D&D General “‘Scantily Clad and Well Proportioned’: Sexism and Gender Stereotyping in the Gaming Worlds of TSR and Dungeons & Dragons.”

[Ruin Explorer]

It doesn't seem to me that you can argue that orcs are a representation of human racism, but not a representation of human evil. Either they are a separate species that does not represent humans, or they are capable of being a representation of humans, including human evil.

Orcs fail as a representation of human evil because you can always excuse or put aside their evil on the grounds that they're doing it because they're orcs, and it is somehow "in their nature", rather than in human nature.

Orcs frequently become representations of human racism because human racist tropes are often used to describe them. Very often the exact language used to describe orcs, and the ideas around them, are identical to ideas about Black or Asian people (or other "non-white" groups) in the 20th century and sometimes even the 21st - especially recently - (or even if we go far enough back, Roman ideas about Celts* and Geats/Goths, albeit those ideas never got quite as extreme).

* = For a specific example see Cicero, who advised a friend never to buy slaves from Britain, because British people were in Cicero's opinion, so profoundly stupid, they were the only people who literally couldn't learn to read, and were in general the stupidest and ugliest people on the planet. Caesar's opinion was not dissimilar - he was convinced Celts were incapable of learning music, among other things.

 

[Gradine]

Sure there is. As I said, sexist behavior from actors who engage in it because of the script and with women who are okay with it due to script is sexism that is not bad, and therefore equivalent to self-defense.

Or if you like, remove both self-defense in the killing example and the acting portion of the sexism example and you know, actually engage the point of my post instead of dodging it like this.

At the risk of directly contradicting my previous post just moments ago, I'll ask the obvious question: is this what is actually happening in the things we're actually discussing in this thread?

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I'm going to attempt to take a stab at this side commentary in this thread of white knighting by using this post to hopefully illustrate where @tetrasodium and Greylord may be coming from.

Your post sharing ideas of the races was great IMO. I and many others saw absolutely no issue with it. It was inspiring. It is the one of the primary reasons for me liking Enworld.
Then your above post reflects on a supposed issue with your dwarf write-up which I doubt anyone observed. It seems a bit of an overkill. It is like we are looking for issues to nitpick and for some this may be perceived a white knighting as we keep lowering the limbo bar so to speak.

I'm not sure what you're trying to do here, but if the idea is to defend the use of the completely inappropriate term "white knight", you're screwing it up real bad. If the idea is to give a perspective that is in any way positive towards the posters you name using it or similar terms, you're screwing it up even worse lol.

 

[TiQuinn]

Tone policing

Inclusive Language Series: Tone Policing

Many people are unaware of tone policing and may not recognize how it can be expressed. So, what is tone policing? According to the Oxford Dictionary, tone policing is “the action or practice of criticizing …

www.housing.wisc.edu

See the bold bit of the post you are tone policing over the term white knighting.

See my response above to Steampunkette then (reposted here.)

Regardless, if one is going to use euphemisms such as "White Knighting", one should understand the greater context around that phrase and be responsible for its use, otherwise refrain from using it in favor of something clearer.

What you call "tone policing" is what I call a lazy attempt to use a loaded phrase ("white knighting") freely and frankly within the exact context which it is typically used, i.e. a suggestion that someone does not believe in what they are saying but is simply defending another poster in order to appear morally superior.

If that's NOT what you mean, then by all means find a better phrase, or explain your position better, or expect more "tone policing."

 

[Steampunkette]

I'm going to attempt to take a stab at this side commentary in this thread of white knighting by using this post to hopefully illustrate where @tetrasodium and Greylord may be coming from.

Your post sharing ideas of the races was great IMO. I and many others saw absolutely no issue with it. It was inspiring. It is the one of the primary reasons for me liking Enworld.
Then your above post reflects on a supposed issue with your dwarf write-up which I doubt anyone observed. It seems a bit of an overkill. It is like we are looking for issues to nitpick and for some this may be perceived a white knighting as we keep lowering the limbo bar so to speak.

It could be, if I weren't part of the group of neurodivergent individuals in question.

Though, admittedly, my particular placement on the scale is different from the one I described.

The one I unintentionally described is also one of the three that is widely produced in media. The other two are the "Brilliant Savant with no Social Skills" (Abed, Sheldon, Monk, Etc) and "Child that refuses to make eye contact and seems to explode at random to utterly innocuous events"

 

[AnotherGuy]

I'm not sure what you're trying to do here, but if the idea is to defend the use of the completely inappropriate term "white knight", you're screwing it up real bad. If the idea is to give a perspective that is in any way positive towards the posters you name using it or similar terms, you're screwing it up even worse lol.

Sadly, clearly.
This was so not the response I was looking for.

 

[Charlaquin]

I guess I have more faith in the ability of an average roleplayer to offer more nuanced portrayals. Perhaps it is unwarranted. I don't expect deep xenofiction, but something on the level of the more developed Star Trek species. Like I would imagine most people who are familiar with Star Trek could play a Vulcan in a manner that would make them recognisable as one. But for this to be possible, the game should actually tell us how these species think and behave, and it really doesn't.

Vulcans have entirely human patterns of thinking though. I mean, the text claims they don’t, but you never really see that reflected in their actions. Because as it turns out, most writers are human, so they end up writing characters that behave like humans. Maybe with some restrictions or exaggerations, but those still inevitably fall within the range of human behavior and expression.

 

[tetrasodium]

Pointing out that the phrase "White Knight" is by it's nature a derogatory phrase is not tone policing.

Tone policing involves a marginalized group advocating for themselves in a manner that the majority considers inappropriate and demands the marginalized group change how they present their advocacy in a manner the majority approves of.

You are not advocating for a marginalized group when you accuse people of "White Knighting".

Trouble is the fact that you are unwilling to even discuss the unquestionabledouble standard or ever shifting bar of unquestionable inclusivity review censorship. That refusal to discuss it without attempting to flatly dismiss the possible criticism is what makes your continued focus on the term obvious tone policing.

 

[Maxperson]

Orcs fail as a representation of human evil because you can always excuse or put aside their evil on the grounds that they're doing it because they're orcs, and it is somehow "in their nature", rather than in human nature.

Orcs frequently become representations of human racism because human racist tropes are often used to describe them. Very often the exact language used to describe orcs, and the ideas around them, are identical to ideas about Black or Asian people (or other "non-white" groups) in the 20th century and sometimes even the 21st - especially recently - (or even if we go far enough back, Roman ideas about Celts* and Geats/Goths, albeit those ideas never got quite as extreme).

Name another way than human to describe anything in this game. We are HUMAN. We only know human ways to describe things. That doesn't make everything we describing in human manner a stand-in for things that have happened here in the real world.

Especially once you consider that humans have been very bad to a lot of groups in a lot of different ways throughout history. We literally cannot describe anything bad about any group in game without there being a real world equivalent that we can find, and then draw a parallel with should we choose to do so.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Name another way than human to describe anything in this game. We are HUMAN. We only know human ways to describe things. That doesn't make everything we describing in human manner a stand-in for things that have happened here in the real world.

Especially once you consider that humans have been very bad to a lot of groups in a lot of different ways throughout history. We literally cannot describe anything bad about any group in game without there being a real world equivalent that we can find, and then draw a parallel with should we choose to do so.

I don't know what else to say except that, imho, you need to read more carefully, and attempt to parse what the poster (me in this case) is actually saying, rather than what you're assuming they're saying. We're all guilty of this from time to time, but you haven't even remotely engaged with what I posted.