D&D General Al-Qadim, Campaign Guide: Zakhara, and Cultural Sensitivity

[Ondath]

And what have skinwalkers to do with the discussion?
Do you really want to use such cherry picked examples as an argument why harems, where no such taboo exists, shall not be named? And that it is respectful to proactively remove parts of a culture because some westerners decide that they are now taboo?

I've got no problems about harems, and as a Turkish person I'd be okay with any work that depicted them - slavegirls and all. I just granted @EzekielRaiden's point that it might not be as easy as "We'll research everything" when trying to do other cultures justice.

 

[bedir than]

And that it is respectful to proactively remove parts of a culture because some westerners decide that they are now taboo?

Why do you think it's only Westerners who think that Western art and entertainment should respect other cultures?

 

[Ixal]

Why do you think it's only Westerners who think that Western art and entertainment should respect other cultures?

Why do you think westerners decide what respect means, which parts of a culture can be shown to stay respectful and how much disneyfication/whitewashing is needed to stay respectful (to western sensibilities)?

 

[bedir than]

Why do you think westerners decide what respect means, which parts of a culture can be shown to stay respectful and how much disneyfication/whitewashing is needed to stay respectful (to western sensibilities)?

I don't. I have spoken Arabic, studied Near Eastern Cultures and Civilizations, and lived in the Middle East.
So I listen to experts and the peoples themselves about how they desire to be portrayed by others

 

[Ixal]

I don't. I have spoken Arabic, studied Near Eastern Cultures and Civilizations, and lived in the Middle East.
So I listen to experts and the peoples themselves about how they desire to be portrayed by others

People like Ondath who mentioned above he is ok with harems, including the warts? Who owns century or even millennia old islamic culture?

 

[Ondath]

People like Ondath who mentioned above he is ok with harems, including the warts? Who owns century or even millennia old islamic culture?

That said, I am not the spokesperson for an entire culture. That's just my personal opinion, but perhaps the writers of the new supplements reached a different conclusion after talking with sensitivity readers.

 

[bedir than]

People like Ondath who mentioned above he is ok with harems, including the warts?

I would definitely trust a Turk to tell a story needing harems more than someone who demands their inclusion for the sake of respect without any regards for the peoples they're forcing their respect upon.

That's why Zakhara is better than al-Qadim; why Radiant Citadels is better than Oriental Adventures.

Trust people to tell their own stories. An outsider forcing negativity at an oppressed culture isn't faithful, it is harmful.

 

[Ixal]

That said, I am not the spokesperson for an entire culture. That's just my personal opinion, but perhaps the writers of the new supplements reached a different conclusion after talking with sensitivity readers.

No one is. That is one problem with this entire cultural discussion. Some people talk about culture being owned by specific people who can give permission to use aspects of said culture.
But such owner do not exist. You can find people who object to the inclusion of certain cultural aspects and people who have no problem with it and both have the same "qualifications". Most probably don't even care.
And it gets especially problematic when the talk is about historic cultures which do not exist anymore (because even if it did not vanish, it changed so much over the time that there are no similarities any more).
And most of the time "permission" is given based on some superficial things like distant ancestry as if the great grandfather coming coming from a specific culture gives someone any kind of insight into it and authority off it. (From what I have seen that seems to be a common "american" thing where they think that their grandfather on one side of the family coming from Ireland gives them a form of connection to Ireland)

The best and most respectful you can do is to stay honest and keep to well researched facts instead of arbitarily cutting cultures apart.

 

[Ondath]

No one is. That is one problem with this entire cultural discussion. Some people talk about culture being owned by specific people who can give permission to use aspects of said culture.
But such owner do not exist. You can find people who object to the inclusion of certain cultural aspects and people who have no problem with it and both have the same "qualifications". Most probably don't even care.
And it gets especially problematic when the talk is about historic cultures which do not exist anymore (because even if it did not vanish, it changed so much over the time that there are no similarities any more).
And most of the time "permission" is given based on some superficial things like distant ancestry as if the great grandfather coming coming from a specific culture gives someone any kind of insight into it and authority off it. (From what I have seen that seems to be a common "american" thing where they think that their grandfather on one side of the family coming from Ireland gives them a form of connection to Ireland)

The best and most respectful you can do is to stay honest and keep to well researched facts instead of arbitarily cutting cultures apart.

We can talk meaningfully about collectives without necessarily having spokespeople or strict hierarchies within that collective (my current research is actually on collective responsibility for such large, disorganised groups!). And in the case of what is or isn't acceptable in the representation of a culture, people who are specifically well-versed in a culture's history and practices would definitely know better than you or me when it comes to judging the appropriateness of a given work. It's the whole reason why the job position of sensitivty reader exists.

 

[Ixal]

We can talk meaningfully about collectives without necessarily having spokespeople or strict hierarchies within that collective (my current research is actually on collective responsibility for such large, disorganised groups!). And in the case of what is or isn't acceptable in the representation of a culture, people who are specifically well-versed in a culture's history and practices would definitely know better than you or me when it comes to judging the appropriateness of a given work. It's the whole reason why the job position of sensitivty reader exists.

Even when using sensitivity readers you do not get a accurate picture. When you hire one of the conservatives you mentioned before you will get wildly different views on harems than when you hire other people. But who would be in the right? Both technically would speak for their culture. Or rather, neither. Views viewpoint which is of course influenced by their personal morals is the correct one?