This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.
The RPGPundit's Own Forum Rules
This part of the site is controlled by the RPGPundit. This is where he discusses topics that he finds interesting. You may post here, but understand that there are limits. The RPGPundit can shut down any thread, topic of discussion, or user in a thread at his pleasure. This part of the site is essentially his house, so keep that in mind. Note that this is the only part of the site where political discussion is permitted, but is regulated by the RPGPundit.

Author Topic: Mike Mearls, Bigots, Homosexuality, Transgender, All-female Art Team, etc  (Read 11123 times)

Alzrius

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • A
  • Posts: 346
Mike Mearls, Bigots, Homosexuality, Transgender, All-female Art Team, etc
« Reply #30 on: October 23, 2014, 03:10:13 PM »
Quote from: jhkim;793608
Out of curiousity, what sort of social reprobation do you think is acceptable?  What is the line?


This is a difficult question, because I don't think that "the line" is static; there are factors involved depending on your relationship to the person in question, the nature of the reprobation you're expressing, etc.

I can tell you that personally, I don't like the idea of sharing personal condemnation of others in a public forum. Even leaving aside the self-aggrandizing nature of this (e.g. "I'm upset, and when you hear about this, you'll agree with me and be upset too!"), I find that attempting to shame someone in public tends to either 1) magnify their misery if they already feel bad, usually to the point of making them feel defensive (which tends undercut any process of self-examination they might otherwise be undergoing), or 2) be an instance of someone trying to promulgate their particular viewpoint by using demagoguery to scapegoat someone else.

I should mention that in this case, "public reprobation" is understood to include explicitly identifying someone else in the public sphere. It's one thing for me to say I hate some of the people I work with - you don't know where I work, or whom among them I hate. It's quite another thing to say that I overheard these two guys making a joke I found offensive, include their names and pictures of their faces, and support a petition to have them be fired from their jobs.

Quote
Personally, my two lines are: (1) I shouldn't lie about someone, although I can express a judgmental opinion, and (2) I shouldn't drag in people's personal lives or in general make it into a personal issue. This is not an absolute, but in general I prefer to talk about what someone writes/creates, not about who they are as people. However, if by telling the truth and expressing my honest opinion, I hurt someone's livelihood, that's not my problem. Yes, stuff like bad reviews and bad word-of-mouth hurt writers, but that shouldn't stifle how we speak (in my opinion).


I feel that you're talking about two different things, here. It's one thing to express your opinion about something, or even someone, that you don't like. It's another thing to use the public sphere as a weapon to attack their ability to operate within said public sphere (usually economically). Saying that you don't like person X's work is one thing, but starting a petition calling on company Y to fire person X is something else again.

I'll admit that these can be something of a continuum, as there can be very little difference between, say, practicing a personal boycott and starting an organized boycott - the former is your personal choice, whereas the latter is attempting to put a barrier between the person and those who'd want to patronize them.

Quote
Just to be clear:  This is the Internet. People of all ideological stripes will act like assholes. Some of them will guaranteed lie, troll, and engage in other bad behavior - up to harassing, libeling, and/or threatening. I'd like standards of behavior to improve, but that can't be done by attacking one ideological side or the other.


I don't disagree; it's the nature of the tactics that I'd like to see change for the better. That said, people tend to go for what's most effective in removing the things they don't like, in my experience. When it's something they condemn, a lot of people are happy to adopt a mindset of "the ends (getting rid of this thing) justifies the means."
"...player narration and DM fiat fall apart whenever there’s anything less than an incredibly high level of trust for the DM. The general trend of D&D’s design up through the end of 4e is to erase dependence on player-DM trust as much as possible, not to create antagonism, but to insulate both sides from it when it appears." - Brandes Stoddard

Haffrung

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • H
  • Posts: 5155
Mike Mearls, Bigots, Homosexuality, Transgender, All-female Art Team, etc
« Reply #31 on: October 23, 2014, 03:39:47 PM »
Quote from: snooggums;793599
Comparing the acknowledgement of existence of other sexual behaviors and identities in an RPG to "affirming the sacredness of any and all consensual sexual behaviors, identities, etc." sounds like someone is is afraid that silence might be read as bigotry, when the opposite is true.

There are a near-infinite numbers of identities, behaviors, and values human beings can have. Which of those are explicitly identified and given sanction in a book like the PHB is most certainly a value (and political) statement.

I suspect in 20 years the comments on sexual orientation in the 5E PHB will come across as dated and awkward as references to Nixon and oil shocks would have been in OD&D.
 

S'mon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13315
Mike Mearls, Bigots, Homosexuality, Transgender, All-female Art Team, etc
« Reply #32 on: October 23, 2014, 04:11:46 PM »
Quote from: Omnifray;793613

I can see where you're coming from, but if it's a game among adults, ultimately, I don't see an issue there. Just like you did, adults can stick up for themselves, and those who can't, well, one paragraph in a rulebook isn't going to make or break them. Also, I don't see that the harm the book facilitates in this way is in any way demonstrably likely to outstrip the harm that it may avoid, by making people of minority identities/sexualities feel included.

For me, what swings it is the children, and the fact that this game is played by kids who are still at elementary school, or maybe one or two years older.


I basically agree, though I don't think the 5e paragraph is nearly as bad as the umpteen paragraphs of NPC background text in Wrath of the Righteous. It was a shame because my son was on a big Wrath of the Righteous kick, collecting lots of the minis, and really wanted to play it. I ran part of the first adventure after attempting to edit the NPC backgrounds to something he'd find comprehensible, but trying to keep the edits straight was a chore and tended to suck some of the life out of my GMing and fun from the game. And he saw my score-throughs on the text and asked what that was about, and I tried to explain, and... :(
...I think Paizo's position is that this stuff is 'mature themes' for their 'mature' player base, so it was my fault for trying to use it, but it's not like there is a warning on the cover, and they'd get SJW flak if they put a warning on anyway. I agree with you that D&D and PF as the big broad-base RPGS ought to strive to be genuinely inclusive - even of parents with children.

ArrozConLeche

  • No Más
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1761
Mike Mearls, Bigots, Homosexuality, Transgender, All-female Art Team, etc
« Reply #33 on: October 23, 2014, 04:16:29 PM »
Quote from: Omnifray;793613

Surely the art-team should be made up of the best artists, regardless of sex, age, sexuality, gender identity, secondary sexual characteristics, race or religion. Give me a book filled with great art, and I don't care if it was drawn entirely by man-hating militant feminist lesbians, I am still going to be equally happy looking at the pictures. The artists draw the pictures they are asked to draw. If WotC wanted a book full of men in full plate and girls in skimpy nightdresses, that is what the artists would draw - or be fired. I don't see that the gender make-up of the team has anything to do with it. The only thing that matters is who is in charge of art-direction, and presumably that's going to be mainly one person for the sake of harmony. And that person could be (perhaps in different senses) a man and a woman at the same time, but if that were your criterion, you'd be restricting yourself to less than 0.7% of the possible pool of applicants...


For sure. But if the purpose is inclusiveness and diversity, you can't have that if people aren't fairly represented. Though if it's  inclusiveness and diversity only in the art, not in the hiring, then I can agree with you.

jhkim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11748
Mike Mearls, Bigots, Homosexuality, Transgender, All-female Art Team, etc
« Reply #34 on: October 23, 2014, 04:26:59 PM »
Quote from: Alzrius;793615
I feel that you're talking about two different things, here. It's one thing to express your opinion about something, or even someone, that you don't like. It's another thing to use the public sphere as a weapon to attack their ability to operate within said public sphere (usually economically). Saying that you don't like person X's work is one thing, but starting a petition calling on company Y to fire person X is something else again.

I'll admit that these can be something of a continuum, as there can be very little difference between, say, practicing a personal boycott and starting an organized boycott - the former is your personal choice, whereas the latter is attempting to put a barrier between the person and those who'd want to patronize them.

In general, I think that organized boycotts are legitimate expression of opinion. If I call for a boycott, the only barrier I'm putting up is the persuasiveness of my argument. For example, if a bunch of GamerGaters wanted to boycott certain gaming journals for their stance, I think that is reasonable.

If what you're boycotting is a single person rather than a group or company, it is hard to avoid it seeming personal. However, it is still possible - and the same principles should apply whether you are boycotting 1, 2, or 500 people. For example, various people have called for a boycott of author Orson Scott Card for his anti-homosexual stance and activism. I think that's fine, too.

Really, I don't think there's much difference in principle between publicly saying "This writer is shitty" - and saying "People shouldn't buy this writer's work."  Both of them can adversely affect a writer's livelihood.

flyerfan1991

  • What, me worry?
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1530
Mike Mearls, Bigots, Homosexuality, Transgender, All-female Art Team, etc
« Reply #35 on: October 23, 2014, 04:33:57 PM »
Quote from: Sacrosanct;793591
Trying to think of appropriate smileys as a response to this thread


:rolleyes::boohoo:

That'll work I suppose.


Too bad that you can't shrink that violin so that it is the world's smallest violin... ;)

Herr Arnulfe

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • H
  • Posts: 411
Mike Mearls, Bigots, Homosexuality, Transgender, All-female Art Team, etc
« Reply #36 on: October 23, 2014, 04:40:44 PM »
I used to be opposed to affirmative action, but I've come around to agreeing with it in cases where systemic discrimination is proven to exist (e.g. fantasy artwork). So I'd have no problem with female artists receiving preference for hiring. However, if D&D5e is intended to attract more women to gaming, they should've also hired women to the design team IMO, because it's still fundamentally adolescent male power/growth fantasy despite the mixed-gender pronouns and fem-positive artwork. But perhaps there simply aren't enough female RPG designers.
 

1989

  • OSR
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 876
Mike Mearls, Bigots, Homosexuality, Transgender, All-female Art Team, etc
« Reply #37 on: October 23, 2014, 04:45:42 PM »
Quote from: Herr Arnulfe;793634
I used to be opposed to affirmative action, but I've come around to agreeing with it in cases where systemic discrimination is proven to exist (e.g. fantasy artwork). So I'd have no problem with female artists receiving preference for hiring. However, if D&D5e is intended to attract more women to gaming, they should've also hired women to the design team IMO, because it's still fundamentally adolescent male power/growth fantasy despite the mixed-gender pronouns and fem-positive artwork. But perhaps there simply aren't enough female RPG designers.


Disgusting.

Skywalker

  • Ron Hates On Zebra
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3636
Mike Mearls, Bigots, Homosexuality, Transgender, All-female Art Team, etc
« Reply #38 on: October 23, 2014, 04:51:41 PM »
Quote from: Herr Arnulfe;793634
I used to be opposed to affirmative action, but I've come around to agreeing with it in cases where systemic discrimination is proven to exist (e.g. fantasy artwork). So I'd have no problem with female artists receiving preference for hiring. However, if D&D5e is intended to attract more women to gaming, they should've also hired women to the design team IMO, because it's still fundamentally adolescent male power/growth fantasy despite the mixed-gender pronouns and fem-positive artwork. But perhaps there simply aren't enough female RPG designers.


Its worth noting that though D&D 5e's art team is female in the majority, the actual artists so far are in the majority male. I don't there is any indication that either the art team or the artists are being chosen for any reason other than their talent. There is an indication that value has been put on having some level of diversity to the approach to D&D's artwork in general.

Omnifray

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • O
  • Posts: 1230
Mike Mearls, Bigots, Homosexuality, Transgender, All-female Art Team, etc
« Reply #39 on: October 23, 2014, 04:57:17 PM »
Quote from: Herr Arnulfe;793634
However, if D&D5e is intended to attract more women to gaming, they should've also hired women to the design team IMO, because it's still fundamentally adolescent male power/growth fantasy despite the mixed-gender pronouns and fem-positive artwork.

Ah, but if you got rid of the fundamentally adolescent male power/growth fantasy, would it still be D&D? ;)

Anyway, plenty of female gamers love it when their stats go up in roleplaying games. Sure, they say they don't care about stats, but the minute you give them actual choices to make about which stat goes up, and each choices has clear benefits and drawbacks, they* start agonising over their choices just like any* male gamer.

* OK, exaggeration here, but this is the common behaviour pattern even if it's not universal - RPG players, a dirty bunch of munchkins the lot of them ;)

Quote from: jhkim;793629
Really, I don't think there's much difference in principle between publicly saying "This writer is shitty" - and saying "People shouldn't buy this writer's work."  Both of them can adversely affect a writer's livelihood.

I don't know. Saying "this game is shit" or "this writer writes shitty shit" is or at least purports to be advice you share with fellow gamers to help them enjoy themselves. Saying "this writer is a jerk" is personal, but (purportedly) just a personal beef. Saying "boycott this writer" is a kind of moral pressure to not buy the stuff, directly dissuading people from buying it. I think that's a lot more vicious. I mean, there are plenty of game-writers I think are jerks, and depending on the situation I would say that straight out about them, but I would even still buy their stuff myself in the right circumstances (if it was good), and I certainly wouldn't call for a boycott of it. For me to call for a boycott of someone's work, well, I'm not saying it could never happen, but it would take something pretty special.

Maybe what I'm focusing on here is more the morality of individual action rather than its effects, but I don't think that that angle is trivial.

Quote from: S'mon;793626
I agree with you that D&D and PF as the big broad-base RPGS ought to strive to be genuinely inclusive - even of parents with children.

Exactly. Of course many parents with children may be perfectly happy for their 9-year-old children to be encouraged to roleplay pansexual transgendered intersex adventurers (or to have that option directly spelt out for them whether with or without positive encouragement), but that's their judgment to make as parents. And simply because many parents are of a different view, and would want these things to wait until the children were older, game-writers should respect that judgment. Not respecting that judgment basically means feeling entitled to put your views on parenting ahead of the parents'. That's one Hell of a sense of entitlement, if you ask me.
« Last Edit: October 23, 2014, 05:03:50 PM by Omnifray »
I did not write this but would like to mention it:-
http://jimboboz.livejournal.com/7305.html

I did however write this Player's Quickstarter for the forthcoming Soul's Calling RPG, free to download here, and a bunch of other Soul's Calling stuff available via Lulu.

As for this, I can't comment one way or the other on the correctness of the factual assertions made, but it makes for chilling reading:-
http://home.roadrunner.com/~b.gleichman/Theory/Threefold/GNS.htm

jhkim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11748
Mike Mearls, Bigots, Homosexuality, Transgender, All-female Art Team, etc
« Reply #40 on: October 23, 2014, 06:40:20 PM »
Quote from: Omnifray;793638
Saying "this game is shit" or "this writer writes shitty shit" is or at least purports to be advice you share with fellow gamers to help them enjoy themselves. Saying "this writer is a jerk" is personal, but (purportedly) just a personal beef. Saying "boycott this writer" is a kind of moral pressure to not buy the stuff, directly dissuading people from buying it. I think that's a lot more vicious. I mean, there are plenty of game-writers I think are jerks, and depending on the situation I would say that straight out about them, but I would even still buy their stuff myself in the right circumstances (if it was good), and I certainly wouldn't call for a boycott of it. For me to call for a boycott of someone's work, well, I'm not saying it could never happen, but it would take something pretty special.

Maybe what I'm focusing on here is more the morality of individual action rather than its effects, but I don't think that that angle is trivial.

I suspect that this is because you are of the opinion that writers have no or very little influence over people. Regardless of whether that is right or not, that is a personal judgment. You should have the right to decide that for yourself.

If you were to decide that certain writing is harmful - say like radical Islamic essays - then you should have the right to boycott and/or protest that writing. Someone else might have a different judgment than you - and both of you should be free to express your thoughts.

Certain boycotts are wrong, but that doesn't mean that it is wrong to attempt a boycott at all. For example, many liberals are opposed to nuclear power and/or GMOs on an irrational basis. I will argue against them, but they should be allowed free speech to protest and boycott.

Quote from: Omnifray;793638
Exactly. Of course many parents with children may be perfectly happy for their 9-year-old children to be encouraged to roleplay pansexual transgendered intersex adventurers (or to have that option directly spelt out for them whether with or without positive encouragement), but that's their judgment to make as parents. And simply because many parents are of a different view, and would want these things to wait until the children were older, game-writers should respect that judgment. Not respecting that judgment basically means feeling entitled to put your views on parenting ahead of the parents'. That's one Hell of a sense of entitlement, if you ask me.

You're right. That is a sense of entitlement. Gay people feel entitled to be treated like everyone else, and not as harmful aberrations that have to come with warning labels so that parents can protect their kids from exposure.

I don't feel that I should have to censor myself and not mention my gay friends and family if there are children present. I wouldn't talk about the act of sex, obviously, but I will mention my cousin Jordan and his boyfriend in the same open way that I mention my cousin Semin and his wife. If a parent asks, I will be perfectly open about this, and they decide to keep their kids away from me and those like me.

This applies to games just as readily. I run and write game material for kids and others, and I'm not going to edit out mention of gays on the basis that some parents might object. Similarly, I don't feel that D&D needs to edit out mention of demons and devils because some parents object to the occult association. Or that they should edit out killing and meat-eating because of some vegan pacifist parents who would object.

snooggums

  • good news everyone!
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 247
Mike Mearls, Bigots, Homosexuality, Transgender, All-female Art Team, etc
« Reply #41 on: October 23, 2014, 06:46:41 PM »
Quote from: Haffrung;793623
There are a near-infinite numbers of identities, behaviors, and values human beings can have. Which of those are explicitly identified and given sanction in a book like the PHB is most certainly a value (and political) statement.


It is no more a political statement than using "she" in the rules to acknowledge female players.

Quote
I suspect in 20 years the comments on sexual orientation in the 5E PHB will come across as dated and awkward as references to Nixon and oil shocks would have been in OD&D.


Those are time period specific references, which are only dated because of changing times, so unless you think that sexual orientation is going to go away in 20 years the comparison doesn't make sense.

It could be dated due to improved communication, where a different way of saying the same thing has made the wording dated like descriptions of 90's hard drive sizes. That can't be avoided any more than fashion choices in the artwork.

S'mon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13315
Mike Mearls, Bigots, Homosexuality, Transgender, All-female Art Team, etc
« Reply #42 on: October 23, 2014, 06:52:12 PM »
Quote from: jhkim;793648

You're right. That is a sense of entitlement. Gay people feel entitled to be treated like everyone else, and not as harmful aberrations that have to come with warning labels so that parents can protect their kids from exposure.


Transgenderism causes problems that do not arise with homosexuality. My son has been around lesbian Rugby players since he was four years old, "Zoe likes Chloe" is no problem. The stuff in Wrath of the Righteous - well, by the time I had edited it and removed the magical sex change etc (etc etc - several columns of text) it became a regular Xena/Gabrielle style lesbian relationship. Before that, it was weird - weirder than real-world transgenderism can be - and didn't make sense to me (the half-orc Paladin bio reads weirdly like somebody's slash fiction fanfic idea of a pre-existing celebrity character - and she's the 'normal' one), never mind to a 7 year old.

Sacrosanct

  • cisgrog
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7224
    • http://www.sacrosanctgames.com
Mike Mearls, Bigots, Homosexuality, Transgender, All-female Art Team, etc
« Reply #43 on: October 23, 2014, 06:55:42 PM »
Quote from: 1989;793635
Disgusting.

Your attitude?

I agree.  But hey, that's just me.




As an aside, I used to be firmly against AA to when I was young.  Then I grew up, lived in Korea for 4 years and finally understood what privilege was because suddenly I was on the other side of it, came back to the states and saw how white men kept getting the jobs against otherwise equally qualified women or minorities (I'm assuming because that's just how it was done, not that the hiring people were overtly racist), and realized that maybe there's a good reason for AA to exist.
D&D is not an "everyone gets a ribbon" game.  If you're stupid, your PC will die.  If you're an asshole, your PC will die (probably from the other PCs).  If you're unlucky, your PC may die.  Point?  PC's die.  Get over it and roll up a new one.

S'mon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13315
Mike Mearls, Bigots, Homosexuality, Transgender, All-female Art Team, etc
« Reply #44 on: October 23, 2014, 06:58:21 PM »
Quote from: snooggums;793651
Those are time period specific references, which are only dated because of changing times, so unless you think that sexual orientation is going to go away in 20 years the comparison doesn't make sense.

Socially constructed notions of sexual orientation certainly do change over time, as do social attitudes, so yes it certainly might well seem dated, one way or another. For instance the SJWs were complaining that the text "man trapped in a woman's body" was archaic and offensive etc. In 20 years that text might seem like a hate crime - possibly a hate crime against a sexuality that doesn't even 'socially' exist yet - or it might seem mundane, or it might seem like a transgressive relic of the naughty early-21st century. Etc etc.