The Gender of "Men"

What a fun title! Anyway.

I replaced references to "men" with "humanfolk" throughout Fantastic Medieval Campaigns (at least, where applicable; in some cases, it was referring to tabletop figures, so there I replaced it with "figures"). This was because I felt that the word "men" is too overly gendered in context, compared to other terms on the same playing field: dwarves, elves, halflings, orcs, etc. The discourse of (O)D&D is that of males, anyway, which one can especially tell when women and children are given separate counts from the given numbers of monsters appearing. But when talking about species or races or whatever, the general terms are basically non-gendered.

That being said, I'm pretty aware of the etymology of "men"—that, originally, it referred to human beings rather than specifically to male human beings (which were called weremen, in contrast to female wifmen; the former is where we get "werewolf"!). I've heard it said pretty often that writers like Tolkien and Gygax refer to "men" in this old-timey sense, aiming to emulate the language of medieval people. Let me throw a wrench into that discourse: doubt!

"Men" in Tolkien

Tolkien himself seemed aware of the interplay between the historical and modern definitions of "man"/"men". The first thing that came to my mind was the scene in The Return of the King when the Witch-King mocks an opponent in battle, saying that no living man can kill him, unaware that he was fighting a woman. "I am no man!", she says in the movie. I wondered if the book had something to that effect (haven't read it since high school) and, surprise, it spells it out for the reader:

It seemed that Dernhelm laughed.... 'But no living man am I! You look upon a woman. Eowyn I am, Éomund's daughter. You stand between me and my lord and kin. Begone, if you be not deathless! For living or dark undead, I will smite you, if you touch him.'

No living man is she, but a woman. One wonders if the Witch-King simply assumed that Eowyn was a man (i.e. male), or if Middle Earth had experienced a linguistic shift like our own! Either way, Tolkien's pun only works if the reader was similarly misled by the same prophecy; that is, even if the reader is aware that Eowyn is a woman, they may be unaware up until this point that the prophecy about men does not apply to women (whether because they assumed a gender-neutral usage of "men", or because the possibility did not occur to them). This problematizes the interpretation of Tolkien's usage of "men" as gender-neutral, since Tolkien almost satirizes this linguistic ambiguity. As it were, the world of Middle Earth centers (male) men but it is sensitive to intrusion by women as a separate (and often excluded) entity-class from men.

"Females and Young" in Gygax

Gygax, on the other hand, doesn't play literary linguistic tricks like Tolkien does. The guy who wrote the random harlot table with wenches and tarts probably was not very interested in exploring the intersection between language and gender roles. This means that the question in his case is more straightforward: when talking about D&D, is the word "men" gendered or not? In my opinion, this conversation is not just about whether "men" is a gendered word, but also whether the "default" gender of a human being is male. OD&D does not really talk about females except in the context of monsters being parents to young, but the AD&D Monster Manual gives us a bit more to whet our appetite. Below is every reference to gendered monsters I could find.

Gendered Selections from Monster Manual

Baboons (p. 8):

The [baboon] tribe will be led by 2-8 large males (+ 1 hit point damage on attacks). Half the tribe will be young which will not attack.

Warthogs (p. 11):

Male and female [warthogs] fight equally. If 3-6 are encountered the balance will be young (1-2 hit dice, 1-3/2-5 hit points damage/attack).

Bugbears (p. 12):

If [bugbears are] encountered in their lair there will always be a chief and sub-chief, and there will be females and young equal to 50% each of the number of males.

Centaurs (p. 14):

If centaurs are encountered in their lair […] there will be found 1-6 additional males, females equal to twice the number of males, and young from 5-30 in number. Females (3 hit dice) and young (1-3 hit dice) do not use weapons and will only fight with their hooves in a life and death situation. If the females and young are threatened, the centaurs will be 90% likely to ransom them with their main treasure.

Succubi (p. 18):

These female demons are usually not found in numbers, for they prefer to act alone. A succubus in its natural form appears very much like a tall and very beautiful human female—although the bat-like wings immediately show the observer its true character. […] Succubi rule lower demons through wit and threat.

Mariliths (p. 19):

[Mariliths are] another of the female demons with a multiarmed female torso atop the body of a great snake.

Erinyes (p. 22):

[Erinyes] are female but can appear as male.

Tiamat (p. 32):

When encountered in her lair, Tiamat will always have five consort/guards with her – one huge, adult male dragon of the white, black, green, blue and red types respectively.

Dryads (p. 35):

These beautiful and alluring tree sprites [dryads] are found only in the most secluded places.

Dwarves (p. 35):

If [dwarves are] encountered in their lair (home) there will be in addition from 2-12 fighters of from 2nd to 5th level, and 2-8 fighter/clerics of from 2nd to 4th level (each category), and females and young equal to 50% and 25% respectively of the number of adult males.

Elves (p. 39):

If [elves are] encountered in their lair there will also be these extra figures: a 4th level fighter/7th level magic-user, a 4th level fighter for every 4 elves in the group, a 2nd level fighter/2nd level magic-user/2nd level cleric for every 40 elves in the group, a 5th level fighter, a 6th level fighter, and females and young equal to 100% and 5% respectively.

Although elves do not favor horses, certain bands of elves will have female fighters who will be mounted on unicorns, although this is rare (5%) and only from 10-30 of such warrior elfmaids are typically encountered.

Giants (pp. 44-5):

Young giants will have hit points and do damage according to the percentage of a normal adult male indicated by the die roll.

If 6 [cloud] giants are thus encountered, one of the young will be a full-grown male, one a full-grown female, and the other two sub-adults of either sex (1-3 male, 4-6 female).

If more than 4 fire giants are encountered in their lair the additional ones will be female (corresponding to frost giants for hit dice [10d8+1d4 instead of 11d8+1d4+1] and damage/attack), except that if 7 or 8 are encountered the last one or to will be young (roll percentile dice for size).

If more than 4 frost giants are encountered in their lair numbers 5 and 6 will be females (treat as stone giants with respect to hit dice [9d8+1d3 instead of 10d8+1d4] and damage/attack), and 7 and 8 will be young giants (roll percentile dice to determine size).

If more than 4 hill giants are encountered in their lair numbers 5, 7, and 9 will be giantesses (6 hit dice, and treat as ogres for damage/attack) and 6, 8, and 10 will be young hill giants (roll percentile dice for size).

If more than 4 stone giants are encountered in their lair numbers 5 and 6 will be female (treat as hill giants with regard to hit dice [8d8+1d2 instead of 9d8+1d3] and damage/attack), and numbers 7 and 8 will be young (roll percentile dice to determine size).

Gnolls (p. 46):

The [gnolls’] lair will also contain female and young equal to 50% and 200% respectively of the number of males present.

Gnomes (p. 46):

If [gnomes are] encountered in their lair (home) there will be the following additional gnomes: from 2-8 fighters of 2nd or 3rd level, 1-4 clerics of 2nd level, and females and young equal to 50% and 25% respectively of the number of adult males.

Goblins (p. 47):

In [the goblins’] lair there will be the following additional figures: a goblin chief and 2-8 bodyguards (9-14 hit points, armor class 4, fight as gnolls doing 2-8 hit points of damage), females and young equal to 60% and 100% respectively of the number of male goblins encountered. As is usual with creatures of this sort, the females and young do not fight.

Groaning spirits (p. 50):

The groaning spirit, or banshee, in the spirit of an evil female elf—a very rare thing indeed.

Halflings (p. 50):

If [halflings are] encountered in their lair there will be females and children equal to 100% and 60% respectively of the adult males indicated.

Harpies (p. 51):

Harpies have the bodies of vultures but the upper torsos and heads of women.

Hobgoblins (p. 52):

There are females and young equal in the [hobgoblins’] lair equal to 150% and 300% respectively of the number of males.

Large males will have blue-red noses.

Ki-rin (p. 57):

Female [ki-rin] are never encountered, and ki-rin are always solitary.

Kobolds (p. 57):

If 200 or more kobolds are encountered in their lair there will be the following additional creatures there: 5-20 guards (as bodyguards above, females equal to 50% of the total number, young equal to 10% of the total number, and 30-300 eggs.

Lamias (p. 59):

[Lamias’] upper torso, arms, and head resemble a human female, while their lower body is that of a beast.

Lions (p. 61):

Lions hunt in packs (prides), the males seldom doing any actual stalking/killing of prey. The lioness is the real huntress. […] Males, however, are ferocious fighters, and will actively defend their group territory. Male lions have armor class 5 forequarters and armor class 6 hindquarters, lionesses have the latter armor class. A typical pride consists of 1-3 males and 1-9 females. If found in their lair there will be 1-10 cubs from 30% to 60% grown which will not fight. There will be 1-4 lionesses with these cubs which will immediately attack.

Lycanthropes (p. 64):

Weretigers are quite similar to normal tigers in their habitat. They are most often female.

Family packs [of werewolves] can be family groups if they number from 5 to 8. Family packs consist of a male, female and 3 to 6 young of 60% to 90% growth. The male will fight at +2 to hit and full damage each time he hits if the female is attacked. If the cubs are attacked the female will attack at +3 to hit and do full damage possible each time she hits.

“Men” (p. 68)—there’s that word!

Cavemen always live in caves or caverns. There will be females and young equal to 10% and 50% respectively of the number of males encountered.

These men [tribesmen] live in villages of grass, bamboo or mud huts. […] The village will contain females and young equal to 100% of the males encountered. There is a 75% chance that there will be 20-50 slaves.

If nomads are encountered in their lair it is 90% likely to be on an encampment of tents (or yurts and carts) or an oasis or stream. There will be females there equal in number to 200% of the males, and children equal to 100% of their number. There will be from 10-100 slaves.

Nymphs (p. 74):

These beautiful, ever-young women inhabit the loveliest of wilderness places, grottos [sic] in the sea, clear lakes and streams, and crystalline caverns. […] if a nymph sees a human male with 18 charisma and good alignment before he sees her, it is 90% probable that the nymph will be favorably inclined towards the person.

Ogres (p. 75):

If ogres are found in their lair there will be from 2-12 females who fight as normal ogres but do only 2-8 points of damage [instead of 1-10] and take a maximum of 6 hit points per hit die [as opposed to from 1-8]. There will also be from 2-8 young who will fight as goblins.

Orcs (p. 76):

There will always be the following additional orcs when the encounter is in the creatures’ lair: a chief and 5-30 bodyguards (AC 4, 13-16 hit points, attack as monsters with 3 hit dice and do 2-8 hit points of damage), females equal to 50% of the number of males, young equal to 100% of the number of males.

Owlbears (p. 77):

The 1,300 to 1,500 pound [owlbear] males will be the darker colored.

Pegasi (p. 78):

A male specimen [of a pegasus] can carry weight equal to a medium warhorse (qv), a female equal to a light warhorse.

Perytons (p. 78):

The wing and back feathers are dark green, and the chest of the male peryton is light blue to medium blue, the females being drab.

Rakshasas (p. 81):

If more than one rakshasa is encountered in its lair, the group will be a male and 1 or more females.

Giant rams (p. 81):

All full-grown specimens [of giant rams], male or female, will conform to the above statistics. Males (giant rams), however, will charge to attack, delivering a butt of double the damage parameters shown.

Sahuagin (p. 84):

If sahuagin are encountered in their lair there will be the following additional sahuagin: 1 baron (6 hit dice + 6 hit points); 9 guards (3 hit dice + 3 hit points); 30-120 females (2 hit dice); 10-40 hatchlings (1 hit die); 20-80 eggs. Also, there is a 10% chance per 10 male sahuagin that there will be a cleric (evil) and 1-4 assistant priestesses, for the religious life of these creatures is dominated by the females.

The number of males, hatchlings, and eggs in a prince’s lair is double the number rolled.

Females are indisinguishable from males, except that they are slightly smaller.

Satyr (p. 89):

Only 1 satyr per band is likely to have pipes. If comely females are in the group the piping will be to charm. If the intruder is relatively inoffensive the piping will be to sleep (and choice items will be stolen from the sleeper), but if the party is powerful the piping will be to cause fear.

Sphinxes (p. 90):

The male, or andro-, sphinx is a very powerful and large creature. […] They usually shun the company of gynosphinxes, for they resent the females’ greater intelligence and neutral alignment.

The gynosphinx is the female counterpart of the androsphinx. They are both knowledgeable and wise.

Stags (p. 92):

[Stags] are the aggressive males of a herd which numbers 4-8 times the number of stags encountered.

Su-monsters (p. 93):

If more than 4 [su-monsters] are encountered it is likely (50%) that the group will be a male, female, and young (determine growth state by rolling a 20-sided die for maturity, using 10% increments and treating 10% as 20% and 100% as 30%). The female will fight at double value for six turns if the young are attacked, and the male will fight at double value for four turns if the female is attacked.

Tritons (p. 96):

If tritons are encountered in their lair there will always be the following additional figures: 60 males; 6 exceptional males of 4-6 hit dice; 3 exceptional males of 7-8 hit dice; 1 magic-user of 7th-10th level; 1 cleric of 8th-11th level; 4 clerics of 2nd-5th level; females equal to 100% of males; young equal to 100% of males.

Only male tritons will engage in combat, as a general rule.

Troglodytes (p. 97):

A [troglodyte] lair will contain females equal to 10% of the males. Females fight as 1 + 1 hit dice monsters (instead of 2 hit dice). There will also be hatchlings and eggs, but these are of no importance [!?].

Yeti (p. 103):

If [yeti are] found in their lair there is a 30% chance that there are 1-3 females there also, and a 15% chance of an additional 2-5 young if females are present.

There are also monsters like night hags and sylphs which are, of course, female—they're great examples of monsters being basically masculine unless otherwise stated, in that female monsters are specifically described as such. But the above criteria and selections pertain more directly to the conversation at hand. Most notably, the medusa is an "it" rather than a "she". Take from that what you will!

The art also speaks for itself.

Genders Appearing

Of the 41 monsters or categories of monsters to whose gender the book refers, 21 are in the context of determining the quantities of females, children, and males in a population.1 This is mostly in the context of social creatures, intelligent (as considered by Gygax) or not. The general rule is that small populations (of usually high hit dice values) have female and child numbers determined via separate rolls, whereas large populations (of low hit dice) count numbers of females and children as a percentile multiplier of the male population. Either way, the number of males seems to correspond to the “Number Appearing” value, which is to say that the male figure is the default figure for any monster group.

There are two notable exceptions: lions and kobolds. The total number of lions appearing is determined by rolling separately for d9 females and d3 males, for a total from 2 to 12.2 Kobolds, on the other hand, seem to be the only large monster population where females and children are given as a percentage of the total population rather than as a multiplier of a base male population (though this is not entirely clear, and they may be like the rest). Giants, su-monsters, and werewolves may seem to pose an interesting exception in that females and/or children are sort of counted as part of the “Number Appearing” statistic, but they do so in excess of a base number of males.

Regardless if “men” as Gygax uses it is technically genderless, the world and discourse of Gygax’s D&D is so male-centric that the distinction does not matter. We can attribute this to a number of reasons, notwithstanding the author's own personal bias in crafting a fantastic fictional world. For example, we can say that (generally speaking) men are also the default "figures" of warfare, economics, and even adventurism in patriarchal societies. At the same time, D&D is not a merely if at all a simulation of medieval history—much less a critical one—but a fantasy of that time period from a modern lens, which informs its viewpoints of gender (where the social dimension is a mere reflection of biology) just as race and class (to the same effect). So, let's cut the shit. Whether "men" or "men", D&D is about men—a specific subset imbued with racial superiority and class power, at that.

There could have been space here to talk about all this from a sort of Lacanian perspective, how patriarchal society standardizes (as it were) men's desires and transforms them into subjects of patriarchy, meanwhile transforming women into objects of exchange between men (the latter implied by the numbering of women and children—what interactions does this imply between the adventurers and the 'monsters', with regards to the women 'belonging' to either party?). Maybe even more generally about the exclusion of women or feminized individuals from formal spheres. But I think all the above could have been said without funky French Freudianism, so I said it without.

Conclusion

In the context of all this, I think my decision to translate "men" to "humanfolk" is the greatest betrayal of the original text. It even contradicts certain aspects of Fantastic Medieval Campaigns which remain unambiguously patriarchal, especially the focus on Lords and Patriarchs (lol). Why the wishiwashiness? On one level, I didn't want to mislead the reader as to the reality of D&D: it's patriarchal, and we should read it (and criticize it) as such. Yet, as a woman and as a participant in this hobby, I could not stand to contribute to the corpus of male fantasy adventure games. It's utterly frustrating.

My hope is that the word "humanfolk", by being a clumsy and obvious substitution, highlights the original word's significance by its exclusion. Maybe the reader, despite the text's otherwise patriarchal leaning, will read "humanfolk" instead of "men" and realize that the world is bigger than the power struggles of men. Maybe it will even problematize the anthropocentric perspective of the text, situating humanfolk not as the center of the fantasy world but as one "race" among many. I don't know.


  1. It is interesting in itself that these are the demographic divisions used, as if children—ungendered—exist on the same horizontal plane as adult females and males—now distinct and sexuated. ↩︎

  2. What the fuck, Gary? That could’ve easily been d8 and d4. Why d9? And how? ↩︎

Comments

  1. Fantastic post. Thorough , empirical, and convincing. -Josh, Hexbrawler

    ReplyDelete
  2. Tolkien's fictional prophecy fits the ancient type whereby ambiguity of prophetic words prompts hubris and downfall. Its prototypes include Herodotus' tale of King Croesus of Lydia, who is assured by prophecy that if he attacks his foes to the east, a great empire will fall. Whoops, though: it was his own empire that fell. He was misled by the ambiguity. Tolkien's fictional prophecy works just so on the ambiguity of the word "man," which means both "human" and "adult male," as you point out, and as Tolkien, philologist of Germanic languages, knew perfectly well. It might have been more impactful if we knew, while reading LotR, where the prophecy was made and had heard of it before that battle, but it's still a favorite scene because it relies on a paradox (in the sense of counter-intuitive outcome).

    It's worth mentioning that the types of characters imagined were initially defined by the miniatures available. I don't know the history of miniatures, but I think there were very few female figures available to wargamers before the mid-'70s, and if they were there, they were probably novelties or figures like "amazons," because they were designed to represent armed forces.

    I bet you are also aware of the debate among the first RPG players in the '70s, in the zines, in Dragon, and in game books, about whether female characters should have stats different from those of men. This was a big deal in a tiny hobby at the time. You probably know this essay, the best informed thing yet, by Jon Peterson:
    https://medium.com/@increment/the-first-female-gamers-c784fbe3ff37

    I wrote a blog post in 2020 about the doodles of topless women in early RPGs. It takes a lo-o-ong time to load (whole minutes for me, sigh), probably because I did something wrong with the images. Anyway, talking about "standardizing men's desires" as you put it:
    https://lichvanwinkle.blogspot.com/2020/10/the-topless-ladies-of-70s-role-playing.html

    There's also this short bit with a meaningful quote from Marc Miller, author of Traveller:
    https://lichvanwinkle.blogspot.com/2020/10/fantasy-as-response-to-sexism-in-role.html

    If you want to see some much more intense sex, gender, and racial stuff in an early RPG, though, take a look at early editions of Chivalry & Sorcery (from 1977), which Gygax regarded initially as a big threat, because players were shifting to it as a more "authentic," "realistic" medieval fantasy while AD&D was being released (and then came RuneQuest in '78). A good bit of Gygax's DMG responds to it indirectly, and the Unearthed Arcana Comeliness rules are modeled on C&S's Appearance stat.

    Apologies for so many notes. Thanks for another interesting post. :)

    PS I think the d9 bit is a typo.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. thank you for your thoughts and many links!!! :)

      Delete
  3. "Humanfolk" has the characteristic clunkiness of a game that started out with its magic-users and fighting-men, to be sure!

    ReplyDelete
  4. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The evidence for your main point about "men" in the (AD&D) PHB is overwhelming. B2 Keep on the Borderlands, written about the same time, is scrupulous in breaking down humanoid populations by age and sex and distinguishing the fighting capabilities and propensities of the males, females and children.

      Re: "What the fuck, Gary? That could’ve easily been d8 and d4. Why d9? And how?"

      Yup. I agree he probably didn't think this through.

      A lot of early D&D material expresses what we interpret to be die rolls as number ranges e.g. "2-12", instead of spelling out specific dice to be rolled e.g. "2d6", "1d3+1d9", "5d3-3", "1d11+1" etc. The latter would have been much less ambiguous.

      The text of the PHB does not specify 1d3 males + 1d9 females. It says total number appearing "2-12", and "a typical pride consists of 1-3 males and 1-9 females". No dice rolls specified.

      This ambiguity is often irritating and adds a cognitive load, but it is consistent with the general permission early D&D grants the DM to choose rather than roll results. The DM can elect to use dice to determine those numbers. But the DM can also just decide how many males, and how many females, by other means, i.e. 1-3 and 1-9 can be taken as guidelines not die rolling instructions.

      Looking at this, I suspect Gygax had a pre-existing list that gave the total number appearing as 2-12, and only decided when writing the PHB that he needed to provide a breakdown by sex.

      If he was determined to stick to 2-12, why not 1-4 males and 1-8 females? Because 1) He thought the number of males should be 1-3. And yes, if the case, it implies that the number of females was a secondary consideration; and 2) He wasn't rigidly attached to rolling dice according to a fixed formula?

      (If he'd really been thinking about it, he would have allowed the possibility of zero males - an occasional state of affairs in the real world. As to the zero females case, yes that could also be considered; I have an idea that "pride" is not usually applied to an all-male group of lions)

      Going out further out on my own precarious limb, I'd say Gygax would not have been upset if the DM were to roll 2d6 for the total number appearing, then 1d3 for the number of those that were male, leaving the balance of the first roll as female. This does entail a fudge in rare cases if the 2d6 roll is 2 or 3, to make sure there is at least one lioness.

      This leaves the number of females as a residual after counting the 1d3 males, and certainly reinforces your main point. But I don't know what his thought process really was, and the fact that this approach occurred to me might display my bias , not his.

      Delete
    2. hey kenco, thank you for your thoughts!! :) it's really interesting that ranges may have served as just that, not dice formulas but just the general range in which something might show up or occur. your algorithm still works if you start with the females, rolling 1-9 out of the original 2-12 and making sure there is at least one male. a matter of presentation! 😄

      Delete
  5. It does work that way, for sure, but I don't own d9; whereas a d3 is trivial to read from a d6. I try to use standard dice for my own stuff. Honestly, 1d8 + 1d4 would have worked fine.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. i am sorry i was so tired yesterday that i forgot d9 was precisely the issue

      Delete
  6. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Fun post. Tolkien's use of man in the Eowyn bit becomes interesting when considered in light of how he chose to translate Rohan speech. They often use Old English. This gets misread, and Anglo-Saxon qualities thrust onto a people that aren't appreciably English. The purpose isn't to imply their Englishness, but to suggest the relationship of their language to the common speech. It's meant to say, "These people don't speak the same as most, but their language isn't entirely alien like that of the elves."

    Where it gets fun is that in Anglo-Saxon, "Mann" is about as gender neutral as it gets. Wifmann is for women. I've never personally run into wermann in my reading, but I've not read the whole corpus, and AS isn't my strongest language. You do get waepnedmann (weapon'd man, where weapon means both weapon and penis, the word having not yet decided which it will mean), and wer as a separate word for specifically males. But despite Old English with its gender-neutral "man" being used for Eowyn's culture, she seems to hear whatever word the Witch-King says in a specifically gendered way, while he hears it as gender neutral. So whatever the theoretical underlying Westron word is, its relationship to Rohan speech is the reverse of Modern English "Man" to Old English "Mann."

    The Westron term for Man doesn't seem to have been invented. Not surprising. But given the way real-life languages are used in LotR, I strongly suspect that the Eowyn/Witch-King pun relies on a speculative difference in dialect that clouds the Witch King's interpretation of the prophesy. He's not used to using whatever word he said in a gendered way, but Eowyn is.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. hi michael, thank you for the fascinating background behind tolkien's pun! i love that there actually is an in-universe explanation for the seeming miscommunication between the characters. on a tangent, it's interesting that waepned has that double meaning---that must have some symbolic implications for their society, especially thinking about the similar origin of "vagina" as well. like, it's interesting that you would expect waepned in the weapon sense to be used against other men. thank you again!!

      Delete
  8. Tolkien did have a helpful tendency to capitalize Men when he was talking about the species. Not 100% by any stretch, but it's a lot more straightforward than it is in D&D.

    To me the obvious source for the prophecy and its ambiguity has been the prophecy re MacDuff in Macbeth. Though of course, Tolkien's solution is different.

    I must say that your sentence about problematization is...well, it reads like modern academic writing and not in the good way. Which is unusual for you.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. hi, thank you for the helpful context on tolkien!

      do you mean this sentence?

      > This problematizes the interpretation of Tolkien's usage of "men" as gender-neutral, since Tolkien almost satirizes this linguistic ambiguity.

      you can replace "problematizes" with "contradicts" or "complicates". that is, tolkien's pun complicates the idea that he uses the word "men" in a gender-neutral sense because, by making the pun, tolkien acknowledges a gender-neutral reading and directly contradicts it.

      Delete
  9. From a non-english-mothertongue standpoint this entire discussion is somewhat amusing. I mean yeah, you don't get generic professions in German ("Arzt" is a male doctor, "Ärztin" his female colleague. "Krieger" or warrior is male) but "Mensch" means human being while "Mann" is just a man, while "Frau" is woman. Don't know where the linguistic split happened though.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

D&D Fifth Edition: Death & Rebirth

OSR Rules Families

Bite-Sized Dungeons