My brother and I would end up creating personas and backstories for each face on the cards to make the game harder. Terry was a cross dresser from Liverpool with a cocaine habit and Linda was a hipster who worked night shifts at the abattoir. Red hair was red hair and big teeth were strategic assets. Kids played the hell out of it and parents stepped into the ensuing fights. There was really only one feature that I thought was missing…really big ears. Kind of like those of a certain unpopular political figure at the moment.
Guess who? Words by Christian Orkibi Illustrations by Tegan Iversen A few years ago a high school friend got a secret girlfriend. Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies. Want to bookmark your favourite articles and stories to read or reference later? Start your Independent Premium subscription today. Already subscribed? Log in. Forgotten your password?
While each of the pictures has a name on it, players can only ask yes or no questions about physical appearance: hair color, hair style, age, etc. Some time back, I came across this game again. Initially I was somewhat excited since it brought back fond childhood memories, but I realized that the entire premise of the game was anything but objective or disinterested. While that may appear to be an objective action, the game teaches children to rely on physical features such as hair color, eye color, gender, and age as a standard way of classifying people, and the features — more often than not — reinforce certain gender and racial norms.
For instance, the game I played as a kid had mostly images of white people with a few ethnically ambiguous people and significantly fewer women than men. Most women had long hair, make-up, rosy cheeks, and delicate features while the men generally had short hair or none and more prominent facial features. While the games have become somewhat more racially diverse, there are still more men than women and more white people than people of color.
0コメント