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

[Cadence]

Double post.

 

[Janx]

In the US, I hear plenty of people refer to America as "she" but have never heard anyone use "he" in reference to the country. I would say I tend to think of the country as a she as well. I think this is probably what the poster had in mind.

Actually, Nazi Germany specifically referred to the their country as "the fatherland"

In many ways, it was to deliberately differentiate themselves from the other countries (ex. Mother Russia)

 

[Dausuul]

Oh, certainly references to the U.S.A. as "she" far exceed references to the U.S.A. as "he," but both are dwarfed to insignificance by references to the U.S.A. as "it." Modern usage does not generally attribute gender to a country. (And when you throw in personifications, I suspect you'd see a lot more masculine than feminine references to the U.S. Columbia has pretty much fallen out of use. Uncle Sam is everywhere.)

 

[Scrivener of Doom]

In what country? Perhaps this is a common usage in Britain or Australia--I wouldn't know--but certainly not in the United States. Americans hardly ever refer to countries using gendered pronouns. And it's worth noting that of the two personifications of our country, the male one has virtually eclipsed the female. Everybody knows Uncle Sam. How many people have even heard of Columbia without the words "District of" attached?

I'm Australian, and an Australian anglophile at that.

I must admit, I was surprised by your answer because my experience with Americans is that American history is something of a religion so the concept of Columbia is quite well known.

Or as I experienced a few weeks ago when discussing American politics with an Australian friend on Facebook, his wife butted in to explain that it wasn't OK for us to be doing so because we weren't Americans and therefore it would be like telling "Yo Momma" jokes about her mother. (We made the mistake of discussing systems in a logical fashion rather than insulting people: the latter would have been perfectly acceptable.)

Yep, 20-odd year friendship brought to an end by a female redneck....

 

[Random Bystander]

I urge everyone to keep going off-topic. The thread has yet to be Godwin'd, or devolve into yelling. This is the internet, and Godwin'ing and incomprehensible, angry posts are mandatory. Remember: Civil discourse is treason. Friend Computer is watching.

The weather is rainy.

 

[Scrivener of Doom]

The weather is rainy here also. Thank God it's just rain and not a typhoon... again.

And, yes, this is a very pleasant thread.

 

[mythago]

In writing at least, the subject “they” is still odd: “The DM first gives the players a description of the room. Then they indicate what monsters are present” (where “they” refers to the DM). Here there is real ambiguity as “they” could easily refer to the players.

Actually, the easiest way out of this is better writing: "The DM first describes the room, then indicates what monsters are present." Or "The DM describes the room, and then describes the monsters in that room." No need for the pronoun at all, and I suppose you could throw 'to the players' in there somewhere, but isn't it assumed by the reader, in the context of (say) a module, that the DM is addressing the players?

Sure, there will be places where a pronoun is necessary, but there are also lots of places where it can be written out, just as one can avoid the 'generic' masculine by making a sentence plural; "Players must prepare their equipment list" vs. "Each player must prepare his equipment list".

I must admit, I was surprised by your answer because my experience with Americans is that American history is something of a religion so the concept of Columbia is quite well known.

Other than "Yankees be trippin'" I admit I couldn't quite follow what you meant here. "History" is a very broad collection of events, images and themes that has waxed and waned over time, even in a fairly young country like America. To the extent that modern Americans personify their national identity as a female icon, that would be the Statute of Liberty, not Columbia.

 

[Dausuul]

I'm Australian, and an Australian anglophile at that.

I must admit, I was surprised by your answer because my experience with Americans is that American history is something of a religion so the concept of Columbia is quite well known.

Well, I admit I haven't done a survey on the subject, but my experience is that plenty of us take great pride in our history without actually knowing very much of it. Though I suppose if you looked at the subset of Americans who play RPGs, it'd be different. D&D players do include a lot of history buffs.

Or as I experienced a few weeks ago when discussing American politics with an Australian friend on Facebook, his wife butted in to explain that it wasn't OK for us to be doing so because we weren't Americans and therefore it would be like telling "Yo Momma" jokes about her mother. (We made the mistake of discussing systems in a logical fashion rather than insulting people: the latter would have been perfectly acceptable.)

Not all of us have that attitude. My dance partner is British and we're forever comparing our respective cultures, institutions, and slang. (I'll have to ask her if she thinks of the United Kingdom as "she.")

 

[Scrivener of Doom]

(snip) Not all of us have that attitude. My dance partner is British and we're forever comparing our respective cultures, institutions, and slang. (I'll have to ask her if she thinks of the United Kingdom as "she.")

I am very much aware of that. The friend I referred to made the mistake of marrying white trash... and I made the mistake of assuming she wasn't reading our conversation. I've had wonderful arguments, debates and discussions with American friends and acquaintances about our respective cultures, institutions and systems. Even when heated it's always been fun.

 

[ClarenceInWonderland]

Actually, the easiest way out of this is better writing: "The DM first describes the room, then indicates what monsters are present." Or "The DM describes the room, and then describes the monsters in that room."

I did mention that later in the same post:

... Try best to avoid needing a pronoun: “The DM first gives the players a description of the room, then indicates what monsters are present.” But there are still going to be places where a pronoun in necessary ...

I find it interesting that singular "them/their" has taken over as an anaphoric pronoun (making reference to a noun earlier in the sentence), but English speakers have yet to develop something similar for subject pronouns. I suspect it’s because subjects necessarily carry semantic baggage which indicates the specifics on who is doing the action. Anaphoric pronouns just refer back to something already indicated, so "3rd person" is enough info. It seems that semantic baggage on "he" is dependent on speaker: some here (like myself) feel that in subject position:
(a) "she" has a [+feminine] feature, "he" has a [+masculine] feature, and "they" has a [+plural]

Others fell that:
(b) "she" has a [+feminine] feature, "he" has [–plural] and "they" has [+plural]

And here lies the problem. For speaker (a), "he" cannot be used generically and such usage may come across as sexually biased. For speaker (b), "he" is perfectly acceptable as it doesn’t carry any gender features at all. So we’ve got two different grammars going on here and it is up to the writer to determine which grammar is appropriate to writing RPG manuals.

Non-gendered pronouns might develop one day in English. English Creoles like Papua New Guinea Tok Pisin (3rd person ‘em’) or Sierra Leone Krio (3rd person ‘i’) have already done so.