D&D 5E WOTC Possibly Removing "Druids" for Religious/Cultural Sensitivity Reasons

[Dannyalcatraz]

Mod Note:

Let’s not go further down the road of RW wars, etc.

 

[Mirtek]

Fighting-Man!

Fighting-Person!

Or better: Conflict-solving-Person! I mean who says that they have to fight all the time?

 

[Tony Vargas]

"I use my action to de-escalate the conflict"

 

[Epic Meepo]

Shaman is very much a problem. The word shaman is currently used to describe religious practitioners all over the world . . . and that's the problem. It takes a diversity of religious practices and subsumes them under one word, one concept.

I ask because I'm genuinely curious about the debate over the word shaman: Is calling religious practitioners all over the world "shamans" more or less problematic than calling religious practitioners all over the world "priests"? Is it the existence of an umbrella term that people find objectionable? The choice of one particular religious title over another? Something else?

A concept that social scientists increasingly realize creates false stereotypes. The word comes from Siberian indigenous peoples, whose concept has been appropriated in a very colonial manner by anthropologists, and then spread to fantasy literature and western New Age practices.

Is "shaman" the problematic term, or is "shamanism" the problem? It was my understanding that "shaman" is just a local religious title being expanded to apply to a broader category (a la "priest"), whereas "shamanism" is a completely invented colonialism that stereotypes the religions of indigenous peoples by making them appear overly simplistic.

An unrelated question: Is there a consensus among linguists over the etymology of the word "shaman"? It's fairly well attested that the English word "shaman" ultimately comes from the word "samān" in either Evenki or a related Tungusic language. But do we know the etymology of the Tungusic word "samān"? An historian named Mircea Eliade speculated that "samān" could be a loanword derived from the Pali word "samaṇa," which was introduced to the Tungusic peoples via Bhuddist monks prior to the 1600's AD. If that proposed etymology is correct, then "shaman" is ultimately derived from Sanskrit, not the language of any indigenous people of northern Asia.

 

[Dire Bare]

We use the word priest to describe a Shinto practitioner. We use the word cleric to describe a Muslim leader. We use the word monk to describe a Buddhist adherent. All those words have origin in the English language and Christian faith, but it's the closest English word we have to describe the concept to someone. Shaman had similar utility as a way to describe a large amount of faiths that shared similar traits. It's not perfect, but neither is Shinto priests, Muslim clerics and Buddhist monks.

"We" . . . do, "we" as in English-speaking westerners, yes. Do Shinto practitioners in Japan use the term "priest"? When westerners use it, does your average Shinto practitioner get upset or irritated? Do Muslim leaders use the term "cleric"? Do they get irritated when "we" do? I honestly don't know the answers to those questions, but your examples are far from simplistic as you would propose.

Aaaanndddd . . . those are western terms used by westerners. "Shaman" is not a western term, it is an indigenous Siberian term. Kindof a big difference. Westerner's appropriation of the term happened in the 1600s, centuries ago, and certainly has become widely used in fantasy, literature, and mystical circles in Western culture. Are those indigenous Siberians still a distinct cultural group? Are they upset how the term "shaman" has been appropriated? Again, don't know. But I do know that many diverse religious practitioners who are labeled by outsiders as "shamans" don't appreciate the term. Our use of the word goes back centuries, but it is still a problematic word. I'm happy to remove it from my gaming, and I'm happy for publishers who make that decision.

 

[Epic Meepo]

"Shaman" is not a western term, it is an indigenous Siberian term. Kindof a big difference. Westerner's appropriation of the term happened in the 1600s, centuries ago, and certainly has become widely used in fantasy, literature, and mystical circles in Western culture.

The English language word "shaman" is certainly derived from a word used in Siberia, but as far as I can tell, that word is "samān," not "shaman," and it might or might not be indigenous to the area. It could also be a loanword from Pali, as spoken by early Bhuddist missionaries in Central Asia.

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

I guess the next step will be (D&D) gods to be replaced with "deities".

Sorry, I have suffered a lot of toxic people, and when somebody gets used to this, then this becomes "insensitive" in the sense he can't understand the reason because his words or actions could cause some damage to others. Or, for example, it is like somebody from a society who doesn't respect the "personal space" then when she travels to other country with different costumes, she doesn't notice the other people feel unconfortable when she is too close to their personal space.

I can try to understand the reasons because something could be potentially offensive, but my fear is we could be creating new limits and losing the good sense, until reaching too ridiculous levels.

We have said "dwarves" for decades. Are we going to replace these with other name in the future?

This makes me to remember in the news telling old episodes of "Sesame Street", a show for pre-school children, couldn't be allowed today because the censorship criteria is very different.

Is offensive an evil orc wearing a turbant?, and a evil vampire wearing a morrion (the helm used by Spanish conquerors)?

 

[Tony Vargas]

TBF, English is syncretic AF - like, if English had to give back every word it ever borrowed, it'd be left with, well, what the F in "syncretic AF" stood for.

 

[MGibster]

TBF, English is syncretic AF - like, if English had to give back every word it ever borrowed, it'd be left with, well, what the F in "syncretic AF" stood for.

We don't just borrow words, we chase other languages into dark alleys, beat them into a stupor, and rifle through their pockets for new words.

 

[Remathilis]

"We" . . . do, "we" as in English-speaking westerners, yes. Do Shinto practitioners in Japan use the term "priest"? When westerners use it, does your average Shinto practitioner get upset or irritated? Do Muslim leaders use the term "cleric"? Do they get irritated when "we" do? I honestly don't know the answers to those questions, but your examples are far from simplistic as you would propose.

Aaaanndddd . . . those are western terms used by westerners. "Shaman" is not a western term, it is an indigenous Siberian term. Kindof a big difference. Westerner's appropriation of the term happened in the 1600s, centuries ago, and certainly has become widely used in fantasy, literature, and mystical circles in Western culture. Are those indigenous Siberians still a distinct cultural group? Are they upset how the term "shaman" has been appropriated? Again, don't know. But I do know that many diverse religious practitioners who are labeled by outsiders as "shamans" don't appreciate the term. Our use of the word goes back centuries, but it is still a problematic word. I'm happy to remove it from my gaming, and I'm happy for publishers who make that decision.

We are English speakers who use English words. I would assume a Shintoist uses a Japanese word, a Muslim uses Arabic, etc. We could use the native word, but we'd end up having to translate it anyway.

As for shaman, English has borrowed plenty of foreign words and appropriated them, often times without the nuance of the original term. If you've engaged in Schadenfreude, even though it might be a faux pas, you understand how English appropriates language. Now, is shaman the best word? Difficult to say. But as a blanket term, it's what we have. But much like all priests do not have the same beliefs, we can use shaman and not have it mean a specific type of belief or religion.