Sexism in D&D and on ENWorld (now with SOLUTIONS!)

[Proserpine]

Re: posts that point out that D&D itself treats female and male characters equally. The mechanics in 4e are, indeed, gender blind. But the representation of women in adventure materials and whatnot isn't. Here and here offer some statistical proof of that. There's a big difference between explicit and implicit sexism, and neither a very good. Just because something isn't totally overt doesn't make it any less questionable or right.

Originally Posted by Cadfan

People, particularly guys, and particularly guys in a traditionally male dominated context, start to assume that the things specifically included to appeal to males are somehow "normal" and therefore not actually specifically designed to appeal to males. This bugs me a bit. You'll get people who look at Barbie and recognize that it's designed to appeal to girls, and then look at a cartoon entitled something like Mega Robot Viking Ninja Explosion Turbo or whatever and cannot, no matter how hard they try, see that this might just be a wee bit aimed at boys as a market.

Originally Posted by Cadfan

They think that their jokes or comments or soft porn artwork are "normal" and not actually gender specific, and blame others, particularly women, for not liking the things and the behavior they do. If someone ever uses the word "feminazi," chances are you're talking to someone in this category. Ditto "oversensitive" with reference to women who dislike their behavior.

I agree with pretty much everything you're saying, but especially with these parts. The marketing/designing issues are really troublesome, since women gamers will engage in "male-centric" activities in spite of not being considered a valid or equal part of those activities' audiences. And things don't really change, because we participate as long as we aren't explicitly excluded.

Your point is reinforced by a recent thread: the one shilsen linked about Witch Girl Adventures. The OP asked (I'm paraphrasing), "Have they missed their mark by targeting females?" That question was asked because the default audience, especially when it comes to gaming, is male.

It also bugs me, as a feminist geek especially, to see dissenting voices silenced in the way you mentioned. "Oh, you silly feminazi!" is not very productive, nor is blaming someone for their discomfort over sexist behavior, sexist artwork, or whatever else.

[Jack7]

and big-breasted.

I try not to hold that against any female.
I'm just enlightened that way.

[S'mon]

3.5 DMG2: "When a realistic portrayal of historical sexism would annoy or depress your players, tone down the history. When the details of an
equal-opportunity world seem too modern or out of step with the medieval atmosphere, revert to history"

- I thought this was particularly good advice for most GMs running a 'pseudo-medieval' setting. Of course it's possible to have a D&D world that does not resemble medieval Earth at all - perhaps it's a far future world where men are extinct and women procreate asexually; or maybe humans sexes are very different from IRL. Maybe it's a setting emulating feminist or anti-feminist fantasy. But for the default D&D setting I think it's excellent advice.

[ExploderWizard]

There are Sly Pimps and Rich Panderers on that harlot table too, and they can be male or female. Heck, anything on that table could be a man whore if you wanted it to be.

[Proserpine]

Originally Posted by Hereticus

Marketing

and

product

design

cater

to

a

target

audience.

Haven't heard that one before. Oh, wait...

Part of the point is that there's no inherent reason for D&D to cater mostly to its male audience. Well, minus the fact that it came out of war gaming, but that's not a valid excuse - D&D has evolved a lot since then, and is a much different game now. What it comes down to is that D&D's target audience should be geeks, and there are PLENTY of female geeks out there (like myself) that feel second-rate when it comes to all sorts of gaming. I am marginalized in a group which is already socially marginalized. And marketing towards a target audience isn't really a good justification for the irony of that.

Originally Posted by RefinedBean

It's the same kind of sexism found in most video games and other popular media. Sex sells, and since you're selling mainly to men, you're going to objectify women at least a wee bit.

This, of course, does NOT mean that the people who play and enjoy D&D are sexist themselves. We're wayyyy too diverse a group to pigeonhole like that.

Then the largely non-sexist geeks can make do without the sexist crap that objectifies women or casts them into gendered roles. A win for all!

[mach1.9pants]

Originally Posted by Rodrigo Istalindir

Thank god someone so enlightened came by to show us the error of our ways. Really I had no idea this hobby I'd enjoyed for so long was so misogynistic. I guess the female players that I've gamed with since the early 80s were just confused or self-loathing.

Look, there are a number of things wrong with your arguments. In fact, you're really just starting with a conclusion and then expecting everyone to chime in and agree with you, rather than have a serious discussion.

Yep there is no more sexism in DnD that anywhere in the 'real world' (TM) but I think a lot less in ENW. I think you are being hyper-sensitive to things which have changed. Original DnD held more sexism 'cos it was launched in a sexist time. The fact that you have played as the only male in an otherwise all female group helps prove DnD is not intrinsicly sexist. Yes fantasy art includes a lot of flesh (including male) but thankfully not so much anymore or in DnD. Yes some settings are sexist to an extent.. well surprise surprise that is because they are based on medieval cultures where sexism was mostly the norm.
And bringing up Pcats harlot table is pathetic, it is brought up because is is so anachronistic

[ajanders]

How do we intend to measure sexism?
Has someone defined a "sexism scale"?

What would be acceptable as evidence of "not sexism"?

[shilsen]

Sigh! This is why I shouldn't nap after I start a thread...

Originally Posted by Crothian

I think some people are sexist and some people aren't. Many people i think don't realize they are being sexist when they are. But i also feel that some people are over sensitive to remarks they find sexist and find it where it doesn't exist.

True. I generally tend to be wary of seeing sexism where it doesn't exist, but I'm also aware of the fact that what I define as sexism isn't necessarily what someone else would define as such. I should also note that what I'm referring to in the original post isn't so much out-and-out "women are inferior" sexism so much as a much subtler vibe that the game is geared towards men, which is more what I see.

I once was running a game that including a woman PC. After she read over the setting she was upset with me that in my setting I had women and men equal. She wanted to create a female character that had to prove herself to the men and over come that in a fantasy setting. Some people actually do want sexism in their game.

Absolutely. I could thoroughly enjoy sexism in a game as long as it didn't make any of the players uncomfortable. I just don't think it has a place in the default game or the gaming community.

Originally Posted by Rodrigo Istalindir

Thank god someone so enlightened came by to show us the error of our ways. Really I had no idea this hobby I'd enjoyed for so long was so misogynistic. I guess the female players that I've gamed with since the early 80s were just confused or self-loathing.

Why would that have to be the case? I've met multiple female gamers who've told me they game despite the sexism in gaming because the game itself is something they enjoy.

Look, there are a number of things wrong with your arguments. In fact, you're really just starting with a conclusion and then expecting everyone to chime in and agree with you, rather than have a serious discussion.

Not at all. I was fully expecting to see very little actual agreement with me here, but I figured we could discuss it maturely.

Like everything else, it's evolved.

No arguments there. I'm very aware of the fact that the game and the gaming community has evolved and certainly improved in this area. But improvement surely doesn't mean that one can't want further improvement, does it?

Originally Posted by Vegepygmy

Yep. I don't really buy Shilsen's premise, though it never hurts to be reminded that other people may see things differently.

Thanks. That was the basic idea behind me starting this thread. I'm really curious to see what people think on the subject, esp. people who have a different take on it than me.

Originally Posted by Lwaxy

Being female, I've never had any issues with sexism in either situation. In any game world i play I or run, except in SciFi settings, sexism happens, just not always towards women.

Interesting. Do you eliminate sexism in SciFi settings?

As in being a female gamer, I've never run into any RL sexism issues either. Maybe that's partly because I'm only one of two GMs they can come to, or because I'm not good looking, but except once where one of the (female) gamers fell in love with another player, we never had issues.

Probably due to being male I've never run into issues with sexism in my games, but I've heard some serious horror stories from female gamers, both in real life and on forums such as ENWorld and the WotC boards (Astrid's Parlor there has some really bad tales to relate).

Also, usually guys notice pretty fast that I'm not the standard female. I make the same type of jokes, drink the same type of beer and can fart as loud as any of them.

Actually, that sounds like at least 50% of the female gamers I've met

Originally Posted by Piratecat

Well, frankly, they are. That table is one of the bizarre artifacts of the 1e DMG, and generally mentioned because people nowadays can't believe that it existed. Bringing up the past is not tantamount to promoting sexism in gaming, and I'm a little surprised you used it as an example.

Then again, folks should draw their own conclusion; I had posted the table, so my opinion is probably biased.

No offense meant, PCat. I just happened to remember seeing that post of yours and it was the one I found when I did a quick search, so I linked it. I may have missed the context in which it was posted. That said, I think the nature of D&D's past does tinge the current in certain not-so-good ways, but then that's obvious in my original post.

I'm dead-set against sexism in real life, in gaming and here on the boards. I think it's up to each DM and player to make sure that they aren't maintaining a game that makes people uncomfortable. I have the most fun with both sexes in my game (out of 12 players in two campaigns, six are female), and both my NPC authority figures and my villains are often female. But that being said, I don't consider my game to be a soapbox against sexism. I'm not trying to make a societal point when I play D&D, I'm trying to have fun and make sure that all my players do as well. Being conscious of sexism (and racism), without dwelling on it, serves me well here.

That's one of the tough balancing acts for me. When I'm running a game, my primary aim is obviously the enjoyment of all concerned, not to make broader societal points. And so sexism and racism tend not to be engaged with unless they are specific plot points. But, at the same time, I tend to notice how societal points influence the nature and presentation of gaming and the gaming community, and I think some of that is worth discussion (hence the thread).

Like Rodrigo said, I've gamed with well over a hundred different women. They've run the same gamut as male players have, and have the same strengths and foibles. Expecting otherwise seems a bit odd to me.

I've gamed with a lot fewer people (men or women) than you, but I'm quite clear on the fact that there's no less or more variety in the women who game as the men. If I indicated otherwise in the original post, then I was presenting my point poorly.

Originally Posted by frankthedm

I found this part of the OP's post the most helpful when evaluating it.

I understand that one of the primary reasons, if not the major one, for such sexism is because we live in a world (speaking mostly of the USA here, which has the biggest part of the D&D pie) where sexism runs rampant.

Good point. If someone seriously doesn't believe that sexism is an issue in the USA right now, I think it's safe to say that the person wouldn't see the sort of things I see (or view them as an issue).

Of course, it's also possible that someone could think there's too much sexism in the US and still think I'm full of it

[Mark]

Originally Posted by shilsen

What do you think?

I think if people's wives, girlfriends and female players would post to gaming message boards as much as the guys and increase their presence at gamestores and conventions, the issue would more rapidly become a thing of the past.

[Hereticus]

Originally Posted by Mark

I think if people's wives, girlfriends and female players would post to gaming message boards as much as the guys and increase their presence at gamestores and conventions, the issue would more rapidly become a thing of the past.

I agree, diversity is great.

It has been my experience (it may not be representative of the majority) that I higher percentage of female players get into a game as a result of a partner than males.

Last night I went to hear an ex-Buddhist monk speak about a book he had written. He shared a story about Buddhism growing to the United States as a result of male US soldiers bringing home Asian wives. As of today in the US, that religion is no longer female dominant.

With more female gamers starting to play for whatever reason, at some point in the future the mix will hit near equilibrium. But as of today, we are not there yet.

[Jeff Wilder]

A data point:

I'm currently running an Eberron campaign in which the heroes are in Xen'drik fighting a lot of giants. I noticed something odd when I was going through my D&D Miniatures collection to evaluate how many giants and of how many types I have.

DDM has produced six or seven ogres, five or so trolls, three ettins, three hill giants, two stone giants, two frost giants, three fire giants, a cloud giant, a storm giant, an eldritch giant, and a death giant. (There may be some I'm forgetting, but that's pretty close.)

Of 30 or more giants produced in the DDM line, three are female: two of the ogres and the storm giant.

I found that to be extremely annoying.

[shilsen]

Originally Posted by Cadfan

Part of the problem is that gaming is, for some people, literally a boy's club to retreat to in order to find a place to fit in. And they get accustomed to things being that way.

I'm not against boy's clubs as a general rule. People being what they are, its cool if they associate in gender segregated groups. Just look around the lunch room in a school, its how people are. But people also associate in gender integrated groups, and from my perspective I'd rather D&D was more of the latter than the former.

That's basically my take on it, though I'm probably less keen on gender segregated groups in general.

I'm less sympathetic to people who have internalized... have gender normative... have... crap. I'm trying to think of a way to say this without descending into incomprehensible humanities- speak.

I've been studying and teaching humanities at college level for decades now. I feel your pain!

People, particularly guys, and particularly guys in a traditionally male dominated context, start to assume that the things specifically included to appeal to males are somehow "normal" and therefore not actually specifically designed to appeal to males. This bugs me a bit. You'll get people who look at Barbie and recognize that it's designed to appeal to girls, and then look at a cartoon entitled something like Mega Robot Viking Ninja Explosion Turbo or whatever and cannot, no matter how hard they try, see that this might just be a wee bit aimed at boys as a market. I think these are the people who are more... "the problem" so to speak, because they don't adjust their behavior when the context changes from "boy's club" to a game with both men and women playing. They think that their jokes or comments or soft porn artwork are "normal" and not actually gender specific, and blame others, particularly women, for not liking the things and the behavior they do. If someone ever uses the word "feminazi," chances are you're talking to someone in this category. Ditto "oversensitive" with reference to women who dislike their behavior.

Obviously I'm engaging in a bit of generalization here... so please don't regale me with stories of this one girl you know named Suzie who thinks that wandering prostitute charts are totally awesome and wants to play a sex pot rape victim PC in a chainmail bikini unless you think that she's representative.

Too. Much. Agreement.

So how do I think that modern D&D is doing in this regard?

I think its mostly doing alright.

...

I think D&D's doing a lot better in this regard than it's ever done. Could it do better? I think so.

Overall, I think that the biggest thing that needs to be done is no longer excising sexism so much as it is including things that appeal to girls and women. Its why I'd like D&D to take a little more influence from modern fantasy, which is much, much more mixed in terms of the genders to which it appeals.

...

This is an area of heavy generalization...

Interesting idea. And, as you say, this is an area of heavy generalization, which is what makes it complicated.

Originally Posted by Mallus

So true!

Well now that's an interesting observation. The funny thing is CITY (the group's previous campaign setting) was intentionally sexist and racist, and yet the most powerful and influential NPC's encountered during the campaign were women.

I noticed that.

CITY was deliberately meant, in part, to be a parody of the less-than-savory aspects of the genre. Would you call CITY less sexist than the Port (the setting for the round-robin)?

I think the CITY setting itself would be equally sexist in that the strong and powerful women seemed to be completely anomalous to the majority of women in the world around them. Just like when Queen Elizabeth I was on the throne and Renaissance England was still a heavily sexist place, because she was unique.

With the Port it seems John and I were just following the genre(s). Which would make it fairly sexist, then, I guess .

Goes with the territory, I guess, but I like to mess with the territory.

Does the fact that it's largely about men --so far, at least-- necessarily mean it's also for men?

I think in theory it doesn't, but in practice it can come across that way.

I'll post some less personal responses later, assuming this thread doesn't go down in a blaze of politics.

Sure, and I hope not.

I think I want to make a point about the gender of particular narratives (that some skew male or female, not that's there anything wrong with that). To my mind, the exclusionary part of some game narratives is that they're fundamentally about solving problems with physical violence and looting, not their lack of strong female characters.

Good point, though most of the female players I've seen really enjoy the violence and the looting.

Originally Posted by Umbran

I think that aside from the art, you will be hard pressed to find anything sexist about the core rules of the recent editions.

Mechanically, I agree totally.

Campaign worlds have to present a society. Most of the societies in recorded human history have had strong gender roles. It is thus actively difficult to produce a game-society that is plausible, but has no trace of sexism.

Difficult, maybe, but not impossible, I think. I used the example of Eberron as one which presents a game-society (one which I think is actually more cohesive than the faux-medieval societies in many other settings) that is both plausible and has no trace of sexism.

I have, in the past, been told that the manner of eradicating gender roles can show as much or more sexism (by way of "pandering", among other things) than depicting a realistic moderately sexist culture in the game. Rock and a hard place, there.

Agreed. One of my examples of a near-perfect way to do it (though not in gaming) is in Battlestar Galactica, where rather than pandering to certain gender stereotypes there are characters of every possible kind and nature. And some of them are women and some are men, and their nature doesn't map intrinsically onto their gender, but is merely inflected by it.

As for EN World - saying there's too much sexism here is rather like saying there's too much sexism in the world. We have no control over the upbringing and beliefs of individual posters. Sexism is here because it is in the general population. You won't fix sexism here, except by fixing it in the general population.

Agreed. But you have to start somewhere, so I might as well start here. After all, I spend more time here than in the general population

I have a major logic failure here. You see, in order to "cater to women", we must have a profile of what women like that is not in the game. That's a stereotype, and inherently sexist.

Originally Posted by Cadfan

Really?

Do you think that D&D as it exists today caters to men?

As Cadfan's question (I think) and Proserpine later noted, I'm not suggesting that D&D cater specifically to women, for precisely the reason you mention. I think it should just cater equally to women as to men.

Originally Posted by S'mon

I think any meaningful discussion of the issue would violate ENW's 'no politics' provision.

I do think WotC has been determinedly, even aggressively, anti-sexist in its presentation of D&D.

I think they've done a much better job than they did before, but there are a number of things (small or large, depending on perspective) where there's a fair bit of gender bias. The artwork, the miniatures, etc.

Originally Posted by Remathilis

...there was no inherent sexism IN THE RULES.

The artwork, otoh, is a different kettle of fish.

Yup. As noted above, the artwork is one of the things I had in mind when posting this thread.

Originally Posted by RefinedBean

Good god, I wish this thread had a humor tag.

And yeah, D&D is inherently sexist, at least a little bit. You ever see fantasy pictures of "normal" women? They're either horridly ugly (and therefore probably a monster in disguise, or Ugly For A Reason) or, at the very least, thin and big-breasted. Meanwhile, males have a much bigger range.

It's the same kind of sexism found in most video games and other popular media. Sex sells, and since you're selling mainly to men, you're going to objectify women at least a wee bit.

And that's the kind of presumption that I don't buy. I think it's possible to sell to men without objectifying women. And I'd much rather that D&D just sold to everyone, male or female.

This, of course, does NOT mean that the people who play and enjoy D&D are sexist themselves. We're wayyyy too diverse a group to pigeonhole like that.

I wasn't saying that the individual people who play and enjoy D&D are all sexist. I know there's way too much variety among people who game to make any such comment. But I do think a lot of people who aren't inherently sexist themselves can allow an atmosphere of sexism to exist without realizing or commenting on it.

Originally Posted by Jack7

I can offer a sort of personal observation about all this, in an analogical fashion.

When I first starting dating my wife, who is black (I am not), she would notice people "looking at us funny a lot."

...

Funny you should mention that, since I'm in an interracial relationship (my girlfriend's white and I'm Indian) too.

Anywho, this is not to say there is no such thing as racism or sexism or whatever the "ism du jour" might be, it's just that it usually isn't the bugbear it appears to be on first blush, and truth be told, you get to know most people, and they're pretty fair. That is they may have motives for their beliefs, even ones I sometimes think wrong, but they may have motives that to them are based on solid principles or based on valid personal experience.

Maybe, but while I can understand why people are sexist or racist or anything of the kind, that doesn't mean I have to think it's a good thing.

As for the game, I suspect it's much like it is in real life.
You get the world you set out to make.

Or the one you'll tolerate anyway.

Right. And this is in part a conversation, I think, about what those of us posting are willing to tolerate. Obviously, our standards differ a lot here.

Originally Posted by Hereticus

Marketing

and

product

design

cater

to

a

target

audience.

And when marketing and target design change, so does the target audience. Or vice versa. And I figure D&D targeted at an audience of men and women is a good thing.

[ajanders]

Are the mechanics of D&D sexist, or are the settings in which those mechanics live sexist?

Put another way, are the core books sexist or is the Forgotten Realms sexist?

[shilsen]

and big-breasted.

Originally Posted by Jack7

I try not to hold that against any female.
I'm just enlightened that way.

And ... thank you for making my point about what sometimes goes on at ENWorld.

[Umbran]

Originally Posted by Cadfan

Do you think that D&D as it exists today caters to men?

If, for the moment, we except the art (because that discussion gets complicated very quickly), I don't really believe it inherently caters to men, no.

The game lacks support in several areas - from watching discussions here and elsewhere, I am not of the opinion that desire for support in those areas is gender-specific.

[Leatherhead]

The less sexism I see, the more discrimination based on superficial looks (i.e. clothing, build, and appearance) I see. I think I will dub it "apperancisim" for lack of a better term. If a term for this actually exist, please let me know.

I would elaborate but that would probably push the thread into social commentary. Well, even more so than it already is.

[SilvercatMoonpaw2]

I'm reading this discussion and I keep feeling like many of the posters understand something about this issue that I'm not getting. Where and what am I supposed to be looking for?

[Mark]

Originally Posted by Leatherhead

(. . .) discrimination based on superficial looks (i.e. clothing, build, and appearance) (. . .)

Law.com - Appearance-Based Discrimination Suits Are on the Rise

[roguerouge]

Random points:

Does the game appeal to the butch and the tomboy in both sexes?

A reminder for the thread, according to that Sean K Reynolds post with WotC numbers, 4/5 of gamers are men.

Wow is this defensive: "Thank god someone so enlightened came by to show us the error of our ways. Really I had no idea this hobby I'd enjoyed for so long was so misogynistic. I guess the female players that I've gamed with since the early 80s were just confused or self-loathing." Look to PCat's response for a better way to respond.

I tend to agree with PirateCat: the humor of the table is that it was published, but also that gamers need a table for everything. I really wouldn't list posting it as an example. (And I'm someone who tends to side with holding gaming companies' feet to the fire on representation.) (Seoni=fan service and so very boring.)

I've not done a sexist society yet in game, but I have done a class-war in game, playing the role of a Union-busting goon and a Robber Baron as a DM. I'm a union man, myself, and I include those figures as antagonists for that very reason. I can easily see someone who takes sexual relations seriously doing the same for their game. Still, it's a good point to draw a distinction between settings and individual games.

A game geared towards men is not evidence of sexism if it lacks significant markers of denigration. The denigration and disrespect are what's key in defining sexism. I don't get upset at the existence of Smith College, for example, nor do I go ballistic at the notion of a guy's night out.

The problem with WotC modules, in my experience, is that their characters are not people, making their gender representation irrelevant. The NPCs are narrative functions. Paizo modules tend to have the kind of characters where characterization matters. I've not read 4e modules, so this is not an edition war comment.

[Silver Moon]

The game is what you make of it. If you don't want sexism then don't make it sexist. I've run a series of campaigns set in a fantasy 19th Century Earth (both Western and Pulp genres) using D&D rules. While I tend to stick with historical facts as much as possible I have greatly expanded the female roles from what was traditiional in that society. I figure if the world can have elves, dwarves and magic then I don't have to stick to gender roles exactly as they were. I'd say that it works, as one-third to one-half of my player have always been female, and I've never heard one complaint about that limiting their play.