@Roz said in Gray Harbor Discussion:
...is actually an entirely different conversation than the one people were talking about. It's definitely come up on the board in the past for people to chew over, talking about the value and feasibility of flexing history to set certain oppressions to the background, but it's not really related to the points that were being discussed. Which is more "these people have existed everywhere in every point of history, even if they haven't been publicly presenting as such."
Okay, sure. I hear ya, but I also think there's a heavy weight of bias in play that lends to the assumption of prevalence.
What's truly at play is simply that people want their own personal demographics to not be excluded. No one wants a game, even fictitious, denying them access to play a demographic that they personally identify with.
I'm just saying that if said setting didn't allow for a certain demographic without good reason doesn't really automatically make it bigotry. I think there's some reasonable wiggle room.