Pronouns in D&D - How should gender be handled?

[delericho]

The use of male pronouns as a non-gender-specific default isn't necessarily sexist, and probably for most people it isn't by intent, but it's IMO misguided if you're trying to be inclusive to folks besides men.

I think this is worth repeating. I think it's very easy to forget that while 'he' might well be considered technically correct, and while it's almost certainly not intended to be exclusive of women, the actual effect seems pretty clearly to be to indicate that this is a game for boys. Assuming that is not the impression a publisher wants to give, it's probably worth sacrificing some correctness in favour of being more inclusive.

(And the same goes for the presence of non-white faces in the artwork, for exactly the same reason. While their absence doesn't explicitly say, "this game is not for you", it also doesn't say "this game is for you.")

 

[ClarenceInWonderland]

I think this is worth repeating. I think it's very easy to forget that while 'he' might well be considered technically correct

The 18th century grammarians (see Bishop Lowth for more info) added in a bunch of stuff into English in an attempt to fix the language, that is, make it more like proper languages like Latin or French. So we get stuck with a bunch of rules that never existed in English previously

1. No prepositions at the end of sentences. English and other Germanic languages always did this, but because the word praepositio in Latin means ‘placed before’, you can’t have a preposition at the end.
2. No splitting infinitives. Again, in Latin you can’t do this, so English shouldn’t either. But putting adverbs between ‘to’ and the infinitive is meaningfully distinct
3. For future tense, one should use "shall" with "I" and "We", but "will" with 2nd and 3rd persons. This one’s just silly.
4. Saying "It is I" instead of "it’s me".

On the whole English speakers don’t bother with all these technically correct rules, as there’s no justification to their correctness. In the modern era where we’ve largely lost touch with Latin education, English has pretty much lost all these rules – you’d be hard pressed to hear anyone speaking in subjunctives outside of a few set phrases.

In any case, "correct" in languages is a fluid thing, there are lots of "corrects" actually. What is preferred in one environment is dispreferred in another. So for the generic-he, if I were writing some Victorian upper-class fiction or the definitive history of Renaissance art, I would be strongly inclined to use the most formal register of the language which includes a bunch of these kinds of rules as they are correct for the genre. On the other hand, if I were out bowling with my buddies, I certainly would not use generic-he or "it is I", the 18th century rules are absolutely incorrect in this environment.

So where does an RPG manual fall? If I were writing Space 1889 I’d be inclined to use "he" throughout to make it sound Victoriany. If I were writing Buffy the Vampire Slayer, I’d want to use "she" throughout just ’cause. If I were writing D&D, I wouldn’t use generic-he because it is inappropriate to the degree of formality I would want to project. In-Character text, sure "he" is proper for pseudo-mediaeval talk, but the rules themselves should have a feeling of approachability, so "they" it would be.

 

[Zhaleskra]

I'm pondering some of the proscriptive grammar rules myself. End a sentence with a preposition? As long is it doesn't make it redundant go ahead. Answering the phone and they're asking for you? Honestly, "this is him" or "this is her" sound a lot better than "this is s/he".

Don't even get me started on the "rules" for "either".

 

[JamesonCourage]

I couldn't say. I don't have any insight into how you feel on the subject.

Was there something in my explanation in post 55 (the same page you posted this reply to) that left something unclear?

The use of male pronouns as a non-gender-specific default isn't necessarily sexist, and probably for most people it isn't by intent, but it's IMO misguided if you're trying to be inclusive to folks besides men.

Again, do you feel like I'm being sexist, as I specifically avoided using "she" in the general sense when writing my RPG? I know you can't make a judgment call on my specific relationships, but I can say with complete certainty that the women in my life don't believe I'm sexist, and that I'm close to quite a few (none of which are family). I can get a poll going in real life, too, if you want me to, but I feel pretty confident.

Am I trying to exclude women? No. And, as I said, if a publisher feels like alternating "he" and "she" will bring more people in, go for it. But is sticking to just "he" sexist? That's what I'm trying to figure out if you're saying. You've qualified it a couple of times ("isn't by itself overtly or intentionally sexist" and "it isn't by intent"), but it still seems like you're implying it is, in fact, sexist. That's why I'm asking if you think it is (again), so I know more before I continue.

Gack, I hadn't realized how that sounded after your post! You were quite clear, and I should have been more clear that I wasn't addressing you in particular. I addressing one of the arguments made in the links I had been looking for and mashed it (unsuccessfully) with a y'all vs. you analogy going for some humor. I shouldn't try that late at night... Sorry.

Oh, no worries, then. There are definitely people who probably do want D&D to "be a boy's club" and who are sexist. But it looks like we're good; sorry if I didn't show enough humor (I noticed the "y'all"). Internet can be hard on me sometimes

So where does an RPG manual fall? If I were writing Space 1889 I’d be inclined to use "he" throughout to make it sound Victoriany. If I were writing Buffy the Vampire Slayer, I’d want to use "she" throughout just ’cause. If I were writing D&D, I wouldn’t use generic-he because it is inappropriate to the degree of formality I would want to project. In-Character text, sure "he" is proper for pseudo-mediaeval talk, but the rules themselves should have a feeling of approachability, so "they" it would be.

I can't XP, but this also makes a lot of sense to me.

 

[delericho]

The 18th century grammarians (see Bishop Lowth for more info) added in a bunch of stuff into English in an attempt to fix the language, that is, make it more like proper languages like Latin or French. So we get stuck with a bunch of rules that never existed in English previously...

Sigh. Yes, I know.

Unfortunately, the bit you quoted was the least important part of my post. I have very little interest in arguing the exact specifics of grammar - in neither my personal nor professional life do they matter enough for me to really care. So I conceded that the point in question might be technically correct so that I could proceed quickly to the meat of my argument, which was that it didn't matter and that a generic 'he' should not be used in favour of inclusiveness.

 

[Nikosandros]

Not B/X. It used "he or she". E.g, "To choose a class, a player should first look for his or her highest ability scores." Or "As a cleric advances in level, he or she is granted the use of more spells."

Not only in B/X, but also in 1st edition AD&D.

 

[Shemeska]

Was there something in my explanation in post 55 (the same page you posted this reply to) that left something unclear?

I hadn't read the entire thread at that point.

As for your usage in specific you mentioned, I don't think you're being sexist, no. Nor do I think that you're trying to exclude women.

However if you take a random woman and present her with a bunch of RPG books and all she sees are male pronouns used in the book, it can come off as a subtle 'this game isn't made for you' sign. Jane or Joe random doesn't know that male pronouns as a non-gendered generic are being used entirely as a stylistic choice or based on what the author/editor feels perfectly appropriate based on past usage, and their perception may be different in the absence of that knowledge. Avoiding that perception of not being welcome is something that the RPG industry as a whole needs to be sensitive towards (likewise with presenting non-white faces, non-hetero relationships, non-cis-gendered characters, etc in presenting a game that simply reflects the demographics of the potential playing audience).

 

[Umbran]

However if you take a random woman and present her with a bunch of RPG books and all she sees are male pronouns used in the book, it can come off as a subtle 'this game isn't made for you' sign.

Every communication has an assumed intended audience. The author is supposed to consider that audience, and write to them. What does it say to the women in your audience if you stick to the male-generic? That centuries old rules of grammar are more important to you than showing they matter?

 

[Janx]

Again, do you feel like I'm being sexist, as I specifically avoided using "she" in the general sense when writing my RPG? I know you can't make a judgment call on my specific relationships, but I can say with complete certainty that the women in my life don't believe I'm sexist, and that I'm close to quite a few (none of which are family). I can get a poll going in real life, too, if you want me to, but I feel pretty confident.

Am I trying to exclude women? No. And, as I said, if a publisher feels like alternating "he" and "she" will bring more people in, go for it. But is sticking to just "he" sexist? That's what I'm trying to figure out if you're saying. You've qualified it a couple of times ("isn't by itself overtly or intentionally sexist" and "it isn't by intent"), but it still seems like you're implying it is, in fact, sexist. That's why I'm asking if you think it is (again), so I know more before I continue.

I think we're at a social change situation with the exclusive use of the word "he" in writing.

People who insist on using only "he" will appear resistant to the social change.

People who read documents that only use "he" may react negatively to the writing because it feels male-dominated.

As with all things offensive, it's in the eye of the beholder, and there's a bunch of reasonable people saying that using "he" only in modern writing can be seen as offensive because it makes no attempt to include the female gender in the writing when known modern style and language accommodates it.

I'm as anti-political correctness as the next guy, but this feels like such a small thing to adopt for the sake of not offending women AND making them feel part of the world of modern written words.

I'd rather everybody alter their writing style to use inclusive pronouns than rename "manhole covers" because it has the word "man" in it.

 

[JamesonCourage]

I hadn't read the entire thread at that point.

As for your usage in specific you mentioned, I don't think you're being sexist, no. Nor do I think that you're trying to exclude women.

Thank you for clarifying that.

Every communication has an assumed intended audience. The author is supposed to consider that audience, and write to them. What does it say to the women in your audience if you stick to the male-generic? That centuries old rules of grammar are more important to you than showing they matter?

As I said, if a publisher thinks it'll attract more people by alternating "he" and "she" in the rule book, then go for it. I also said, though, I do find "she" in the general sense jarring while reading it, unless it refers to a specific person. It has nothing to do with tradition; I was just taught that "he" was general, so whenever I see "she" in the general, my mind immediately tries to connect it with a specific example. If none were offered yet, it's somewhat jarring.

I do like Celebrim's suggestion, though. Give alternating male and female examples, and tailor the "he" or "she" in the rule book to suit the examples given. That seems like an excellent middle ground for everyone.

People who read documents that only use "he" may react negatively to the writing because it feels male-dominated.

Which may actually be the case for some people advocating the sole use of "he"; however, when I'm voted for it, it wasn't to make D&D a "boy's club" or the like, as I've explained. A little bit more on my thoughts below.

As with all things offensive, it's in the eye of the beholder, and there's a bunch of reasonable people saying that using "he" only in modern writing can be seen as offensive because it makes no attempt to include the female gender in the writing when known modern style and language accommodates it.

See, the thing is, when I write "he" in my rule book, I'm not trying to include males, either. I'm just writing how I was taught to write. Would I mind a societal change? No, not really. It's not like I have a moral objection to it. I'd adjust, just like I did eventually when I regularly read the 3.X books.

In the meantime, though, I'd really rather the argument focus on "this feels more inclusive for women" than "it's sexist if you don't do this." That feels much less insulting and much more compelling, from my perspective. I totally get the first argument (which is why I've repeatedly said "go for it" to publishers), and I kinda resent the second argument (as it's untrue in my case).