let's talk about queer art and censorship. As you may know, my module Curse of Hearts (shown) was deactivated by the Dungeon Master's Guild yesterday after we failed to reach an agreement about pieces of internal art deemed too provocative for a 'kid/teen friendly' environment

now, any of us who know mainstream RPGs are familiar with images like these

I'd like to draw your attention in particular to the images on the far right (they come up later)

These images (all women) are supplied to new D&D creators as part of the art resources approved for use.

So anyway back to the email I received. Very polite and professional, and it suggested that my work contained obscene material, and was not appropriate for a "kid or teen friendly" environment, and nor was it within the bounds of good taste. I was given a chance to correct this.

The D&D kid friendly standard is demonstrated in the 5th edition monster manual (a core book) eg. the succubus, which "whispers forbidden desires","fills the victim’s dreams with debauched images" and "seduces...its victim, indulging all its desires" (MM p.285)

but I digress

the first censored image from Curse of Hearts ( @LluisAbadias) is on the left. I was asked to change it because he was 'fondling a nipple' and it was suggestive.

Note the accompanying images, the latter of which features a naked woman pushing her breasts in someone's face.

The second image I was asked to censor was the headless knight. Ok. Fair cop, I suppose. I didn't even mind censoring it, but alas despite following the guidelines I received in the first email my alterations (shown on the right) were deemed adversarial and inadequate

I've thought about this a lot overnight, and whilst the commentary was intended to be tongue in cheek, I'm not sure there are any credible grounds for banning the art despite my covering the offensive area as requested because they don't like the way I complied

The third image (depicted on the left) I was not required to censor, though it was strongly suggested I do so, as there was a "higher risk" WOTC would ask it to be taken down. Again, I present the art it would be sharing a storefront with.

Now, I think it's important to note that I don't mind if the Guild or WOTC want to keep their products free of sexual material. What I -do- ask is that they wield their authority and discretion consistently to empower all creators regardless of orientation

And this really is the crux of the problem isn't it? I'm being asked to cover non-existent nipples on art designed for queers and women, while some art designed for straight men goes unnoticed for months or is actively enabled

Curse of Hearts was censored almost -immediately-

Part of the reason I wrote this module in the first place was to demonstrate some points about the kind of art we allow and don't allow. I didn't expect to become the victim of my own success in quite such a dramatic fashion, but there you are.

So, going forward.

I don't expect the Guild to change their mind. They've very kindly agreed to let me find Curse of Hearts another home, which in all truth they didn't have to do. So that's what I'll be doing.

What -would- be helpful is if you notice art that feels uncomfortable to you, let the guild team know.

Send it in, post it in, carrier pigeon it in. They are always inundated with new products, and am sure they will want to hold others to the same standards I've been held to.

PLEASE NOTE: All the guild staff I interacted with weren't unkind, and I do believe they acted in good faith. Acting badly towards them doesn't do much but trickle down to harm me in the end.

If you have comments, please please keep this a professional dialogue for my sake.

On a final note, I DO think it shows a particular disregard for queer culture to deactivate a satirical homage to gay art history no more provocative in content than Tom of Finland (arguably less so), during Pride month. But that's just me being bitter.