Sexism in Table-Top Gaming: My Thoughts On It, and What We Can Do About It

[Nellisir]

Maybe, but you're from a different society altogether, one that medieval Europe/D&D is not patterned after. The relevant question is: Would she beat a typical medieval male adult in an arm-wrestling contest?

Never mind; I really don't want to get into this.

 

[VelvetViolet]

....ah, but that's the point. They weren't. (As my dad used to say, "Yeah, and if Grandma had a beard, she'd be Grandpa.") We're not in a parallel universe, we're in this one, where the evil elves are black-skinned and worship a demon goddess and are not only matriarchal, but oppressively and violently so. They're the D&D version of the ancient Greek's terrified myths about the Amazons; a society run by women? They're evil and will subjugate us!

If what you're trying to say is that everybody is bigoted and in a mirror-mirror universe it would be the opposite, um, that's a pretty hard hypothesis to test. It's also a bit beside the point. Are you trying to argue that bigotry doesn't count because, in theory, everybody in power would do it? So what? Is that some kind of claim that two wrongs (one in a fictional parallel universe) make a right?

No. I'm saying that societies that consist of exaggerated stereotypes are silly. Whether its drow or A Handmaid's Tale, they're equally silly.

If the Drow had been morally relativistic and less man-hating lunatics, we wouldn't be arguing how racist they are. We'd be arguing "is it morally right for drow women to force their husbands into the kitchen or to abandon their unwanted sons in the wilderness?" Seriously, sci-fi writers do this sort of thing all the time.

 

[evilbob]

OP: Great thread. Definitely something that needs more discussion. Thanks for starting it. Sorry you basically have to go on the defensive for every position you're taking.

I haven't really gotten into this thread, but some of the more recent post discussions are actually handled pretty well by the OP. Here are some examples:
- Bigotry is bad. It doesn't matter if "reverse bigotry" "would" have happened or not; that doesn't justify bigotry.
- The reason why you cannot compare racism against elves to racism against black people is because elves don't exist. You can certainly explore why racism against elves might be bad in a game, but that doesn't mean that it somehow justifies additional racism against actual people who do exist. Also see: sexism.
- Men and women haven't always been considered equal throughout history. That doesn't justify sexism now. History is full of really bad mistakes. We're talking about now. Even fantasy games set in a historical world do not get a pass because the people who are playing those games are living now, and the feelings they have are being felt now.

A lot of arguments against the OP tend to boil down to "slippery slope" accusations:
"Why can't I include rape when I include spiders? I can't know if you're agoraphobic any more than I know if you're sensitive to rape!"
"If you start telling people they can't include X in their games, that's restricting their free speech!" (The idea being that asking someone not to say something will eventually lead to them not being able to say it.)

These are false premises. The first example (while a little over-the-top) ignores the fact that pretty much anyone can tell the social, sub-textual, and reasonable difference between those two extremes. It's not fair to try to justify an easily recognizably heinous example with an easily recognizably softer one. The second example is exactly the same, although it seems different: the idea that anyone will actually censor your right to say something is absurd. It's about realizing that speech has consequences, not that speech is (or would ever be) restricted. To put that another way: it's not about what you CAN or CANNOT do; it's about what you SHOULD or SHOULD NOT do.

 

[ShinHakkaider]

It's very strange to me when in the game world, its okay to be racist towards elves and orcs (even killing them), but when someone is prejudiced toward black people, gay people, or female people, they're irredeemably evil as in the real world. Just because elves and orcs are fictional doesn't excuse prejudice against them or the racist way they're designed. D&D societies display this bizarre moral system where they treat their own kind with 21st century liberal attitudes, but otherwise act like conquistadors/cowboys/etc.

It's posts like this that make me wonder how I've made it this far being a black guy being part of this hobby since the early 80's. It's posts like this that really make me wonder, if even for a split second, that maybe the people who made fun of me for playing a "white people's game" didnt have a point.

I was considering going full court press on getting my 11 year old and his friends into RPG's this year.

Now I'm thinking maybe, just maybe I should stick with the board and card games (Settlers, Pandemic, Munchkin) that I've been introducing them too. And keep them as far away from the RPG community as possible.

 

[Bedrockgames]

It's posts like this that make me wonder how I've made it this far being a black guy being part of this hobby since the early 80's. It's posts like this that really make me wonder, if even for a split second, that maybe the people who made fun of me for playing a "white people's game" didnt have a point.

I was considering going full court press on getting my 11 year old and his friends into RPG's this year.

Now I'm thinking maybe, just maybe I should stick with the board and card games (Settlers, Pandemic, Munchkin) that I've been introducing them too. And keep them as far away from the RPG community as possible.

I really hope you stick with it and introduce them to RPGs. Out of curiosity, could you elaborate on this point a bit. I would be interested to know what it is in particular about the post that made you feel this way and what it is about RPGs in general that you think causes a lot of people to view it as a white-man's game. I've been gaming since the 80s and it has been getting more diverse in my area, but not much improved since the late 90s I would say.

 

[Morrus]

I find Paizo's attempts to be inclusive rather bizarre, since D&D is founded on racism being measurably true (e.g. dwarves are genetically hardwired to be good at appraising precious metals, half-orcs are genetically stupider than humans, etc) and ethnic cleansing and crime fantasy being a common past time (e.g. breaking into the homes of goblins, orcs, gnolls and other "ugly" peoples to kill them and take their stuff).

It's very strange to me when in the game world, its okay to be racist towards elves and orcs (even killing them), but when someone is prejudiced toward black people, gay people, or female people, they're irredeemably evil as in the real world. Just because elves and orcs are fictional doesn't excuse prejudice against them or the racist way they're designed. D&D societies display this bizarre moral system where they treat their own kind with 21st century liberal attitudes, but otherwise act like conquistadors/cowboys/etc.

You cannot discriminate against fictional races. It's impossible. You can discriminate against real people.

 

[ShinHakkaider]

Bedrock, I dont want to derail the sexism thrust of the thread so I'll be brief. It was the tone of post that just rubbed me the wrong way.

It was the implications that fictional creatures somehow carry as much if not more weight than actual REAL living people who exist.

It was also the idea of racist = irredeemably evil. Which is not the case ESPECIALLY in the US where the first defense against the accusation of racism is "well theyre not all saints" or "Just deal with it" or "You should have a thicker skin". I'm dealing with an issue RIGHT NOW with the seeming acceptance of young white people dressing up in blackface and seeing NOTHING wrong with it at all.

To the second part:
I grew up in areas in NYC where if you were black and male and if you read and knew how to construct and speak in complete sentences you were considered "Acting white". Oddly enough reading Comic Books was OKAY. But anything out of the ordinary, like say the D&D Red Box or the Advanced D&D players handbook was considered a "white people's game" mainly because at the time (and still) there arent a whole lot of black people who are into RPG's.

And historically having been part of several RPG forum communities? I can't say that I blame them.

I see a company like Paizo purposefully looking to be more inclusive and then getting derided for it? Kinda makes me think that racial inclusion at least is a lost cause. Gender and Sexism issues are good to go I think because almost everyone at least knows someone else of the opposite gender. And these days alot of people know of at least one person who is LGBT. But I'm pretty certain that in terms of race there's not a lot of mixing. Especially of black males. So there's that.

Back to the topic at hand...

 

[Bedrockgames]

ShinHakkaider, thanks for the response. I just wanted to make sure I understood your position, and that makes a lot of sense. I've seen this debate here and on other forums, and while I think it is fair to for people to argue whether all fantasy RPG settings need to be inclusive, I don't think people should be giving Paizo grief for trying to be more inclusive.

 

[ShinHakkaider]

ShinHakkaider, thanks for the response. I just wanted to make sure I understood your position, and that makes a lot of sense. I've seen this debate here and on other forums, and while I think it is fair to for people to argue whether all fantasy RPG settings need to be inclusive, I don't think people should be giving Paizo grief for trying to be more inclusive.

No Problem BedrockGames.

And just to clarify my stance on inclusivity in RPG's? My favorite RPG genres are Supers and FRPG's.

Supers for fairly obvious reasons I guess. Your race and sex really shouldnt matter that much if you can take over someone's mind or benchpress a tank. (but superhero comics have their own issues around sexism and racism. But theyre handling it a hell of a lot better than the RPG community seems to be doing)

And as for FRPG's? I've NEVER seen them as medieval simulators. EVER. Are there peices of medieval touches in these games? ABSOLUTELY. You see it in the dress and in the armor and in a bunch of other things. But Greyhawk, FR, Planescape and Golarion ARE NOT medieval Europe.

The idea that people claim this and then get pissed off when anyone OTHER than a white/Euro d00d shows up in game just annoys the hell out of me. People who get annoyed with the idea of Asian monks in their D&D are people I just dont need around me. People who scratch their heads at a half-elf PC who's mother or father was black are people I dont need around me. People who go on and on about how Pirates in their D&D game are okay but NO GUNS in their D&D games are people I dont need around me.

Because IT IS FRPG that makes it inclusive. For someone who isnt white and wants to play a character who isnt white because it's NOT medieval Europe it allows people to do just that without worrying if it's historically accurate. You know why? BECAUSE IT'S NOT HISTORY!! LOL!!

 

[VelvetViolet]

Nowhere did I imply hypothetical reverse bigotry justifies bigotry. Discussing hypothetical histories were [insert race] colonized the world is just speculation. There is absolutely no line of logic where that justifies letting people get slaughtered in Sudan or using racial slurs. I meant to criticize the drow for being cartoonishly evil, and that this applies to all such fictional groups regardless of their race/gender. I wrote a topic about my dislike of always chaotic evil races elsewhere.

But back onto fictional racism, my point is that fictional characters in the D&D world are free to be racist against elves and orcs, but the moment they're racist against black/gay/women people or whoever, they're considered scumbags by the other people in the game world. It's a weird double standard that doesn't accurately reflect human psychology. I would like D&D books to address the topic of racism against fantasy races and real races alike and how to maturely handle it (and not through revenge fantasy).

Fantasy and scifi races were (and still are) meant to be stand-ins for humans of exotic extraction. Basically, they exist to recreate the original racist stereotypes like noble savage and exotic dancer without offending real people by saying that they're aliens/elves and that makes it okay. I don't believe it does.

I feel this reflects a very deep-seated psychological problem with people: inborn prejudice. Since racism is UnPC, writers and gamers decide to project their inherent xenophobia/xenophilia onto fictional constructs instead. But it's still (vicariously) racist and those writers/gamers would be racist against real people if they weren't trained to be accepting by society.

D&D is just conquistador/cowboy/crime/etc fantasy with the indians and chinese and poor people replaced with elves and orcs to look politically correct. But at its core it's still White Man's Manifest Destiny (or, if you live in an alternate universe where [insert race] people colonized the world, [insert race]'s Manifest Destiny).