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

[roguerouge]

Originally Posted by Mathew_Freeman

In addition to that, I would like to state this: If you are male, then it is not possible for you to make a valid judgement on whether or not there is or is not a problem with sexism in gaming. You cannot experience the same sort of discrimination as women, as you are not one.

Baloney. As someone who's been disabled and teaches disability studies, that's baloney. You may not know exactly what it feels like to be disenfranchised in that way, but I'd certainly never state that you can't know anything about disenfranchisement, ever. It takes some education, some imagination, and some empathy, but yes, you can have a valid opinion on something that you don't have direct experience with.

In fact, I bet you have loads of valid opinions on topics with which you don't have direct experience. You do, after all, play a game of imagining things that never were.

Basically, taken to its logical extreme, your stance is that people can't extrapolate from their own experience to try to understand anyone else's experience. Abstract reasoning, imagination, metaphors, similes, theory... all subservient before the great god of Experience.

In addition, I can hardly think of a less productive viewpoint to have when it comes to promoting progressive values. Basically, this statement says, "Shut up" to anyone you might try to work with in a coalition and to anyone you might try to persuade of your viewpoint. I can hardly imagine trying to teach my students disability with that attitude. I can easily imagine what the impact of doing so would be... even though I've never directly experienced teaching in that manner.

Essentially, you advocate for political solipsism: nobody's viewpoint but mine and those exactly like mine matter. If that's true, why are you in this thread, talking to people who don't have this experience of sexism? Whatever they might learn from you would be invalid, because they never directly experienced it.

[roguerouge]

Originally Posted by Tuft

I think the point here is that if a boys-only club is sexist, then a girls-only one ought to be sexist too.

If marketing something to a male audience using imagery that attracts males is sexist, marketing something... well, fill in the rest.

If that's the opinion, then drawing that equivalency is a fairly noble yet unrealistic way to understand real world power disparities and how to rectify them.

[dbm]

This sort of thing fascinates me, and I'll post at length when I have more time. I just wanted to riposte this point:

Originally Posted by Mathew_Freeman

In addition to that, I would like to state this:

If you are male, then it is not possible for you to make a valid judgement on whether or not there is or is not a problem with sexism in gaming. You cannot experience the same sort of discrimination as women, as you are not one.

If the players of a game whose fundamental point is to put yourself in someone else's shoes can't empathise with the other sex then go help us all!

Cheers,
Dan

[Proserpine]

Originally Posted by Tuft

I think the point here is that if a boys-only club is sexist, then a girls-only one ought to be sexist too.

If marketing something to a male audience using imagery that attracts males is sexist, marketing something... well, fill in the rest.

In my opinion, it's not really the same thing. As Shilsen pointed out earlier, males are treated as the default position in gaming. Even if D&D is mechanically egalitarian, it's gender skewed in other areas. And plenty of other RPGs are definitely catering more (or exclusively) to guys, creating implicit sexism left and right.

My point is, these things aren't interchangeable, since one gender has historically been subordinated to the other in many areas, including gaming. Think of it this way (and I'm not trying to play oppression olympics, just trying to intellectualize the issue): you (hopefully) wouldn't call Black History Month racist, or Women's History Month sexist. Because... well, every other month is about the pursuits of white men. This is anecdotal, but: I've taken "progressive" humanities courses that decided to move away from the usual literature covered in humanities courses. Between nearly 17 texts, we read one female. I've also taken contemporary literature classes, and in one where I read 12 plays, we covered two females. And academia is not a boys' club anymore. Gender wise (and race wise, though we're not arguing that here) the world is quite unbalanced, and the male is seen in as the defaul even in areas (like academia) which are no longer boys' clubs.

[Mathew_Freeman]

Originally Posted by Aus_Snow

Let's see now. . .

Oh, and it gets better.

Are you male?

If so, you have just shot yourself in the foot with the other one in your mouth.

Nice shootin'.

How so?

Yes, I am male. The name was a clue.

I appreciate that I cannot experience the sexism and discrimination in gaming, as a man, as a woman can. However, I can still see that there is discrimination and sexism, and in my own way I can try and work against that.

[Aus_Snow]

Originally Posted by Mathew_Freeman

How so?

Yes, I am male. The name was a clue.

I appreciate that I cannot experience the sexism and discrimination in gaming, as a man, as a woman can. However, I can still see that there is discrimination and sexism, and in my own way I can try and work against that.

If you insist. . .

'If you cannot see or understand that there is a problem with sexism in RPG's, in terms of the marketing, the assumptions, the behaviour of gamers (both in games and at conventions), then you are part of the problem.'

So, here you are clearly stating that there is a problem with sexism in RPGs. Right? Right. Next one along then. . .

'If you are male, then it is not possible for you to make a valid judgement on whether or not there is or is not a problem with sexism in gaming. You cannot experience the same sort of discrimination as women, as you are not one.'

And here you are clearly stating that, if one is male, one cannot 'make a valid judgement on whether or not there is [. . .] a problem with sexism in gaming.'

And, uh, you are male. See it now?

[Doug McCrae]

Originally Posted by Mathew_Freeman

I do also find it slightly hilarious that in a hobby which is dominated by men, has products that are nearly entirely aimed at, written by and marketed to men, finally gets around to writing a game aimed at and marketed to women, that the response isn't "Oh, about time" but "This is sexist! It excludes men! I am excluded! I feel oppressed!"

It is sexist, but in a good way. Any product must have a target market, that's just good business. But to identify such a market, whether it's geeks or sports fans or teenagers or men or women, is necessarily exclusionary.

There's really no reason why the response to Witch Girls from men in their 30s (the most common demographic on ENWorld) should be positive. Witch Girls isn't for men in their 30s, it's marketed towards younger females.

That Witch Girls exists is something I find really interesting. The creators are trying something new (which should always be applauded imo), going for more of a Harry Potter/manga market than Blue Rose which derived from modern romantic fantasy. Testing a roleplaying game with a girl scout group is kind of mind-blowing and potentially revolutionary.

But Witch Girls is not for me. It's not aimed at me. It doesn't care about me, and rightly so. So there's no reason why I or others in my demographic should care about it.

[1Mac]

This is a way more interesting, level-headed, and helpful thread than I imagined it would be. Kudos ENWorld! I have a lot of reactions, but I'll try to focus on things that have been less discussed.

1.) It's been touched on indirectly, but I thought I would clarify: When you ask "Is D&D sexist?", you are really asking several things. To focus on a few of them...

a.) Are the mechanics sexist? (I think everyone agrees that despite some aberrant counterexamples, this is not true)

b.) Are the setting assumptions sexist?

c.) Is hobby gaming culture at large sexist?

There are further ways to refine these points.

2.) Regarding point b, that depends on a few things. For starters, it is important to recognize that many game settings, published and homebrewed, purposefully invoke real-world myth and legend, either directly or via modern fantasy. And as it happens, myth and legend, from Homer to King Arthur to Miyamoto Musashi, is often about manly men hacking at foes and rescuing damsels.

So why rely on such a milieu, if it reinforces sexual stereotypes (both male and female)? Because they are classics, and have given enjoyment for millennia. I can understand tweaking such tropes to accommodate powerful female characters. But there comes a point where the imperative to overhaul time-tested legend because it affronts our modern sensitivities to gender inequality becomes silly.

3.) Is there anything wrong with a boy's club or a girl's club in gaming? I personally don't think there is. People often like being around people exclusively of their own sex from time to time, and I don't think this is immature or prejudicial, nor should it be discouraged.

I realize, though, that this is a different issue than whether an entire hobby should be the domain of one sex or another.

4.) A personal anecdote, one that I hope my wife won't find too embarrassing, since it's about her (though she was telling it in public to strangers the other day, so I think I'm fine).

Years ago, before we were married and I was visiting her school, we took a trip into town to see Kill Bill. My now-wife doesn't like film violence, but I and some of her friends were enthusiastic, so away we went.

Afterwards she was visibly upset, not angry, but literally speechless with shock. This was upsetting to me. I felt like I had pushed her into doing something that she not only didn't want to do, but was actually harmful to her. We had an awkward, silent busride back to campus, where I finally brought up my concern. She was a bit surprised, and told me that I didn't need to take responsibility, that it was her decision to go to the show, and that she could bear the consequences.

This was an important teaching moment for me, and I was reminded of it recently when talking about starting a gaming group. I have tentatively persuaded her to join, but at one point I was suggesting that she encourage one of her girl friends to join as well, being aware of the "boy's club" that gaming can be. In so many words, she said "I can take what you guys dish out."

This doesn't abrogate the need to discuss how to make gaming more palatable to women, but I don't think what limited sexist relics still exist in D&D are insurmountable roadblocks. Most women are of sterner stuff than that.

[CardinalXimenes]

I think it's worth drawing a distinction between gaming sexism as an instrumental problem and gaming sexism as a moral failing, because the answers are going to be different for each. It's perfectly possible to make a devil's bargain with your content, pushing the material that is most likely to get you the most players regardless of what that material is. To argue that sexist content turns off the female demographic is to retreat to a utilitarian argument that is vulnerable to market facts. I don't think a lot of people making this argument would be satisfied if the market proved that splatbooks full of naked barbarian chicks boosted player numbers by 100%.

I think an argument many would prefer to make is that participating in vicarious sexism is something that more people should be uncomfortable about roleplaying. In that sense, debating whether a given RPG is turning off female gamers is a different conversation entirely. The success or failure of sexist content to expand the hobby is in no way going to affect their satisfaction with a game that seems sexist. It's also a much more difficult argument to make, because you have to not only convince your interlocutors of the existence of sexist content, but also that they should feel bad about participating vicariously in it.

[Canis]

Originally Posted by Starfox

As an illustration from real life: In the Swedish schooling system today, girls do better than boys. Not just a little better, but a lot. Most of our university students are now women.

Those stats hold true in the States, too (insofar as you can call what we have an educational system at this point). Boys are increasingly likely to go right into the workforce after high school, for some reason. Strange sort of reversal there. And girls get better grades overall almost straight through the system (with the usual noise around math and science depending on the school system and teachers).

And if you want to see institutional sexism in action.... look at American graduate school.

American women are significantly more likely than men to enter graduate school but FAR less likely to finish it. And a disturbingly large percentage of those who do finish end up ditching that career entirely for something else. The sciences in particular are bad that way, though men also drop out of the sciences after attaining advanced degrees at a shocking rate. Just not as high as the rate at which women drop out. So higher level science education, teaching, and research are actually badly broken for both sexes, just broken WAY worse for women.

So even in the most liberal parts of our culture, who are allegedly the watchdogs for this stuff.... sexism is practically grafted into the institutions.

Originally Posted by NewJeffCT

<<snip>>
But, there is still the impression that it's sort of a "Boy's Club"

Well.... yeah. Last three times my wife came to any sort of gaming/comic store with me she was, in order:
1) Leered at by a pair of guys who were literally giggling in the corner after we came in
2) An extremely awkward and very creepy attempt was made to hit on her
3) Her anatomy was scrutinized to the point where I literally had to put my hand in front of the guy's face to get his attention to tell him I no longer intended to buy the books in my hand

They sound like bad stereotypes, but these events all took place within the last 3 years. A sizable and very visible minority of male gamers (and geeks of all stripes) continue to treat women as if they were some other species entirely. Women are consistently either objectified to an extreme or put on a ridiculous pedestal. I've even seen some guys do both at the same time with the same woman, which is some ju jitsu conceptualization.

In short.... I'm not convinced the games themselves contain sexist elements worth noting at this point. The culture, however, is a disaster area much of the time. The gaming culture and the culture in general (leastwise here in the States)

[Mathew_Freeman]

Originally Posted by roguerouge

Baloney. As someone who's been disabled and teaches disability studies, that's baloney. You may not know exactly what it feels like to be disenfranchised in that way, but I'd certainly never state that you can't know anything about disenfranchisement, ever. It takes some education, some imagination, and some empathy, but yes, you can have a valid opinion on something that you don't have direct experience with.

In fact, I bet you have loads of valid opinions on topics with which you don't have direct experience. You do, after all, play a game of imagining things that never were.

Basically, taken to its logical extreme, your stance is that people can't extrapolate from their own experience to try to understand anyone else's experience. Abstract reasoning, imagination, metaphors, similes, theory... all subservient before the great god of Experience.

In addition, I can hardly think of a less productive viewpoint to have when it comes to promoting progressive values. Basically, this statement says, "Shut up" to anyone you might try to work with in a coalition and to anyone you might try to persuade of your viewpoint. I can hardly imagine trying to teach my students disability with that attitude. I can easily imagine what the impact of doing so would be... even though I've never directly experienced teaching in that manner.

Essentially, you advocate for political solipsism: nobody's viewpoint but mine and those exactly like mine matter. If that's true, why are you in this thread, talking to people who don't have this experience of sexism? Whatever they might learn from you would be invalid, because they never directly experienced it.

I need to my hands up and confess to being tired and to making a mistake with my post, for which I apologise.

What I was saying is that you cannot experience the same sort of discrimination, not that you cannot understand it or view it at all. Reading back, I didn't make that clear.

The point I was making was aimed at those people who were claiming that there is no sexism in gaming, as they were unaware of any. I'm of the opinion that if you're not aware of it, you're part of the problem.

I think I'm going to go back and make that original post read more like how I meant it, and rather less like I'm a pompous jerk.

roguerouge, you sound like you have a great job, and I've clearly riled you. I hope you can accept that it wasn't my intention, and that I've written unclearly.

thanks,

Matt.

[Mathew_Freeman]

Originally Posted by Aus_Snow

If you insist. . .

'If you cannot see or understand that there is a problem with sexism in RPG's, in terms of the marketing, the assumptions, the behaviour of gamers (both in games and at conventions), then you are part of the problem.'

So, here you are clearly stating that there is a problem with sexism in RPGs. Right? Right. Next one along then. . .

'If you are male, then it is not possible for you to make a valid judgement on whether or not there is or is not a problem with sexism in gaming. You cannot experience the same sort of discrimination as women, as you are not one.'

And here you are clearly stating that, if one is male, one cannot 'make a valid judgement on whether or not there is [. . .] a problem with sexism in gaming.'

And, uh, you are male. See it now?

My original post really isn't clear, and my follow up doesn't help. Sigh. I should have thought harder before posting in this thread.

To be much clearer on my own position - I think there is a problem with sexism in gaming, but I appreciate that I cannot have the same experience of sexism as a woman can, because I am a man.

Therefore, I think it's important that men take advice from women on how to solve the problem, rather than dictating to them how it should be done.

It's a mess, and a bog, and I'm going to bow out of this thread until I can think (and post) more clearly.

[Aus_Snow]

Originally Posted by Mathew_Freeman

Therefore, I think it's important that men take advice from women on how to solve the problem, rather than dictating to them how it should be done.

Indeed.

FWIW, you seem a lot more reasonable than I'd first assumed. My bad. Well, I hope I didn't let that assumption show too much. I totally get that it's a mistake, especially with internet communication being unclear at the best of times, even without hot topics jangling people's nerves every which way.

And hey, I probably agree with what you meant to say (again fwiw).

[shilsen]

Originally Posted by Starfox

One of the bad things about traditional sexism is that it strikes both ways; not only does it punish women for not confirming to male values; it punishes males who do not confirm to male values either, and much harsher.

I personally wouldn't say that the patriarchy (aka traditional sexism) is much harsher to males who fail to conform, because the harshness does vary drastically from case to case, but I agree totally that the patriarchy hurts men a great deal too.

Originally Posted by Mathew_Freeman

If you are male, then it is not possible for you to make a valid judgement on whether or not there is or is not a problem with sexism in gaming. You cannot experience the same sort of discrimination as women, as you are not one.

While I agree with a lot of your other points, I was going to disagree with this assertion, but I see that roguerogue has already done so much more articulately than I could, and that you've modified/retracted the comment below. Drat - there goes my righteous indignation

I do also find it slightly hilarious that in a hobby which is dominated by men, has products that are nearly entirely aimed at, written by and marketed to men, finally gets around to writing a game aimed at and marketed to women, that the response isn't "Oh, about time" but "This is sexist! It excludes men! I am excluded! I feel oppressed!"

Yup. And that's a disjunction which I think a lot of people totally don't get or notice.

Originally Posted by roguerouge

Baloney. As someone who's been disabled and teaches disability studies, that's baloney. You may not know exactly what it feels like to be disenfranchised in that way, but I'd certainly never state that you can't know anything about disenfranchisement, ever. It takes some education, some imagination, and some empathy, but yes, you can have a valid opinion on something that you don't have direct experience with.

Agreed on all counts. Nicely put.

Originally Posted by dbm

If the players of a game whose fundamental point is to put yourself in someone else's shoes can't empathise with the other sex then go help us all!

I agree, but the funny thing is that whenever there's a thread about roleplaying another gender and someone makes the point you do, a number of people post that it's harder for a man to play a woman or vice versa than to play an elf or a dwarf because they're fictional. I totally don't buy that viewpoint, in part due to the sort of idea expressed by roguerogue above. And partly since I think that there's enough divergence between two men or two women that playing the other is just as complicated as playing someone of the opposite gender.

Originally Posted by Mathew_Freeman

I appreciate that I cannot experience the sexism and discrimination in gaming, as a man, as a woman can. However, I can still see that there is discrimination and sexism, and in my own way I can try and work against that.

And that I'm completely on board with. Just because I'm not being discriminated against doesn't mean I shouldn't care. Nor does it mean I should use double negatives, of course

Originally Posted by Doug McCrae

But Witch Girls is not for me. It's not aimed at me. It doesn't care about me, and rightly so. So there's no reason why I or others in my demographic should care about it.

I see your point, but would you say you never care about anything which isn't directly aimed at you? On that basis, would you argue that men should never care about sexism aimed at women?

Originally Posted by 1Mac

This is a way more interesting, level-headed, and helpful thread than I imagined it would be. Kudos ENWorld!

I was hoping it would work out this way, mainly because I have a lot of confidence in most of the posters and in the moderators at ENWorld. That said, I'm quite gratified that we're still having this conversation here and in the tone in which it's being carried on.

Regarding point b, that depends on a few things. For starters, it is important to recognize that many game settings, published and homebrewed, purposefully invoke real-world myth and legend, either directly or via modern fantasy. And as it happens, myth and legend, from Homer to King Arthur to Miyamoto Musashi, is often about manly men hacking at foes and rescuing damsels.

So why rely on such a milieu, if it reinforces sexual stereotypes (both male and female)? Because they are classics, and have given enjoyment for millennia. I can understand tweaking such tropes to accommodate powerful female characters. But there comes a point where the imperative to overhaul time-tested legend because it affronts our modern sensitivities to gender inequality becomes silly.

I would disagree here, but I think that's evident already. Firstly, I don't think sexism is as necessary to most, if not all, of these real-world myths and legends as people often claim. The fact that they were sexist doesn't mean that there's any logical necessity for them to be so. When Edmund Spenser writes The Faerie Queene, he creates the female knight Britomart and she works. And I'm pretty darn sure I can create and run a game which has all the resonance of myth and legend without it being sexist.

Secondly, and maybe this is a matter of personal taste (and I speak as someone who's been a mythologist since I started reading the kiddie version of the Mahabharata at four), I would happily give up all use of myth and legend in my games rather than use that to justify sexism.

This doesn't abrogate the need to discuss how to make gaming more palatable to women, but I don't think what limited sexist relics still exist in D&D are insurmountable roadblocks. Most women are of sterner stuff than that.

I don't think they are insurmountable roadblocks. If they were, I wouldn't have started this conversation. But I also don't think women should have to be "of sterner stuff" to play D&D. Or anyone, for that matter.

Originally Posted by CardinalXimenes

I think an argument many would prefer to make is that participating in vicarious sexism is something that more people should be uncomfortable about roleplaying. In that sense, debating whether a given RPG is turning off female gamers is a different conversation entirely. The success or failure of sexist content to expand the hobby is in no way going to affect their satisfaction with a game that seems sexist. It's also a much more difficult argument to make, because you have to not only convince your interlocutors of the existence of sexist content, but also that they should feel bad about participating vicariously in it.

Good points, but I think to some extent we're having both of those conversations in this thread. And while that may make some of this discussion a little schizoid, I think they're related enough that we can do so.

Originally Posted by Canis

And if you want to see institutional sexism in action.... look at American graduate school.

Speaking as someone in American graduate school, who also happens to teach undergraduates, let me just say - OMFG, yes!

A sizable and very visible minority of male gamers (and geeks of all stripes) continue to treat women as if they were some other species entirely. Women are consistently either objectified to an extreme or put on a ridiculous pedestal. I've even seen some guys do both at the same time with the same woman, which is some ju jitsu conceptualization.

Sad but true. That's one of my major issues with the sort of seeming chivalry expressed by posters like Jack7. It presents itself as positive towards women, but what it really does is treat them as if they are aliens and also as if they are dependent upon male protection. It's a really backhanded form of sexism. Not new of course, since it's been around for much of history.

[Proserpine]

Originally Posted by Mathew_Freeman

My original post really isn't clear, and my follow up doesn't help. Sigh. I should have thought harder before posting in this thread.

To be much clearer on my own position - I think there is a problem with sexism in gaming, but I appreciate that I cannot have the same experience of sexism as a woman can, because I am a man.

Therefore, I think it's important that men take advice from women on how to solve the problem, rather than dictating to them how it should be done.

It's a mess, and a bog, and I'm going to bow out of this thread until I can think (and post) more clearly.

For what it's worth, I agree with what you're getting at entirely. I'm really interested in and aware of -isms, but empathy, understanding, and a willingness to acknowledge my own privilege (as a white, cisgender, kinda heterosexual, and able woman) is the extent to which I can and should explore the subject. That is to say, it's kind of rotten of me to say "oh geek stuff/geek culture isn't racist, heterocentric, or what have you" - because I'm not actively excluded in those ways. And being aware of my positioning definitely helps me too see that... well, those people definitely have merit to their arguments, which is really helpful. I certainly dislike a priviledged group telling a marginalized one that something doesn't exist, or that they should just deal with it... which is something that unfortunately happens a lot with gaming. (I'm thinking especially of online gaming. ENWorld and the people I've played with for ttrpgs are pleasantly intelligent - usually.)

[S'mon]

I think this thread is well into 'political' territory, but since the mods don't seem to mind, I have a query:

Isn't a game about killing things, taking their stuff, and getting more powerful (better at killing things) a game that caters to male power fantasies, and thus inherently sexist? Some women enjoy those male power fantasies of killing and looting themselves, but most don't, and thus are inherently excluded.

And it seems to me that 4e D&D is if anything much more narrowly focused on the kill-loot fantasy than was 2e AD&D. Thus even as the art is 'less sexist', the game itself is 'more sexist'. People, especially female players & GMs, have always used D&D for different stories than the inherent power-fantasy one, but if anything that's harder now.

Or is that the 'anti sexists' want girls to be like boys - they want a game that encourages female players to enjoy the same kill-loot-power fantasy that most males like, without feeling excluded by sexist art or sexist game-world cultures?

[Ycore Rixle]

Originally Posted by Proserpine

...one gender has historically been subordinated to the other in many areas, including gaming.

That's not true for gaming. People freely choosing to act according to their will does not subordinate anyone else. No D&D gamer's choice forces another player into a subordinate position. Put it this way: If one group chooses to call their gaming group the He-Man Woman-Haters D&D club, that doesn't subordinate women. It might be stupid, rude, irrepsonsible, and risible, but it's not subordinating anyone else. It's just their choice. People choosing what they want to do, of their own free will, doesn't force anyone else to do anything, or assume any particular position, be it subordinate, ordinate, or cardinal.

[Taralan]

Altought I can see the remaining subtle sexism in D&D (lets call it male-centrism) it seems to me that it is rather mild and certainly less so than many other hobbys including most of all professionnal sports and related entertainment. The new editions make it a point to promote strong female characters in all roles and class, really diminishing the feeling of exclusion.

It seems to me that D&D is far more subtly racist now than sexist. A sample of the art rarely depicts anything other than white characters except in very traditional depiction of semi-historical culture, such as the mwangi in pathfinder or the calimshan in FR for example... altough this too is getting better lately.

And of course, it is 20 times more heterocentric then male centric. I am unaware of any mention or depiction of homosexuality at all in the 40 years of existence of the game, be it in art, settings, adventure etc.... (except perhaps fringe products like the book of erotic fantasy).

[1Mac]

I don't think sexism is as necessary to most, if not all, of these real-world myths and legends as people often claim. The fact that they were sexist doesn't mean that there's any logical necessity for them to be so. When Edmund Spenser writes The Faerie Queene, he creates the female knight Britomart and she works. And I'm pretty darn sure I can create and run a game which has all the resonance of myth and legend without it being sexist.

I'm reminded of Brienne in A Song of Ice and Fire, who also works pretty darn well. There's a trick to this sort of thing, however, to play it so it doesn't seem like you are creating such characters specifically to counter perceived stereotypes. Otherwise the pandering inherent becomes more sexist than if you had just left it alone. Joss Whedon, who is of course my master, nevertheless frequently skirts this line, and it is only because he is such a good writer that he usually avoids crossing it. Stuff like the Charlie's Angels remake, or Kiera Knightly's Gweneviere in that King Arthur movie, Keira Knightly's character in Pirates of the Caribbean ("Try wearing a corsette!") cross it with reckless, hilarious aplomb. My point being that if you are trying to correct for sexism, rather than create interesting characters, you frequently fall on your face.

Also, in general, you could be forgiven for reading my OP and thinking that I thought the fantasy tropes I mentioned were in fact sexist, but I am not sure that is the case. That is, telling stories about beefy Herculeans hewing ogres and rescuing princesses is not in itself sexist. It is only in the context of a culture where those are the only stories being told, and where female passivity is the enforced cultural norm--as is the uber-action-male--are those stories problematic. But the story itself is neutral, and given that our cultural context is much different, I see nothing wrong in retelling such stories.

Also

Secondly, and maybe this is a matter of personal taste (and I speak as someone who's been a mythologist since I started reading the kiddie version of the Mahabharata at four), I would happily give up all use of myth and legend in my games rather than use that to justify sexism.

I'm glad you concede that it could be a matter of personal taste, but I'll just clarify that this seems a minority position, depending on what you mean by justifying sexism. If you mean telling the sort of classic stories I outline, then that seems rather extreme. It certainly doesn't mean that anyone who tells such stories in their games is being sexist.

[Bumbles]

Originally Posted by S'mon

I think this thread is well into 'political' territory, but since the mods don't seem to mind, I have a query:

Your query has been addressed in the countless existing threads discussing the relative merits of 4th edition, and is really independent of any gender-bias that may exist in it.

If you think 4e is that way, and it bothers you, then start playing it another way is the only advice I can offer.