Sexism and presumed sexism in RPGs

[Loonook]

Never said any such thing. I said that a great many fantasy female character depictions show her as powerless or inappropriately sexualized or both. She is fairly likely to be wearing impractical sexy clothes or no clothes in situations where this is a *ridiculously stupid thing to do*. +5 chainmail bikini of orc arrow attraction FTW, and all that. Because gut wounds in combat are totally sexy.

I'm not sure how that equates to "Oh no, women can't show skin or it's bad/degrading/shameful". I don't have an issue with skin-showing under circumstances that make any damn sense, or in porn for consenting adults. I have a problem when it is the result of automatic, knee-jerk sexualizing of a female image just because it is female, in situations where it would make a hell of a lot more sense for her to be wearing normal clothes or actual armor. Not Fredrick's of Waterdeep lingerie armor, which is freaking insane. Because, clearly looking hot and defending your boobies must be more important than, I don't know, little things like not sustaining fatal gut wounds or getting your legs chopped off.


If you seriously want to do so, pick any RPG sourcebook that includes depictions of both males and females of assorted PC and monster races. Categorize the images based on how many could be considered sexualized, how many depict a sexualized character as a passive or powerless object, and how many are inappropriately sexualized (eg, someone who is fighting or wilderness scouting in skimpy clothing).

Elric of Melnibone, though technically he does become magically fit after he becomes the wielder of the Black Sword, albeit at the agonizing price of consuming his loved ones' blood and souls. Thomas Covenant, the leper. Bilbo and Frodo Baggins, who are three feet tall and have hairy toes. Need more examples?

So your examples are a leper who 'dreams' a fictional life where he

Spoiler

rapes the first woman to come along

to escape his own travesty to become a hero in his own delusions, a patricide/fratricide who is a mage/warrior antihero who gains his warrior nature through the death of his loved ones... And halflings who are completely normal in their own race and pretty much walk somewhere with purpose with a creepy corrupted halfling?

Your first two are antiheroes at best, and the others are protected for the battle parts of their journey by big strong men with armor and swords.

Very inspiring.

Also, people who scout and fight never walk about in skimpy, impractical clothing

Yeah, I agree with the concept of the chainmail bikini being faulty... But I asked for your canon. What do you read fantasy-wise?

Slainte,

-Loonook.

 

[TanithT]

So your examples are a leper who 'dreams' a fictional life where he

Spoiler

rapes the first woman to come along

to escape his own travesty to become a hero in his own delusions,

Didn't say he was my hero, just that he was a hero of a decently long running series of fantasy novels. And about as unfit as they come, both physically and emotionally/mentally. Personally I can't say I much like the guy.

a patricide/fratricide who is a mage/warrior antihero who gains his warrior nature through the death of his loved ones...

Elric did not kill his father and he had no siblings. His distinctly evil and corrupt cousin Yrkoon set him on the fateful path to wielding Stormbringer by seeking power over the Black Swords, and by kidnapping his fiancee. He accepted the burden of Stormbringer to save her, and killed her kidnapper, but the destiny that came along with that was horrific and not of his choosing.

Scion of an ancient and decadent race, Elric was arguably the best and most moral person he could be under the circumstances. He holds back the black sword's hunger as much as he can, but in the end it betrays him every time. He hangs up the sword and forswears it more than once, and only picks it up again to save the lives of his loved ones, accepting the terrible price it exacts for giving him vitality so that he can save his friends and loved ones.

Yes, I do find Elric to be an inspiring hero. He makes complex moral decisions in a complex world, most of which are surprisingly unselfish and self-sacrificing. He's fundamentally a good guy thrust unwillingly into a mostly bad guy's role that he can't get free of, no matter how hard he tries. And he does try, over and over again. The tragedy is that he never quite succeeds, and he has to pick up the evil sword one more time in order to prevent a greater evil for people he cares about, or for the world.

And halflings who are completely normal in their own race and pretty much walk somewhere with purpose with a creepy corrupted halfling?

Your first two are antiheroes at best, and the others are protected for the battle parts of their journey by big strong men with armor and swords.

It was only Frodo and Sam at the end, and that's where the real heroism of the trilogy is best shown, IMO. Gollum is a complex character who is both detestable and pitiable, and it is through that pity and also through the hobbits' steadfast, heroic persistence that Middle-Earth is saved.

Yes, very inspiring indeed, and none of the hobbits can exactly be referred to as models of strength, fitness or physical perfection. They're little people with hairy toes, but they are also very much heroes.

Also, people who scout and fight never walk about in skimpy, impractical clothing

I wouldn't call that a sexualized image, nor is the scout being depicted in a sexually appealing/inviting pose.

Skimpy clothing where it makes sense makes sense. The issue I have is when it doesn't make sense but it's there anyway to sex up the picture. The vast majority of images that fit into the 'makes no sense, the nudity/sexy clothing here is totally gratuitous or ridiculous/dangerous/illogical' are female.

Yeah, I agree with the concept of the chainmail bikini being faulty... But I asked for your canon. What do you read fantasy-wise?

It varies. Naomi Novik, Misty Lackey, R. Salvatore, China Mieville, Andre Norton, Anne and Todd McCaffrey, Tolkien and Moorcock come immediately to mind, but there's a heck of a lot more on my shelves.

 

[Elf Witch]

My issue with some of the fantasy art in RPGs is that unrealistic for the situation.

It is one thing in a tropical setting or a primitive setting to have warriors of both sexes with little or no coverings. It another when you portray a wizard in an adventuring party dressed in skimpy silks while she is wading trough a swamp or in frozen tundra or in a dungeon with lots of rough rocks.

Then there are the poses showing the female adventurer's butt and boobs at the same time. Who really stands that way in battle. And why are all female adventurers stacked? The same with superheros in comics. Does having big boobs make you a better adventurer.

Saying that it is the same for men is reaching. Male adventurers are shown as buff and in shape well if they are warriors or wizards who go adventuring they had better be if they want to stay alive.

As for what the OP wrote I don't there is a simple answer of why more woman are not in gaming. Part of it is that some woman feel that gamer culture is aimed at men. Others are worried about being labeled a geek. It may be the age of the geek but that is for males. The fact because of their earning power they can now get hot chicks. It is not quite the same for female geeks.

I do know woman who were turned off by the complexity of the rules. I noticed that a lot of woman who didn't like DnD loved White Wolf. I think maybe because it focuses more on role playing then slaying.

I have seen woman made very uncomfortable by the male culture surrounding gaming especially in the past when all the art was more cheesecake and you had rules making woman second class fighters with the hit to stats. You don't tend to see that as much today which is great.

For some woman the only games they are exposed to is a game run that is more historical accurate and that can be a huge turn off for woman because for the most part it kind of sucked to be a female.

The best way to get woman to play is to make a game that is fun for everyone and is not to complicated to play. And to show woman playing the game in ads and have good artwork. And if you have daughters teach them to play.

 

[Loonook]

Didn't say he was my hero, just that he was a hero of a decently long running series of fantasy novels. And about as unfit as they come, both physically and emotionally/mentally. Personally I can't say I much like the guy.

Definitely a laudable warrior, with all of that 'Delusional leper-dreaming' stuff, and being free to make his choices due to the fact that ehh... It may just be a dream.

Scion of an ancient and decadent race, Elric was arguably the best and most moral person he could be under the circumstances. He holds back the black sword's hunger as much as he can, but in the end it betrays him every time. He hangs up the sword and forswears it more than once, and only picks it up again to save the lives of his loved ones, accepting the terrible price it exacts for giving him vitality so that he can save his friends and loved ones.

And yet he consorts with demons and elder powers. Good intentions feel very comfortable on my feet... Where IS this road heading?

It was only Frodo and Sam at the end, and that's where the real heroism of the trilogy is best shown, IMO. Gollum is a complex character who is both detestable and pitiable, and it is through that pity and also through the hobbits' steadfast, heroic persistence that Middle-Earth is saved.

And they walk to a volcano, get into a bar brawl, and fling a ring into a volcano. Again, they are not truly the heroes I'm speaking of... But you did go against the whole 'magic assistance' part with Elric so ehh.

Yes, very inspiring indeed, and none of the hobbits can exactly be referred to as models of strength, fitness or physical perfection. They're little people with hairy toes, but they are also very much heroes.

I wouldn't call that a sexualized image, nor is the scout being depicted in a sexually appealing/inviting pose.

And yet their depiction is just as naked as the ones above. You are placing a sexualized view on the targets you want to place it upon.

Skimpy clothing where it makes sense makes sense. The issue I have is when it doesn't make sense but it's there anyway to sex up the picture. The vast majority of images that fit into the 'makes no sense, the nudity/sexy clothing here is totally gratuitous or ridiculous/dangerous/illogical' are female.

And as I am pointing out, the ridiculous/dangerous/illogical wear is common among the same people that I showed above. It is a cultural depiction over sexuality.

It varies. Naomi Novik, Misty Lackey, R. Salvatore, China Mieville, Andre Norton, Anne and Todd McCaffrey, Tolkien and Moorcock come immediately to mind, but there's a heck of a lot more on my shelves.

So Norton, a heavily noted exemplar of misandry in early feminist scifi (to the point she's a punchline), Lackey who has 'strong female characters'... Mieville, who is pretty much modern fantasy, and McCaffrey... Which personally I never got around to. Novik retreads McCaffery in the Napoleonic era (she's the writer of His Majesty's Dragon right?)... So no fantasy reading beyond Lackey and Salvatore?

And Salvatore never, ever has images of impractical/sexualized garb in portrayal of women:

Now, again, female warriors in my canon just are not depicted in any way other than a completely sexualized form... Especially in that sexist Game of Thrones...

I mean, we can definitely discuss the issues that your readings are a treatise on first and second-wave feminist SciFi/Fantasy that has no real example of a unique mythic fantasy, or that your examples of Fantasy are either sex-negative/sexless (Lackey/Tolkien), or D&D writ in novel form (Salvatore). Your historical settings are also pretty well white-washed, but hey... as a historian I don't know how things worked. Or with my focus in gender history and required gender study.

Want to know an actual depiction of strong female characters, sex positive, who run two kingdoms and actually battle each other for supremacy throughout the series?

Of course it is a portrayal of war. There are horrible things done on both sides. Murder, suicide, assault, corruption... You know, real life.

Again, the leaders are women. They do horrible, terrible, necessary things, and their underlings are depicted in the realism of a raiding party turned mercenary company.

But that may not be to your liking. How about a science fiction series that discusses racism, sexism, misogyny and misandry, and does it with humor, tact, and interest?

Though I must warn. A guy wrote this without supervision... There is even a whole spinoff run in a brothel! A sex-positive brothel that also discusses the concepts of cultural bias, human sexuality and gender identity, BDSM, and other hot topics with humor and insight.

Or you can think we all just read chainmail bikini novels because of preconceived notions of fantasy and scifi. Or that all worlds should be perfect, while lauding a morally ambigious villain with a heart of gold as an epic hero.

Slainte,

-Loonook.

 

[Dire Bare]

So Norton, a heavily noted exemplar of misandry in early feminist scifi (to the point she's a punchline), Lackey who has 'strong female characters'... Mieville, who is pretty much modern fantasy, and McCaffrey... Which personally I never got around to. Novik retreads McCaffery in the Napoleonic era (she's the writer of His Majesty's Dragon right?)... So no fantasy reading beyond Lackey and Salvatore?

Dude, in almost every post on this thread, you have taken Tanith's posts out-of-context and read things from in-between the lines that simply aren't there. The above quote is a good example, she listed some favorite authors off the top of her head, and mentions she has a ton more of different authors on her bookshelf. All of her posts have shown she is quite well read in the fantasy genre, from all around the genre. So now her "reading list" shows her overtly "feminist" agenda or something? Read her posts more carefully before responding again, and try not to put your own baggage in your interpretations of what others say.

I'm with Tanith on this one. I'm a guy, and I see what she sees in fantasy gaming art. Of course, I'm not always as aware of it, as I often find these images, well, sexy. But when it's called out, I gotta agree that the art in rpg books, even today in 2012, still has a lot of negative female stereotypes. Not all of the art, or even necessarily most of it anymore, but there is still plenty left.

Luckily, the current D&D art director seems to see this as well, and is making a very conscious effort to dialogue with WotC's fans, both men and women, on the issue and take D&D even farther away from negative stereotypes in art. He won't be 100% successful, as this is ingrained in the industry and hobby, but I expect some good progress.

 

[Jon_Dahl]

I think that RPGs are perhaps the best way to reflect one's prejudices. I've often noticed that I associate certain roles with certain genders, ages etc. Even certain NPCs with certain body-types always get specific roles.
If I have to create a town sheriff, I've noticed that it's almost always a strong man.

The best thing about RPGs is that there is really no reason to exclude men or women from any role. Since this is about imagination, you can do anything you want. Add pregnant men and female gnome weightlifting champs if you wish. It's when you always associate certain stereotypes with certain roles, you should perhaps ask yourself questions. I always have a fat man as the barkeeper. What is your excuse?

 

[Dire Bare]

This is some of the abuse she had hurled at her. Not for the young or easily offended. Again, suggesting that simply going it's no big deal/ doesn't really affect people is out of touch.

Wow. You just reminded me why I try not to read comments on any YouTube page, news page, or really any page at all. So much misogyny and antisemitism . . . I feel like I need to go bathe and scrape all that crap off my skin.

 

[enrious]

What's old is new. http://www.enworld.org/forum/press-...arily-closed/7906-q-rogue-fighter-nudity.html


Also, when did doing nothing but making strawman attacks constitute a valid side to a debate? I think personally think there's one person in this thread who's yelled themselves off my screen.

 

[TanithT]

And yet he consorts with demons and elder powers. Good intentions feel very comfortable on my feet... Where IS this road heading?

He grew up with those elder powers; his culture considered them friends and allies. The novels show how he progresses from essentially innocent and naive, but tainted by the essential inhumanity of Melnibonean culture, into someone who sympathizes more with the values and mores of human society and much less with those of his ancestors.

His road heads to doom and tragedy, but at almost every turn, his choices are made to save others, often at his own expense. Essentially he becomes more and more human by choice, despite his initially inhuman origin.

And yet their depiction is just as naked as the ones above. You are placing a sexualized view on the targets you want to place it upon.

Nudity and sexualization are very different things. I don't think that anyone could arguably point to any of those images as strongly emphasizing or even really showing either the primary or secondary sexual characteristics of these men.

And as I am pointing out, the ridiculous/dangerous/illogical wear is common among the same people that I showed above. It is a cultural depiction over sexuality.

They are accurate cultural depictions that have *nothing to do* with sexuality. The clothing in question is practical for their job and their environment, and customary for their time. It makes contextual sense. It is not gratuitous or sexualized.

Various attacks and criticisms of random fantasy authors I've read redacted out of boredom.

Dude, you asked what I read for fun, not who I'd elect for president. Good gods.

If your actual question was, "What fantasy author do you feel best represents a fair and balanced view of men and women" I would say Elizabeth Moon in the Paksennarion series. But that isn't what you asked.

And Salvatore never, ever has images of impractical/sexualized garb in portrayal of women:

Authors don't have any say over cover images. They are chosen by the marketing department. Funny how marketing departments work.

Especially in that sexist Game of Thrones...

You're making a whole lot of stuff up that I didn't say and don't believe.

I made it clear that I *had not seen the series* and knew nothing about the characters, so my comments on the images were necessarily limited to how they were being depicted in that place at that time, nothing more. Perhaps that disclaimer was not clearly phrased enough for you to understand?

I mean, we can definitely discuss the issues that your readings are a treatise on first and second-wave feminist SciFi/Fantasy that has no real example of a unique mythic fantasy, or that your examples of Fantasy are either sex-negative/sexless (Lackey/Tolkien), or D&D writ in novel form (Salvatore). Your historical settings are also pretty well white-washed, but hey... as a historian I don't know how things worked. Or with my focus in gender history and required gender study.

If I actually gave enough of a damn to find and list all the fantasy authors from the 1,000+ books I own, I'm sure I could come up with some people you personally approve of. Since I don't, you can take your approval and find something else to do with it which may or may not require a water-soluble product.

Though I must warn. A guy wrote this without supervision... There is even a whole spinoff run in a brothel! A sex-positive brothel that also discusses the concepts of cultural bias, human sexuality and gender identity, BDSM, and other hot topics with humor and insight.

I wouldn't characterize Spider as a fantasy author, but I know his works very well, and I know the author casually as we used to hit some of the same filk events. He is a damn good guy, and he said he was touched and honored to find out (because I told him) that there was such a thing at least one real life brothel that literally used Lady Sally's as their operating manual and required employee reading. The owner of said establishment is an avid sci fi reader, but not really plugged into the con circuit, so I relayed for her.

Yep, pretty frickin' cool. At least I thought so. He did, too. He politely turned down her offer of a comp, though, because Jeanne was still alive at the time and their agreement didn't happen to include poly.

This snarky crap about "I must warn, a guy wrote this without supervision" that is directed at me? Not cool. Cut it out, along with the rest of the crap you're making up about what I said just so you can attack it. These are not things I have actually said, nor things I personally believe. You're dueling shadows by yourself, and it isn't productive.

 

[Loonook]

Nudity and sexualization are very different things. I don't think that anyone could arguably point to any of those images as strongly emphasizing or even really showing either the primary or secondary sexual characteristics of these men.

Which is odd, as the dress in the various forms does accentuate the secondary sexual characteristics of the male body. It just so happens that that accentuation is not perceived by you as lauding a characteristic that is offensive.

They are accurate cultural depictions that have *nothing to do* with sexuality. The clothing in question is practical for their job and their environment, and customary for their time. It makes contextual sense. It is not gratuitous or sexualized.

Customary for their time, yes. Environment? Questionable. And of course context is necessary... I would wonder what your idea of going sky-clad or depicting werewolves in the nude would be?

Dude, you asked what I read for fun, not who I'd elect for president. Good gods.

You presented the writings that form your ideas of fantasy. I made critiques on those writings that have held up to criticisms... Hell, Norton is infamous for her misandry, but alright.

If your actual question was, "What fantasy author do you feel best represents a fair and balanced view of men and women" I would say Elizabeth Moon in the Paksennarion series. But that isn't what you asked.

An excellent series, in which the world is presented through the eyes of a Paladin who, for all intents and purpose, is a sexless warrior of the faith. So if we reverse the genders of those interacting... The book pretty much reads the same. Again, if the concepts of sexuality, gender, and ambiguity do not exist it is very easy to gloss over their portrayals...

While if the realities of a world where men and women live on a constantly evolving and mutable scale of gender, ambiguity, sexuality, and its interpretations the waters get muddy rather quickly, and knees jerk. Sadly this isn't exactly a new concept, but again it is a great series... Just not at all focused on anything discussed in our discussion.

Authors don't have any say over cover images. They are chosen by the marketing department. Funny how marketing departments work.

As Salvatore is one of the bigger wigs in the FR pantheon and personally looks through his materials, art direction, etc. and has established pretty wide-ranging projects on his Drizzt novels including art direction for the comics, you may want to look into who is choosing what.

You're making a whole lot of stuff up that I didn't say and don't believe.

I will state the same.

I made it clear that I *had not seen the series* and knew nothing about the characters, so my comments on the images were necessarily limited to how they were being depicted in that place at that time, nothing more. Perhaps that disclaimer was not clearly phrased enough for you to understand?

Oh no, I did understand. But I also figured that, as someone who actually reads up on topics I am not aware, you would extend the same courtesy. Especially when I presented articles for and against my points.

If I actually gave enough of a damn to find and list all the fantasy authors from the 1,000+ books I own, I'm sure I could come up with some people you personally approve of. Since I don't, you can take your approval and find something else to do with it which may or may not require a water-soluble product.

Shrugging off the argument and then making a sexual comment on my post doesn't negate the fact of it. I am glad you own thousands of books... And I asked for your canon. What you consider a good representation of your personal preferred writers, and then spoke on what you have presented.

This snarky crap about "I must warn, a guy wrote this without supervision" that is directed at me? Not cool. Cut it out, along with the rest of the crap you're making up about what I said just so you can attack it. These are not things I have actually said, nor things I personally believe. You're dueling shadows by yourself, and it isn't productive.

The snark was in reply to what I received from your replies, and for any offense I do apologize. Also... I would be more than happy to discuss the topic and see what you personally have to say about it. You have presented your arguments without knowledge of the source, and (while I do apologize, it has been years since I read the Elric saga) I could have been more well-versed on my presentation on one of the myriad of books you placed forward.

As someone who reads voraciously and studied the topics we are covering as an academic pursuit I find it sort of off-putting to see your comments go so blue. As I said, I would be happy to discuss this with you in another thread as we have sadly derailed this one.

But, as someone who was brought into the game by a rabid pack of wonderfully geeky women and men, who was handed Burroughs and Atwood, Norton and Card, Davis and Campbell in my formative years, I find you are trying to argue for a romanticized view of something that has never existed.

Cultures have always had their warrior women, and kind and cruel witches, clever thieves and queens of noble and questionable virtue. Painting everything we do in the broad stroke of a blow to the ideals of female portrayal ignores thousands of years where we have known that, to be a woman is a struggle. However, to proclaim that in fantasy there is no prejudice, no sexism, no racism, nor want is to ignore the principles of societies, cultures, and life as we have been able to perceive it for all of our recorded history.

And ignoring parts of what makes us human is silly. As I stated the concept of the chain-mail bikini is foolish... But so is living your life in a walking can. More realistic armor is something that a lot of people are going for, and I don't mind it. But then stating that the sexualizing of ALL clothing, even when it is based on the dress of a syncretic culture versus a show that has run three seasons of fan service of blood, gore, and sex.

And when I have a personal sexualized attack posed at me as part of the counterargument? Even better!

Slainte,

-Loonook.