Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1082050"Politically incorrect" seems to be relative. Politically incorrect to who? Who defines what is politically correct? It just seems like the exact same concept, only varying by which political standpoint it supports or opposes. Are we confusing this with an arbitrary standard of historical accuracy, insofar as that makes any sense for a fantasy context?

You took the time to explain that the boundaries of political correctness are based on one's politics... OK, that's hardly news.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1082050Politically incorrect to who? Who defines what is politically correct?

Those who can scream the loudest to the largest audience.

Quote from: HappyDaze;1082061You took the time to explain that the boundaries of political correctness are based on one's politics... OK, that's hardly news.

On a more concrete level, a bunch of people have said that having domestic violence, oppression of women, and/or rape in a game makes it politically incorrect. By that standard, A Handmaid's Tale is politically incorrect - along with similarly-themed games like the Bluebeard'd Bride RPG.

However, that conflicts with how a lot of people use "political correctness" means being being liberal and/or feminist.

My feeling is something is politically incorrect if a bunch of people get offended over it.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1082050"Politically incorrect" seems to be relative. Politically incorrect to who? Who defines what is politically correct? It just seems like the exact same concept, only varying by which political standpoint it supports or opposes. Are we confusing this with an arbitrary standard of historical accuracy, insofar as that makes any sense for a fantasy context?

Also, what is the line between politically incorrect and just plain exploitative? If you make all orcs/goblins into vicious rapists that graphically brutalize women, then why? Is the intent to be as offensive as possible? Will trying to offend your political opponents really result in better writing than otherwise?

If I devised an aesthetic in which all men are absurdly beefy and all women are boyish waifs, in what way would that be politically in/correct?

Exploitation stuff is normally Politically Incorrect.
You can be Exploitive and Politically Correct too, eg Get Out.

Quote from: jhkim;1082073On a more concrete level, a bunch of people have said that having domestic violence, oppression of women, and/or rape in a game makes it politically incorrect. By that standard, A Handmaid's Tale is politically incorrect - along with similarly-themed games like the Bluebeard'd Bride RPG.

However, that conflicts with how a lot of people use "political correctness" means being being liberal and/or feminist.

My feeling is something is politically incorrect if a bunch of people get offended over it.

PC standards change over time. Also standards vary by who is doing the writing/creating. But obviously valorising a Handmaid's Tale setup would be un-PC.

Blue Rose is PC although a bunch of people were offended by it - it depends who is offended.

Quote from: jhkim;1082073On a more concrete level, a bunch of people have said that having domestic violence, oppression of women, and/or rape in a game makes it politically incorrect. By that standard, A Handmaid's Tale is politically incorrect - along with similarly-themed games like the Bluebeard'd Bride RPG.
However, that conflicts with how a lot of people use "political correctness" means being being liberal and/or feminist.
.

That is because to you SJWs everything has to either be a SJW utopia or  full on SJW propaganda nothing else is acceptable.  So yes D&D Waterdeep  and The Handmaiden's Tale can be politically correct at the same time.

Quote from: Gagarth;1082146That is because to you SJWs everything has to either be a SJW utopia or  full on SJW propaganda nothing else is acceptable.  So yes D&D Waterdeep  and The Handmaiden's Tale can be politically correct at the same time.

At what point does the brutalization of women become SJW propaganda?

Let's take the classic example of "Women Getting Ripped Apart by Orcs." It's a hypothetical work of fiction which gleefully depicts women getting brutalized and ultimately dismembered by orcs. How would it be different if it was or was not used as SJW propaganda?

If one of the women was raped but survived and became the main character, then would her story qualify as SJW propaganda? Why or why not?

If the women are only ever treated as disposable, and only women who weren't raped ever got happy endings, then does that make it anti-SJW propaganda?

Would Glorantha Broos be considered an example of such?

Regarding what makes Waterdeep and the Handmaid's Tale both SJW propaganda commonality is...

Waterdeep; Be anything but a straight white male.

Handmaid's Tale; straight white males are bad.

Basically, both glorify the "oppressed" (as defined by SJW sentiment de jour) and cast the "oppressor" as misguided or obsolete at best to outright evil incarnate.

For the Women ripped apart by orcs scenario you described; so long as the Orcs embody the "white patriarchy" (perhaps they all have white facial markings and wear red helmets) then you'd be able to claim SJW wokeness to your message (i.e. look at how the white patriarchy destroys women).

The SJWs would claim the anti-woke equivalent would be casting the orcs as "black" and the women as "white" and having human males i.e. the "default white people" of fantasy.

But the real anti-woke version would be the Orcs are just antagonists and the protagonist is either a person familiar with one or more of the women or one of the women herself who gathers up heroes to try and rescue them and end the threat of the orcs where they face dramatically tense situations and setbacks and reverses until the drama is resolved.

In other words, telling a proper story instead of a piece of propaganda. That is the TRUE anti-woke for storytelling (just as true anti-woke for RPGs would be a system and adventures designed with being fun for those participating instead of beat them over the head with a message).

Quote from: Chris24601;1082201Regarding what makes Waterdeep and the Handmaid's Tale both SJW propaganda commonality is...

Waterdeep; Be anything but a straight white male.

Handmaid's Tale; straight white males are bad.

Basically, both glorify the "oppressed" (as defined by SJW sentiment de jour) and cast the "oppressor" as misguided or obsolete at best to outright evil incarnate.

For the Women ripped apart by orcs scenario you described; so long as the Orcs embody the "white patriarchy" (perhaps they all have white facial markings and wear red helmets) then you'd be able to claim SJW wokeness to your message (i.e. look at how the white patriarchy destroys women).

The SJWs would claim the anti-woke equivalent would be casting the orcs as "black" and the women as "white" and having human males i.e. the "default white people" of fantasy.

But the real anti-woke version would be the Orcs are just antagonists and the protagonist is either a person familiar with one or more of the women or one of the women herself who gathers up heroes to try and rescue them and end the threat of the orcs where they face dramatically tense situations and setbacks and reverses until the drama is resolved.

In other words, telling a proper story instead of a piece of propaganda. That is the TRUE anti-woke for storytelling (just as true anti-woke for RPGs would be a system and adventures designed with being fun for those participating instead of beat them over the head with a message).

That's a very interesting take on The Handmaid's Tale. I never got the impression that it was demonizing straight white men. I'm pretty sure the sympathetic love interest was a straight white man.

I've never seen SJW propaganda like what you describe. If it does exist then it isn't popular enough to show up in my content feed. Far more often I see fiction that uncritically depicts the excessive brutalization of women and perpetuates a disturbing virgin/whore dichotomy. When such fiction gets criticized for this, defenders come out of the woodwork to defend and justify the fetishistic rape, maiming and dismemberment of disposable women.

If a story depicts a white women falsely accusing a black man of rape, resulting in him being lynched, and punishes her by having her graphically raped to death, then does it qualify as SJW propaganda? If so, then it is ironic that variations on that situation were defended by anti-SJWs despite being criticized as literal revenge porn. If not, then does the amount of effort devoted to defending said revenge porn strike you as remotely disturbing? Because I found it really sickening that so many people were bending over backwards to justify raping someone to death.

It is entirely possible to tell a story while embedding that story with propaganda. You just don't notice the propaganda if it aligns with your own beliefs, unless it is excessively preachy.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1082208That's a very interesting take on The Handmaid's Tale. I never got the impression that it was demonizing straight white men. I'm pretty sure the sympathetic love interest was a straight white man.

Demonizing white men is fun for SJWs. Let's not play stupid.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/someone-made-a-handmaids-tale-for-men_n_59429cd6e4b06bb7d271596e

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1082208I've never seen SJW propaganda like what you describe. If it does exist then it isn't popular enough to show up in my content feed. Far more often I see fiction that uncritically depicts the excessive brutalization of women and perpetuates a disturbing virgin/whore dichotomy. When such fiction gets criticized for this, defenders come out of the woodwork to defend and justify the fetishistic rape, maiming and dismemberment of disposable women.

Yes - no one in Hollywood is pushing back against rape as a plot device...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/arts-and-entertainment/wp/2017/09/28/rape-is-an-overused-plot-device-heres-how-one-new-show-smartly-flipped-the-script/?utm_term=.5b70ead32767

https://jezebel.com/some-showrunners-are-banning-rape-as-a-plot-device-on-t-1789776988

https://variety.com/2016/tv/features/rape-tv-television-sweet-vicious-jessica-jones-game-of-thrones-1201934910/

http://www.feminisms.org/5844/using-rape-as-a-plot-device/index.html

https://www.thecut.com/2016/12/showrunners-are-fighting-back-against-rape-as-a-plot-point.html

https://www.ranker.com/list/rape-dramatic-device-tv-shows/alexandra-plesa

https://medium.com/@Shibuyaviolet/put-her-in-her-place-the-use-of-rape-as-a-plot-device-7217cb9e559e

https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2017/10/sexual-assault-plot-device-twist-liar-una/544340/

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1082208If a story depicts a white women falsely accusing a black man of rape, resulting in him being lynched, and punishes her by having her graphically raped to death, then does it qualify as SJW propaganda?

That's not a story. That's a premise. There's a few more details you'd have to cover for it to be an actual story.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1082208If so, then it is ironic that variations on that situation were defended by anti-SJWs despite being criticized as literal revenge porn. If not, then does the amount of effort devoted to defending said revenge porn strike you as remotely disturbing? Because I found it really sickening that so many people were bending over backwards to justify raping someone to death.

You're parsing word salad. Rape in fiction is... FICTIONAL. No one is actually raped. Because sane people understand this. SJW's are moral-panic fundamentalists. Their religion spouts such nonsense that words-are-violence. "Revenge Porn" in fiction is non-contextual.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1082208It is entirely possible to tell a story while embedding that story with propaganda. You just don't notice the propaganda if it aligns with your own beliefs, unless it is excessively preachy.

Depends on the individual. Honest people with a shred of self-awarness can freely admit their biases and *see* propaganda for what it is. Dishonest people, and those zealots caught up in their ideology du jour, can't. Instead they create not-so-clever nomenclature, rules, and idioms to justify their beliefs rather than admit objective reality doesn't correspond to those beliefs. That's why propaganda is perpetuated largely by those people. It's important to them. To honest people... not so much.

How many articles can we find from gaming sites saying Orcs are "blacks" or other implications of racism in D&D and fantasy fiction?

https://www.autosave.tv/2018/09/24/that-orcward-moment-racial-coding-in-dungeons-and-dragons/

https://www.publicmedievalist.com/race-fantasy-genre/

https://www.tor.com/2012/07/30/ecce-orcus-an-argument-for-humanizing-the-orc/

https://chroniclesofharriet.com/2012/01/19/racism-role-playing/

https://mthrisho.wordpress.com/2012/04/29/dungeons-and-dragons-is-way-more-racist-than-you-realize/

https://kotaku.com/dungeons-dragons-stumbles-with-its-revision-of-the-ga-1819657235

https://www.sageadvice.eu/2018/06/21/how-do-you-explain-to-young-players-that-dd-stands-against-racism-while-codifying-racial-traits-as-a-determinant-of-ability/

https://critical-hits.com/blog/2009/01/30/dungeons-dragons-racism/

https://themillions.com/2017/05/dragons-are-for-white-kids-with-money-on-the-friction-of-geekdom-and-race.html

https://femmagazine.com/on-decolonizing-dungeons-and-dragons-and-similar-role-playing-games/

http://analoggamestudies.org/2016/01/how-dungeons-dragons-appropriated-the-orient/


Oh I could go on and on... oddly there are not many defending D&D as not racist.

Lastly - I would love for someone to point out a single black person harmed in real life as a result of the alleged racism of D&D - or a woman raped, because of the use of rape in fiction.


Let's examine the moral panic vs. the actual cases. As a test-case: I vow to sacrifice 100000 analog halfling babies to demons in my next game-session. I'll examine the internet to see if any non-abortion child-murders are reported Sunday.

Quote from: tenbones;1082218Demonizing white men is fun for SJWs. Let's not play stupid.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/someone-made-a-handmaids-tale-for-men_n_59429cd6e4b06bb7d271596e

Whenever people use the term SJW, I can't tell if they're actually referring to genuine loonies or just leftists in general. It's thrown around so often here.

The American political parties literally see each other as evil. It's genuinely difficult for me to understand your perspective when that's the case, because I can't tell whether you hate me or not just for having different political beliefs.

QuoteYes - no one in Hollywood is pushing back against rape as a plot device...

I didn't say that. I said that some people defend the use of rape as a plot point. That's the exact opposite of what you think I said. Just this winter we had manufactroversies over some anime that casually used rape as a plot device. There were strawmen everywhere.

QuoteYou're parsing word salad. Rape in fiction is... FICTIONAL. No one is actually raped. Because sane people understand this. SJW's are moral-panic fundamentalists. Their religion spouts such nonsense that words-are-violence. "Revenge Porn" in fiction is non-contextual.

You're not even addressing my point. People online are actively supporting over-the-top fictional depiction of the graphic rape and murder of women, outside of literal porn mind you, despite being told that it is disgusting. That's what I'm talking about.

I'm almost scared to ask what you must think of the Rape Day controversy on Steam recently. Almost. What do you think?

QuoteDepends on the individual. Honest people with a shred of self-awarness can freely admit their biases and *see* propaganda for what it is. Dishonest people, and those zealots caught up in their ideology du jour, can't. Instead they create not-so-clever nomenclature, rules, and idioms to justify their beliefs rather than admit objective reality doesn't correspond to those beliefs. That's why propaganda is perpetuated largely by those people. It's important to them. To honest people... not so much.

How do you even know who is a zealot and who is an honest person? When the average person thinks the other political party is literally evil, there's no difference at that point.

But let's not make this into a political discussion. We clearly aren't communicating intelligibly with one another. You didn't address my actual points and even if you did I don't know if I'd even understand your answer.

Quote from: jhkimMy feeling is something is politically incorrect if a bunch of people get offended over it.

Quote from: S'mon;1082078PC standards change over time. Also standards vary by who is doing the writing/creating. But obviously valorising a Handmaid's Tale setup would be un-PC.

Blue Rose is PC although a bunch of people were offended by it - it depends who is offended.

Quote from: tenbones;1082222Lastly - I would love for someone to point out a single black person harmed in real life as a result of the alleged racism of D&D - or a woman raped, because of the use of rape in fiction.

Let's examine the moral panic vs. the actual cases. As a test-case: I vow to sacrifice 100000 analog halfling babies to demons in my next game-session. I'll examine the internet to see if any non-abortion child-murders are reported Sunday.

I'm mostly with tenbones here - fictional events aren't real-world offenses. I don't buy into moral panic over RPG games or products. I do think that fiction - particularly mainstream mass-media fiction - does have an impact on culture, but that is still the marketplace of ideas where free speech should reign.

These days, though, I feel there is at least as much moral panic from conservatives over liberal fiction than vice-versa. Within RPGs, I see this as people posting in outrage over the latest SJW content - like a third-party collection of Call of Cthulhu scenarios that spark outrage and calls to boycott Chaosium over allowing it.