LuisCarlos17f
Legend
Please, the Spanish conquistadores aren't like the enemy propaganda told by rival powers says. There were some "black sheeps" or "rotten apples" but they weren't worse than others. If you try to use History to cause shame and a guilty feeling, then you can find the answer about your words are worthless when you are totally silent about the horrible things done by others. I don't talk about a "but you more" but "how do you dare to tell that speech when I see your double standars and using two different yardsticks to measure?" Do you know whad did the general Jacob H Smith in Phillipines? Or search in wikipedia about the California genocide, when and who were the responsibles. Or the genocide in Tasmania.
I guess you will not mind if a dark lord of Ravenloft is based in the actions of Oliver Cromwells to the cities of in Droghead and Wexford during the invasion of Ireland? Or a dark domain whose dark lord is a ersatz based in John Calvin when a strict theocratic regime was established in Geneva. Isn't it a double standards, when ones can be offended but others have to be respected? Or a dark lord based in Jean-Baptiste Carrier, responsible of the drownings at Nantes. Or a dark domain whose source of inspiration is Julio Verne's unknown novel "The Count of Chanteleine" (about the bloothbaths in la Vendée, the first genocide in the modern age), and the dark lord based in the antagonist character, Karval.
Would you wellcome a dark domain in Ravenloft style Phazaria, based in Pakistan(the nightmare of an Islamophic coming true), and his dark lord, Diamabel was an ersatz of any jihadist terrorist leader? It could be potentially problematic, couldn't it be? Then we should clear up the criteria about why somebody should be allowed or banned in the name of political correction. Are they coherent criterias? Can't you realise the speculative fiction can be used for propaganda?
Please, lets imagine a fantasy kingdom ruled by imperialist gnolls, and these are inspired in the African kingdom of Dahomey (let's remember that movie, the "The Woman King", but in the real life they weren't anti-slavery at all, but they attacked their neighbours to catch slaves). Wouldn't be it offensive? Then we should wonder about why something can be allowed but other is now a new taboo. Are we using rational criterias?
Or a cyberpunk manhua (Chinese comic) where all the cities of USA are showed as copies of Detroit. Wouldn't be it a slap to your pride? But it doesn't happen only once, but it stats to be time after time. The good and evil factions are always the same, without positive tokens for members of each community.
Did you know the king Philip II of Spain issued an edict in 1593 establishing an eight-hour workday? Or the steam motor was patented by Jeronimo de Ayanz in 1606. Juan de Sessa or "Juan Latino " was the first Afrodescendent who studied at a European university and who reached a professorship on Grammar and Latin Language at the University of Granada (South-East of Spain), in the century XVI. The famous story of Robison Crusoe was based in a real shipwrecked Spaniard, Pedro Serrano. Do you know the famous story of Pocahontas? Some scholars have speculated those facts were based in the experiencies of Juan Ortiz.
The "Hispanophobia" is not only annoying. It may be even more dangerous than the Islamophia because there is not fear to become monsters when we go beyond certain red lines. And Hispanophobia is not only dangerous for Spaniards, but also against the Hispanoamericans who could suffer the same negative stereotypes.
The Hispanophobia and the black legend is not only to cover the horrible actions by the rest of powers, but also because the "nordic powers" want to sell us the tale the world is better thanks them, but they could lose a lot of popularity if the rest of the world knew group of people with Mediterranean blood mixed with other origins were living too well without their "guide", and tried to create a civilitation who respected the human dignity of their citizens more others, instead being a toxic predator and raider.
It is really increible. WotC worries about the orcs and the drows to avoid possible racism against people from the real life, but the vampires from Ixalan settin wear morrions, the helm used by the Spanish conquerors.
If somebody published in DMGuild or Drivethru an adventure of D&D based in the Cristero war (Mexico, in the begining of XX century), what would be your opinion? And what if in this adventure the fault of the war is by the lodges (secretly controlled by vampires) who wanted to terminate the faith of a church who can't be controlled by them? Would you tolerate a module based in the Spanish reconquest and the fitna of al-Andalus, where the big bad guy is a warlord based in Almanzor and showed as a true monster and a slave trafficker? Or an adventure inspired in the battle of Lepanto. What are your criteria to say when any thing can be tolerated or too offensive?
I guess you will not mind if a dark lord of Ravenloft is based in the actions of Oliver Cromwells to the cities of in Droghead and Wexford during the invasion of Ireland? Or a dark domain whose dark lord is a ersatz based in John Calvin when a strict theocratic regime was established in Geneva. Isn't it a double standards, when ones can be offended but others have to be respected? Or a dark lord based in Jean-Baptiste Carrier, responsible of the drownings at Nantes. Or a dark domain whose source of inspiration is Julio Verne's unknown novel "The Count of Chanteleine" (about the bloothbaths in la Vendée, the first genocide in the modern age), and the dark lord based in the antagonist character, Karval.
Would you wellcome a dark domain in Ravenloft style Phazaria, based in Pakistan(the nightmare of an Islamophic coming true), and his dark lord, Diamabel was an ersatz of any jihadist terrorist leader? It could be potentially problematic, couldn't it be? Then we should clear up the criteria about why somebody should be allowed or banned in the name of political correction. Are they coherent criterias? Can't you realise the speculative fiction can be used for propaganda?
Please, lets imagine a fantasy kingdom ruled by imperialist gnolls, and these are inspired in the African kingdom of Dahomey (let's remember that movie, the "The Woman King", but in the real life they weren't anti-slavery at all, but they attacked their neighbours to catch slaves). Wouldn't be it offensive? Then we should wonder about why something can be allowed but other is now a new taboo. Are we using rational criterias?
Or a cyberpunk manhua (Chinese comic) where all the cities of USA are showed as copies of Detroit. Wouldn't be it a slap to your pride? But it doesn't happen only once, but it stats to be time after time. The good and evil factions are always the same, without positive tokens for members of each community.
Did you know the king Philip II of Spain issued an edict in 1593 establishing an eight-hour workday? Or the steam motor was patented by Jeronimo de Ayanz in 1606. Juan de Sessa or "Juan Latino " was the first Afrodescendent who studied at a European university and who reached a professorship on Grammar and Latin Language at the University of Granada (South-East of Spain), in the century XVI. The famous story of Robison Crusoe was based in a real shipwrecked Spaniard, Pedro Serrano. Do you know the famous story of Pocahontas? Some scholars have speculated those facts were based in the experiencies of Juan Ortiz.
The "Hispanophobia" is not only annoying. It may be even more dangerous than the Islamophia because there is not fear to become monsters when we go beyond certain red lines. And Hispanophobia is not only dangerous for Spaniards, but also against the Hispanoamericans who could suffer the same negative stereotypes.
The Hispanophobia and the black legend is not only to cover the horrible actions by the rest of powers, but also because the "nordic powers" want to sell us the tale the world is better thanks them, but they could lose a lot of popularity if the rest of the world knew group of people with Mediterranean blood mixed with other origins were living too well without their "guide", and tried to create a civilitation who respected the human dignity of their citizens more others, instead being a toxic predator and raider.
It is really increible. WotC worries about the orcs and the drows to avoid possible racism against people from the real life, but the vampires from Ixalan settin wear morrions, the helm used by the Spanish conquerors.
If somebody published in DMGuild or Drivethru an adventure of D&D based in the Cristero war (Mexico, in the begining of XX century), what would be your opinion? And what if in this adventure the fault of the war is by the lodges (secretly controlled by vampires) who wanted to terminate the faith of a church who can't be controlled by them? Would you tolerate a module based in the Spanish reconquest and the fitna of al-Andalus, where the big bad guy is a warlord based in Almanzor and showed as a true monster and a slave trafficker? Or an adventure inspired in the battle of Lepanto. What are your criteria to say when any thing can be tolerated or too offensive?
Last edited:
