D&D General The Art and the Artist: Discussing Problematic Issues in D&D

[payn]

And that's because that's how it's been weaponized.

It originally meant 'everyone brings something to create a stronger whole' and now it's used to say 'How dare you be black when you should be 'Merican! I'm still going to make it a point to treat you how I feel black people should be treated though.'.

Right, the dominant culture takes what it wants and rejects what it doesn't. The minority has no say in this process.

 

[Scribe]

yeah, if a book that an orc (again using this to avoid real world groups) reads makes some part of the orc population feel attacked, and some elves that have read that book use it as an excuse to persecutor the orcs?
How many Orcs need to feel bad for it to be significant? how many orcs need to be persecuted to be significant

I feel compelled to make clear.

Orcs and Elves are not real. This comparison sets a false condition as its initial premise, because Orcs cannot be offended, and Elves cannot use text to support their views of Orcs.

They are not real, and they are not representation of actual people.

 

[Lyxen]

Being a 50+ year old cis white male is not an offense (capitol or otherwise) to anyone, save perhaps a small handful of overeager and mostly very young want-to-be activists, who will likely learn with time and patience that the issue of privilege is far more nuanced than “old white cishet men bad.”

It was meant as a joke (but forgot the smiley), although it's true, and it's certainly something that my daughters spent a lot of time explaining to me.

If you wonder at the fervor with which some people engage with these sorts of discussions, it’s often because we’re exhausted with constantly having to fend off accusations such as these. As I said before, I think we would all do well to try to focus more on the content of each other’s arguments, rather than the (yes, often grating) ways they’re being made.

I'm fine with this, hard to do with missiles flying left and right.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Being a 50+ year old cis white male is not an offense (capitol or otherwise) to anyone, save perhaps a small handful of overeager and mostly very young want-to-be activists, who will likely learn with time and patience that the issue of privilege is far more nuanced than “old white cishet men bad.”

Very true. I swear I wish on Twitter I could have like, a flag on anyone's post if they're under, say, 25 (really though it's 23 and under that's the big issue), so if they're making some wild sweeping argument along those lines, I can think "Ahh sweet summer child", rather than having to work out if they're actually a maniac. Because occasionally it's some upper-middle-class loon who is like 45 and the next thing you see from them is (ironically enough) probably extremely wild transphobia or some kind of elaborate reasoning for why some far-right maniac (present-day or historical) is "good, actually".

 

[HammerMan]

Stop worrying about yourself and think about them.

if I wasn't worring about them I would have booked my honey moon a month ago.

Your melting pot challenge assumes you have some right to their culture, but in the past that is not something that has been reciprocated (not by you, but by culture in general).

I don't know about this but since the culture merged before i was born (and I am old) I don't understand what to do to do the right thing.

The numbers and percentages are immaterial, if you can adjust you behavior in a minor inconvenient way, the locals will appreciate it. If they dont meet you half way, thats on them. Just put your best foot forward and be genuine and understand that its a constant process of review and not an endgame.

I am trying to understand... and again when I was told to research it, and I did, I found as many people are saying they NEED tourism as say they NEED it to stop, and that the amount that don't like it is less than those that do like it.

So again... how do I act responsibly? Do I go with the majority? Do I go with what is best for me(especially since my fiancé doesn't give a rats but about what the locals want)? Do I go with the loudest? I normally try to let my heart be my guide... but in the last 5ish years I have repeatedly been called a bad person for doing what I think is right. SO now I am gun shy. Am I a bad person? Am I going to cause harm if I don't go to a state I have never been to but want to? Am I going to cause harm if I do go to a state I have never been to but want to? What do I do if the answer is YES to both do harm?

 

[HammerMan]

Right, the dominant culture takes what it wants and rejects what it doesn't. The minority has no say in this process.

I don't think that is much of a melting pot... a melting pot is when ALL (majority and Minority) merg there strengths.

 

[HammerMan]

I feel compelled to make clear.

Orcs and Elves are not real. This comparison sets a false condition as its initial premise, because Orcs cannot be offended, and Elves cannot use text to support their views of Orcs.

They are not real, and they are not representation of actual people.

except I need words that means (A group but not a group I want to single out) so like I said in the post... I used Orc and Elf as stand ins... it could have been X and Y

 

[MGibster]

While I agree with the spirit of #1, I'm not sure it's appropriate for every discussion, especially in the context of the Artist and their Art. For example, if we are discussing Gygax's comments on "nits and love," I don't know that it's appropriate to balance out a racist quotation with positive remarks. On the other hand, if we are analyzing what made original D&D different than 5e, that's an appropriate discussion to have both positive and negative critiques.

I don't think it's necessary to provide a positive critique every time you provide a negative one in order to maintain some sort of balance. But one of the bigger problems with online communication is that the negative discourse tends to attract a lot more attention. I would wager that the threads with the most activity on this site are the ones where negativity is heavily featured. And this particular phenomenon isn't limited to discussions about the past or even to EN World alone.

 

[HammerMan]

Very true. I swear I wish on Twitter I could have like, a flag on anyone's post if they're under, say, 25 (really though it's 23 and under that's the big issue), so if they're making some wild sweeping argument along those lines, I can think "Ahh sweet summer child", rather than having to work out if they're actually a maniac. Because occasionally it's some middle-class loon who is like 45 and the next thing you see from them is (ironically enough) probably extremely wild transphobia or some kind of elaborate reasoning for why some far-right maniac (present-day or historical) is "good, actually".

yeah and sometimes it's hard to tell hyperbole...

I am friends with people who have said "Death to_____" where I match _____ but I know they mean it as "we need to make thing mor even" not "I want you personally dead" but I also have been in the presence of someone who was attacked for being ____. SO if a staragner says "Death to blank" is it a threat or hyperbole?

 

[BookTenTiger]

Extending the idea of the Artist / Art split a little further...

It is very, very difficult to know the true intention of an artist.

It is also very, very difficult to know the true intention of an internet poster.

As much as possible, I try not to assume I know the intention unless they have made it explicitly clear.

Sometimes I will see posts that start with "So you think that..." or "To you, it's..." or "You're saying..."

These always make me cringe because a lot of intention is being assumed. I think it's a lot more useful to ask about the intention instead of assuming. I try to ask, "Are you saying..." or "Is your intention...", or I might say, "It seems to me like you're saying..."

And if their intention still seems suspect after that, I try to disengage!