Sexism in D&D

[NewJeffCT]

With some of the outrage expressed recently concerning the gender-based attribute modifiers in the D&D next poll I thought this might be a good topic for discussion. Just how prevalent is sexism in the game? Or is the outcry a movement being heralded to further an agenda? I personally don't agree with the attribute adjustment in the base game since any DM who wants to interject some realism into the game can simply houserule it. But I'm not going to slam someone who feels it adds an element of realism. I really do not think its that big of a deal and the reaction honestly kind of took me aback. It makes me think that there are other, probably more personal, issues beyond simple gender-based attribute modifications for the people crying foul.

One thing I will agree with 100%, however, is that the earlier artwork of some of my RPG books did portray women unfairly. Not every female adventurer is going to be a super model in a chain bikini. But to be fair, we need to have some neck-beards in ill-fitting, cheeto stained armor thrown in there too. The street goes both ways ladies.

I don't think sex-based attributes have a place in a game where you're trying to bring more women into the hobby.

Can somebody also provide a link to this poll?

Thanks

 

[steeldragons]

While there are physical and hormonal differences between the male and female bodies that allow males to put on muscle easier then women, the examples you gave are ridiculous. There are plenty of female athletes and body builders out there that could arm wrestle you under the table.

Another big difference is societal roles. In a fantasy society where women *do* play a more physical role, I guarantee you you'd see more built women on the street then you do in your average Walmart.

Being that the game *is* a fantasy....I don't see what the problem is with just leaving this out.

I pretty much agree with this. It does not disrupt my immersion at all to imagine the female barbarian (or female half-orc anything) walking down the street with an obvious physique that could pound my mage or thief into the ground.

That said, I think adding it in as an "optional"/sidebar module to add to play for groups that might want it is not, nor should be a problem for anyone. The individual DM/group decides if they want that level or not.

Say, the proposed campaign world doesn't have half-orcs...or barbarians for that matter...say the proposed campaign world has a much more 'traditional/pseudo-historical" bent to it and women are, generally, kept safe and secure in the keeps and towns and protected vehemently (though sometimes studying magic in secret for their own power, entering a religious order or "Joan of Arc-esque" exceptions to the rule, but going to be looked at strange for picking up a sword or shield) or what have you.

Say the proposed fantasy campaign world is one in which women dominate society (Amazonian princess campaign, anyone?), or a certain race exists where that is the case, and ARE actually bigger, stronger and more highly trained than the males.

It's a fantasy game, and as I said, it does not phase me one way or the other...but I think the option should be there to add it, not as a default point in the rules.

Have fun and happy gaming...no matter what gender you are (or choose to portray in-game
--SD

 

[S'mon]

Would you add a rule to lower the intelligence of certain human races based on other stereotypes?

Again, it should be setting-specific: What's appropriate in an "RE Howard's Hyborea" type setting is not appropriate in a Blue Rose type setting; that goes for race, sex, age, social class etc.

 

[Buugipopuu]

But frankly the STR part is something virtually any reasonable woman wouldnt bat an eye at. And if she does, screw a jar lid on real tight and ask her to open it. Or move your couch across the room alone to illustrate how stupid her argument is.

Maybe D&D isn't your sort of thing. I have a game that will be more suited to your tastes.

 

[Dellamon]

While there are physical and hormonal differences between the male and female bodies that allow males to put on muscle easier then women, the examples you gave are ridiculous. There are plenty of female athletes and body builders out there that could arm wrestle you under the table.

Another big difference is societal roles. In a fantasy society where women *do* play a more physical role, I guarantee you you'd see more built women on the street then you do in your average Walmart.

Being that the game *is* a fantasy....I don't see what the problem is with just leaving this out.

I'm not sure where you are getting your facts, but as someone with a B.S. in Biology I can say you are completely wrong. The female bodybuilders you reference take testosterone to gain the sort of strength and mass they possess - its not natural. There are always going to be weak men and strong women, but on average males are going to be stronger than females. Its the facts, jack - blame evolution.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

While there are physical and hormonal differences between the male and female bodies that allow males to put on muscle easier then women, the examples you gave are ridiculous. There are plenty of female athletes and body builders out there that could arm wrestle you under the table.

Another big difference is societal roles. In a fantasy society where women *do* play a more physical role, I guarantee you you'd see more built women on the street then you do in your average Walmart.

Being that the game *is* a fantasy....I don't see what the problem is with just leaving this out.

I completely agree with it being a Pointless rule and better left out, but your first example doesn't really help much. Those that like (or at least don't dislike) the rule would easily reply:

"Sure the female body-builder would beat me. I've got a 12 Str and she has a 14. But put her up against a male bodybuilder with a 17 Str and she's gonna lose."

Of course, take the female gymnast against the male equivalent, and it's only the strength aspect that allows the male gymnast to come close to the amazing stuff the female gymnast can do. Gotta give the female the edge in Dex.

But wait! Dex is also hand-eye coordination. Females probably don't beat males in hand-eye. How about Con? Better pain thresholds in females probably don't make up for generally lighter bone-structure (though my wife would kill me in that area, too) Again, it's probably Str that holds a man together. Charisma? I mean. *I* think women are more alluring than men... but that might be just me.

Do y'all see how silly it all is? You can't argue for or against it as far as making sense goes. The only thing left is to forget about it.

 

[billd91]

How about Con? Better pain thresholds in females probably don't make up for generally lighter bone-structure (though my wife would kill me in that area, too)

<snip>

Do y'all see how silly it all is? You can't argue for or against it as far as making sense goes. The only thing left is to forget about it.

I agree it is silly, in no small part because our understanding of this stuff and attempt to model it is often incomplete and flawed. Recent studies suggested that men have better pain tolerance than women.

There are times when the simulation should give way to the game. This is one of them.

 

[Li Shenron]

Gender equality is perfectly realistic. Maybe it's true that the average female character should have lesser Strength than the average male character, however the average female player character is certainly much higher above the female average compared to how higher a male player character is above the male average, simply because female player characters are less numerous than male player characters.

Also for the sake of realism, if male Strength is higher than female's, why don't you also give female character a higher Charisma (everybody knows that women are better at getting what they want), a higher Constitution (they live longer), and a bonus to Will and Fortitude saves (men are biologically much much more vulnerable to laziness and children's diapers, I mean Stinking Cloud)?

How about that equality?

Incidentally, I wonder how many of those who want female character penalties (at least have the decency of calling them properly) in the core rules would actually have the guts of proposing them as house rules to a table that has more than one female gamer, not counting gfriends and little sisters.

 

[ExploderWizard]

Gender based STR attribute is perfectly fine. If you give a half orc a bonus to STR because he's bigger and stronger on average, well men are bigger and stronger then women on average. So the same should apply.

Most girls I have played with had no problem with that idea. The issue comes in that then for mechanical balance you have to give men a penalty to something and women a bonus to something else. And no one can seem to agree on what those other factors should be.

But frankly the STR part is something virtually any reasonable woman wouldnt bat an eye at. And if she does, screw a jar lid on real tight and ask her to open it. Or move your couch across the room alone to illustrate how stupid her argument is.

When it comes to femi-nazi's who are just looking to start a fight over anything. Kick them out of the group. This is the least of the problems they are likely to cause.

The STR argument has been done many times and when all is said and done isn't really worth bothering with in an abstract game such as D&D.

If I can accept that a character can have 100 or more HP just from getting better at fighting then an 18 STR female doesn't even make it to the unbelievable radar.

Its quite easy to assume that average individuals will skew towards males having a higher STR. So a typical human male has a 10-11 and a human female an 8-9. This campaign "reality" doesn't overly effect play.

This has nothing to do with PCs. Adventurers break sterotypes and turn assumptions on thier collective heads.

 

[boredgremlin]

While there are physical and hormonal differences between the male and female bodies that allow males to put on muscle easier then women, the examples you gave are ridiculous. There are plenty of female athletes and body builders out there that could arm wrestle you under the table.

Another big difference is societal roles. In a fantasy society where women *do* play a more physical role, I guarantee you you'd see more built women on the street then you do in your average Walmart.

Being that the game *is* a fantasy....I don't see what the problem is with just leaving this out.

First off.
1. Actually no there arent.
2. You cant compare a female str athlete. Which is a absurdly tiny % of the female population to any joe schmo. Those are the absolute strongest a woman can be.

You have to compare them to MALE STRENGTH ATHLETES. Which are the strongest a man can be. And the men blow them out of the friggin water.

So you have no argument at all on that front.

2nd off. Womens roles in fantasy society happen to be whatever the DM decides they are. And even if all things were equal role wise it absolute has no bearing whatsoever on the number of buff women running around.

Our current western society is basically genderless with regards to roles and you still only see a tiny % of women running around worrying about how big a bicep they can get or how much they can bench press.

Its NOT societal. Its nature.

The problem with it is that perhaps you want your fantasy women to look like men with long hair. Okay your choice. Some of us want our fantasy women to look like real women. Or idealized women, because hey its fantasy.

The only reason to leave it out is to avoid arguments on how to balance it mechanically because nature didnt give a crap about mechanical balance when we evolved so it doesnt exist in the real world and has to be gamed in for D&D. If your group can agree on that balance its perfectly fine.