D&D 5E D&D Promises to Make the Game More Queer

[FrogReaver]

@tombowings

You are much better at speaking on this topic than I. Well done. Keep up the good fight. I still find it amazing how those that cry inclusion the loudest are the first to be uninclusive.

(If they get their gay man in D&D just because gays exist then I wanna see some official KKK ideology support because those people exist too. All for inclusion right? TIC of course, but I think it highlights the point).

*TIC = tongue in cheek

 

[billd91]

Which I would argue is a great example of using the wrong tools for the right reasons, though is remains something I am not in favor of and cannot support.

The right tool is the one that works.

 

[guachi]

Even if we ignore those fundamental truths you've still got to account for the backfire effect, which has been getting some attention lately, I suspect because of that Adam Ruins Everything clip that's been making the rounds (The Oatmeal has a better breakdown of it that they released a while back but I've also seen making the rounds recently as well). Which states that people with deeply held ideological beliefs actually dig in and get more defensive when presented with facts that contradict those beliefs.

I literally knew every one of those things the Oatmeal claimed I wouldn't believe. Hey, Oatmeal, you won't believe that I already believed the things you claimed I wouldn't believe!! Can you believe it?!?!?

And the reason I believed them was because I either never knew what I was supposed to have falsely believed in the first place or that the other evidence was presented in a convincing enough manner to get me to change my mind. My basic response, upon learning those things was, "Huh. That's interesting."

Kind of like finding out Crawford is gay. Huh. That's interesting.

 

[Ristamar]

@tombowings

You are much better at speaking on this topic than I. Well done. Keep up the good fight. I still find it amazing how those that cry inclusion the loudest are the first to be uninclusive.

(If they get their gay man in D&D just because gays exist then I wanna see some official KKK ideology support because those people exist too. All for inclusion right? TIC of course, but I think it highlights the point).

*TIC = tongue in cheek

Your example highlights a false equivalency.

EDIT: Or to quote a recent popular tweet...

the wise man bowed his head solemnly and spoke: "theres actually zero difference between good & bad things. you imbecile. you ******* moron"

 

[MechaPilot]

As I said, we have a long way to come as a species with regards to reason, logic, and understanding. I will, however, not advocate for the use of the wrong tools for the right reasons.

He's not using "the wrong tool." He's using his creative voice; that is a right tool for affecting the perceptions of others, especially for a person in an artistic field such as writing or art. I get that you don't like the reason he's choosing to exercise his creative voice, even if you may agree with what his creative voice is saying, but that doesn't mean he's using "the wrong tool."

 

[tombowings]

You have not adequately demonstrated how media is the "wrong tool" for social change, and have not responded to all evidence to the contrary, which I'll refer to as "The History of Media As a Tool To Promote Ideology And Social Change, Also Simply Known as the History of Media"

The biggest problem is you're not asserting that "media is the wrong tool" because you are, like MLK Jr's "white moderate", overly concerned with protecting a "false peace'. It appears to be coming from a place of intellectual snobbery. Which I shouldn't have to explain is a morally and ethically indefensible position to take and much worse even than the kind of feigned paternalism MLK was railing against in his Letter from the Birmingham Jail.

How is the position that people are able to understand well reasoned argument a snobbish or paternalistic position? The opposite, people cannot understand well reasoned argument, seems to me much more condescending.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

Because an RPG is a group activity in which many people come together to enjoy. Many friends use weekly D&D games to socialize. Those groups are dependent on all members retaining interest in the game. If WotC suddenly starts to target a specific ideology, many groups could torn apart as a result. Or in my case, I could literally end up drowned in a river for continuing to play the "gay game" in the country I life in. There's that, too.

You claim to live in the US right? yet you say you say that if D&D gets more gay you may die as a result? Sorry but this sounds iffy to me.

 

[Sir Brennen]

@tombowings

You are much better at speaking on this topic than I. Well done. Keep up the good fight. I still find it amazing how those that cry inclusion the loudest are the first to be uninclusive.

(If they get their gay man in D&D just because gays exist then I wanna see some official KKK ideology support because those people exist too. All for inclusion right? TIC of course, but I think it highlights the point).

*TIC = tongue in cheek

Go back a few pages and look at the illustration of how tolerant people do not have to tolerate intolerance. False equivalency, as stated. (Also, who is *actually* being treated "uninclusive"-ly in this thread by people who are pro-inclusive?)

 

[tombowings]

He's not using "the wrong tool." He's using his creative voice; that is a right tool for affecting the perceptions of others, especially for a person in an artistic field such as writing or art. I get that you don't like the reason he's choosing to exercise his creative voice, even if you may agree with what his creative voice is saying, but that doesn't mean he's using "the wrong tool."

Well, the use of the word "wrong" already implies that it's my own, subjective opinion. He has his way. I have my way. We don't have to agree. But it also means neither of us is obligated to stand down, either.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

The bit you’re blind to is this:

You have not posted in a thread decrying the existence of hungry children or abused animals in your adventures.

You have posted in a thread decrying the existence of gay people in your adventures.

To you, one is different to the other. You didn’t claim there was hungry children agenda when Curse of Strahd had some hungry children in it.

You argue that but I keep reading him say he doesn't mind the gay characters he just finds it distasteful to add them as pat of a social/political agenda rather than as a natural part of the story. Which is supported by the guy at D&D who said he was doing it because he wanted more gay representation in a story. Not taking a side really but it seems like everyone is arguing around each other here.