don't know any better.

Was this necessary?

Of course. Male privilege means that a man will rarely understand the opppression of many women, unless they decide to study the subject themselves, something that not many do.

I forgot that men are incapable of and unwilling to understand the perspectives of others.

Glad to help.

[robertthebard]

RinjiRenee wrote...

Droma wrote...

great example of not getting what I'm talking about. But to play your game, you should never drive a car in your life. EVER. If I would take the time to google your us crime and weapon assault rates, you should also never ever go outside of your house. it's a dangerous world. The point isn't that there aren't any threats in this world (and being raped is one of them), the point is that there are more good things in this world. Anyone should be aware of the threats but nobody should live his/her life only fearing about the next one.

No, I don't think you get it at all.

Men never have to worry about being sexually assaulted.  Not that it doesn't happen, but women are sexually assaulted and killed every day merely based on the fact that they are women.  No other reason. 

You really don't have much experience with life outside of the home do you?

I'll just leave this here and then completely ignore anything else you have to say.