Are the Lashunta a sexist trope?

[BigNorseWolf]

Kobold Cleaver wrote:

Sci-Fi and Fantasy as genres are littered with the bones of authors who used the genre for self-gratification, or to push racist or sexist ideas about people. H.P. Lovecraft is only the most well-agreed-upon example.

So we'd be better off if lovecraft hadn't written anything?

[Gaekub]

I've seen a couple say earlier in the thread that as long as only one race exhibits strong sexual dimorphism they don't see the issue, but I kind of feel the opposite way. As long as you only have one it's always going to be seen as a statement on human sexuality. If there were multiple races each with their own form of sexual dimorphism, I think people would feel a lot more comfortable with it (at least I would).

[davrion]

Guessing Lovecraft discussion will just derail things in this thread

[thejeff]

Archmage Variel wrote:

Dysphoria is basically just a state of unease or generalized dissatisfaction with something, in this case one's gender. It's often confused as a mental disorder, as the original name was "gender identity disorder". The treatment of gender dysphoria is basically like every other form of dysphoria for the most part, talk to a therapist about how you're feeling in order to work on the sources of discomfort. The only difference is that if the individual wishes, they can transition, which may also ease the dysphoria (although with other sources of stress within the individuals live this wouldn't be a total fix). Not everyone who is trangender experiences gender dysphoria, although due to the current environment of our society which has a tendency to depict transgender individuals as being sexual deviants, it likely happens fairly often (I'm too lazy to look up a scientific poll right now).

Neh, I get how the gender dysphoria works. I'm less clear on the "trans without dysphoria", though KC's mention of "gender euphoria" helped.

As I understand it though (which as proven above may not be very well :)), gender dysphoria isn't linked to how people are treated in society, it's more fundamental than that. Transitioning (even just HRT) often relieves much of the dysphoria, while often exposing the individual to even more discrimination.

[Archmage Variel]

thejeff wrote:

Archmage Variel wrote:

Dysphoria is basically just a state of unease or generalized dissatisfaction with something, in this case one's gender. It's often confused as a mental disorder, as the original name was "gender identity disorder". The treatment of gender dysphoria is basically like every other form of dysphoria for the most part, talk to a therapist about how you're feeling in order to work on the sources of discomfort. The only difference is that if the individual wishes, they can transition, which may also ease the dysphoria (although with other sources of stress within the individuals live this wouldn't be a total fix). Not everyone who is trangender experiences gender dysphoria, although due to the current environment of our society which has a tendency to depict transgender individuals as being sexual deviants, it likely happens fairly often (I'm too lazy to look up a scientific poll right now).

Neh, I get how the gender dysphoria works. I'm less clear on the "trans without dysphoria", though KC's mention of "gender euphoria" helped.

As I understand it though (which as proven above may not be very well :)), gender dysphoria isn't linked to how people are treated in society, it's more fundamental than that. Transitioning (even just HRT) often relieves much of the dysphoria, while often exposing the individual to even more discrimination.

Well one of the treatment suggestions (at least those proposed by psychiatry.org) is introducing relatives to counseling and groups to help them better "create a supportive environment". Obviously you can't stop everyone from prejudging, but creating a supportive family environment is more where I was trying to go with that.

[thejeff]

Gaekub wrote:

I've seen a couple say earlier in the thread that as long as only one race exhibits strong sexual dimorphism they don't see the issue, but I kind of feel the opposite way. As long as you only have one it's always going to be seen as a statement on human sexuality. If there were multiple races each with their own form of sexual dimorphism, I think people would feel a lot more comfortable with it (at least I would).

I kind of agree. I've always liked some of the weirder aliens in SF. More than 2 genders. Switching genders during the lifecycle. Varley-style centaurs. Species even more dymorphic, with mating patterns that match - Cherryh's Hani, for example, based on lion pride structures.

Of course, the farther you get from "human with a twist", the harder it gets to immerse and play the character well. The harder it gets for even professional SF authors to pull off.

[thejeff]

BigNorseWolf wrote:

Kobold Cleaver wrote:

Sci-Fi and Fantasy as genres are littered with the bones of authors who used the genre for self-gratification, or to push racist or sexist ideas about people. H.P. Lovecraft is only the most well-agreed-upon example.

So we'd be better off if lovecraft hadn't written anything?

Nah, we just want to avoid dragging in the nastier elements when drawing from some of the inspirations.

[Rednal]

Gaekub wrote:

I've seen a couple say earlier in the thread that as long as only one race exhibits strong sexual dimorphism they don't see the issue, but I kind of feel the opposite way. As long as you only have one it's always going to be seen as a statement on human sexuality. If there were multiple races each with their own form of sexual dimorphism, I think people would feel a lot more comfortable with it (at least I would).

That's basically what I'd been suggesting earlier, yes. Have a race with "pretty" females and "rugged" males. Have a race with "rugged" females and "handsome" males, too. Have a three-gender race. Have a race that transitions gender whenever it wants. Have a race that simply doesn't have gender in the first place. Apparently we're going to have quite a few racial options, so why not support a bunch of different ideas and concepts?

[Nicos]

Rednal wrote:

Gaekub wrote:

I've seen a couple say earlier in the thread that as long as only one race exhibits strong sexual dimorphism they don't see the issue, but I kind of feel the opposite way. As long as you only have one it's always going to be seen as a statement on human sexuality. If there were multiple races each with their own form of sexual dimorphism, I think people would feel a lot more comfortable with it (at least I would).

That's basically what I'd been suggesting earlier, yes. Have a race with "pretty" females and "rugged" males. Have a race with "rugged" females and "handsome" males, too. Have a three-gender race. Have a race that transitions gender whenever it wants. Have a race that simply doesn't have gender in the first place. Apparently we're going to have quite a few racial options, so why not support a bunch of different ideas and concepts?

There is a three-gender race. A race without gender would be the androids?

And the answer to your last question could be that they are already supporting a variety (of a kind) of ideas and concepts, but their creative energy and printing space is finite. Also, they have other things to think about, so they can't play around with sexes, genders and be politically correct all the time.

[Gaekub]

Rednal wrote:

Gaekub wrote:

I've seen a couple say earlier in the thread that as long as only one race exhibits strong sexual dimorphism they don't see the issue, but I kind of feel the opposite way. As long as you only have one it's always going to be seen as a statement on human sexuality. If there were multiple races each with their own form of sexual dimorphism, I think people would feel a lot more comfortable with it (at least I would).

That's basically what I'd been suggesting earlier, yes. Have a race with "pretty" females and "rugged" males. Have a race with "rugged" females and "handsome" males, too. Have a three-gender race. Have a race that transitions gender whenever it wants. Have a race that simply doesn't have gender in the first place. Apparently we're going to have quite a few racial options, so why not support a bunch of different ideas and concepts?

Ah, sorry, I thought I'd read something like that but then couldn't find it when I scanned back through the thread. Apologies!

[Tom Kalbfus]

Kobold Cleaver wrote:

Fantasy is art. Art is political. Saying, "It's just a fantasy," is equivalent to saying, "It's just a story. It's just fiction." By that logic, not even Birth of a Nation could be called racist.

Tom Kalbfus wrote:

Since when has a pretty woman become sexist? Should women try to look "fat and dumpy" in order to be politically correct? It is fantasy after all isn't it? They are all fictional characters so you can make them as pretty or as ugly as you like. Maybe some jealous women don't like the artwork because it depicts women who are prettier than they are, the old "Snow White/Evil Queen" troupe isn't it?

Ironically, in the same post insisting that there is no sexism at play, you made a sexist remark about feminists. Well done.

It is just an observation, if feminists go in the direction of saying there is something is wrong with being a pretty woman, I have to speculate why, maybe they are just covering up their jealousy with politically correct outrage. We all get old and ugly, beauty doesn't last, it is a sign of poor character when feminists attack young women for looking pretty because they don't look as pretty anymore and are jealous. Men are attracted to pretty women, that is biology working, its not our fault. We are genetically programmed to be attracted to pretty women in order to maximize our chances of having healthy offspring. So women are not supposed to look so pretty because all are supposed to be equal, even when they are not. Don't worry beauty doesn't last. There will always be some younger women that replace those that grow old. These are fictional characters, they might as well be pretty if the artist is going to the trouble of painting them. You want fat and dumpy, go right ahead. Anyway men are not supposed to look pretty, they are supposed to look strong, because that is what women are looking for, a mate that can help protect her offspring, and pass on traits to that offspring that would help with survival of the next generation. That is how evolution works after all. No conscious decisions are made about this. Men don't decide to be attracted to pretty women, they just are. Women don't decide to be attracted to strong looking men, they just are. Do you want men and women to fight nature and do the opposite of their inclination? Do you want men to date ugly women because they feel sorry for them? Do you want women to date short wimpy looking men because they feel sorry for them?

[thejeff]

Luckily no one here is saying what you think you're hearing, so it's all pretty much moot.

[Tom Kalbfus]

Kobold Cleaver wrote:

Fantasy is art. Art is political. Saying, "It's just a fantasy," is equivalent to saying, "It's just a story. It's just fiction." By that logic, not even Birth of a Nation could be called racist.

Tom Kalbfus wrote:

Since when has a pretty woman become sexist? Should women try to look "fat and dumpy" in order to be politically correct? It is fantasy after all isn't it? They are all fictional characters so you can make them as pretty or as ugly as you like. Maybe some jealous women don't like the artwork because it depicts women who are prettier than they are, the old "Snow White/Evil Queen" troupe isn't it?

Ironically, in the same post insisting that there is no sexism at play, you made a sexist remark about feminists. Well done.

I've never seen Birth of a Nation, I am told it is racist, a more recent movie I have seen is Gone With the Wind, some people consider that racist because it depicts "happy slaves" that are not constantly being whipped and beaten by their owners. it is told from the Southern point of view of course, so those Yankees are rascals burning down Atlanta and putting the plantation house Tara to the torch. Scarlet was always playing mind games with her various wannabe lovers leading them on, flirting with each of them and pitting them against each other all for her enjoyment. Finally Rhett Butler got tired of it all and just left her. "Frankly my dear, I just don't give a damn!" The End!

[Archmage Variel]

Tom Kalbfus wrote:

Kobold Cleaver wrote:

Fantasy is art. Art is political. Saying, "It's just a fantasy," is equivalent to saying, "It's just a story. It's just fiction." By that logic, not even Birth of a Nation could be called racist.

Tom Kalbfus wrote:

Since when has a pretty woman become sexist? Should women try to look "fat and dumpy" in order to be politically correct? It is fantasy after all isn't it? They are all fictional characters so you can make them as pretty or as ugly as you like. Maybe some jealous women don't like the artwork because it depicts women who are prettier than they are, the old "Snow White/Evil Queen" troupe isn't it?

Ironically, in the same post insisting that there is no sexism at play, you made a sexist remark about feminists. Well done.

It is just an observation, if feminists go in the direction of saying there is something is wrong with being a pretty woman, I have to speculate why, maybe they are just covering up their jealousy with politically correct outrage. We all get old and ugly, beauty doesn't last, it is a sign of poor character when feminists attack young women for looking pretty because they don't look as pretty anymore and are jealous. Men are attracted to pretty women, that is biology working, its not our fault. We are genetically programmed to be attracted to pretty women in order to maximize our chances of having healthy offspring. So women are not supposed to look so pretty because all are supposed to be equal, even when they are not. Don't worry beauty doesn't last. There will always be some younger women that replace those that grow old. These are fictional characters, they might as well be pretty if the artist is going to the trouble of painting them. You want fat and dumpy, go right ahead. Anyway men are not supposed to look pretty, they are supposed to look strong, because that is what women are looking for, a mate that can help protect her offspring, and pass on traits to that offspring that would help with survival of the next generation....

I think you're confusing people not wanting oversexualization with people not wanting attractive characters portrayed in games. It's more an issue with the depictions of lashunta in the past being naked fanservice pieces. No one is "saying there is something is wrong with being a pretty woman". I have yet to see anyone make that assertion.

[Tom Kalbfus]

Yes there are a lot of those. I think outright porn doesn't belong in RPG games, I mean who wants that? You can allude to that of course, and children get born somehow, one doesn't have to get overly descriptive. Frankly porn is a bit embarrassing.

[thejeff]

It really is impressive how people can read the same words (I assume) and understand completely different things from them.
I say that apropos of nothing, of course.

[Sara Marie]

If we have a female of a race that looks sexually attractive to the stereotypical current male population of humans, we get conversations about how likely said males are to want to have sex with these women.

If we have a female of a race that does not look sexually attractive to the stereotypical current population of male humans, we get conversations about how no one wants to engage in sex with these “aliens” (bonus points for the guys that jump into say they would still be sexually attracted to them, like its a favor).

The problem isn’t how sexually attractive or not sexually attractive the females of a race are.

The problem is how we can’t have a female character or race in a book without having a conversation on our public forums turn into a diatribe on how sexually desirable they are or ought to be to appease the male gaze.

The Pathfinder community comes from a lot of backgrounds. We have a lot of women who play the games, who write the words, paint the pictures & maps, who work for Paizo in almost every aspect of the company, editing content, laying out books and pawns & card decks, fixing your broken orders, shipping your packages, and captaining the company. Threads like this make the forums a less welcoming place for women and folks who may not conform to stereotypes of men.

“Are the Lashunta a sexist trope?” is a fine discussion to have, but how this thread has progressed is not ok. It encompasses a whole spectrum of problematic attitudes and commentary that is directly hurtful to people; people we want to encourage to participate in our community.

Devolving the thread into another back and forth about what’s sexually attractive to your assumptions about what men want is not okay. Assuming the reason people might be tired of the overtly sexually attractive female alien trope is because they’re ugly, old, jealous women is a toxic attitude and is not okay. If you really want to have that discussion and espouse those views, take it off of paizo.com because we are done with it here.

There are a number of posts that on their own are worthy of removal, however, they are not being removed. The thread has been closed and the posts in it will remain, serving as examples of what we mean when we talk about sexism in gaming and what is not okay on our forums.

Help us foster a fun and friendly atmosphere on our public forum. Thanks!

edit: I've received some feedback from several folks wondering why some specific posts were not removed. I've updated my "thread closing comment" to reflect some of the moderation philosophy on why those posts haven't been removed.