Oriental Adventures, was it really that racist?

[FrogReaver]

Once again you have left me speechless.

Why?

 

[Mordhau]

lol, that's just D&D for ya

Well yes. But it does make you wonder what they thought they were trying to do.

 

[FrogReaver]

Well yes. But it does make you wonder what they thought they were trying to do.

Make Japanese themed themed D&D? I feel like I'm missing something here.

 

[Bill Zebub]

That's fair. I may have a misunderstanding there. Let's say I accept your definition. How insulting is it to the white people in poverty to tell them they have privilege in relation to Lebron James, when any bit of white privilege they have is miniscule in comparison to his 500 million dollar net worth privilege. I mean it's obvious that they technically have white privilege by your definition but still incredibly insulting. IMO.

I mean...JFC...the implication here that the only way these 'white people in poverty' will accept the notion of white privilege is if there are literally no successful blacks in America for them to compare themselves to. That as long as some, or even one, black person achieves great success, white privilege must be a myth.

Which is just so f'ed up I'm kind of dazed.

Which actually makes me think of Isabel Wilkerson again, who points out in "Caste" that often the staunchest defenders of a caste system are those on the lower, but not very bottom, rungs. That people near the bottom want to be able to point to a group even more reviled than themselves, and say, "At least I ain't one of them!"

 

[Scars Unseen]

That's fair. I may have a misunderstanding there. Let's say I accept your definition. How insulting is it to the white people in poverty to tell them they have privilege in relation to Lebron James, when any bit of white privilege they have is miniscule in comparison to his 500 million dollar net worth privilege. I mean it's obvious that they technically have white privilege by your definition but still incredibly insulting. IMO.

I think the first thing to take into account there is that having privilege doesn't mean you are automatically better off than anyone lacking your privilege. Even in the post you quoted, that should be evident simply because of the existence of multiple types of privilege. But fame or no, wealth or no, Lebron James could still find himself in situations where, due to the color of his skin, he could face significantly higher risk of harassment or physical harm than if he were white. More so even than a poor person who was white. All it takes is being in the wrong place, wrong time where his wealth doesn't apply and his fame isn't noticed. Then he's just another black guy living in a society where figures of authority often make harsher judgement calls against black people than white. And that's just one area where PoC are disadvantaged against white people.

If people know that and still feel insulted? That's on them.

 

[Mordhau]

Make Japanese themed themed D&D? I feel like I'm missing something here.

There's a whole lot of rules and elements that seem to assume that PCs will slot into society and the caste system and that doing so is one of the things that makes playing OA unique...

...but then they exclude a huge chunk of the character options from that.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Oriental Adventures was first published in 1985. At that time "Oriental" was not considered a racist term by default. Many universities still had "Oriental Studies" as a field of study into the 90s. University of Pennsylvania changed their department name to remove "Oriental" in 1991, University of Arizona in 1990, and that's just what I could find with a quick google search. TSR may not have been on the cutting edge of terminology, but you can't fault them for their usage of it at the time.

The mistake you are making here is to assume that because a term is socially acceptable it doesn't carry negative connotations. Often it just means that nobody bothers to ask the people it's describing. Or doesn't care what they are saying.

 

[Bill Zebub]

I think the first thing to take into account there is that having privilege doesn't mean you are automatically better off than anyone lacking your privilege. Even in the post you quoted, that should be evident simply because of the existence of multiple types of privilege. But fame or no, wealth or no, Lebron James could still find himself in situations where, due to the color of his skin, he could face significantly higher risk of harassment or physical harm than if he were white. More so even than a poor person who was white. All it takes is being in the wrong place, wrong time where his wealth doesn't apply and his fame isn't noticed. Then he's just another black guy living in a society where figures of authority often make harsher judgement calls against black people than white. And that's just one area where PoC are disadvantaged against white people.

If people know that and still feel insulted? That's on them.

And I want to reiterate that dealing with police is just one facet of privilege. Whites are more likely to get called in to interviews. To get favorable terms on bank loans, or to get the loans at all. To have mistakes (especially as kids) be forgiven and forgotten. To get help from strangers. Etc. etc. etc.

 

[FrogReaver]

I mean...JFC...the implication here that the only way these 'white people in poverty' will accept the notion of white privilege is if there are literally no successful blacks in America for them to compare themselves to. That as long as some, or even one, black person achieves great success, white privilege must be a myth.

I don't think that's anyone's position. I think it's more contextual than that. It's not so much that they won't accept the notion of white privilege. It's much more that they don't accept the importance that's being placed on it especially since no other kind of privilege is ever mentioned in society at large (possibly in academic discourse).

Which is just so f'ed up I'm kind of dazed.

Which actually makes me think of Isabel Wilkerson again, who points out in "Caste" that often the staunchest defenders of a caste system are those on the lower, but not very bottom, rungs. That people near the bottom want to be able to point to a group even worse off than themselves, and say, "At least I ain't one of them!"

To me that seems like a very childlike way of viewing the world. People are around to ask their thoughts for why they take a particular position. Why does no one do that, instead of just blindly speculating about why they do something?

 

[Deset Gled]

The mistake you are making here is to assume that because a term is socially acceptable it doesn't carry negative connotations. Often it just means that nobody bothers to ask the people it's describing. Or doesn't care what they are saying.

That's an interesting philosophical point, but not relevant to the question I was answering. I'm specifically talking about the social acceptability of the term (at a particular time), which is a highly relevant thing to understand when considering historical works.