D&D 5E What happened to the Hermaphrodites???

A

Askaval30

Explorer

• May 26, 2017

• #1

Having recently introduced my Italian group to the joys of 5th Ed via a converted Spelljammer setting, the topic came up of how inclusive this new edition is when mentioning potential LGBT themes or non-binary genders during character creation.

In order to illustrate this I directed their attention to page 121 of the PHB... the one where Corellon Larethian is referenced as both " androgynous and/or hermaphroditic"... I was sort of surprised when one of the players found no mention of him being hermaphroditic on their PHB.

Turns out his version of the PHB was a later printing where it had been edited out. We were curious as to why this would be... he bought his book in the UK and the older version was purchased in the US, but it would seem odd to have a separate print run for both.

We were just curious as to why they'd modify the books in such a way, and were wondering if anyone out there might know.

 

log in or register to remove this ad

jaelis

Oh this is where the title goes?

• May 26, 2017

• #2

Turns out that hermaphrodite is kind of an offensive term now, for humans at least. Intersex is the going phrase I believe, but it sounds like they adjusted the wording to be safe. It does lose some impact, I agree.

 

Capn Charlie

Explorer

• May 26, 2017

• #3

I thought it was more of a real and fiction religion interaction, since hermaphrodite was a Greek god construct.

Sent from my MT2L03 using EN World mobile app

 

TheCosmicKid

Hero

• May 26, 2017

• #4

jaelis said:

Turns out that hermaphrodite is kind of an offensive term now, for humans at least. Intersex is the going phrase I believe, but it sounds like they adjusted the wording to be safe. It does lose some impact, I agree.

Click to expand...

Yeah, especially since the main reason "hermaphrodite" is kind of offensive is that the word denotes specific reproductive capabilities, and that denotation does not fit RL intersex humans. It's simply the wrong term. But for a fictitious elven god, it may well have been accurate, and furthermore quite interesting: it would mean that Corellon can be both a mother and a father, which seems suitably godlike to me at least. Still, better safe than sorry, I suppose. (On the other hand, you can find people who are offended by the term "androgynous" too.) At least the main point of the paragraph is still there: "This is a fantasy game, and we fully endorse you being whoever and whatever you damn well please."

 

ad_hoc

(they/them)

• May 26, 2017

• #5

Yes, intersex is the correct term. It's also unnecessary to refer to sex. Androgynous refers to gender and is good enough. Non-Binary is a better term but may also be confusing to some.

I am glad it was corrected.

 

S

S'mon

Legend

• May 26, 2017

• #6

Corellon is both male and female, according to elven legend, going back to 1e Deities & Demigods - this wasn't Gygax seeking LGBT brownie points.

No real world human can be biologically fully male and female AFAIK, but s/he is a god.

 

Eltab

Lord of the Hidden Layer

• May 26, 2017

• #7

Askaval30 said:

... the topic came up of how inclusive this new edition is when mentioning potential LGBT themes or non-binary genders during character creation ...

Click to expand...

D&D is as inclusive as you and the group want it to be.

If you don't want to get into that subject matter at all, you can still play D&D.
If the subject matter is central to a character concept, you can still play D&D.

 

Dire Bare

Legend

• May 26, 2017

• #8

My initial response was an eyeroll that "hermaphrodite" is an offensive term to the LGBQT community, but after doing some poking around on the internet, looks like that is definitely the case . . . . but it is a real thing, and it isn't synonymous with "androgynous".

Androgynous means that someone has an overall physicality that is between masculine and feminine. Think the amazing actress Tilda Swinton. Being a hermaphrodite means that you literally have both sets of sexual organs. This is/was certainly a mythic construct in several world religions, but is a real thing too, both in the larger animal kingdom and the human species, although quite rare among humans. It's a literary and scientific term.

So, according to the older PHB, Corellon's physicality is in between masculine and feminine, AND he may literally be both male and female. Similar ideas, but not the same. Intersex does seem to be the preferred term now and is more inclusive than "hermaphrodite", both socially and scientifically, but it doesn't really have a medieval fantasy ring to it, it is a very modern sounding word (because, it is a very modern word).

WotC is probably right in removing the word hermaphrodite from their books, but I'll keep using it in my own campaigns . . . . not that Corellon's bits & pieces come up in table conversation often . . . .

 

C

Captain Lhurgoyf

First Post

• May 26, 2017

• #9

What I don't get is why they went with "androgynous" instead of "intersex". "Androgynous," at least as I've seen it used, refers to one's physical appearance and has nothing to do with sex or gender identity. Of course he appears androgynous, that's par the course for elves

Did they just assume that players wouldn't know what "intersex" meant?

 

L

Lord Twig

Adventurer

• May 26, 2017

• #10

I liked the recognition of more than just the traditional female/male genders in D&D. Since it is a real thing in the real world why wouldn't it be a real thing in a fantasy world? They might have gone a little overboard with the examples, I think just listing the various possibilities would have been enough, but better too much than not enough I guess. So overall good job.

What I don't like is the exclusion of options. So I don't like the exclusion of the hermaphrodite description for Corellon Larethian. I guess it would be more rare for a character than a god/godess, but still, why not leave the option open?

I also don't like the absence of the Girdle of Masculinity/Femininity. It is a D&D classic and a lot of fun. And if you think about it, it might actually be a quest objective for characters that actually want the change.

Oh well. I can always add these things back into my own campaigns. So not really a big deal. Just annoying that they leave things out for fear that someone somewhere might be offended.