D&D General Why a PETITION: Stop Hasbro's hurtful content is a Bad Idea

[LordEntrails]

Because the other thread (D&D General - PETITION: Stop Hasbro's hurtful content—no more Black orcs, Asian yellow orcs, or Native American red orcs—amend GAZ10 (+positive, A-game thread)) is a plus thread and should be kept positive and discussion of why the premise is bad/poor/unreasonable or otherwise not a good idea is not supposed to occur in a Plus thread, we now have this thread to discuss or object to all the things that we can't say in the other thread.

REMEMBER: this does not mean you can be a jerk, or attack other personally, or otherwise break the forums rules. But, it does mean you can discuss all the things here that you are not allowed to discuss in the other thread.

Read the key posts in that other thread such as:

• My own initial reply: D&D General - PETITION: Stop Hasbro's hurtful content—no more Black orcs, Asian yellow orcs, or Native American red orcs—amend GAZ10 (+positive, A-game thread)
• @MGibster: D&D General - PETITION: Stop Hasbro's hurtful content—no more Black orcs, Asian yellow orcs, or Native American red orcs—amend GAZ10 (+positive, A-game thread)
• @Hussar : D&D General - PETITION: Stop Hasbro's hurtful content—no more Black orcs, Asian yellow orcs, or Native American red orcs—amend GAZ10 (+positive, A-game thread)
• The excellent post by @The Sigil : D&D General - PETITION: Stop Hasbro's hurtful content—no more Black orcs, Asian yellow orcs, or Native American red orcs—amend GAZ10 (+positive, A-game thread)
• Why this discussion can not be kept in the original thread: D&D General - PETITION: Stop Hasbro's hurtful content—no more Black orcs, Asian yellow orcs, or Native American red orcs—amend GAZ10 (+positive, A-game thread)
• @Steampunkette view: D&D General - PETITION: Stop Hasbro's hurtful content—no more Black orcs, Asian yellow orcs, or Native American red orcs—amend GAZ10 (+positive, A-game thread)
• @Dausuul D&D General - PETITION: Stop Hasbro's hurtful content—no more Black orcs, Asian yellow orcs, or Native American red orcs—amend GAZ10 (+positive, A-game thread)
• @CleverNickName D&D General - PETITION: Stop Hasbro's hurtful content—no more Black orcs, Asian yellow orcs, or Native American red orcs—amend GAZ10 (+positive, A-game thread)

And more.

 

[Mistwell]

I am moving this reply I had from the other thread here, so I don't threadcrap that other thread:

Whenever feels right or good enough.

Like I get the implication of this slippery slope argument is essentially leading to Demolition Man where saying a curse word gets you an automatic fine and having sex is illegal.

But it's actually super easy to not slide down the slippery slope into ridiculous extremes. Just ask Garfunkel and Oates.

I mean, it's easy to not slide down until it isn't. Hyperbolic example to follow, which I apologize for and I am not trying to say or imply this topic can lead to actual horrible harms. See less hyperbolic example at end for more realistic potential harms.

Mao never intended for the Struggle Sessions to be the reality of China. They started from a premise of "whatever feels right or good enough...it won't get out of control right?" and it got out of control way faster than anyone expected and resulted in Mao sending the youth to farms to get them away from cities so they didn't kill every perceived intellectual in the nation. Many who supported those new ethics ended up on the wrong end of those Sessions. Similar events happened in Cambodia. I mean, name a horrible event in history and there are decent odds it started with your premise that "whatever feels right or good enough....it won't get out of control right?"

Now of course I don't think "expunge the history of D&D racism" will lead to Maoist struggle sessions and mass death. But I am saying I think it's a falsehood to claim it's "actually super easy to not slide down the slippery slope into ridiculous extremes." History is full of people saying that only to see events rapidly escalate out of control far faster than anyone expected. Unintended consequences is a thing us humans should be wary of more often than we are. I don't know why we constantly make the error to trust to our fellow humans to not take things too far, but we keep making that mistake.

And, because I am uncomfortable comparing these mild issues to horrible historical examples (because it doesn't warrant that hyperbole - even though it makes the point) I will bring it back closer to home with RPG issues, and one raised already in this thread. The use of "A-Game Threads" were never intended to become what they've become at some places around the net (and I don't mean to pick on any particular other forum - this is more a general problem found at more than one place around the Internet). Those who use them had good intentions, they were doing what they felt was right and good.

It doesn't take long however for that good intended tool to up the quality of posts about sensitive topics to rapidly devolve into the weaponization of conversations where such a tool is used, far more often than not (which is why I much prefer the policies here for these kinds of topics). With those types of thread labels, people frequently angle to get their perceived foes tricked into a perma ban, moderators often are lured into excessive penalties to try and maintain a sense of equality and equity if someone else was ever banned for something which could be compared to that event. Meanwhile a meaningful portion of the poster population sees all this happen and become afraid they might make a misstep with a comment which might accidentally be perceived as wrong-think and get them banned.

This results in dissent becoming nearly nonexistent in an atmosphere of fear as everyone bends over backwards to state just how much they agree with the premise of the thread, and often tries to one-up each other in their agreement and take that premise one step further, and then a step further than that, until the very kind of escalation we're discussing can easily happen because all the carrot and stick social pressure is on escalating things.

All of which is particularly harmful if the topic was one intended to inform a future policy decision because dissent is often warranted to help avoid unintended consequences from policy decisions about those topics. Like this one - a thread about the policy decision to get WOTC to re-write or ban 30 year old books for reasons we all agree are good intended.

 

[The Glen]

The black orcs aren't even based on a real world culture. Thar dresses them in a uniform based on the Thyatian empire. Their name comes from the color of their clothing.

 

[Irlo]

Like this one - a thread about the policy decision to get WOTC to re-write or ban 30 year old books for reasons we all agree are good intended.

The petition in question does not ask WotC to rewrite or ban anything.

 

[Alzrius]

I think there's also a discussion to be had about the differences between pastiche and mockery. I perceive a general erosion of the recognition between the two, particularly with regard to people asserting that personal opinions about when the former becomes the latter should be treated as objective criteria, and that those who transgress said criteria have committed a moral failing and should be censured for doing so.

While I recognize that the concept of jester's privilege can be used as a fig leaf for bad actors, I don't find that to be a compelling reason for discarding the concept altogether.

 

[Steampunkette]

"To avoid threadcrapping I will create a separate thread entirely devoted to posting negatively about the positive thread." is an interesting direction to go.

And @Mistwell while I understand the point you're trying to make, using hyper-authoritarian and fascistic genocides to show "Less Extreme Examples" is just terrible. And I won't get into the political explanation of -why- it's a terrible argument for obvious reasons.

 

[Mistwell]

The petition in question does not ask WotC to rewrite or ban anything.

It's asking for a re-write of the disclaimer, with a cultural sensitivity report to be amended and bundled with it. In the other thread, there was further escalation of the issue with some calling for it just to be pulled.

 

[Mistwell]

"To avoid threadcrapping I will create a separate thread entirely devoted to posting negatively about the positive thread." is an interesting direction to go.

I didn't create the separate thread. I just thought this was a more appropriate place for my reply to you. But to be fair, the moderators suggested people create a second thread if they wanted to disagree with the premise of the first thread. Kinda hard to blame people for taking the moderators suggestion to do just that.

And @Mistwell while I understand the point you're trying to make, using hyper-authoritarian and fascistic genocides to show "Less Extreme Examples" is just terrible. And I won't get into the political explanation of -why- it's a terrible argument for obvious reasons.

I don't think I mentioned any fascist genocides (at least I've never heard the Chinese and Cambodian revolutions called fascist ones), and I made it VERY clear I was not making that actual comparison (repeatedly) and then made an RPG based comparison. There's no way you could have missed it - I made it clear at the top of the response, and then the bottom of the response, and said why I was initially using hyperbole to demonstrate the point. I don't think it was terrible at all, and it didn't require you to defend Mao or the Khmer Rogue to disagree with my premise if you chose to disagree.

 

[Steampunkette]

Your basic premise is "It's easy to not slide down until it isn't" and then you posted a couple of hyperbolic examples which set the tone of your post and provide a basis for everything else that follows. Even when you acknowledge they're hyperbolic you state that they illustrate the point.

And no. People haven't "Fallen" down slippery slopes throughout history. People walked perfectly flat paths toward their goals. Stated or not, history is full of people seeking to do great and terrible harm to those they disagree with. Again, I don't want to get into politics, but read up on Nationalism and Authoritarianism as inciting causes of both the issues you brought up. There was no slippery slope involved.

You then chose to go into the more "Reasonable" angle of people intentionally baiting posters and manipulating moderators to stifle dissent. Which is just such a fantastically insulting direction to go with it, intentional or not. The immediate assumption that even the EXISTENCE of (+) threads is a tool that will result in people trying to get people banned for wrongthink. Like. C'mon, Man.

I will never understand why people think taking any kind of progressive approach to social issues in gaming (or literally any other aspect of life) is going to instantly leap to the end-game of "No one is allowed to say anything!" in a perfect "Slippery Slope" every freaking time.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I will never understand why people think taking any kind of progressive approach to social issues in gaming (or literally any other aspect of life) is going to instantly leap to the end-game of "No one is allowed to say anything!" in a perfect "Slippery Slope" every freaking time.

I got banned from an otherwise-positive, definitely progressive forum specifically because I used the (de-contextualized) actual lived experience example of a friend of mine who is trans to explain why someone was being callous or wrong. I was given no opportunity to explain, despite an incredibly unfair and overly-critical reading of my words being used, and in fact by the rules of the forum in question, even attempting to explain myself would have resulted in even harsher penalties, possibly a permaban.

That was when I decided not to engage with topics like this anymore. When being an ally and actually using lived experiences as examples (without names or identifying info, of course) gets you slapped with penalties, something has gone seriously wrong. Being harshly punished once was enough.