D&D General Creating a Pride Flag for my D&D setting

[Dannyalcatraz]

Maybe the dwarves use quartz color to signify who one is interested in? In this case, the gem color might adopt the elven colors. The jewelry often includes three stones for three colors.

Where the gem color is usually shades of grey in darkvision, the romantic interest is symbolically reserved. So the dwarves are more polite and formal about their romantic interests.

A given stone of a particular type will have a variety of characteristics: cut (including engraving, like runes), clarity (translucent to cloudy to opaque and all kinds of variations between), mass, color. Additional factors may exist, depending on inclusions, trace elements, and the like.

So Dwarven stone code can convey at least 5 discrete pieces of information per stone. That’s a LOT, and differences can be subtle, so nuance is possible.

 

[Yaarel]

Some posts seem to suggest that pride is impossible without oppression, but such an argument would be absurd.

Many Americans are proud of being American. America is a relatively empowered nation and can display pride.

Many men are proud of being a man. Many women are proud of being a woman.

Pride comes from self-identity, and perhaps specifically, a shared self-identity.

In a better world, where LGBTQIA+ can take freedom, equality, welcome, and saftety for granted, they will still demonstrate pride in oneself and in each other.

 

[Yaarel]

A given stone of a particular type will have a variety of characteristics: cut (including engraving, like runes), clarity (translucent to cloudy to opaque and all kinds of variations between), mass, color. Additional factors may exist, depending on inclusions, trace elements, and the like.

So Dwarven stone code can convey at least 5 discrete pieces of information per stone. That’s a LOT, and differences can be subtle, so nuance is possible.

The clarity of quartz has
• transparent crystalline quartz (including rock crystal, amethyst, rose, etcetera)
• translucent microcrystalline chalcedony (including carnelian, prase, etcetera)
• opaque cryptocrystalline jasper (any color and pattern)

I like the use of clarity for anatomy. Anatomy is the physical body, including genitalia but also the secondary characteristics like muscularity or higher eyebrows.

Which seems to have more affinity?

Transparency is moreso female or male?

Opacity is moreso female or male?



Tentatively, I am leaning toward transparency being female, where the beauty includes the interior. Meanwhile opacity being male, has the beauty exterior.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

The clarity of quartz has
• transparent crystalline quartz (including rock crystal, amethyst, rose, etcetera)
• translucent microcrystalline chalcedony (including carnelian, prase, etcetera)
• opaque cryptocrystalline jasper (any color and pattern)

That’s technically correct, and part of how they’re defined. But even within those classifications, you can have great variations of clarity.

So ”transparent crystalline quartz” can be clean enough to make lenses out of (sometimes called “optical” quartz) to quite included (by tourmaline, rutile or other minerals) or cloudy. You can even find cat’s eye and star versions of that material.

Meanwhile, certain samples of chalcedony or jasper may be clear enough to read through.

I like the use of clarity for anatomy. Anatomy is the physical body, including genitalia but also the secondary characteristics like muscularity or higher eyebrows.


Which seems to have more affinity?

Transparency is moreso female or male?

Opacity is moreso female or male?

At this point, I can’t help beyond saying whatever works for the dwarves of your campaign is how you should do it.

I will say that, unless you’re writing an epic novel, you probably don’t want to spend too much time designing your Dwarven stone code becaues it’s unlikely to pay off in player enjoyment in proportion to your efforts. Most will take note of it and be “Cool!” or “Whatever.” They’re probably not going to try sending their own coded messages.

Instead, telling them the stone code exists and simply telling them the message without actually codifying the underlying symbology, syntax and grammar of it will satisfy 99% of your players.

 

[Faolyn]

Some posts seem to suggest that pride is impossible without oppression, but such an argument would be absurd.

Many Americans are proud of being American. America is a relatively empowered nation and can display pride.

Many men are proud of being a man. Many women are proud of being a woman.

Pride comes from self-identity, and perhaps specifically, a shared self-identity.

In a better world, where LGBTQIA+ can take freedom, equality, welcome, and saftety for granted, they will still demonstrate pride in oneself and in each other.

Yes, but.

People who are proud of their country are proud because they live in a great country that does good things (or at least they believe it is/does).

Women who are proud of being women usually are so because they live in a place where women are expected to behave in a particular way, and thus the woman is proud for behaving in that way or for circumventing those expectations. Ditto for men. This could be a societal expectation or a familial one. A woman could be proud of being a stay-at-home mom because she's doing what good moms are supposed to do and she's doing it well, or because she chose to be with her kids and raise them instead of rejoining the ratrace like everyone thinks she should do. Both are things to be proud about. A man could be proud of being a stay-at-home dad because he wants to give his children the best life, despite society thinking that's a woman's job.

So, in a world where one's sexuality is just a label with no baggage attached, what sort of pride is involved? "I sure smooched the heck out of those guys!" is not, IMO, a flag-worthy moment of pride for someone who is sexually/romantically attracted to guys.

 

[Yaarel]

Yes, but.

People who are proud of their country are proud because they live in a great country that does good things (or at least they believe it is/does).

Women who are proud of being women usually are so because they live in a place where women are expected to behave in a particular way, and thus the woman is proud for behaving in that way or for circumventing those expectations. Ditto for men. This could be a societal expectation or a familial one. A woman could be proud of being a stay-at-home mom because she's doing what good moms are supposed to do and she's doing it well, or because she chose to be with her kids and raise them instead of rejoining the ratrace like everyone thinks she should do. Both are things to be proud about. A man could be proud of being a stay-at-home dad because he wants to give his children the best life, despite society thinking that's a woman's job.

So, in a world where one's sexuality is just a label with no baggage attached, what sort of pride is involved? "I sure smooched the heck out of those guys!" is not, IMO, a flag-worthy moment of pride for someone who is sexually/romantically attracted to guys.

The above post seems to underestimate the inherent value of orientation and transgederness.

There is a reason the human species evolved the presence of transgender individuals − because they improved the survival rate of the group as a whole. For example, when the paleolithic gender-divide into masculine hunter and feminine gatherer, it proves useful for trans women to remain as part of the feminine group and trans men to venture off as part of the masculine group.

Humans evolve to specialize for group survival, cohesive symbolic language, and learning. Indeed, human infants are appallingly vulnerable compared to other animals. It is the group who protects the infant. Indeed, humans evolved elders who live long beyond their reproductive fertility, because their knowledge and caretaking of other peoples infants dramatically increased the survival rate of everyone in the group. Likewise, youthful persons who dont have their own children dramatically increase the survival of the group.

Moreover, a trans woman is proud of being a woman for the exact same reason that a cis woman is proud of being a woman. Samesex couples are proud of their relationship for the same reason altsex couples are proud of their relationship. And similarly for any LGBTQIA+ permutation.

 

[Faolyn]

The above post seems to underestimate the inherent value of orientation and transgederness.

There is a reason the human species evolved the presence of transgender individuals − because they improved the survival rate of the group as a whole. For example, when the paleolithic gender-divide into masculine hunter and feminine gatherer, it proves useful for trans women to remain as part of the feminine group and trans men to venture off as part of the masculine group.

That... doesn't seem right. Not every trait that exists is one that was selected for. A lot of traits exist because they weren't selected against. Being transgender doesn't prevent the human species from surviving so it stuck around. Being transgender may have been useful in society for the reasons you state, but society doesn't do much for evolution. But even then, it's not so much something useful as a natural occurrence in a society that both accepts transgender people and has fairly strict gender roles. In a society that accepts transgender people but doesn't have gender roles (such as elves, often), then a hunter would be anyone who was good at hunting, regardless of their sex or whether they are trans or cis.

Moreover, a trans woman is proud of being a woman for the exact same reason that a cis woman is proud of being a woman. Samesex couples are proud of their relationship for the same reason altsex couples are proud of their relationship. And similarly for any LGBTQIA+ permutation.

I think you're missing the point though. The inherent value of orientation and gender is because, for millennia, people insisting that there are two genders and only one proper orientation. A trans woman may be proud to be a woman, but her trans-ness is only actually important because of people insisting that trans-ness isn't real or is wrong. In a society where someone who was AMAB comes out as being a woman, and everyone elses' response is "OK, what should we call you now?", then there's no real need for pride in transitioning. It's just a thing that you are, and would only be important in certain medical situations. Ditto for sexual orientation. If literally nobody cares if you're into guys or girls or both or neither, then being gay or straight is just a thing that you are.

You're also ignoring that no, not every cis woman is going to be proud she's a woman. For many people, being a woman is just a thing that you are, no biggie. Ditto for men.

 

[Yaarel]

but society doesn't do much for evolution.

The term "society" is a sum total of a groups learned knowledge. It equals human survival. This triumph of learning over instinct is precisely what the human species evolved to specialize in.

The inherent value of orientation and gender is because, for millennia, people insisting that there are two genders and only one proper orientation.

The supremacism of cisgender heterosexuality is mostly modern, achieving totalitarianism in Western cultures mainly around the 1800s.

We can see from photographs, how even any male-male affection, such as embracing and sitting in each others laps, diminishes from the 1800s until near nonexistence around the 1950s. Today dysfunctional masculinity has destroyed the lives of many men, especially older men who live in loneliness isolated from other men.

In the centuries before the 1800s, many communities include transgender persons and samesex relationships, as part of general eccentricities, especially in remote towns and villages, away from urban political conflicts.

A trans woman may be proud to be a woman, but her trans-ness is only actually important because of people insisting that trans-ness isn't real or is wrong. In a society where someone who was AMAB comes out as being a woman, and everyone elses' response is "OK, what should we call you now?", then there's no real need for pride in transitioning. It's just a thing that you are, and would only be important in certain medical situations. Ditto for sexual orientation. If literally nobody cares if you're into guys or girls or both or neither, then being gay or straight is just a thing that you are.

You're also ignoring that no, not every cis woman is going to be proud she's a woman. For many people, being a woman is just a thing that you are, no biggie. Ditto for men.

There are many people who are proud of their body. Many people who are proud of their gender. Many people who are proud of being a member of a man/woman/nonbinary community. In this same way, there are many people who are proud of being gay and proud of being trans, and so on.



Not every American is "extremely proud" or "very proud" of being an American − but the majority is; about 65% feel heightened pride in their shared identity.

 

[Steampunkette]

Trans people exist because the human genome is incredibly complex and the brain is only slightly less so.

There's tons of switches that can get turned on or off, for sure, but all kinds of scenarios and variables can lead to X, Y, or Z structure to form in an "Enlarged" or "Diminutive" state which is sort of like a slider for various aspects of self. Sometimes brains produce too much of X, Y, or Z chemical compared to baseline. Sometimes not enough. Human variety is massive because of it.

That's it. There's no evolutionary advantage to being trans or nonbinary. It's just a thing that happens. Same with homosexuality. And y'know what? We kinda -found- it in the brain. And hormones. It's a -thing-.

Like. AFAB embryos have to create a specific protein to stop estrogen from reaching their tiny developing brains so that it alters their undifferentiated gametes and changes their genital structure into a vulva and all, because if the estrogen penetrates the brain tissue that kid will develop mentally like an AMAB person.

Take the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis, for example. In people who state they are men, it is about 50% larger than it is in people who say they are women. And it bears out in trans men just like it bears out in cis men. And men with a larger than average (for men) BSTc express attraction to men. Well generally.

So in addition to the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis (BSTc) there's also the sexually dimorphic nucleus of the preoptic area (SDN-POA) and the vasoactive intestinal peptide suprachiasmatic nucleus (VIP-SCN). All three of these, together, determine gender and sexuality to some degree.

Based on the size of each region a person will feel male or female, and if they go beyond the "Standard" size (either smaller or larger) than normative for a given gender, they produce erotic attraction toward that gender.

So there's at least 8 different "Brain Sexes" assuming it is flatly binary, which it isn't automatically since someone's particular BSTc, VIP-SCN, or SDN-POA (or all three) could hover in the middle. Or all be "Too Big" or "Too Small" or something similar, which creates at least 5 points on each for 125 different potential "Brain Sexes w/Orientation"

There's... it's a -lot-... Here. This guy helps make it easier.

 

[Faolyn]

The term "society" is a sum total of a groups learned knowledge. It equals human survival. This triumph of learning over instinct is precisely what the human species evolved to specialize in.

No, humans evolved to live in groups. "Society" is all the extraneous, non-natural stuff people have added to make these groups work in a way not ruled by base instincts.

The supremacism of cisgender heterosexuality is mostly modern, achieving totalitarianism in Western cultures mainly around the 1800s.

That is not entirely true. Ancient Greeks and Romans viewed being penetrated as being a woman's role and forbade "real men" from engaging in such activities under great societal pressure (even to the point of viewing a man performing oral sex on a woman as wrong). The Aztecs, despite having a god of male homosexuality, made homosexuality a capitol offense--as I mentioned earlier, I've read it's because gay couples don't produce new taxpayers--but they also put men captured in battle but who weren't sacrificed in the same category as gay men as being "lesser."

In addition, in many cultures, third genders were assigned to people were intersex or who didn't fit societal roles properly, like an "effeminate man," not necessarily because they are what we would call transgender or non-binary. I'm sure many of them were transgender or nonbinary, of course, but it's doubtful all of them were.

There are many people who are proud of their body. Many people who are proud of their gender. Many people who are proud of being a member of a man/woman/nonbinary community. In this same way, there are many people who are proud of being gay and proud of being trans, and so on.

Yes, and again, this is still because historically (and it doesn't matter if you're counting two centuries or two millennia here), people have been oppressed for being "wrong" no longer have to be ashamed of who they are.

If you have a fantasy race in a fantasy world that doesn't have a history of oppression, why would they be proud of their sexuality? It's completely normal. It's like being proud for having two hands when barring accidents, every member of your species has two hands.

You want some dwarf pride? Give them Beardless Pride month. Because traditionally, in games, real dwarfs have beards (I am of the opinion that this includes the women). There's been stuff written in various D&D books and in Dragon over the years talking about how shameful it is to not have a beard, and that it's even common to cut the beards off of dwarf criminals.

You want a dwarf code, so that dwarfs can let other dwarfs know who and what they're into without having to be rude enough to say it out loud (assuming dwarfs think talking about one's sex life is rude), then do it with gemstones.

If you actually want dwarfs, or elves, or orcs, or whatever, to have pride in a gender identity or orientation without having a history of oppression, then you need to have a reason for it beyond "it's what real-life humans do" to have it make sense in a gaming world. Maybe the creator god made special material to make male dwarfs, and special material to make female dwarfs (gold and silver, stone and fire, whatever), and instead of getting rid of the bits that were left over or treating them as worthless, the creator combined saw there was something special about them and use them to create an alloy; in modern terms, trans/non-binary/intersex dwarfs are seen as a representation of that alloy who were made special.

Not every American is "extremely proud" or "very proud" of being an American − but the majority is; about 65% feel heightened pride in their shared identity.

I really don't know what nationalistic jingoism has to do with anything.