D&D 5E 5e's new gender policy - is it attracting new players?

[seebs]

I don't think it's a problem at most tables, though. i think of we were all seated at a table Playing D&D, none of these problems would really arise. Online discussions are something else.

Basically, for me, in a public game, anyone who continues to play the game or their character in some way that makes other players uncomfortable after they're made aware of it, is usually the person at fault.

Usually.

And the fact is, this stuff has been arising at actual tables in play on and off for the last thirty years. I've seen people drive girls away from D&D games because they weren't comfortable with someone playing a character who was a girl.

 

[TheCosmicKid]

But maybe you know of others I haven't seen. It's been a while since I've paid much attention, I've been busy raising my kids.

Again: Misogyny: The Sites. But raising your kids is a much better use of your time than paying attention to these guys.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Usually.

And the fact is, this stuff has been arising at actual tables in play on and off for the last thirty years. I've seen people drive girls away from D&D games because they weren't comfortable with someone playing a character who was a girl.

Sure, some of that stuff has gone on and always will to some extent. I think most reasonable folks know who is at fault in the scenario you described.

My earlier point was just that we should all try to be aware of the comfort levels of the other players, and then be willing to adapt to what's best for the group. Within reason, of course.

Honestly, the general pronouncement that WotC included is a pretty decent start.

 

[MostlyDm]

Again: Misogyny: The Sites. But raising your kids is a much better use of your time than paying attention to these guys.

There's a conflation of numerous disparate (and often mutually hostile) groups that the SPLC has lumped together under "manosphere" in that link. Many of them would in fact reject the title of "MRA" and many self-described MRAs would likewise not associate with them. It kind of casts a bad light on the whole article, like they're trying to paint a lot of people with a very broad brush.

I think Werebat's mention, Straughan, is a much clearer example of an MRA.

 

[TheCosmicKid]

There's a conflation of numerous disparate (and often mutually hostile) groups that the SPLC has lumped together under "manosphere" in that link. Many of them would in fact reject the title of "MRA" and many self-described MRAs would likewise not associate with them. It kind of casts a bad light on the whole article, like they're trying to paint a lot of people with a very broad brush.

I think Werebat's mention, Straughan, is a much clearer example of an MRA.

Context.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

There's a conflation of numerous disparate (and often mutually hostile) groups that the SPLC has lumped together under "manosphere" in that link. Many of them would in fact reject the title of "MRA" and many self-described MRAs would likewise not associate with them. It kind of casts a bad light on the whole article, like they're trying to paint a lot of people with a very broad brush.

I think Werebat's mention, Straughan, is a much clearer example of an MRA.

Context.

I made it as far as a group that actively tries to dissuade false police reports being labled bad guys... because we should be for false police reports??? I don't get it...

 

[GMforPowergamers]

"Men's rights" has become a buzzword for misogynists, sort of like how "states' rights" (in the U.S.) is sometimes code for institutional racism.

wait what?!?!?!? how is states rights anything to do with institutional racism?? one has nothing to do with the other... If I oppse a national drivers licenses I'm racist now?!?!?! how crazy is this?

 

[MostlyDm]

CosmicKid: a lot of the worst "manosphere" folks, e.g. Red pillers, actually dislike the MRA label and avoid using it. The confusion occurs because it is politically expedient for the opposition to label them as MRAs as a smear tactic.

GM for power gamers: "State's rights" being about racism goes back to the civil war, and the reconstruction. Southern pride terms the war "the war of northern aggression" and says it was a violation of state's rights and sovereignty and an abuse of federal power.

Which is all true to some extent. But it really was also a war about slavery, and everyone knew it. The Republicans were founded on the principle of overturning slavery, and the south seceded when it was clear Lincoln would win because they knew Lincoln's presidency would ultimately lead to the end of slavery.

I'm skeptical of the idea that anyone discussing state's rights is using it euphemistically to endorse racist views *today,* though. This is more of a historical issue. There are many more relevant, current issues that federalism pertains to.

 

[Alzrius]

wait what?!?!?!? how is states rights anything to do with institutional racism?? one has nothing to do with the other... If I oppse a national drivers licenses I'm racist now?!?!?! how crazy is this?

It's an issue of branding. Certain phrases, expressions, or terms are used to reference some other specific thing often enough that they become shorthand for that thing in the public eye. Somehow "4:20" became code for smoking marijuana, despite the fact that it's just a time on the clock. So if you hear someone say "Let's have a meeting at 4:20," it carries the implication that the "meeting" is to go light up.

This doesn't necessarily have to be the case, of course. There might very well be an actual meeting going on at 4:20 that has nothing to do with weed, the same way that there can be an issue of states' rights that has nothing to do with institutional racism, or issues of men's rights that have nothing to do with misogyny, but the use of those phrases as shorthand for the other thing is now widely understood, and so using that term will invariably invoke that thing in the minds of other people, rightly or wrongly.

 

[Chaosmancer]

wait what?!?!?!? how is states rights anything to do with institutional racism?? one has nothing to do with the other... If I oppse a national drivers licenses I'm racist now?!?!?! how crazy is this?

I thought he was referencing a lot of the debates over state's rights regarding "voter registration" and "immigration laws" which sometimes are legitimate complaints and other times are referencing to policies like "self-deportation" which I personally found horrifying.

Not that this has anything to do with the discussion of gender and gaming, but such is the nature of this thread.