Good point.
Though AP style is also considered dry and very deliberate in how things are written to promote readability to a mixed audience.
-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Pronouns in D&D - How should gender be handled?
- Thread starter shadow
- Start date
Good point.
Though AP style is also considered dry and very deliberate in how things are written to promote readability to a mixed audience.
Mishihari Lord
First Post
Really? We're not allowed to examine whether the gripe is legitimate? You can always find "some people" saying any old kind of wacky thing. Reduction ad absurdum: I say it's sexist that I don't have a pony. You are now required to give me a pony. If you don't you are sexist and a bad person.
a) Your pony is in the mail.
b) it takes two seconds to see that writing "he" all over the place, whether tradition, old standard or not might be taken the wrong way by a woman. I wouldn't want "she" to be the standard either. So it's easy ground to give on in the Equal Rights movement. It has the key attributes of lopsided distribution and keyed to a specific gender. That examination takes two seconds to complete to determine an air of legitimacy to the issue. It's not as big as letting women vote, but it is bigger than renaming man hole covers because it has the word "man" in it
c) what does a pony have to do with gender or sexism? There is no connection to lopsided distribution keyed to a specific gender. You don't have a pony because your parents decided not to get you one or because they couldn't afford it, or they were logical determined that it wouldn't be best for the pony's well being. Gender never came into the equation, thus it wasn't sexist. Unless your parents said "you're a boy, you can't have a pony", which wasn't disclosed in the original claim, there's no sexism, and it didn't take a lot to determine that.
d) wanting to keep doing things the old way doesn't make you bad, but it can you look bad to others. Let's assume you don't care what I think, that's OK. These situations matter when a person sticks to their guns in front of people they DO care what they think. If a female friend reads your gaming manuscript and says "hey, I think your writing leaves women out because you only use male genders", I hope you care what she thinks, and I would be concerned that defending the writing practice will not make you look tolerant to her. Expand that out to any of the people you care about, in the case of an RPG manuscript, likely gamers, some of which are women.
e) I agree we can find people who will claim something whacky offends them. The slippery slope argument is usually used as protection against them (we can't do X, or the whacky people will use that to further justify something). I think the normal people outnumber the whacky people. As long as the normal people try to do the right thing AND make course corrections when it's gone too far, it'll never get that far. Normal people know when whacky people are being stupid again.
f) you're neither allowed nor barred from examining anything. There are no restrictions on what you do, other than the potential PR fallout of what one says about the old way vs. the new way. I doubt anybody here in this thread is any kind of PR trouble. But anybody writing an RPG would be advised to side with the newer styles, unless they want PR issues with people who finally review/read their product. In today's modern era, I cannot fathom why ANYBODY would risk it. It's like that Indian government guy in the news recently. Given what a hot button the R word is over there, only an idiot would make ANY statement containing the R word or saying anything that doesn't outright condemn it. It ought to have been an HR memo saying "don't talk about R except in carefully vetted by PR phrases."
The "he" vs. "he/she" thing is way minor to that. But it's an issue, and my imaginary legal department, PR and HR has advised me to acquiesce to their request, as resisting it could be taken the wrong way.
As an aside, it might be interesting to consider the background of those of us with different views on the subject.
I come from LARGE corporations. I now help run a very small IT company.
In both venues, when somebody raises an issue or concern that smells like lawsuit bait (harrassment or discrimination), you'd best watch what you say, and cede to the request if its reasonable. Any quibbling or whatnot, could be construed as condoning the alleged bad behavior.
Even my InfoSec guy is wired this way. If he remotely detects anybody is doing something wrong (like illegal porn on an executive's laptop), that goes straight to the Feds. We don't get an opportunity to hem and haw over it or quietly take care of it, because THAT can look like an attempt to hide evidence and make us an accessory to the crime.
Every time the news has an article about a scandal, it is invariably because the company did not handle the problem in a sufficiently serious and immediate way, and instead spent more time hiding it, debating it, or not taking it seriously.
It may be human nature to go through the seven stages over every change forced upon us, but other humans don't give a hoot if you're going through it to realize that you need to respond NOW to a Gender Equality request that isn't onerous or excessive.
My position and viewpoint is aimed at people writing actual products/running an RPG company because that is analogous to what I do for a living.
I don't care if some dude's personal writing is gender exclusive or not. That's below the radar of the RPG industry as a whole.
I come from LARGE corporations. I now help run a very small IT company.
In both venues, when somebody raises an issue or concern that smells like lawsuit bait (harrassment or discrimination), you'd best watch what you say, and cede to the request if its reasonable. Any quibbling or whatnot, could be construed as condoning the alleged bad behavior.
Even my InfoSec guy is wired this way. If he remotely detects anybody is doing something wrong (like illegal porn on an executive's laptop), that goes straight to the Feds. We don't get an opportunity to hem and haw over it or quietly take care of it, because THAT can look like an attempt to hide evidence and make us an accessory to the crime.
Every time the news has an article about a scandal, it is invariably because the company did not handle the problem in a sufficiently serious and immediate way, and instead spent more time hiding it, debating it, or not taking it seriously.
It may be human nature to go through the seven stages over every change forced upon us, but other humans don't give a hoot if you're going through it to realize that you need to respond NOW to a Gender Equality request that isn't onerous or excessive.
My position and viewpoint is aimed at people writing actual products/running an RPG company because that is analogous to what I do for a living.
I don't care if some dude's personal writing is gender exclusive or not. That's below the radar of the RPG industry as a whole.
Things like this always reminds me of a similar topic, though a bit more exaggerated, that has become sort of a long-term big deal in my country, Sweden. Now, Sweden is seen as a pretty progressive country, and many here claim "political correctness have gone too far!!!!!111one".
In sweden, there's a pastry, which has often been called something that translates into english as the n-word followed by balls. "n****balls" (but it doesn't have any real sexual connotation, just as in "round object" mostly). Obviously many people regard this as racist as heck, and most people don't use it anymore for very obvious reason, and nowadays most people (and certainly all bakery shops etc) call them "chocolate balls" or similar.
Yet there is a bunch of (white) people saying "STOP BEING SO PC!!!" and "IT'S ALWAYS BEEN CALLED THAT!!!", and of course a small minority that just has missed the whole issue and haven't even considered the name.
Now, of course not everyone that calls them "n*balls" are ideologically convinced racists, but if someone uses the phrase, and gets told that it's racist, you can tell a lot by the response.
Some will say "oh, sorry, it's a bad habit" or "oh, sorry, I'd never considered that". I mean, I have a hard time believing someone saying they've never thought of it seeing as how it's been quite a big deal in Sweden, but at least there's a confirmation of understanding that it is an issue. They understand that the _expression_ is a consequence of a racist society and makes many black people feel uncomfortable. They understand that using that expression is a racist _act_; that does not mean that they as people are racist, it means they live and partake in a racist society, and if one does not wish to continue to reproduce that racist society, one has to actively take steps to prevent it. You can't be "neutral" and just continue to use racially loaded language that makes people of a certain race uncomfortable; once you are informed of the issue there isn't such a thing as "not taking sides", either you continue the racist practice or you change your behaviour. Most people are decent people when it comes to something like that, and thus most have changed their behaviour.
Others will say stuff like "oh stop being so PC!!!!", or "it's just a word, it's not racist!!!!" or "that's the REAL name!!!" or "it's always been called that!" or "oh but you can say white onion?!?! (swedish word for garlic)" or "freedom of expression!!!!" or whatever. I have a very hard time not seeing these people as racist - whether they explicitly believe in a hierarcy of human races/subspecies or not (in Sweden we don't really use the word race about people the way it's used in other parts of the world) they purposefully continue to use a racist phrase even whilst knowing the issues with it. It may be laziness that they don't change their ways, it may be just because "they like to provoke" or because they don't like "all this PC
". It doesn't really matter how they justify it - they still continue to act racist without even trying to stop.
And of course, they'd all claim that being called "racist" for their behaviour was a faaar graver insult than using the n-word.
Now, of course pronouns are a bit different; they're not inherently a slur the same way the n-word is. Yet they are still a consequence of a sexist society wherein the man is the norm and example everywhere and the woman is "the other". Being "othered" is a central part of hierarchial and oppressive systems; the "othering" of women is an important leg for the still patriarchal society we live in. Yes, it's "just a word", but it's one of the most common words in the language.
And the arguments are so, so very similar. "It's just a word, it shouldn't matter", "I've been taught so", "political correctness has gone too far" or "so we aren't allowed to write how we want anymore?" etc. And of course often the defendants will claim implying their actions might be sexist is some kind of insult.
Whenever someone tries to actively _defend_ the usage, it makes me think of those swedes defending the pastry. And, ultimately, even apart from the usage of the word itself, I've never met one n-ball defendant who wasn't very racist in general. Not always of the Ku Klux Klan type, but always very "othering" to people who weren't ethnic swedes and in other ways reinforcing the hierarchal and oppressive system.
I have a hard time for products that use all masculine pronouns, and would probably never buy a product from someone who staunchely defends the usage of all masculine pronouns.
P.S. The whole "P.C." thing is so goddamn silly. I mean, comeon. I get called "politically correct" all the time while propagating for abolishon of the whole economic system through violent revolution, by people who's political opinion is in line with large corporation and major political parties.
In sweden, there's a pastry, which has often been called something that translates into english as the n-word followed by balls. "n****balls" (but it doesn't have any real sexual connotation, just as in "round object" mostly). Obviously many people regard this as racist as heck, and most people don't use it anymore for very obvious reason, and nowadays most people (and certainly all bakery shops etc) call them "chocolate balls" or similar.
Yet there is a bunch of (white) people saying "STOP BEING SO PC!!!" and "IT'S ALWAYS BEEN CALLED THAT!!!", and of course a small minority that just has missed the whole issue and haven't even considered the name.
Now, of course not everyone that calls them "n*balls" are ideologically convinced racists, but if someone uses the phrase, and gets told that it's racist, you can tell a lot by the response.
Some will say "oh, sorry, it's a bad habit" or "oh, sorry, I'd never considered that". I mean, I have a hard time believing someone saying they've never thought of it seeing as how it's been quite a big deal in Sweden, but at least there's a confirmation of understanding that it is an issue. They understand that the _expression_ is a consequence of a racist society and makes many black people feel uncomfortable. They understand that using that expression is a racist _act_; that does not mean that they as people are racist, it means they live and partake in a racist society, and if one does not wish to continue to reproduce that racist society, one has to actively take steps to prevent it. You can't be "neutral" and just continue to use racially loaded language that makes people of a certain race uncomfortable; once you are informed of the issue there isn't such a thing as "not taking sides", either you continue the racist practice or you change your behaviour. Most people are decent people when it comes to something like that, and thus most have changed their behaviour.
Others will say stuff like "oh stop being so PC!!!!", or "it's just a word, it's not racist!!!!" or "that's the REAL name!!!" or "it's always been called that!" or "oh but you can say white onion?!?! (swedish word for garlic)" or "freedom of expression!!!!" or whatever. I have a very hard time not seeing these people as racist - whether they explicitly believe in a hierarcy of human races/subspecies or not (in Sweden we don't really use the word race about people the way it's used in other parts of the world) they purposefully continue to use a racist phrase even whilst knowing the issues with it. It may be laziness that they don't change their ways, it may be just because "they like to provoke" or because they don't like "all this PC
". It doesn't really matter how they justify it - they still continue to act racist without even trying to stop.And of course, they'd all claim that being called "racist" for their behaviour was a faaar graver insult than using the n-word.
Now, of course pronouns are a bit different; they're not inherently a slur the same way the n-word is. Yet they are still a consequence of a sexist society wherein the man is the norm and example everywhere and the woman is "the other". Being "othered" is a central part of hierarchial and oppressive systems; the "othering" of women is an important leg for the still patriarchal society we live in. Yes, it's "just a word", but it's one of the most common words in the language.
And the arguments are so, so very similar. "It's just a word, it shouldn't matter", "I've been taught so", "political correctness has gone too far" or "so we aren't allowed to write how we want anymore?" etc. And of course often the defendants will claim implying their actions might be sexist is some kind of insult.
Whenever someone tries to actively _defend_ the usage, it makes me think of those swedes defending the pastry. And, ultimately, even apart from the usage of the word itself, I've never met one n-ball defendant who wasn't very racist in general. Not always of the Ku Klux Klan type, but always very "othering" to people who weren't ethnic swedes and in other ways reinforcing the hierarchal and oppressive system.
I have a hard time for products that use all masculine pronouns, and would probably never buy a product from someone who staunchely defends the usage of all masculine pronouns.
P.S. The whole "P.C." thing is so goddamn silly. I mean, comeon. I get called "politically correct" all the time while propagating for abolishon of the whole economic system through violent revolution, by people who's political opinion is in line with large corporation and major political parties.
Jester David
Hero
I liked what Paizo did with Pathfinder where they had iconic characters and used the iconics's gender to determine pronoun usage for classes.
Other rules can avoid it somewhat, referring to "creatures" or "characters".
There's no shortage of pronoun alternatives
Other rules can avoid it somewhat, referring to "creatures" or "characters".
There's no shortage of pronoun alternatives
You left out the strategy WotC uses for Magic, which is to use "he or she" when necessary. There's also the generic feminine, which is unusual but a nice retort to those who argue that we should all just use the generic masculine and shut up.
For RPGs, I would say my preference is #2, creating and using iconic characters as a reference. Just make sure the iconics do not themselves get too stereotypical (i.e., don't make all the melee warriors male and all the rogue-types female).
Last edited:
Random Bystander
First Post
They also falls into the same pronunciation as he and she. This is important, as "Hir" is an abomination against good taste in English pronunciation.
Similar Threads
D&D General
Creating a Pride Flag for my D&D setting
