D&D 5E Should the next edition of D&D promote more equality?

[TanithT]

Anyone who thinks mythological creatures don't belong in D&D Monster Manuals, so long as they're merely murderous and scary, rather than seductive and scary, are the very definition of puritanical and biased. Denying it seems to be wanting it both ways. You get to whitewash art from generating "bad thoughts" (highly subjective that a scary monster is better for a child's mind than a boobie), while at the same time, pretending like you support freedom of thought! It's perfect! I'd never imagined that puritans could also be hypocrits! //sarcasm

We had 2000 years of art and literature being censored, and some of us enjoy living in the free, modern world. This type of "cleansing" is happening and does happen. Calling it "marketing" is a cop out : until we see the data of D&D book sales being hurt by showing Harpies or Sirens or Succubi as being nude, it is pure conjecture to assume that it's increased market share.

And now you're just making stuff up. I was talking about harpies specifically in the category of their not being an inappropriate depiction of nudity. It is completely appropriate and not stupid to draw monsters without clothes on, because they don't wear clothes. The biology of having mammary glands on an avian or a reptile is pretty silly from a biological viewpoint, but as long as you are explaining their hybrid characteristics with magic, the science is a non issue. I certainly never suggested they should be removed or censored, only that their origin would have to be magical since it makes no evolutionary sense.

How you are reaching your conclusions or who you are even talking to, I have absolutely no idea.

 

[Morrus]

OK, now people are just being jerks and calling each other names. From this point on, zero tolerance on name calling - those doing so will be asked to leave the thread, and it will be solely because they can't refrain from calling people names. This includes calling people, prudes or hypocrites.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I don't think I've ever had trouble finding well-armored female minis, particularly for fighters.

Its better than it used to be- MUCH better. I'm old enough to have been able to buy Grenadier's female adventurers half-box when it was new. Some of those warrior women were...underdressed. Interestingly, at least one of the spellcasters in that set was clothed from head to toe in utterly non-revealing robes.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Anyone who thinks mythological creatures don't belong in D&D Monster Manuals, so long as they're merely murderous and scary, rather than seductive and scary, are the very definition of puritanical and biased.

Zero people in this thread have asserted this position.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Oh yes, forgot to point this out: boob-plate armor is potentially lethal...but is still probably better than a chainmail bikini.

 

[El Mahdi]

Not sure what the thesaurus commment is supposed to be about, you're wanting alternate words for 'coloured' or 'oriental'... why exactly?

...yes, Oriental is also offensive. So sayeth my wife. You don't get to pick what names she's offended by.

Essentially, both of those terms have been excised from polite discussion of race for...ohhhhh...40 years or so.

Danny, Nellisir, and others are right: they are both most definitely considered pejorative, and have been for rather significant periods of time. Likely as long or longer than you've been alive. Now whether that's common knowledge to everybody? Apparently that's not the case. And although I find it hard to believe that these two words, being two of the most common such words, aren't common knowledge among most everybody, I am willing to give one the benefit of the doubt. However, even if specific words aren't common knowledge, it is universal common knowledge that there do exist racial terms that are considered pejorative and offensive in polite company; and that reason in itself is enough that I think people can be held responsible for using such words. We're all internet proficient enough to be able to make a quick search to verify the appropriateness of such words. Ignorance does not relieve one of the responsibility to communicate clearly and appropriately.

As for the first word, I'd think any American who has even a passing knowledge of the 60's and 70's in America, and the historical events that happened during that time, most likely knows better. I find ignorance of that highly unlikely; but again, benefit of the doubt and all...

The second word is likely more obscure in that respect, but still quite common knowledge. However, in the interest of education:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oriental

The Orient means "the East". It is a traditional designation for anything that belongs to the Eastern world or the Near East or Far East, in relation to Europe. In English it is largely a metonym for, and coterminous with, the continent of Asia.

...

"Oriental" is considered to be an antiquated, pejorative, and disparaging term in the United States. John Kuo Wei Tchen, director of the Asian/Pacific/American Studies Program and Institute at New York University, said the basic critique of the term developed in the 1970s. Tchen has said, "With the anti-war movement in the ’60s and early ’70s, many Asian Americans identified the term ‘Oriental’ with a Western process of racializing Asians as forever opposite ‘others’".^[7] In a press release related to legislation aimed at removing the term "oriental" from official documents of the State of New York, Governor David Paterson said, "The word ‘oriental’ does not describe ethnic origin, background or even race; in fact, it has deep and demeaning historical roots".^[8]

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/oriental

Adjective

oriental (comparative more oriental, superlative most oriental)

1. eastern, of the east, of or relating to the Orient especially Asiatic, but most commonly to the Far East.

Note: this term is considered by some to be objectionable in American English.​

Is there actually any PC way of saying someone of a different race?

Yes, there most certainly is. All it takes is a little bit of effort to make sure one isn't being unintentionally offensive.

When in doubt, look it up.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Originally Posted by kingius
Is there actually any PC way of saying someone of a different race?

Many American people of my persuasion and my age + prefer "black", some younger prefer "African American" or just African.

Similarly, "Asian"- if you don't know someone's particular country of origin- is the go-to replacement for the outdated "oriental". (The "O-word" is reserved for objects in contemporary language.)

 

[El Mahdi]

Oh yes, forgot to point this out: boob-plate armor is potentially lethal...but is still probably better than a chainmail bikini.

Ooooh...Cool Article!

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Ooooh...Cool Article!

Be sure to read the commentary.

Besides the same kind of malarkey that is going on here, there are some responses that talk about RW knightly orders for women and the armor they wore, etc. Potential gold mine of info.

 

[Umbran]

Its better than it used to be- MUCH better. I'm old enough to have been able to buy Grenadier's female adventurers half-box when it was new. Some of those warrior women were...underdressed. Interestingly, at least one of the spellcasters in that set was clothed from head to toe in utterly non-revealing robes.

Interestingly, the TSR boxes sets of minis I remember (from 1983, I think) didn't have many female figures, but they were all appropriately clothed. The only one running around showing a lot of skin was a male barbarian*, IIRC.

*technically, "fighter with axe", as barbarians hadn't been invented yet.