Quote from AEDorsay >>

My day job is identifying racism, sexism, misogyny, transphobia, et al. Then fixing those systems.

You are asking people to work for free, without compensation for their time, knowledge, experience, or respect for them.

 

No one's forcing anyone. You're taking it too far. When simple questions asking for opinions of the general public for a fictional setting are now forbidden because it's someone's job to provide unbiased, impartial, objective solutions, we're getting close to preventing open discussion because someone wants to be paid for it. Your day job has zip-all to do with people having a conversation in public.

Except that the topic in discussion, in this case, is one that has been talked about for 900 years, is not separated from reality, and is not as abstract As it is being treated.

you are asking people to give you their time, energy, thoughts, effort, knowledge. There are centuries of sources out there.

there are several responses here already. Asking, yet again, without offering compensation for their time and knowledge is rude and disrespectful.

For you, there may be no direct personal impact here. If there is, the. It is even more rude, but if not, when this kind of thing happens, it shows that you not only have no respect for the strangers here, but for the conversation at the larger level.

which you already do because you think that it can magically be decoupled between the game and reality, which is further disrespect of the people, their knowledge, their efforts and their time.

it was asked and answered.

Quote from AEDorsay >>

Except that the topic in discussion, in this case, is one that has been talked about for 900 years, is not separated from reality, and is not as abstract As it is being treated.

you are asking people to give you their time, energy, thoughts, effort, knowledge. There are centuries of sources out there.

there are several responses here already. Asking, yet again, without offering compensation for their time and knowledge is rude and disrespectful.

For you, there may be no direct personal impact here. If there is, the. It is even more rude, but if not, when this kind of thing happens, it shows that you not only have no respect for the strangers here, but for the conversation at the larger level.

which you already do because you think that it can magically be decoupled between the game and reality, which is further disrespect of the people, their knowledge, their efforts and their time.

it was asked and answered.

To me, this has always been one of the sticking points of fantasy worlds "triggering" people.   Essentially, if one looks hard enough at virtually anything, a parallel can be found and offense can be claimed.  If you look hard enough for something, you will find it, real or not.

The lack of separation of fantasy and reality is an issue more so than the fantasy itself.  In the case of say, Orc hatred, where Humans have an inherent hatred for Orcs is explored, discussed and wrung out and the Humans are now viewed as horrible, racist and more.  When exactly are we permitted to look at the Orc behavior and their inherent hatred for Humans, or Elves?  Why do we have this burning NEED for something fantasy to represent something in the real world?

While I oppose racism and any other form of treating another human being like shit for any petty or idiotic reason like skin color, religion, sexual orientation and such, in fantasy worlds, I don't give it any real weight.  The fact that THIS imaginary race/culture/species/whateverthehellwecallitnow hates THAT one has ZERO correlation or connection to the real world.  Maybe (likely?) this is due to all my playtime, on either side of the table has been in homebrewed worlds, so any attempt to claim Tolkien's Orcs or anyone else's depiction, intent or thought on their created creatures don't apply to what I've used/done.  My worlds have all contained aspects of one region's inhabitants hating on some other's for no "valid" reason.  It's a fact of sentient life that certain groups will hold irrational views, mostly.

I play D&D and other fantasy/fictional games to escape reality and try and immerse myself in the imaginary world.  I don't drag or look for things to bring me back to RL things I don't like and focus on them.  If one can't find solitude and enjoyment in their escapes, there will never be a place they can truly relax.  I would prefer to see more of a focus on the separation of reality and fiction than striving to make as many connections as possible.

When you are one of the people who are affected by this stuff, you are not “looking” for it. It comes and grabs you and lifts you up by the collar and shakes the hell out of you and then tosses you in a corner.

it isn’t hidden, it isn’t buried, it isn’t some kind of secret code switching, it is there, right in front of you, because you encounter it every single day of your life. So the point of “if you look” is derived from the notion of “I don’t see it”, and goes back to those 900 years I mentioned. I don’t look for racism or transphobia or misogyny, I don’t have to. It just comes along and slaps me upside the face.

so that kind of thinking only holds water if the people thinking that way do not see it. And these systems — for racism is a system, and all the rest; part and parcel of what our society is built on, and taught to everyone in all the different ways of teaching — are designed so that if someone benefits from them, they are not going to see it. Which is why we have discussions like this after 900 years of discussions like this.

You say there is no correlation, but that isn’t accurate, either. The game is no an absolutely separate space, a safe reality of its own, that does not touch nor be touched by the vagaries here. This is because to enter that world, you have to come from here, and with it you will bring all the things that come from here — in design, in creation, in weighting, in characterization. Writers do the same thing.

it is a dependent fiction, no matter how removed, and even for folks who are fully aware and informed, those fictions are informEd by this world — be a utopian civ or anti-racist civ, they are created from the single pool of reality we share, because they are shared, even if with only a few people.

so that falls because factually the fantasy world is not separate. That is a pretense fallacy that has significant psychoemotional usefulness, and is ultimately an aspect of that system in action, because the thinking comes from the system, not from the game.

Quote from Falwith >>

 

The lack of separation of fantasy and reality is an issue more so than the fantasy itself.  In the case of say, Orc hatred, where Humans have an inherent hatred for Orcs is explored, discussed and wrung out and the Humans are now viewed as horrible, racist and more.  When exactly are we permitted to look at the Orc behavior and their inherent hatred for Humans, or Elves?  Why do we have this burning NEED for something fantasy to represent something in the real world?

 

       This "need" that you refer to is psychological.  It's the same seed of the human mind that wants to "see" images of itself in the stories we tell.  Almost ALL fiction, including fantasy, comes directly from copying something people have already seen in the real world.  If there is racism in the real world, many people will put that into their fiction, whether consciously or subconsciously.  It's the same reason why so many monsters in mythology (not just D&D) have human or human-ish faces, because we as a species have a very strong tendency to project out mental images of ourselves into our fantasies.  Homesick sailors saw seals and manatees and half-naked women-fish because they projected their desires onto the real world.  People who are literally starting to die of thirst will see mirages of water in the desert.  In a not-so-different vein, when writers imagine and put down on paper an Always Good race of people fighting against an Always Evil race of people, this too is a projection of the human mind based on human desire to story-ify or make sense of the highly complex and conflict-ridden world.  These projections are often simplifications or exaggerations of the world because, as you so well illustrated, most people do not like handling all that complexity, contradiction, and "shades of grey."  This desire for simplicity is then projected onto the fantasies that we create for other people to read/watch/experience.   That is how we get racism/sexism/etc. in RPGs.  

Quote from AEDorsay >>

My day job is identifying racism, sexism, misogyny, transphobia, et al. Then fixing those systems.

You are asking people to work for free, without compensation for their time, knowledge, experience, or respect for them.

You don't have to answer, but it isn't too unreasonable for people to ask a question like this, since not everyone has enough money to pay for this and everyone on the forums is are pretty much already doing some form of free work anyways. That being said, it is really annoying when people post a question that has already been answered on repeat (this isn't the case here, but there are a number of threads where people do things like this).

Quote from Falwith >>

Quote from AEDorsay >>

 To me, this has always been one of the sticking points of fantasy worlds "triggering" people.   Essentially, if one looks hard enough at virtually anything, a parallel can be found and offense can be claimed.  If you look hard enough for something, you will find it, real or not.

People aren't looking for anything, these aspects of the game pop up and hurt them regardless of whether or not they are intentionally sought out. Your point about gaming being an escape from the real world is especially interesting, because it can't be an escape for everyone if some players are reminded of some of the most difficult things they have to endure in real life every 5 seconds at the table because those problematic elements were forcibly put into their game.

After 20 years, there is no question I haven’t seen asked that wasn’t asked before, and all of them are variations on the same things that have been asked for hundreds of years.

I think it is unreasonable for people to place that burden on those who have been doing this for generations, always without any sort of compensation for doing so. I don’t say *money* because one can get paid in whatever form wants to be paid in — barter, the feeling of winning, the satisfaction of saying the words, but…

The value of that time, energy, effort, revisiting emotional trauma, revisiting psychological harm, dealing with the measurable, real world effects on health and longevity, all of that should be valued by those asking, and they should find a way to show that they value and appreciate and will not waste that effort and energy and time.

Otherwise they are asking for a benefit for themselves and giving nothing back. Worse, they assign to the labor being done on their behalf a value of nothing, and so most often they appreciate it in the same way. That lack of value, in turn, supports (even if that wasn’t their goal) the system of violence and harm that is always being talked about as if there was not violence and harm, creating an abstract ideation with no real world effect or import from a concrete idea that does have such.

And i have found that the moment they are confronted by the mere notion that they must offer something in value in return, they default to money, and they are offended — though these same people have been doign exchanges for knowledge heir entire lives — but not in this. And that, in turn, tells me much about the underlying motivations and ideations that drive the question.

Especially around concepts such as ‘watch this and tell me if it is racist” — they are asking people to expose themselves to what is a form of violence they already don’t acknowledge is violence, and they want it to answer their own personal needs, so they can then argue the point further and ultimately expand on that violence and harm?

I cannot call that unreasonable, myself. I understand others may, but I cannot do so. 

Quote from AEDorsay >>

After 20 years, there is no question I haven’t seen asked that wasn’t asked before, and all of them are variations on the same things that have been asked for hundreds of years.

I cannot call that unreasonable, myself. I understand others may, but I cannot do so. 

I think it would be unreasonable to tell someone they have to watch something, especially if a potential trigger warning wasn't given in advance. That being said, asking whether or not answering would be possible, - with a warning in advance, - doesn't seem like something that's unreasonable to me. Not everyone can afford to hire people to answer questions like this (I genuinely wonder what other ways there are to compensate people for this), and it makes sense for them to not want to accidentally offend anyone in real life, which requires that they vet content by asking people who would have more experience with the subject.

However, I am not a person of color myself, and I appreciate your perspective and input. You have zero obligation to answer questions like the one Eric gave, and I understand the desire to want to be compensated for effort, time, and dealing with such a hard subject, though it doesn't feel unreasonable to me for someone to ask for help on this if they aren't making anyone answer their question.

Quote from BoringBard>>

Quote from AEDorsay>>

Not everyone can afford to hire people to answer questions like this (I genuinely wonder what other ways there are to compensate people for this),

The key to this is provide something of value — it need not be money, it could be an agreement to drop a subject, or good joke, anything *so long as those involved both have a value for it*.

I have done entire lecture courses to get a group of kids a pizza party. I swapped a month of rides in a car for a lesson on collecting LGBT demographics, lol. It was what I needed at the time.

Sometimes, *satisfaction* is its own reward, other times it is the challenge — but in this specific area, there is none.

I understand the desire to want to be compensated for effort, time, and dealing with such a hard subject, though it doesn't feel unreasonable to me for someone to ask for help on this if they aren't making anyone answer their question.

 The catch is it isn’t asking for help.

It is asking for expertise of a group that is filled with inexperts to gather opinions, not actual facts. If they really wanted an answer, they would have approached someone as an individual, and not simply presumed that there was no value to the time and energy of the people asked.

Just throwing it out there is a tactic been used since at the minimum the 1840’s in the US alone. Still used today for other groups as well as the core ones.

If they wanted an expert opinion, they would have asked an expert. They didn’t — so what was the point and value to others of doing that? What do others get out of it? Why would they ask people who don’t have enough knowledge and experience said question, asking for their time and labor?

What, statistically and historically, has such an action been meant to do or had the basic result of causing?

Is it not re-litigating information they can find out on their own, without having to be lectured by some over educated twerp like me? 

If ending racism was as easy as a conversation between strangers, it would have been done long before the US had a civil war.

Though you did misrepresent my point at the end by attributing me as having said something completely "ending racism", I now understand your thoughts, and actually think that I agree with you now about answering these inquiries, though I'm not 100% sure. Thank you for your thoughts.

I originally thought you said that asking this question at all without paying was bad (instead of just asking a bunch of random people Online), but I now understand your views and thank you for clarifying. I appreciate the clarification.

Also, I just wanted to say that you are excellent and insightful community member on these forums. Thank you.