But are forks and spoons on the weapon charts for Occidental Adventures? Or how about frying pans? Using frying pans as a weapon is a trope that we see in films like Indiana Jones (Marion), Tangled (Rapunzel), and Lord of the Rings (Samwise Gamgee). We can probably even find more uses in media of frying pan as a weapon than chopsticks as a weapon. So does "it's a common trope" argument really explain why an improvised weapon is included in one weapon list but the other isn't?
Sorry, 66 pages of discussion literally rolled out in the time between my first read of the thread and when I got a chance to post a response to the OP, so I probably skipped it. I'm not even sure what 'other thread' you would be referring to... (maybe the one about what word to use to replace 'race', that one is pretty interesting). So, the complaint is literally that someone wrote something about chopsticks which seemed to be a trope? As I said in another post, I think it most certainly IS a trope! It is a trope IN CHINA, and not even a recent one, it goes back, probably many centuries.
You and I have a pretty long history of agreeing on most things and talking openly about stuff. I ask you, is this literally an issue that you all have that a white man said something about chopsticks????!!!!! I mean, maybe it is so dorky that no Chinese RPG designer would do it, but I suspect some of them would. If so, I again have to wonder at the dubious nature of a 'rule' where certain types of people are told it is unacceptable for them to exercise creativity in a certain way. I cannot be in favor of that, surely not without there being some mitigating factors. Its one thing to say that someone has a phobia of spiders (as I made an example in the race thread). That's not a choice someone has. Our reactions to various cultural things, assuming they don't cross a line into denigration, etc. are a lot more under our control. So, there's a balance here, are you going to deny white guys a chance to say chopstick in their RPG because someone else CHOOSES TO BE OFFENDED by it? Who's got the priority here? Its a serious question! I'm certainly willing to look at it, but there's more work to be done if that's going to fly as some kind of taboo.
On this issue, Aldarc thinks I'm reactionary and AbdulAlhzared things I'm loony left.
As has already been posted multiple times both in this thread (I'm pretty sure) and in the other OA thread,
frying pan was given stats in DL material. Someone cited the details not too far upthread of this post.
As I've posted multiple times now in one or both threads: my understanding of the objection being run against chopsticks is
not that it's racist to put cutlery on the weapon chart, but that it's triggering and/or stereotyping to present fantasy Asia through the lens of a chopstick and rice obsession. And my point is that, if this
is the criticism, then you can't cure it by putting forks and spoons on some other weapon chart. Because the complaint is not about
unequal treatment of cutlery but rather about stereotyping/triggering motifs and obsessions in the work.
Now whether that critical diagnosis is accurate is a different matter. I've expressed some views about that quite a way upthread. Aldard disagrees. AbdulAlhazred probably doesn't. Let's leave it at that. But if we accept that diagnosis as accurate - which seems the only profitable way for this thread to go forward - then there is no point talking about forks and spoons on weapon charts. The conversation has to be about how to avoid stereotyping/triggering motifs.
My rule for “cultural appropriation“ is quite simple. I ask or try to ascertain what is offensive about my or another’s use of something from another culture?
If the only offense cited is the very act of using it because it is not from my culture, then I ignore the person. Anything I see or experience in any way becomes part of me. What I do with my experiences is my business.
If there is a reason cited that is reasonable - something that is offensive on its face to the culture where something is borrowed, then simple politeness I should avoid offending someone.
I don't think this gets to the heart of cultural appropriation.
Here's an example, from my own real-life conversations on the topic: if a white woman in inner-city Melbourne usea a kanga (= printed cloth popular in East Africa) as a headwrap, she will tend to be treated as a hipster, cool in some crowds and a poser in others. If a Black woman in the same suburbs does the same thing, she is apt (not guaranteed, but rather likely) to be viewed as traditionalist or even a bit backwards. She almost certainly is not going to get the cachet the white woman might.
There, my sympathies are with the Black woman. Someone else is using her cultural repertoire to obtain social benefits that, because of racialised expectations and projections that operate in Melbourne, are not avaialbe to her.
Here's another example, again with a real-life case in mind: a Black author who is not herself a refugee and whose parents where nor refugees writes a short story which becomes quite well-known and acclaimed, in which the protagonist voice is that of a South Asian refugee. The author is acclaimed for speaking truth to power, giving voice to the oppressed, etc. Some South Asians who are themselves refugees or from refugee families are a bit upset by this. Especially when they find that their disagreement with this author costs
them social cachet in progressive circles.
In this case, I don't think the author's work should be banned, but I am rather sympathetic to the South Asians who objected to her work.
Does or did OA claim to be speaking for anyone? Did it crowd out works that were more authentic? Is it costing East Asian RPG designers social cachet? These would be some of the relevant questions, in my view. They're not answered by focusing on notions of
offensiveness or cosmopolitan ideals of
cultural diffusion and transmission. Because the concern in the sort of example I've descibed is ultimately about power.
A related concern, but one I'm more ambivalent about, is
authenticity. You don't get that either just by being polite and inoffensive.
In the context of OA, the relevant question would be
in what way does OA present itself as speaking to RPGers for Japan, or China, or . . . ?
that's where the "Cultural appropriation" arguments go off the tracks. It's perfectly fine to use some culture's trappings or whatnot, so long as it's done respectfully and without any attempt to hide where the ideas come from.
OA is problematic because it paints a picture of "Oriental" which is massively skewed towards Japan and then viewed through the lens of 1980's pop-culture understanding of the history and culture of an incredibly diverse range of peoples.
<snip>
Oh, and let's draw almost exclusively from Japan when talking about armor and weapons, right down to the names. Scanning the book, I can find exactly ONE art piece that isn't pulled straight from a Japanese art history book.
In other words, it's not really cultural appropriation so much as just wildly inaccurate.
I think we're agreed that OA is not very coy about where its ideas are taken from. As you note, names are given using various extent Asian languages. The fantasy realms are fairly clearly derived from real historical places and pictures in East Asia. But that doesn't answer the cultural appropriate objection, whether framed through the lens of
power or of
authenticity.
the message virtually seems to be 'stick to your own culture, buddy. This one belongs to other people!' Which TBH makes me bristle! Nobody OWNS a culture, nobody can, nobody should, nobody ever will even if they try. So, it comes back to the question I asked earlier, where is this line?
I mean, I can imagine some things that would give me pause: Suppose a major multinational company took a specific distinctive artistic style used by a small ethnic group and turned it into a multi-billion dollar business. Further suppose this ethnic group had nothing to do with it, and that their own livelihood was in no way improved, perhaps even it became hard for them to sell their own goods. I would not look favorably on that. If you called THAT 'cultural appropriation' then I am going to feel OK about that use of the term. The use is primarily commercial for one, and there is a clear cultural distinction, an imbalance of power, etc. A lot of things seem wrong there to me.
OTOH when some white guys wrote a campy RPG supplement take on a major historical culture who's practitioners number 20% of mankind, have vast economic, political, and cultural clout, and are quite well-equipped to answer with their own spin on this subject matter. I'm a lot less concerned.
I can easily see the contrast you're drawing. And feel its force.
As I understand it, the complaint about OA is less about its impact on China or Japan, and more about its impact on Asian Americans. There's the complaint about stereotyping tropes/motifs (like the rice and chopsticks) and there's the complaint about appropriation of their cultural heritage.
