Gender Reversal in D&D

[Hardhead]

The "can girls be paladins" thread got me thinking. We have several PrCs in D&D that are female only (Hathran, Sword Dancer, others I'm not thinking of) but as far as I know, there's only one male-only PrC - the Eunuch Warlock from OA. And that's hardly a manly PrC!

And while there are societies like the Hathran where women are the rulers and there's a glass ceiling for men, there aren't any examples of highly patriarchal socieities (I can't think of any detailed by WotC in 3.x). Indeed, if you look at the D&D minis line, there are more female "warriors" than there are male figures!

It's odd. WotC's D&D seems to assume total gender equality (something we haven't achieved IRL yet). It's a world where women can discriminate against men, but the idea of men discriminating against women (and being cast in a good light, like the Hathran) will never ever be shown.

It just strikes me as strange.

 

[Nightfall]

Well there is a male only ranger brother hood Pr-class in the Scarred Lands. I should know, I wrote em.

 

[MeepoTheMighty]

Indeed, if you look at the D&D minis line, there are more female "warriors" than there are male figures!

Ummm, what? Are you serious? There's the Axesister..and um...the Bladesinger..and that's about it.

 

[Hardhead]

Well there is a male only ranger brother hood Pr-class in the Scarred Lands. I should know, I wrote em.

Yeah, but among 3rd party publishers, you get a lot of variance. I mean, there's the Book of Erotic Fantasy, after all!

I was mainly talking about WotC produced material.

 

[Caspian Moon Prince]

I believe it stems from the fact that culturally you can make more exceptions for "minorities" than for "majorities". Now, basically what I'm saying is that a female sect or Prc can be created and would be considered as PC, but a male-based sect would come off as "sexist" or "chauvanist".

This has real-world equivalents...for example there is a station for african-americans(BET), latin-americans(such as Telemundo), and for women(Oxygen and Lifetime), yet there is not a station for whites and there is only one for men(Spike TV). Now if there was one for whites it could be considered racist and images of segregation of yesteryear would come up. While that can be a consideration, IMO the opposite could be considered racist in a sense. As with the male station(Spike TV), I would make the assumption that if asked, many would think it was sexist and chauvanist, yet the female stations would be considered in a much kinder light and no where near sexist. Why is that? I don't know, but my only guess would be that "minorities" have more rights when it comes to empowerment of the whole than "majorities".

*Mods: If this breaks any rules or you would like me to remove the comments...just let me know. It may be off topic, but I believe it helps explain the question*

Basically, to specifically answer the question, it keeps sexist arguements from being raised in roleplaying games.

 

[WayneLigon]

It's odd. WotC's D&D seems to assume total gender equality (something we haven't achieved IRL yet).

I think it's the best way to go with it, really. Otherwise, it just becomes too distasteful for a lot of people and evokes memories of Gor in others. D&D has a more idealizaed version of the pre-modern civilization and, of course, the GM is free to change whatever is needed for his own world.

 

[Asmor]

It's odd. WotC's D&D seems to assume total gender equality (something we haven't achieved IRL yet). It's a world where women can discriminate against men, but the idea of men discriminating against women (and being cast in a good light, like the Hathran) will never ever be shown.

Bzzt! Wrong! Equality MEANS equality. Equality DOES NOT mean special treatment. A world where women can discriminate against men is very much sexist.

 

[Hardhead]

Ummm, what? Are you serious? There's the Axesister..and um...the Bladesinger..and that's about it.

I guess you mean besides Ember, Sword of Heironeous, Arcane Archer, Elf Ranger, Lidda, Vadania, Wood Elf Skirmisher, Drow Archer, Tiefling Captain, Gnome Fighter, Copper Samurai, Elf Spearguard, Cleric of Nerull, Thayan Knight, Ogre Ravager, Orc Druid, Mialee, Champion of Eilistraee, Cleric of Kord, Graycloak Ranger, Moon Elf Fighter, Ragnara, Dark Moon Monk, Human Cleric of Bane, Aspect of Lolth, Githyanki Fighter, Drow Sergeant, and Yuan-Ti Pureblood?

I was actually exagerating when I said there were more female fighting-types than men, but there sure are a lot of women (not really a complaint, just an observation).

 

[vox]

exclusiveness and minority groups

I think what you are seeing isn't sexism or reverse-sexism or whatever you want to call it. It's just that people are already very familiar w/male dominated societys. Look at history or pop culture and you can find plenty of references to many different societies where men are on a higher social rung than women. So if the interesting concept that you are pinning on a fantasy society is that it's run by men, well, that's not that interesting.

Similarly, if a prestige class's "hook" is that only men can join it because men have superior social position, again it's not that interesting. You could have an interesting male-only PrC but you'd need some kind of spin as to why it's male only--maybe there is a male god and it's special elite group of his.

Likewise, minority-specific art, organizations etc exist and majority-specific versions usually don't exist because the default version of things generally caters to the majority. There is no white-straight-middle class-Protestant-guy TV station because there is an abundance of television already produced w/him in mind.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Countdown to threadnuke due to politics in 3...2...1....

Seriously, it's largely a PC and Fantasy issue. AKAIK, there are a lot of male-only positions, historically, in fantasy, but they are represented in D&D through base classes that are more flexible than their roles (e.g.: the fighter and the paladin can represent a Knight of Valour, a very typically Male role).

Add to that the fact that the 'mythomale' has been, to a certain extent, pushed in the back to be PC. The 'mythomale' has been seen by a lot of women's power movements as being the root cause of the gender opression they see going on. So creating something that emulates it that has to be male (like making a Knight of Valour, Male-Only PrC), or something that relegates the female to a subservient role (It's a Housewife template!) would be looked down on, in general (not always -- the Book of Erotic Fantasy, if anyone, has probably pushed this limit).

Aside from the mythomale being the cause of gender opression in certain peoples' eyes, there's just less cool "must be male" archetypes in Fantasy literature.

For women, there are typical archetypes like witches, nymphs, earth mothers, civic totems, amazons, hyperactive ninja schoolgirls, and pure maidens. For men, there are basically a handful in comparison: Chivalric knight (base class), Wizened old man (base class), Heir of the Lineage (nothin' strong's been done with that yet), Eunuch (the OA thing), and maybe a Defender of some sort. Indeed, a lot of these are flexible depending on the gender (Joan of Arc was a female chivalric knight, arguably a witch is a female wizened old man, a pure maiden is a eunuch, and a civic totem is a defender).

So chalk it up to the following:

1 - There's less cool male-only archetypes (chalk it up to that feminine mystique?)
2 - Those that exist could be adopted by women with the same powers, but a different spin (so making them male-only would be exclusionary)
3 - Those that are cool, and that are all-male, may be seen as slightly un-PC: the aforementioned issue of being blamed for gender discrimination in earlier times.

That said, I thouroughly ignore this IMC -- even those female-only things could be done by a male (there's no reason female unicorns wouldn't like a particularly pure and innocent young cleric, ferinstance.)