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

[Pig Champion]

In what way? Are you saying women are responsible for dealing with insensitive comments directed toward them?

Sure and in whatever way they see fit. As I was trying to point out, not all women are the same and some might not mind things that others will so IMO I think it's best left in the individuals hands. I don't think a blanket solution works in the context of gaming or gaming groups.

IMXP, the people who call others "oversensitive" about racism and sexism are generally not the ones on the receiving end of such treatment, so it tends to make their assumptions about things pretty suspect.

I wouldn't really want to go down this road. I try to look at things objectively and although as a general rule I agree but I was just pointing out that some people are in fact oversensitive.

I mean, we've all had the oversensitive friend haven't we? The one where over the years we've just grown not to mention or bring up certain subjects around because of their inability to discuss it in a civil way.

 

[El Mahdi]

But gaming IN a gentleman's club will get you ridiculed.

I don't know, I could see Role Playing having it's place at a gentlemans club. Or at least in the VIP Room.

Also, when it's a thread concerning sex, is it really thread Necromancy to bring it back, or Necrophilia?

 

[pawsplay]

Sure and in whatever way they see fit. As I was trying to point out, not all women are the same and some might not mind things that others will so IMO I think it's best left in the individuals hands. I don't think a blanket solution works in the context of gaming or gaming groups.



I wouldn't really want to go down this road. I try to look at things objectively and although as a general rule I agree but I was just pointing out that some people are in fact oversensitive.

I mean, we've all had the oversensitive friend haven't we? The one where over the years we've just grown not to mention or bring up certain subjects around because of their inability to discuss it in a civil way.

If somone experiences inappropriate behavior, how relevant is it to figure out if they are being "oversensitive?" That's like saying, "Gosh, you've been dehumanized and prejudged your whole life, why are you so over-sensitive?"

You're right there is no blanket solution. That is why we should strive for a reasonable standard of behavior that generally does not unnecessarily offend people.

 

[Pig Champion]

If somone experiences inappropriate behavior, how relevant is it to figure out if they are being "oversensitive?" That's like saying, "Gosh, you've been dehumanized and prejudged your whole life, why are you so over-sensitive?"

You're right there is no blanket solution. That is why we should strive for a reasonable standard of behavior that generally does not unnecessarily offend people.

I'm glad we agree and to answer your question...Well I had a very long and personalized post but I realized that this subject is just too multifaceted for internet forum discussion.

I believe that these subjects are up to the individual but in doing so I believe that everybody has a social obligation not to bring unnecessary baggage to the DnD group.

It's one thing for someone to use sexist terminology or racist slurs at the table and toward another player but it's quite another for someone to get abusive and indignant over an umbrella term like "Pacific Islander"*.

* Note that I am Melanesian, ethnically we're more in tune with Asians or Austonesians (such as the Guinean or Cham people) yet culturally we share ties with Polynesians. Some consider Pacific Islander a slur because we don't belong to the people commonly assocated with such a term while others see it as a labelling of our homeland.

I believe to abuse another player over such a distinction (that they can't possibly be aware of) is being oversensitive.

 

[Wik]

It's one thing for someone to use sexist terminology or racist slurs at the table and toward another player but it's quite another for someone to get abusive and indignant over an umbrella term like "Pacific Islander"*.

This made me laugh, if only because technically, it would apply to me as well... since I, you know, live on an island in the pacific.

 

[Pig Champion]

This made me laugh, if only because technically, it would apply to me as well... since I, you know, live on an island in the pacific.

Haha, then i've done my job Personally I don't mind it but yet it causes so many, so much distress.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I don't know, I could see Role Playing having it's place at a gentlemans club. Or at least in the VIP Room.

Also, when it's a thread concerning sex, is it really thread Necromancy to bring it back, or Necrophilia?

To paraphrase Chris Rock: There is no gaming in the Champagne Room... NONE! Oh there's CHAMPAGNE in the Champagne Room
But you don't want champagne.. you want gaming
And there's NO gaming... in the Champagne Room

 

[Gentlegamer]

Way up thread I mentioned a reference in OD&D to Women's Lib:

From Greyhawk, D&D Supplement I, page 35 (misspelling and emphasis in the original):

DRAGONS: These additional varities of Dragons conform to the typical characteristics of their species except where noted. There is only one King of Lawful Dragons, just as there is only one Queen of Chaotic Dragons (Women's Lib may make whatever they wish from the foregoing).​

 

[RaidingPartyGames]

I had a male friend who always said he wanted to have multiple women to father children by to insure his line would continue,I have since found out that children not raised by thier biological father have a much higher chance on dying(from a multitude of reasons)than children raised by thier biological father.sorry but monogomy is the correct form of child rearing.

I'm baffled why you're replying to me, as well as why you're apologizing. I'm also not sure by what metric you're determining "correct", or what study you're quoting. If you're going by biological imperative, if you raise X children, any children produced beyond that are just gravy; even if mathematically it's just 1/10 of a child. (I don't know what statistics you're using, so this "much higher" is sort of meaningless... I'm assuming 1/10 here.) So even if only 1/X children not raised by their biological fathers survive to reproduce, creating X children without raising them is probably as good a strategy as creating and raising 1 child (for a given level of effort, variable by parent).
Please note that I am not encouraging anyone to abandon their children, and am in favor of strong parenting. However, I disagree with the assertion that there's just the one system, and find your thesis flawed.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

Why.