D&D General Just sweeping dirty dishes under the rug: D&D, Sexism, and the '70s

[PHATsakk43]

Yeah... And this is why I am always a bit cautious in these sort of discussions around art and sexualisation etc. Like I absolutely do not deny that the history of this hobby has had a lot of sexism and lot of art has been rather questionable, but there is also this American puritan streak that seem to see all sort of nudity or references to sexuality (which are not the same thing) as inherently suspicious or even immoral. As a Nordic person, I see these things rather differently.

We’re not discussing morality of sexual imagery, but sexism and gender stereotyping.

In the case of so-called American puritanical attitudes, I don’t think anyone would have accused 1970s TSR of having those.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

We’re not discussing morality of sexual imagery, but sexism and gender stereotyping.

Yes. But whilst some things are very obvious, there is also subjective aspect to this, and one's cultural background will affect this.

In the case of so-called American puritanical attitudes, I don’t think anyone would have accused 1970s TSR of having those.

Obviously.

 

[Dire Bare]

Glad you mentioned Roma people. Boy, this will be long one.

I grew up in neighborhood with significant Roma population. I speak some language (not Romani Chib, Roma in Croatia speak different language, form of archaic Romanian, called bajaški). They, among themselves, are not unified, they are more tribal, so to speak. In short, it's complicated. I have Romani friends, my cousin dated Romani girl, been to couple of their weddings. If you are honest and respectful, they respect you back and treat you like one of their own. You cross one, whole family is after you.

Also, Romani is ethnicity, not a race (to be pedantic).

It's true, Romani people suffer from discrimination. No point in denying it. It's still problem. One of big problems is integration into broader society. Some of their cultural norms are very problematic ( underage marriages and pregnancies, blood feuds). Also, although elementary school is mandatory by law, they tend to drop out due to pressure from their parents and child protective services can't really do anything. While lots of them work legitimate jobs ( mostly in collecting recyclable metals), fair amount of them earn in grey to black area ( reselling stolen goods, begging etc). Lots of them live outside of system (no IDs, no drivers license, no official documents, some don't even have certificate of birth). They also have reputation of settling disputes violently ( and i can attest to that personally, still have scars from few altercations i had with some of them in my youth).

It's unfortunate, but it cuts both ways. Yes, we as majority need to drop some stereotypes and treat them better, but they also need to start embracing norms and laws of country. In essence, it's not racial per se, it's more socio economic problem.

In English, "race" and "ethnicity" are nearly synonyms. Ethnicity is the more clear term.

Roma culture certainly has plenty of friction with the majority cultures they live with. But it doesn't "cut both ways".

Some Roma struggle to adapt to the majority culture of their host country, sure. Some Roma are criminals, sure. But to dismiss the racist stereotypes against the Roma as even partially justified is . . . well, racist, even if unintentionally.

 

[PHATsakk43]

Glad you mentioned Roma people. Boy, this will be long one.

I grew up in neighborhood with significant Roma population. I speak some language (not Romani Chib, Roma in Croatia speak different language, form of archaic Romanian, called bajaški). They, among themselves, are not unified, they are more tribal, so to speak. In short, it's complicated. I have Romani friends, my cousin dated Romani girl, been to couple of their weddings. If you are honest and respectful, they respect you back and treat you like one of their own. You cross one, whole family is after you.

Also, Romani is ethnicity, not a race (to be pedantic).

It's true, Romani people suffer from discrimination. No point in denying it. It's still problem. One of big problems is integration into broader society. Some of their cultural norms are very problematic ( underage marriages and pregnancies, blood feuds). Also, although elementary school is mandatory by law, they tend to drop out due to pressure from their parents and child protective services can't really do anything. While lots of them work legitimate jobs ( mostly in collecting recyclable metals), fair amount of them earn in grey to black area ( reselling stolen goods, begging etc). Lots of them live outside of system (no IDs, no drivers license, no official documents, some don't even have certificate of birth). They also have reputation of settling disputes violently ( and i can attest to that personally, still have scars from few altercations i had with some of them in my youth).

It's unfortunate, but it cuts both ways. Yes, we as majority need to drop some stereotypes and treat them better, but they also need to start embracing norms and laws of country. In essence, it's not racial per se, it's more socio economic problem.

I get it, but at some level telling people to effectively, “just get on with it” regarding assimilation, it does raise the question of who gets to establish the cultural norms and practices that are in force?

At one level, I’ve had similar feelings towards ethnic groups (as for the use of “race” it’s basically the way we in the US discuss everything from ‘race’ [itself a made up concept] to ethnic and even regional cultural differences) that seem like they would simply be better off if they just dropped their culture and joined into the mainstream.

Again, looking back, most of us are probably descended from centuries of ethnic cleansing and forced assimilation, it just happened (for the majority of those of us in the Anglosphere with WASPy backgrounds) so long ago we don’t even realize it. For most of human history, this was just the norm. Basically, as Thucydides said, “the strong do what they will and the weak suffer what they must.”

So, assuming that the majority culture—at some level at least—is simply the effect of a sort of social Darwinism. In the other hand, the concepts of inherent human rights is part of that same history and currently, there is an attempt to create some level of objective morality regarding human rights.

That all said, this conversation regarding assimilation reminded me of a comment by a Canadian colleague while we were working on the indigenous outreach part of our project which was, “you Americans did one thing better than us—you killed all your Indians.” Which was definitely a concept I had never really considered before. Both the reality of the American genocide of indigenous people in the 19th century and the lack of of them in most parts of the country and how much more visible indigenous peoples are in Canada and that there is still active hostility towards them.

 

[Mannahnin]

I think that if you truly value free speech, and I do, then you have to recognize its power. To help, and to harm. And you have to act accordingly. Just as you shouldn't wave a gun around carelessly (I'm Canadian), you should not toss words around carelessly, either.

And to be careful, and caring, with your words, you have to consider the world from other perspectives. Especially from the perspective of those who have less power. Privileged folks have never really had to do this, and could largely get away with it. They could afford to be careless with their words. I am reminded of the conclusion of The Great Gatsby: “They were careless people, Tom and Daisy - they smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back into their money or their vast carelessness or whatever it was that kept them together, and let other people clean up the mess they had made.”

I think that freedom of speech, with certain limitations, is everyone's right. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't be expected to choose our words carefully. Or be exempt from social consequences when we don't. Most people have always had to fear those social consequences, on top of legal ones, so this is not new and alarming to them.

But words aren’t bullets. Guns stop conversations. Speech starts a conversation. I appreciate the great hats by too but I think what is going on is the opposite. That is a story about elite society and the lengths one must go through to even know how to speak or act among them. And it is about how shielded elites are. If you are prioritizing this stuff and expecting everyone to be as cautious in their language as you, rather than reading their words with charity and attempting to understand the meaning: there is a good chance you are privileged. I value courtesy as well. And I think we can speak against bad ideas when raised. Too often though it seems people are getting called out because they didn’t understand educated society decided this word or that word means something else now, or this word is no longer the preferred word to use. Again if someone has a degree they have a much greater chance of having picked up this etiquette.

Speech can shut down conversation. If someone starts spouting slurs and abuse around me, I can respond to that, politely or harshly, and try to make them stop. Same if they start spouting hateful political rhetoric around the holiday dinner table. If they make a nuisance of themselves at dinner and disturb the other guests I can ask them to leave, and I'd say I have a moral obligation to as host.

There is an aspect of language being updated which is education/class-related, but in meatspace people almost always give credit for people making a good faith effort and being open to learning. Harsh language policing for internet points/social status is mostly an online phenomenon. The idea that requests for more inclusive and respectful language are primarily coming from elites also seems weird, because a whole lot of queer, trans, and ethnic minority people are and have historically been poor. Most of the trans people I know are on the "struggling" end of the spectrum. I will say that being able to spend a lot of time on the internet debating these issues is a somewhat privileged position- the poorer and more desperate your situation the more you prioritize survival needs (and being treated with respect is higher up Maslow's pyramid). But OTOH I also have friends and acquaintances who are quite poor and struggling but who spend time on this stuff because it's an inexpensive way of spending free time, and the issues matter to them.

The role of "elites" in this issue is an interesting one. Our recent discussions and this entire thread have been sparked and spurred by one of the biggest elites in the world (by wealth and media control) opining that WotC should "burn in hell" for expressing criticism of material published in the 1970s. And then expressing an interest in purchasing them presumably so he can control their speech and shut them up. The same elite individual also took over one of the biggest social media platforms in the world, made it more hostile to free expression for people he disagrees with, more obedient to content takedown requests from authoritarian governments (particularly suppressing journalism critical of the Indian and Turkish governments), banned journalists for criticizing him or reporting on his bands, and made the site more welcoming for hate speech and abuse of minorities. That's definitely been a significant recent shift in the free expression landscape, but it's in the last two years rather than ten.

But that's getting into politics a bit, I fear.

I'm still interested in ANY examples of this phenomenon you've talked about of RPG publishers/creators being shouted down and stopped from publishing things based on content (examples of failed/boycotted kickstarters or other product launches would be very helpful).

 

[PHATsakk43]

.

I'm still interested in ANY examples of this phenomenon you've talked about of RPG publishers/creators being shouted down and stopped from publishing things based on content (examples of failed/boycotted kickstarters or other product launches would be very helpful).

nuTSR?

Again, they had other things that forced them out of business, including bad product and copyright infringement, but there was definitely some shouting down regarding their biases in their stuff. Granted, it was absolutely justified.

 

[AnotherGuy]

Some Roma are criminals, sure. But to dismiss the racist stereotypes against the Roma as even partially justified is . . . well, racist, even if unintentionally.

He is not justifying it, he Bill Burred it.
He literally said they (general non-Romani populace) need to drop the racist stereotypes.

Bill Burr famously did a skit on the no reason to hit a woman.

 

[GrimCo]

@PHATsakk43

Problem with some of cultural norms is that they are clearly against law. Biggest problem with their culture is underage marriage. By law, people under the age of 16 can't be married. Age of consent is 15. Yet, in Romani population, there are still very common marriages where brides are 13-14-15 ( usually to few years older groom, who is also in lot's of cases underage aka under 18). But it's not that uncommon to have bride under the age of consent and adult groom (usually 18-19yo). There is also very high percentage of very young (13-16yo) pregnancies in that population. I respect different customs and cultural norms, but we have laws also. Another problematic one is blood feuds. Those are nasty and just lead to multi generational spiral of violence.

I get them. They have their way of life. They like their freedom and independence. They have tremendous cultural heritage in their oral history, their music. But some things just need to go away. You can't have it both ways. Keep your culture, keep your heritage, be proud of it, but respect the laws of the country you live in.

 

[Dire Bare]

. . . but respect the laws of the country you live in.

From a practical standpoint, I guess.

But you are judging Roma culture by your cultural standards, not theirs.

 

[Mannahnin]

nuTSR?

Again, they had other things that forced them out of business, including bad product and copyright infringement, but there was definitely some shouting down regarding their biases in their stuff. Granted, it was absolutely justified.

Right, nuTSR was engaged in fraud.

I cited them as one of the only two examples I could think of recently of a publisher being dogpiled for content, but the content being complained about was outright racism and sci-fi Confederate apologism:

We have lots of dark and edgy and grimdark settings and games. I suspect we have more of them now than ever.

The last time I can recall seeing someone get dogpiled for the content of a game was when nuTSR employed an outspoken white supremacist to write their version of Star Frontiers, and he put stuff like "nordics" being statistically superior to black people (whose intelligence was capped) in the game, and a benevolent space (con)federation whose laws and constitution made clear that it was a crime to interfere with worlds where slavery was legal.

I'm dredging my memories and the only things I'm coming up with are the WS stuff in Star Frontiers: New Genesis and when WotC got a bunch of flak for the Hadozee writeup.

If it's happening "all the time" it should be easy for you to give me a few examples so I can understand what you're talking about. "Everyone reading this" definitely does not know what you are talking about here.

If THAT's the kind of content we're talking about...