We define race as the “notion of a distinct biological type of human being, usually based on skin color or other physical characteristics” (Delgado & Stefancic, 2020). Within the context of this framework, race is largely rooted in U.S. sociopolitics, but race is distinct from but has many interesting parallels to other concepts globally such as ethnicity, nationality, caste, tribe, culture, and more that can be noted when engaging with this framework.
In order to use this framework effectively, it is necessary to understand some base line concepts regarding race and ethnic studies. We encourage designers to do additional reading, but we will provide the necessary baseline of knowledge here.
The “Four I's of Oppression'' was written by the Chinook Fund as a way of breaking down racism and other forms of oppression into distinct components. The Four I's encourage us to look beyond individual interactions and to incorporate a wider lens on how oppression operates within our society. Understanding what these 4 I’s empower designers to address racism (especially unintended biases and oppression) within their game systems and world building.
Ideological Racism: the belief that some racial groups are superior to others.
Interpersonal Racism: interactions between two or more individuals that enact racism (e.g., racial epithets, exclusions, violence, microaggressions, etc.)
Internalized Racism: when an individual endorses racist beliefs about themselves or members of their racial group(s)
Institutional Racism: when systems and rules are designed to enact racial inequality or discrimination (e.g., discriminatory laws, disproportionate policing of some groups over others, education systems that privilege certain groups, etc.)
All forms of these oppressions may be enacted upon people consciously or unconsciously. For designers who are creating gameplay systems, character interactions, worlds with their own beliefs, all including race, culture and ethnicity, we believe it is imperative that we know and understand the different forms of oppression so designers can recognize it within the systems, characters, and worlds they create and consciously know if it is intentional as a commentary, or unintentional and potential harm.
As we elaborate on later in the Design for BIPOC Flourishing, recent discussions around race and ethnic studies highlight how discussions often center around trauma and harm; inspiring recent work focusing BIPOC liberation and flourishing. The 4 I’s of liberation were influenced by the 4 I’s of Oppression, however allows for conversations for liberating marginalized groups. Defined by Kiki Ochoa and Guillermo Gomez, liberation is “The struggle against dominance and oppression where people fight for and/or gain complete freedom from the systematic abuse, exploitation and injustice of the oppressor” (Ochoa and Gomez 2023).
Ideological Liberation: the idea of any system, collective or space being free of hierarchy and making sure all people contributing are equally valued regardless of where they are from and or who they are. No one group or person has control over another.
Interpersonal Liberation: the support and solidarity between all oppressed people.
Institutional Liberation: recognizing that institutions reinforce oppressive systems and the push to dismantle them.
Internalized Liberation: an individual's duty to reduce the importance and pressure of economic capital, need for hierarchy, and productivity by focusing on the main goal of liberation and acknowledgment that liberation is met through solidarity and not division.
Tenets of critical race theory allow us to identify how racialized social structures impact game design and manifest in the game design process, the games industry, and games themselves. Specifically we highlight:
Race is socially constructed: race and racial differences are not biologically inherent but rather categories formed to enforce social hierarchies.
Differential Racialization: the ruling class will racialize different minority groups at different times according to the needs of the labor market.
Racism is ordinary in our Socio-Technical World: racism is not simply one off instances of explicit violence or harassment but rather embedded inextricably and sometimes invisibly into many aspects of our digital society and technological systems.
Interest Convergence/Material Determinism: social progress will occur only insofar as it materially benefits whiteness.
Critique of Colorblindness: a ‘colorblind’ approach to equality that mandates equal treatment across policies can only eliminate blatant forms of discrimination and does not eliminate inequality or inequity that has been established through continuous historical processes and events.
Tech Liberalism is Limiting: “The academic, technocratic, and capitalist aversion for race conscious work inhibits the fight against racism".
Voice-of-Color Thesis: the histories and experiences of People of Color enable them to communicate ideas and experiences of oppression that white people cannot speak to. BIPOC voices should be empowered to share their lived experiences.
Intersectionality: identities such as race and gender are not discrete but are rather overlapping and compounding, resulting in particular lived experiences according to the intersection of identities.
Designing for BIPOC Flourishing is a design framework building upon pluriversal design and emergent strategy. This design framework encourages us to look beyond “damage-centered design” that only views Black, Indigenous, and People of Color through the lens of oppression and harms and instead look for opportunities to center racialized experiences simultaneously with an ethos of joy, self-actualization, and flourishing.
Seek Opportunities for Self-Actualization, Not Problems to Solve: rather than approaching engaging with race from a framing of fixing “deficits” or only addressing under- or mis-representation, focus on how engaging with race and center the joy, flourishing, and self-actualization of BIPOC communities. What opportunities have been missed?
Identify and Center the Desire to Flourish: think about what flourishing might mean for the community you are thinking of. Flourishing could be the everyday joy of representation. Or it might mean getting to engage with cultural values that are not often present in games. Maybe flourishing means the catharsis of seeing a more difficult experience portrayed and addressed directly in a game. How can we move beyond “basic needs” into exciting creative endeavors?
Collaborate and Distribute Power: attend to the power dynamics in the process of game design. If your game engages with a community that is underrepresented in games, how can the process of game design engage the community directly? How can you collaborate with them and provide opportunities for them to be in the driver’s seat or offer meaningful input into the process? Are there legitimate and equitable opportunities to give meaningful feedback?
Refrain from Reducing Communities to Damage-Centered Facets: when engaging with race, sometimes it is appropriate to address topics such as inequality, discrimination, racism, and more head-on. In these cases, be sure not to “flatten” the community to only be about those aspects. How can you ensure that your engagement represents a complex, multi-dimensional experience?
The concepts informed the design and development of the spectrums. It is necessary to have an understanding of these concepts to thoroughly understand each spectrum and how they interact with one another. The following section will implement these principles into eight spectrums.