So I’m over on one of the Facebook RPG groups and read an intro to a post that made me eye roll:

All the other stuff aside, Wizards of the Coast get a lot of extra credit from me for including the following text from the Basic Rules set:

“You don’t need to be confined to binary notions of sex and gender. The elf god Corellon Larethian is often seen as androgynous or hermaphroditic, for example, and some elves in the multiverse are made in Corellon’s image. You could also play a female character who presents herself as a man, a man who feels trapped in a female body, or a bearded female dwarf who hates being mistaken for a male. Likewise, your character’s sexual orientation is yours to decide.”


Now, don’t get me wrong — I don’t particularly care about people sexuality unless we’re having an intimate moment together; outside of that, it’s none of my business. We’ve had bisexuals, homosexuals, and one transvestite that was a bit of an odd character (and not because he dressed as a woman), as well as a stripper who wanted to play in the nude…much odder — doesn’t bother me. In game, there’s been plenty of sexual issues and non-standard characters.

But especially after the “Don’t let you parent enforce gender binaries” bullshit on the slide at my kids park — a park for 3-5 year olds — I’ve had my fill of Progressive reformist nonsense.

My response was my usual snarky, sarcastic self. “Can’t we just play without somebody bringing gender politics into everything?”

At this point, I apparently did the internet version of shit on their dinner table.

The immediate response is the classic example of reformist twats at their worst:

No we can’t.
Not when oppression and objectification still exists within the greater community of roleplaying.

And if you can’t understand that you’re part of the problem.

Oooo…sick burn, man. I hope you can fit all that self-importance through your bedroom door, or you’ll be in real danger of disappointing that lesbian transexual woman with a taste for making her male subs watch.

Now for the less asshole-ish response: 1) Oppression? If you feel you are being oppressed by your gaming group — you’re in the wrong fuckin’ game group. 2) Objectification? Listen, ladies, if the men are treating you like a sexual object, or just the “girl at the game”…you’re in the wrong fuckin’ game group.

I had a related issue with group way back in the ’90s where all the players were treating the female at the table like their “kid sister” (their view point), when they were actually treating her like some doll to be joked over and ignored (my POV.) I made a point of teaming up with her character and forcing the guys to take her seriously. It worked.

No whining about gender norms. No filing lawsuits. No puffing out my chest in righteous indignation about how much of a feminist I was. Just play and treat everyone the same. (“Just like shit…” LCDR Richard Marcinko.)

And if I can understand that, if makes you a bit of a pretentious prat, Mr. Angry About the Latest Trendy to be Angry About.

But wait! There’s more from the guy that started the thread:

Because sex and gender is pivotal to the human condition. We play ROLE playing games, and those include many different lifestyles and cultures. That’s why.

Wow — I got told, huh? Back to Mr. Angry About the Latest Trendy Thing to be Angry About:

Go play with your game group if you want to escape reality, or a singleplayer videogame.

The internet (and this community) is made up of people from reality, so that whole argument is moot.
And as a society/community we wish to include/cater to people of all genders/sexualities. Just because you don’t want to acknowledge their presence whilst you play your game doesn’t mean we shouldn’t see it as an issue that should be tackled (and is starting to be by WotC).

As Spock so aptly put it “the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few”, and we all NEED to accept/acknowledge our NB compatriots.

Did you just, in the space of saying you’re “from reality” quote Spock at me? Better yet, you use a quote that actually runs contrary to the very thing you are bitching about: a small subculture — the few — wants to be treated normally by the main culture, or the many (or peckish white patriarchy, if it’ll make you feel more accepted), then make a point of being as contentious as they can on the issue…only to be shocked when the many don’t rally to the cause of the few.

But that’s “gender binaries” for you. Darned breeders.

Here’s a notion you might not have considered, Mr. AATLTTBAA. I don’t have to accept or acknowledge your lifestyle, because I’m not affected by it. Because I am a decent fellow, I do feel I have to tolerate you and treat you like i do most people. To a point. That point is when you make an ass out of yourself. (Which I was declared to be doing for not reflexively applauding WOTC for their “inclusiveness.”) Accept you? Nope, I don’t have to do that. And I’m less like to do so when you are a posturing tit.

Now considering Dungeons & Dragons is marketed to teens, I can see where WOTC wants to be warm and cuddly, but there is a question of appropriateness. There are kids that are not yet sexualized reading the book. There are kids who are in the early stages of puberty and most don’t need confusing concepts tossed at them.


I don’t see how teaching children about the spectrum and lifestyle choices could be inappropriate.

I’m guessing because you don’t have kids. Granted, Progressives slinging gender around as a political mace don’t see problems with sex education for kindergarteners, either…but then, the reformist impulse Progressivism inherited from the new religiosity of the Second Great Awakening is only concerned with being right. Whether an argument over slavery, gender, or forcing people to stop drinking or doing narcotics, or disarming the public — they just want to win the argument.

A perfect case to illustrate this is a close relative of mine who has had trouble with every PTA, library board, Democrat Party committee, local government board they’ve been on. Recently, this person was staggered that the library board could not move on an obvious issue — that front desk the library has had since I can remember. This person decides a new one is needed, but the board takes no action. “My son-in-law can build it for cheap!” They still are not convinced. My wife asks the relative after hearing this, “Did you ask them if they needed a new desk?”

“Well, no…but they need a new desk.”

The desires (not needs) of the few probably have no impact on the “going about my life” of the many.

WOTC took the opposite approach to a vocal portion of the gaming community who apparently define themselves primarily by their sexuality or gender, and who demand that we acknowledge them. The paragraph isn’t particularly offensive, so much as it is tiresome after 10 years of listening to half-witted academics talk about “gender binaries” like the universe (or most folks just trying to feed their families) gives a shit we don’t like our sexual choices. But like my relative, squeezing your opinion on the latest trendy “issue” into every place you can, regardless of whether it is wanted or appropriate, is unlikely to win you traction from anyone but your own subculture. (As if gaming weren’t a small enough one…)