D&D General Old School DND talks if DND is racist.

[CleverNickName]

More the point, it's not about literally capturing bronze skin in a b/w line art per se. "Tanned white person" isn't much more diverse than just "white person in general" if the physical features are the same (Caucasian). So it's less about capturing actual skin tone, and more about capturing defining and diverse physical features, which absolutely can be done in b/w line art (see my post above).

Anyone who's taken an illustration class knows that skin tone is one of the last things the artist considers when drawing people. Eyes, nose, and mouth features are far more important for conveying race, sex and gender, age, and attitude. Next is hair, followed by clothing and personal effects. Whether or not to add shading or tone to the skin (and how much of it to add) are usually the last things the artist will consider. And depending on the media being used (especially pen and ink), it is often omitted altogether. See the line art drawings that @Sacrosanct posted.

Shading in the skin is usually only necessary when the artist wishes to emphasize the skin tone, or to contrast it with other people in the frame. This was most notably done in a lot of the older woodcarving and ink illustrations that European explorers made of the indigenous people they met in Cuba, Hawaii, and the Americas. There were very specific (and sinister) reasons for wanting to emphasize the complexion of the peoples they met and the images they brought back to Europe.

 

[Sacrosanct]

This does seem to be one of the core issues of the culture war though. A depressing number of people truly do believe that Joe’s and Jane’s opinions should be given equal weight to those of the experts.

My favorite Asimov quote:

"There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."

Throw in a healthy dose of Dunning-Kruger, and you have what we have here.

 

[Don Durito]

This is not only ridiculous, it's an impossible arbitrary standard you just came up with out of thin air. It's also a horrible standard.

"Well, the majority of doctors have written papers about how the transmission rate of this virus is a problem, but I don't consider that a mountain of evidence unless you also include the opinions of Joe at the car wash and Jane at the Walmart."

One assumes that doctors have some evidence for their opinions. You know scientific studies and the like.

If a bunch of journalists wrote articles about a virus quoted no science, and said "trust u" all the other journalists agree with us" we'd rightly lose all faith in them.

Yes, it's an impossible standard to meet. The consequence of this, as I said, is not that you can't argue that things aren;t problematic, but that you have to argue. There is no appeal to authority which can reasonably be made.

 

[PsyzhranV2]

It just feels like a solution looking for an issue, at least based on the articles where the interviewers actually talked to Hispanic people.

Much like how this particular topic has never come up at any table I've been actually involved with. Which ... in and of itself is meaningless because it's such a narrow slice. Much like the incredibly narrow slice you get from most social media.

I don't think anyone posting (myself included) has any real clue as to whether this is an issue outside of the blog-sphere.

There absolutely is a problem: Spanish, and other Indo-European languages that use grammatical gender, struggles to represent gender expression outside a strict male-female binary.

 

[Zardnaar]

You have just defended every conspiracy theory from Blood Libel to flat Earth to Q. Want to try that again?

In the context they used it in perception is reality.

If everyone in the USA fell over and hit their head and woke up tomorrow wanting to follow the aztec religion human sacrifice is back on the menu. To make the sun rise of course.

It doesn't matter who's technically correct what happens does.

 

[Don Durito]

I remember I had the Fighting Fantasy Titan world book long before I got into D&D.

That was my first experience with Dark Elves. Looking at the illustrations now it's obviously that they're shaded in such as to indicate dark skin. But I don't recall it being mentioned in the text, and I never realised. It never occured to me. I always imagined they had really pale skin because they lived deep underground (after all that would make sense wouldn't it)

 

[Haffrung]

I’m pretty sure the majority of the people who use the term Latinx are well aware that it has not yet been broadly adopted.

I'd wager the term is more widely adopted among extremely online, educated whites than among Latinos themselves, to the extent that there are social media sites popular with said demographic where I would be admonished for not using it. Which gives us an insight into the narrow origin of these sorts of movements, and why some of us question their legitimacy.

 

[Sacrosanct]

One assumes that doctors have some evidence for their opinions. You know scientific studies and the like.

If a bunch of journalists wrote articles about a virus quoted no science, and said "trust us" all the other journalists agree with us we'd rightly lose all faith in them.

Yes, it's an impossible standard to meet. The consequence of this, as I said, is not that you can't argue that things aren;t problematic, but that you have to argue. There is no appeal to authority which can reasonably be made.

Do you know how journalism works? There is no science. There is reaching out, interviews, research into trends, looking at reaction, ect. It's not a scientific process. Trying to compare this to a scientific process is not just apples vs oranges, it's so ridiculous that it doesn't even merit attention.

What we do know is that A LOT of BIPOC have been coming forward, including industry leaders, and they are all saying the same thing about problematic issues. There is NO evidence that there aren't any problematic issues and it's just white people projecting or looking for racism where there is none.

Take a step back and look at what you're arguing.

 

[Mannahnin]

Right. Which is why inclusive hispanic folks have come up with Latine as a better alternative.

 

[Mannahnin]

I'd wager the term is more widely adopted among extremely online, educated whites than among Latinos themselves, to the extent that there are social media sites popular with said demographic where I would be admonished for not using it.

Right. Which is why inclusive hispanic folks have come up with Latine as a better alternative, and the white progressive folks I know who communicate with said hispanic folks have adopted that as well.