Mana, Shamans, and the Cultural Misappropriation behind Fantasy Terms

[Maxperson]

I suspect that “priest” is more applicable of a term for most spiritual leaders than either “druid,” “cleric,” or “shaman.”

So it's okay to be offensive to people, so long as you aren't offending the groups you've decided shouldn't be offended?

 

[Bedrockgames]

It may be best if you don’t then. It’s scarcely a discussion if you are just gonna accuse me of being an oppressor of language and creativity just because I suggested a little critical and cultural reflection on how we use words in our hobby.

I don't mind you being clear in what you think of my position. And I am going to continue being clear with you as well. We can do that respectfully. You've essentially said people in the course of these threads people are being culturally disrespectful, potentially even racist, by misappropriating terminology. I am totally fine with you making that argument. I disagree with it, but if that is your position, it is good for us to understand that is your position and for you to make it clear. My response to that post was all about the way you said it, it was insulting and it put words in my mouth. I feel like I have been respectful to you in this discussion. I haven't pulled my punches when it comes to saying what I think is bad about your argument, but I haven't engaged in that kind of snark. I don't want to derail the thread, so this is the last I will comment on this.

 

[Bedrockgames]

...accuse me of being an oppressor of language and creativity just because I suggested a little critical and cultural reflection on how we use words in our hobby.

I am just pointing out what I think is negative about the position you have been taking, and about the trend your positions are part of. It isn't a discussion if we can't honestly disagree with your conclusions, and if we can't point to why we think that are not good conclusions. What we've seen in thread after thread, in my opinion, isn't just a little critical and cultural reflection. We've seen a constant call to vet language and content, in ways, I personally think, are counter-productive, and harmful to creativity in the hobby. One of the ways I think it is harmful is it stifles communication, it makes people second guess what words they use, and it creates an atmosphere where you are walking on eggshells all the time. It is also, in my opinion, harmful because it often falls along class/educational lines (and I think this is hard to see if you are steeped in this conversation or come from a strong academic background). I get that you see it as a mere call for self reflection, to be more respectful. But I think where you set the bar on what is and isn't respectful, is part of why this kind of thinking produces the outcomes I am talking about. My goal here isn't to insult you or be disrpecftul it is to persuade you and to point to an argument that I think creates more problems than it solves (and personally I don't think it even solves any problems).

 

[Doug McCrae]

If terminology was never criticised, D&D would still have "Fighting Man" as a class.

 

[Bedrockgames]

If terminology was never criticised, D&D would still have "Fighting Man" as a class.

I think what people are reacting to is the constancy and intensity of it these days. No one is saying criticism is never valid. They are saying this feels like being in a room with someone who is constantly telling you 'don't step there', 'and definitely don't step there'. I am sure there are plenty of people in this thread who are having this experience with it. I know I did. For a while I was able to track all these conversations and concerns but it reached a point where, just to be creative, I had to tune it out. I think what is going on, is a lot of writers and designers now are just weary of hearing the thousand voices from the internet in their heads when they sit down to make something. But on the other end, as a consumer, I am growing weary of products that are overly vetted, and just, like I said before, pablum, because they have to pass so many filters in order to be considered appropriately wholesome.

 

[Campbell]

I think there is a difference in kind between the way D&D has classically used Clerics, Druids, and Paladins.

From my perspective this is not completely about accuracy. We are talking about marginalized cultures here. The depictions of shamans and witch doctors seen in pop culture are often used to reinforce negative stereotypes of indigenous people.

I am fine with shamans in D&D if just a standard good faith effort is made not to reinforce those negative stereotypes. I just expect creatives to try to do better. I understand there will be missteps. Just like try.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

And this is exactly why these kinds of arguments that stifle language, are not good for creativity in my opinion. Prophet is a perfectly useful word, and it evokes so much. Used accurately, it would be awesome, but it could also bring a lot of flavor if used in a new way. And I think if we are at the point where a word like prophet is a problem, then things are pretty dire in terms of creative freedom.

I think this attitude is the real problem here, frankly.

You're claiming stuff is banned and that creative freedom is "dire", when there's an extremely mild suggestion that people think before they use terms. It's kind of outrageous that people are "upvoting" you on this, when you're basically misleading people, in quite a serious way. Your argument is utterly hypocritical, too - by your own logic, you're policing people's ability to communicate, essentially suggest (again by your own logic) that it's "illegal" for people to ask others to be more thoughtful in their use of language.

It's also amusing to hear someone claim to be a "creative" whilst insisting they don't have to think about the word choices they use. The reality is, any competent creative thinks very carefully about word choices in writing. They may not be thinking "is this harmful", but rather "does this convey what I want", but to imply that being asked to think about usage is unreasonable is just nonsensical in that context.

But I think the result is people just feel like they are having their words policed. And I don't think that is good for creators, or for gamers. It produces more pablum content.

The first bit here is you deciding you're the victim, because you've been asked to think about word usage. That is ridiculous. Ludicrous. Laughable. It's not a reasonable thing to "feel" in response to such an incredibly mild point.

The second point, re: "pablum", requires citations. You need specific examples of how when mild requests that people think about what words they use have lead directly to low-quality content. If you can't provide these, then that is not a reasonable claim, because it should be extremely easy, if there's a direct causal relationship, and you are asserting a direct causal relationship.

But on the other end, as a consumer, I am growing weary of products that are overly vetted, and just, like I said before, pablum, because they have to pass so many filters in order to be considered appropriately wholesome.

Going to need citations on those products, or I'm going to have to say, this is a fiction.

 

[Maxperson]

You're claiming stuff is banned and that creative freedom is "dire", when there's an extremely mild suggestion that people think before they use terms. It's kind of outrageous that people are "upvoting" you on this, when you're basically misleading people, in quite a serious way. Your argument is utterly hypocritical, too - by your own logic, you're policing people's ability to communicate, essentially suggest (again by your own logic) that it's "illegal" for people to ask others to be more thoughtful in their use of language.

No. "Don't police me." is not the same as policing you. You are free to curtail your use of whatever words you wish. If you find 10,000 other people who feel the same way, you can all curtail your own uses of words. It's when the 10,000 of you try to curtail the use of those words by other people that policing comes into play.

 

[Aldarc]

I am fine with shamans in D&D if just a standard good faith effort is made not to reinforce those negative stereotypes. I just expect creatives to try to do better. I understand there will be missteps. Just like try.

These are just the words of an elitist oppressor of languages and creatives everywhere. What’s next? Asking creatives to carefully consider the words we use to refer to marginalized genders, sexualities, nationalities, and ethnicities? Don’t worry, fellow creatives. Sing with me, “We Shall Overcome (Walking on Eggshells)”.

 

[Bedrockgames]

You're claiming stuff is banned and that creative freedom is "dire", when there's an extremely mild suggestion that people think before they use terms. It's kind of outrageous that people are "upvoting" you on this, when you're basically misleading people, in quite a serious way. Your argument is utterly hypocritical, too - by your own logic, you're policing people's ability to communicate, essentially suggest (again by your own logic) that it's "illegal" for people to ask others to be more thoughtful in their use of language.

It isn't mild, and it isn't small at this stage in my opinion.

I am not policing anyone. I've invited critiques form you and from Aldarc. But I can criticize the criticism sure? And when the criticism becomes a trend, and impacts how people think when they are making art or designing games, I think it is fair to point out. Especially when it goes beyond that, as it has in recent years and you have calls to put pressure on companies or to boycott, so that products get removed. I think that is where this stuff becomes a big issue.

If people are upvoting my post, it might be because I am expressing something they are having trouble expressing, but think is true.