Replies

I wonder if this Breitbart author knows what he's talking about? His claim is that this Stanford Prof's article talks about "white privilege" and "male privilege" in D&D. Yet the only supporting documentation, the only quotes he provides, is the text of this abstract:

"Focusing on how the tabletop role-playing game Dungeons & Dragons is built on a system of play that has grown and shifted over the course of 40 years, this study emphasizes the central role that systems play in mediating the experiences of participants. By focusing on depictions of gender, race, and power in Dungeons & Dragons — as a singular cultural practice — this study highlights how researchers must attend to cultural production both around and within systems."

That sounds pretty innocuous to me. Besides that quote, the only link that Breitbart gives is to a page on tandfonline.com that contains only that exact same quote, and a means by which you can pay $$ for access to the entire publication that this article was included in (p 232-246 of how many more "scholarly articles"? ... no thanks!)

Also, this same author has been hanging out at D&D games here in Ft Collins for years, taking notes (funded by a $70K research grant), and the resulting articles he's published on D&D seems to be supportive, not adversarial. Eg, at this link:
http://mediax.stanford.edu/events/dungeons-dragons-in-an-era-of-terror-nationalism-and-gamergate
he contrasts paper & dice board-games like D&D favorably with digital/online games: "...this talk explores how the roots of tabletop gaming foster collaboration, learning, and player agency. Further, through dialogue and historical analysis, this research considers how non-digital forms of interactive media are enacted in an era fueled by online vitriol, nationalism, and gamergate...."

We already have enough people on the Left who are looking under every rock for evidence of White Male Privilege that isn't there. We don't also need anyone on OUR side looking under every rock for WMP-seeking Lefties who aren't there. There are plenty of well-documented cases of leftists imagining WMP, so why do we need to imagine more cases of the same that might not exist?

With *any* type of persuasive argument, as you state your case by collecting anecdotes that back you up, there is a fatal temptation to stretch your list out to the max by including "just a few more" bullet points that deep down you know or suspect shouldn't be on your list. When you do that, the other side will seize on those 1 or 2 items, debunk them, and use that to destroy your entire argument in the eyes of others.