The problem with Evil races is not what you think

[Dannyalcatraz]

And who is being "constantly dismissive" of "western literature"? Who has dismissed any literature in this thread? Do regard it as "dismissive" of JRRT, or HPL, or REH, to do the sort of textual analysis and exegesis that (eg) @Doug McCrae has done in this thread? From where I'm standing that just looks like pretty standard literary criticism. Where is this alleged "dismissal" to be found?

Gotta say, HPL is a big, fat racist who would probably be utterly appalled that I (a multiracial black dude) have read his complete works*, and the stuff other writers based on it. But the fact of his well-documented racism doesn’t diminish the massive contribution he made to what we call genre fiction today.

So yeah, IDing racist tropes is totally fair game, IMHO. The older I get, the more I find myself divorcing creators from their works because, let’s face it, humans are pretty shoddy critters.

But accepting their human nature doesn’t excuse their inclusion of their inner demons in their work.

* well, if I’m honest, he’d be appalled I could read at all.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Ok, let me explain this to you. I get all of that. I’m well aware of all and I deplore that, and stand against that and stand with those who suffer from this Don’t for a second think otherwise. This is not the same as fictional monsters in D&D. So spare me the attempt to reach for moral superiority. This is my problem as the debate is being framed as a moralistic crusade, any one who is opposed to this opinion must be up holders of the social status quo. I stand against this argument because I believe in social progress and equality, I believe the constant linking of orcs as racist is problematic, the constant dismissiveness of western literature because of historical reasons that when explained reach dangerously close to the noble savage trope and is also a very US/Eurocentric POV . This also has implications for how terms and names are weaponised in modern politics in a manner that concerns me, but for obvious reasons, this is not the place to detail that.

You might disagree with my viewpoint on execution, that’s fine, but that’s not the same as saying that our goals are not the same.

As I've said, I'm not really in a position to, nor feel inclined to, throw any shots at anyone here, really. I'm just saying that, yes it may well be, probably is, true that orcs in D&D were never intended as any sort of racial stereotype. Yet, they do evoke one, and that alone is pretty problematic. I think you mentioned the Vistani. I know nothing of their 5e lore. 4e kind of deconstructed the whole 'cosmic Gypsie' thing, which I know some people were fairly approving of. OTOH the old school ones were very definitely a blatant stereotype, right? I mean, not all of it was negative, but even if it is just a really inaccurate caricature, it is still kind of a bummer, right? Now, clearly there is the difference from orcs and hobgoblins and such that these were based on one very specific group of real-world people. I think though it is a matter of degree more than of kind. If you are not happy with one, you probably shouldn't be totally OK with the other. That's my opinion anyway.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Gotta say, HPL is a big, fat racist who would probably be utterly appalled that I (a multiracial black dude) have read his complete works*, and the stuff other writers based on it. But the fact of his well-documented racism doesn’t diminish the massive contribution he made to what we call genre fiction today.

So yeah, IDing racist tropes is totally fair game, IMHO. The older I get, the more I find myself divorcing creators from their works because, let’s face it, humans are pretty shoddy critters.

But accepting their human nature doesn’t excuse their inclusion of their inner demons in their work.

* well, if I’m honest, he’d be appalled I could read at all.

Yeah, I've had to wonder if my handle is really all that cool... I mean, as with every other aspect of HPL and race, "Abdul Alhazred" is a completely idiotic and not at all realistic Arabic name, just stupid gibberish really. Made up by someone who apparently didn't know enough about, or couldn't be bothered to, learn 2 words of correct Arabic (Abdul means pretty literally "Servant of God", 'Alhazred' is just gibberish). Typical Lovecraft unfortunately. As you say, we are all rather flawed!

 

[Doug McCrae]

CONTENT WARNING: VERY RACIST CLAIMS, IN QUOTATION

This post is about the correspondence between the alignment and mental abilities of the D&D "savage" humanoids and ideas about racial moral and intellectual inferiority. It uses the list on page 7 of the D&D 5e Monster Manual (2014) — bugbears, gnolls, goblins, hobgoblins, kobolds, lizardfolk, and orcs. In the AD&D 1e Dungeon Masters Guide (1979) (pg 40) all of these races (along with cavemen, which includes tribesmen) have witch doctors. AD&D 1e and D&D 5e will be considered.

John Arthur, Race, Equality, and the Burdens of History (2007) describes the five major forms that "beliefs in racial inferiority can take." This post uses the first two: "Another race may be thought to be (1) intellectually inferior (naturally less able to understand complex problems or less artistically creative); (2) morally inferior (inherently less virtuous; less trustworthy, hard working, loyal)."

AD&D 1e

	Alignment	Intelligence
Bugbear	Chaotic evil	Low to Average (low)
Gnoll	Chaotic evil	Low-average
Goblin	Lawful evil	Average (low)
Hobgoblin	Lawful evil	Average
Kobold	Lawful evil	Average (low)
Lizard Man	Neutral	Low (average)
Orc	Lawful evil	Average (low)

Average means human intelligence: 8-10. Low is 5-7. (1e MM pg 6)

All but one of the "savage" humanoids are evil, and all but one are below average intelligence.

AD&D 1e Monster Manual (1977): "Gnolls… dislike work" "All goblins are slave takers and fond of torture." "Kobolds hate most other life, delighting in killing and torture." "Orcs are cruel and hate living things… They take slaves for work, food, and entertainment (torture, etc.) but not elves whom they kill immediately."

D&D 5e

To measure both the ability to "understand complex problems" and artistic creativity all three mental ability scores are used – Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma.

	Alignment	INT	WIS	CHA	Total*
Bugbear	Chaotic evil	8	11	9	-2
Gnoll	Chaotic evil	6	10	7	-7
Goblin	Neutral evil	10	8	8	-4
Hobgoblin	Lawful evil	10	10	9	-1
Kobold	Lawful evil	8	7	8	-7
Lizardfolk	Neutral	7	12	7	-4
Orc	Chaotic evil	7	11	10	-2

*This column represents the total difference of INT + WIS + CHA from an assumed baseline of three 10s (30) — the ability scores of the Commoner NPC in Appendix B (5e MM pg 345).

All but one of the "savage" humanoids are evil, and all are intellectually inferior to the baseline when all three mental ability scores are taken into account. This post from an older thread argues that lizardfolk are misaligned as neutral and ought to be evil.

Several of the "savage" humanoids — bugbears, lizardfolk, and orcs — have Wisdom scores above the baseline. D&D 5e PHB: "Wisdom reflects how attuned you are to the world around you and represents perceptiveness and intuition." (pg 178) This is not inconsistent with racist ideas. Arthur de Gobineau, The Inequality of Human Races (1853): "[Black people's] senses, especially taste and smell, are developed to an extent unknown to the other two races."

D&D 5e MM: "Bugbears are born for battle and mayhem". They have a "love of carnage" "Even when paid, bugbears are at best unreliable allies." "No goodness or compassion resides in the heart of a gnoll. Like a demon, it lacks anything resembling a conscience, and can't be taught or coerced to put aside its destructive tendencies." "Goblins are… black-hearted, selfish… lazy and undisciplined… motivated by greed and malice." Orcs have a "lust for slaughter."

Morally and Intellectually Inferior

Josiah C Nott, Two Lectures on the Connection Between the Biblical and Physical History of Man (1849):

The capacity of the crania of the Mongol, Indian, and Negro, and all dark-skinned races, is smaller than that of the pure white man. And this deficiency seems to be especially well-marked in those parts of the brain which have been assigned to the moral and intellectual faculties.​

Gobineau: "The negroid variety['s]… mental faculties are dull or even non-existent." Alfred R Wallace, The Origin of Human Races and the Antiquity of Man (1864): "The intellectual and moral… qualities of the European are superior." William Benjamin Smith, The Color Line (1905): "When we come to the profounder mental, moral, and social differences, we can find no other terms than greater and less to describe the relative endowments of the widely sundered races."

According to Robert Wald Sussman, The Myth of Race (2014), the Pioneer Fund is "the major source of funding" for scientific racism today. Michael Levin, emeritus professor of philosophy at the City University of New York, has been one of its recipients. "Blacks just aren't as moral as whites, genetically, Levin argues. He holds that blacks have two unalterable characteristics: less intelligence and greater proneness to violence."

Like a Demon

Kay Wright Lewis, A Curse Upon the Nation (2017): "Native people were "demons" and "beasts in the shape of men," and Europeans often refused to recognize them as fully human."

Born for Battle and Mayhem, Love of Carnage, Lust for Slaughter, Destructive Tendencies

Samuel George Morton, An Inquiry Into the Distinctive Characteristics of the Aboriginal Race of America (1844):

The [Indian's] love of war is so general, so characteristic, that it scarcely calls for a comment or an illustration. One nation is in almost perpetual hostility with another, tribe against tribe, man against man; and with this ruling passion are linked a merciless revenge and an unsparing destructiveness.​

Dislike Work, Lazy, Selfish, Greedy

Gobineau: "The yellow man has little physical energy, and is inclined to apathy… His whole desire is to live in the easiest and most comfortable way possible." Charles Wentworth Dilke, Greater Britain (1868):

The apathy of the Cinghalese [Sri Lankans] is not surprising; but they are not merely lazy, they are a cowardly, effeminate, and revengeful race. They sleep and smoke, and smoke and sleep, rousing themselves only once in the day to snatch a bowl of curry and rice, or to fleece a white man.​

 

[Doug McCrae]

CONTENT WARNING: GENOCIDAL RACISM, IN QUOTATION

This post examines whether some of the D&D 5e "savage" humanoids — bugbears, gnolls, kobolds, lizardfolk, and orcs — cannot be considered racist because they are more like animals than people.

In the D&D 5e Monster Manual (2014) artwork the bugbear's snout resembles a bear's. "Hyenas were transformed into the first gnolls." Gnoll heads look like those of hyenas. Gnolls and kobolds have digitigrade legs, like dogs or hyenas. Kobolds are "egg-laying" and have tails. Kobolds and lizardfolk are "reptilian" and have heads resembling those of lizards. Orcs have "low foreheads, and piggish faces with prominent lower canines that resemble tusks."

The category of "humanoid" in D&D 5e includes the races "most suitable as player characters" — humans, dwarves, elves, and halflings — as well as the "savage" humanoids — bugbears, gnolls, goblins, hobgoblins, kobolds, lizardfolk, and orcs. All humanoids have "language and culture, few if any innate magical abilities (though most humanoids can learn spellcasting), and a bipedal form."

In addition, the "savage" humanoids that could be considered beast-like all use tools, such as weapons. Most wear clothing or armour, lizardfolk being the only exception. Most have religion. Most build or modify structures, even gnolls. All are social and live in communities. They have alignments rather than being unaligned as animals are in D&D 5e.

"Gnolls rarely build permanent structures or craft anything of lasting value." But this demonstrates that they occasionally do so. Gnoll leaders adorn their bodies with art, including "demonic sigils." This suggests they have a form of writing. Gnolls worship Yeenoghu. Kobolds possess "a cleverness for trap making and tunneling" and worship Kurtulmak. Lizardfolk live in "hut villages." They dance, tell stories, and "craft tools and ornamental jewelry." They have shamans and worship Semuanya. Orcs can interbreed with other humanoids, including humans, producing children. Gruumsh and Luthic are the orcish gods.

It can be concluded therefore that the beast-like features of bugbears, gnolls, kobolds, lizardfolk, and orcs are superficial. They are, in all important respects, people.

The Racist Use of the Idea That People Are Like Animals

Assigning the properties of animals to real world peoples has been, and continues to be, a significant element of racism as the following examples demonstrate. Robert Miles and Malcolm Brown, Racism 2e (2003):

The African was attributed with a bestial character and there was much speculation about the origin and consequences of the supposed physical similarities between Africans and apes, both of which were 'discovered' by Europeans at the same time in a common geographical location. Some Europeans suggested that sexual intercourse occurred between Africans and apes… the African was less civilised, a barbarian, by virtue of supposedly looking more like a beast and behaving in ways that approximated to the behaviour of beasts.​

Robert Sussman, The Myth of Race (2014): "Charles White (1728– 1813), an English physician… proposed that black Africans... were an intermediate form between true humans (white Europeans) and apes, with other races intermediate between these extremes." Orcish "low foreheads" and, in the artwork, disproportionately long arms correspond to this idea that black people resemble apes. Nathan G Alexander, Race in a Godless World (2019):

Charles Bradlaugh… used the French physician Jules Cloquet's facial angle, measuring "an European, a Negro, an infant chimpanzee, a full grown chimpanzee, a male gorilla, and a Newfoundland dog" to show that the facial angle was highest for a European and gradually became lower as one moved down to the lower races and non-human animals... The arm of "the Negro" was longer than that of the European and was nearly indistinguishable, proportionally, from a gorilla's.​

Ben Kiernan, Blood and Soil (2007):

The Sydney Herald claimed in 1838 that Aborigines had "bestowed no labour upon the land—their ownership, their right, was nothing more than that of the Emu or the Kangaroo."​

​

Governor George Gipps... had 12 men tried for the Myall Creek massacre; they were acquitted. A juror called blacks "a set of monkies and the earlier they are exterminated from the face of the earth the better."​

David Roediger, The Wages of Whiteness (1991): "It was an open question in the mind of nineteenth-century white Protestants whether these Celtic immigrants belonged to the white race. They were vilified, segregated, and castigated as savage, simian, and bestial." Sussman:

Ernst Haeckel (1834– 1919) was one of the most respected scientists of his time… He called for the halting of immigration of the "filthy" Jews and, claiming that since inferior races are "nearer to the mammals (apes and dogs) than to civilized Europeans, we must, therefore, assign a totally different value to their lives."​

Karl Hannemann in Bulletin of the German Association of National Socialist Physicians (June 1938): "Rats, bedbugs and fleas are also natural occurrences in the same way as Jews and Gypsies. All existence is a struggle; we must therefore gradually biologically eradicate all these vermin." Katie Hopkins in The Sun (17th April 2015): "Make no mistake, these migrants are like cockroaches."

EDIT: This section's argument isn't that all animal people are racist. It's that the use of animal features applied to real world people by racists demonstrates that animal people in fiction can be racist.

 

[aramis erak]

Doug, I honestly think you're going a bit overboard here.

THe use of animal-men in RPGs is (excepting the Orc, Troll, and Ent, both taken from Tolkien's casually racist view) Is seldom to disguise hate; it's to draw a culture that would be offensive if any existing phenotype were assigned to it.

 

[Esau Cairn]

It is personal (an attack, to be clear), you know it is, and the title is not antagonistic. Stop the passive aggressiveness.

Appeal to Authority is a fallacy. And I have a Master's degree. So what?

No I do not, and I never said that. You are wrong.

No I do not, and I never said that. Again you are wrong.

This is wordsmithing

This shows me that you did not read what I wrote. The problem is people making such vile interpretations. Games are unreal. People who want to assert such interpretations are the problem, and should be shunned. If you are unable to separate the unreal game from your feelings among players of good faith, then that is your problem, not the game's problem. But as I said, lots of players cannot be taken at good faith, and their toxic influence confuses player feelings and game objectives. This is a very real problem, which is why toxic players needs to be ejected. Playing in a setting with ethical problems is fine as long as the players understand that the setting is problematic and act accordingly. Now you not wanting to play in such a setting is your choice and is fine, but without any conflict what are you fighting? Several commentators have suggested undead or other clearly Evil monsters. That's also fine, but it's boring. The greatest monsters are evil humans. If you are uncomfortable with the reality of humans in a completely unreal setting, then I don't know what to say. As I said, it's a matter of trust. If you can't trust your group to understand the unrealness of the game (i.e. they are getting off on racism, sexism, etc.), the you need a different group. Based upon your final comment, you have the right group!

I did not do this. Race = species, and most RPG players know this. Changing the terminology is fine with me, but so is not changing it, as I am fine with abstract definitions.

Agreed, which I addressed and rejected. Again, did you read what I wrote?

Which was my point!

You proved my point, if in no other manner, than personally attacking me and insisting I was wrong (and being passive aggressive) when all objective evidence would show that is not the case. But you're free to believe in--and to rationalize--all your prejudices.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Doug, I honestly think you're going a bit overboard here.

THe use of animal-men in RPGs is (excepting the Orc, Troll, and Ent, both taken from Tolkien's casually racist view) Is seldom to disguise hate; it's to draw a culture that would be offensive if any existing phenotype were assigned to it.

Well, like any other tool, it’s one that could be misused. If you’re using an animorphic species as a stand in for a RW race that has been described with that species’ characteristics, odds are good you’re not playing nice.

But if your racial/cultural stand-ins are removed from animalistic stereotypes, then you’re probably safe. For instance, if your campaign’s Arabic analogues were based on brightly colored parrots- including their speech patterns and other mannerisms, it would be hard to say you were using racist dog whistles.

(And I’m pretty sure when I used Minotaurs for a Plains Indian culture, I wasn’t being racist.)

 

[pemerton]

My view, and I think this is similar to @Doug McCrae's view, is that what is at issue is tropes and related ideas.

Consider Lizardmen/Lizardfolk: they are (literally) presented as resembling certain animals; they are also presented as culturally closely resembling a stereotyped conception of "native" peoples: they live in "huts", they use "primitive" tools and weapons, they practice exo-cannibalism, etc.

One school of thought has it: we use Lizardfolk so we can enjoy those pulp tropes but not associate them with any actual human peoples.

Another school of thought, which I personally am closer to, has it: using Lizardfolk keeps alive these tropes which have no cogency or currency except as byproducts of the racist ideologies connected to European colonialism particularly in Africa and Asia. It's the tropes themselves that carry this baggage and hence keep the racist ideas alive.

 

[Doug McCrae]

The charge of cannibalism, in some form, might be perennial -- it was levelled at early Christians, at Jews in medieval Europe, and against those believed to be witches in the early modern period. But the form it appears in in D&D -- Edgar Rice Burroughs-style pulp cannibalism (or exo-cannibalism) -- derives, I think, from accusations made about non-white colonised peoples going back to Columbus. When I was a kid in the 70s and 80s, the missionary-in-the-cannibal's-pot image was common in cartoons.

Ideas about racial, biological, inherited, unchangeable traits -- such as the way orcs and half-orcs in 5e can never be free of evil no matter how hard they try -- are also modern I think.

Even if an orc chooses a good alignment, it struggles against its innate tendencies for its entire life. (Even half-orcs feel the lingering pull of the orc god's influence.) (PHB)​

​

No matter how domesticated an orc might seem, its blood lust flows just beneath the surface. With its instinctive love of battle and its desire to prove its strength, an orc trying to live within the confines of civilization is faced with a difficult task. (Volo's Guide to Monsters)​