Quote from: ForgottenF on May 29, 2024, 03:52:26 PMI sometimes think we need like a 20 year moratorium on the word "racism", until we can all chill out and agree on what it actually means.

Yep. According to the activists, Howard is racist because white people are inherently racist.

Quote from: ForgottenF on May 29, 2024, 03:52:26 PMI sometimes think we need like a 20 year moratorium on the word "racism", until we can all chill out and agree on what it actually means.

Anybody who reads much REH is likely to come away with the impression that the concept of race loomed pretty large in his thought (as it did of many authors of his time), and he had a particularly high opinion of the Celtic and Anglo-Saxon races. I think it's completely fair to say that "The Last White Man" expresses a degree of animosity and/or fear to what Howard would have thought of as "the African Race", but from what I can find, the version we have is an unfinished manuscript, and we don't know what Howard submitted to Weird Tales as a finished product. It's also interesting that the story appears to have been written in or around 1925, very early in Howard's career. That would mean it was followed shortly thereafter with the Solomon Kane stories (published 1928-32, with the first probably being written in 1927), which are probably the Howard stories in which Africans are most positively portrayed.

As far as the Conan stories go, I'd be reluctant to ascribe racial animosity to anything in them, simply because Howard pretty universally stereotypes and/or caricatures real world cultures to come up with their Hyborian analogues, and he can be surprisingly even-handed. Just as the Africans who get a pretty rough characterization in "Shadows in Zamboula" get a much more sympathetic one in something like "Wings in the Night" or "The Footfalls Within", Howard's own beloved Picts get remade from the Kull stories, in which they are noble savages par excellence, to the Conan ones, where they are made out savages of the least noble kind, and then get kind of rehabilitated via the Bran Mak Morn stories.

All of that is a long way round to go to say that I'm not enough of a Howard scholar to pronounce judgment on his racial views. What I will say is this: Howard is usually discussed in the same breath as HP Lovecraft. The stance I've long taken on Lovecraft is that whatever his suspect attitudes on topics like race might have been, he deserves some extra leeway because he was a spectacularly neurotic person, and we probably owe that neuroticism in no small degree for the extraordinary imagination that gave us his best work. I generally get a lot of agreement on that point. Howard hasn't been anywhere near as thoroughly psychoanalyzed in the years since his death, but given that he committed suicide at age 30, he probably deserves some of the same charity.

At any rate, there's something pretty distasteful about spitting on a man's grave while profiting hugely from his life's work. Any one who appreciates fantasy, horror, historical fiction, or sword-and-sorcery should probably be prepared to cut REH an immense amount of slack on whatever his personal failings might have been, out of regard for his contributions to the culture.

10 yard penalty for having a reasonable, thought out post.

This is all of course a distraction from the point that the original article is terrible and very likely the author hasn't spent nearly as much time considering REH and Conan as has been spent in this discussion. He's simply using activist shorthand for "problematic content" in the hobby to justify his activism.

Quote from: Ratman_tf on May 29, 2024, 04:01:59 PM

Quote from: ForgottenF on May 29, 2024, 03:52:26 PMI sometimes think we need like a 20 year moratorium on the word "racism", until we can all chill out and agree on what it actually means.
....

Any one who appreciates fantasy, horror, historical fiction, or sword-and-sorcery should probably be prepared to cut REH an immense amount of slack on whatever his personal failings might have been, out of regard for his contributions to the culture.

10 yard penalty for having a reasonable, thought out post.

This is all of course a distraction from the point that the original article is terrible and very likely the author hasn't spent nearly as much time considering REH and Conan as has been spent in this discussion. He's simply using activist shorthand for "problematic content" in the hobby to justify his activism.

LOL.

I mean honestly, I didn't think the original article was even worth discussing. It's the kind of low-thought, low-effort tripe that identity politics grifters are probably able to crap out on automatic pilot, and do on a regular basis. The only thing that makes it worth the bits it's printed on is that people on this forum decided to use it as a jumping off point to discuss topics with a degree of substance to them.

Quote from: jhkim on May 29, 2024, 01:05:18 PM

Quote from: blackstone on May 29, 2024, 11:26:54 AMTaking REH and HPL out of the context of the time they live and wrote does a disservice to them. Yes, they may have been racist viewed from a "modern" standpoint, but it doesn't matter. Their view on race for the time period was considered normal. It doesn't make it right or wrong. It's a product of it's time. So, those of you saying REH and HPL racists are taking them out of historical context, no matter how truthful and uncomfortable that makes you feel.

It's about facts, not feelings.

It's not postmodernist to think words like "racism" should have a consistent and objective meaning. Yes, racism was common in REH's time -- but even at the time, there were people who used the term "racism" and opposed it.

By claiming that it is not postmodernism to think that "racism" should have the same definition as today as 100 years ago is something only a racist like jhkim would think!

Thinking about it a bit further, it might not be fair to use "The Last White Man" to evaluate Howard at all. If it was written in or before 1925, Howard was probably 20 or 21 at the time. The fact that later in life, he didn't re-work it and try to get it published (which he routinely did with rejected stories) suggests he probably didn't think it was his best work. I know I wouldn't want to be held to either my political opinions or the quality of my prose at that age.

EDIT: Also, I did not know until today that Robert E Howard wrote sleazy bodice-ripper romance stories under the pseudonym "Sam Walser". It is a pity those aren't still in print, because they're probably hilarious.

Quote from: ForgottenF on May 29, 2024, 05:05:17 PMThinking about it a bit further, it might not be fair to use "The Last White Man" to evaluate Howard at all. If it was written in or before 1925, Howard was probably 20 or 21 at the time. The fact that later in life, he didn't re-work it and try to get it published (which he routinely did with rejected stories) suggests he probably didn't think it was his best work. I know I wouldn't want to be held to either my political opinions or the quality of my prose at that age.

EDIT: Also, I did not know until today that Robert E Howard wrote sleazy bodice-ripper romance stories under the pseudonym "Sam Walser". It is a pity those aren't still in print, because they're probably hilarious.

I wasn't aware of that. The good news? Some are out of copyright and available online: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Author:Robert_Ervin_Howard#Spicy_stories

I know what I'm reading this evening.

Quote from: Krazz on May 29, 2024, 03:42:54 PMSo fine, let me give an updated response
...
The stories by Howard that influenced D&D, especially his Conan works, have oodles of explicit beauty and romance, as well as some grace. They also contain blood, brutality and butchery, which to many adds to their charm. I've not seen any evidence of any of Howard's stories being overtly racist, though some contain in-world racism.

There. Do you disagree with any of that?

Thank you for the clarification (and for reading the story), but yes, I do disagree with that.

I think that "The Last White Man" is overtly racist as a story. The depiction of black people invading Europe to kill off all the hated whites is not portrayed as a delusion, but as events that actually happened. That is not a function of the character - it is a depiction by the author. The race war depicted and the characterizations of the black race all are evidence of racist thinking in the world events themselves, not just the mind of the protagonist.

Quote from: ForgottenF on May 29, 2024, 05:05:17 PMThinking about it a bit further, it might not be fair to use "The Last White Man" to evaluate Howard at all. If it was written in or before 1925, Howard was probably 20 or 21 at the time. The fact that later in life, he didn't re-work it and try to get it published (which he routinely did with rejected stories) suggests he probably didn't think it was his best work. I know I wouldn't want to be held to either my political opinions or the quality of my prose at that age.

I don't claim that either Howard's writing or his politics at that age define him later. Like everyone, he changes over time. He is more than this one story. Still, particularly if one enjoys an author, it is worthwhile and interesting to read their early works, like Tolkien's unpublished "Book of Lost Tales" that has a lot of his later mythology.

None of that denies that this story is, in fact, racist - and it shows evidence of his racist thought at this time.

This is a sticky point because there are many posters who are insisting that it is not racist.

I am happy to discuss more about evidence of racism in Conan stories, but discussion of that should be in the context of this disagreement over "The Last White Man".

Quote from: Omega on May 15, 2024, 11:24:32 PMWhoo boy is this one a mess. A friend recently pointed this out to me from a Reddit post they saw.

https://www.rascal.news/hack-the-orcs-loot-the-tomb-and-take-the-land/

QuoteEven so, when I started to create my characters, it wasn't the brash (white) warriors who appealed to me, or the dignified (white) princelings seeking to regain their thrones, or the noble (white) paladins charging down the dragons to rescue the swooning (white) maidens in distress. These weren't characters who reflected where we lived or where we came from. I struggled with shame about my little mountain town, far from what I envisioned as the center of culture, art, and intellectual achievement, but I loved the place, too; and so, to manage the cognitive dissonance, I began imagining myself in worlds of magic and mystery where difference was valued, not despised, where the game's explicit insistence on the dungeon master's (DM's) ultimate authority as storyteller made it possible to ignore the parts that wounded and enhance those that empowered, no matter what the canonical rule books might otherwise state. The DM was the ultimate creator of worlds through story, and that was something I understood at a visceral level.

So another 50th Anniversary of D&D book thats a cover for some woke screed.

Look, not everyone is going to be into the sort of pulpy sword and sorcery sort of fantasy that D&D was initially based on. I can appreciate it but it's not my preferred sort of fantasy. But this sorry excuse for a person is complaining about their own lack of imagination. If all I want are strong warrior women, Red Sonja has been there for years. One of my favorite types of heroines are the jungle goddesses of comic books who live alongside dangerous animals in the wild rainforests. There is not and was never a limitation on what sort of skin tone or gender you could give your characters. There is not and was never a limitation on what sorts of stories you can tell with this system. There is not and was never a reason why this article should have been released for D&D 50th anniversary.

Quote from: jhkim on May 29, 2024, 06:00:24 PMThank you for the clarification (and for reading the story), but yes, I do disagree with that.

I think that "The Last White Man" is overtly racist as a story. The depiction of black people invading Europe to kill off all the hated whites is not portrayed as a delusion, but as events that actually happened. That is not a function of the character - it is a depiction by the author. The race war depicted and the characterizations of the black race all are evidence of racist thinking in the world events themselves, not just the mind of the protagonist.

There's a race war in the story. I'm not suggesting it's a delusion. There's clearly a large amount of racism in-story. But what makes the story itself overtly racist? What are "the characterizations of the black race" that are overtly racist? You're the one who's been making these claims for pages in this thread, so you need to justify them with quotes and reasoning.

Quote from: Krazz on May 29, 2024, 06:26:04 PM

Quote from: jhkim on May 29, 2024, 06:00:24 PMThank you for the clarification (and for reading the story), but yes, I do disagree with that.

I think that "The Last White Man" is overtly racist as a story. The depiction of black people invading Europe to kill off all the hated whites is not portrayed as a delusion, but as events that actually happened. That is not a function of the character - it is a depiction by the author. The race war depicted and the characterizations of the black race all are evidence of racist thinking in the world events themselves, not just the mind of the protagonist.

There's a race war in the story. I'm not suggesting it's a delusion. There's clearly a large amount of racism in-story. But what makes the story itself overtly racist? What are "the characterizations of the black race" that are overtly racist? You're the one who's been making these claims for pages in this thread, so you need to justify them with quotes and reasoning.

In fairness to Jhkim, he did provide quotes, but they're back on page 2 of the thread. I don't know how to link previous posts, but it's comment #27.

Here's where I suspect that the conversation goes no further if people don't start defining their terms. These days, "racist" has so many varied and nebulous meanings that it really has to be clarified to be properly discussed. That's why I don't use the term if I can instead use something more precise or descriptive. Even just saying "so-and-so doesn't like black people" is a lot clearer nowadays than saying "racist".

Quote from: ForgottenF on May 29, 2024, 08:17:16 PM

Quote from: Krazz on May 29, 2024, 06:26:04 PM

Quote from: jhkim on May 29, 2024, 06:00:24 PMThank you for the clarification (and for reading the story), but yes, I do disagree with that.

I think that "The Last White Man" is overtly racist as a story. The depiction of black people invading Europe to kill off all the hated whites is not portrayed as a delusion, but as events that actually happened. That is not a function of the character - it is a depiction by the author. The race war depicted and the characterizations of the black race all are evidence of racist thinking in the world events themselves, not just the mind of the protagonist.

There's a race war in the story. I'm not suggesting it's a delusion. There's clearly a large amount of racism in-story. But what makes the story itself overtly racist? What are "the characterizations of the black race" that are overtly racist? You're the one who's been making these claims for pages in this thread, so you need to justify them with quotes and reasoning.

In fairness to Jhkim, he did provide quotes, but they're back on page 2 of the thread. I don't know how to link previous posts, but it's comment #27.

Here's where I suspect that the conversation goes no further if people don't start defining their terms. These days, "racist" has so many varied and nebulous meanings that it really has to be clarified to be properly discussed. That's why I don't use the term if I can instead use something more precise or descriptive. Even just saying "so-and-so doesn't like black people" is a lot clearer nowadays than saying "racist".

In fairness to Jhkim, he dragged TLWM into a discussion about Conan because he thinks that if he can convince you that the story is raicismist it makes REH raicismist for writing it and by his logic this proves that any and all accusations of raicismism in Conan (or other stories) fully proven.

I wonder if the cannibals in Shadows in Zamboula were White and the reaction was the same from the other characters he would condemn it for raicismism against White people, or if he thinks the Hyperboreans prove REH was also raicismist against White people.

He's doing his usual, defending a far left leftard and derailing the thread to distract from the fact that the leftard is retarded.

Quote from: ForgottenF on May 29, 2024, 08:17:16 PMHere's where I suspect that the conversation goes no further if people don't start defining their terms.

To paraphrase GE Moore, I shouldn't have to define every word I'm using in a discussion just because some Marxists are disingenuous. The moment we can't communicate with a general understanding of what commonly used terms mean is the moment we need to haul out the shotguns and clean house.

Quote from: jhkim on May 29, 2024, 01:53:49 PM

Quote from: Eirikrautha on May 29, 2024, 07:22:16 AMYou are normally the person here who objects to gross generalizations and reductive statements, yet suddenly [Daniel Justice's evaluation] is accurate and acceptable?

...Daniel Justice's "analysis" of the Conan stories is superficial and reductive.  It cherry-picks a few elements, ignoring the overarching themes, and is the kind of thing one would expect from a first year lit student.  I.e., it's garbage "analysis.  Do you agree?"

That's a fair request. I'll quote Justice's comment on Howard again for clarity.

Quote from: Daniel Justice(The other great influence on D&D's world-building, Robert E. Howard, especially his Conan works, held no appeal for me whatsoever, as there was no beauty, no grace, no romance—just blood, brutality, butchery, and overt racism.)

I disagree that this is intended as analysis of any sort. It is a single sentence in explicit parentheses, and it is phrased as a personal reaction -- i.e. "held no appeal for me".

As a personal statement of his reaction, it sounds like that was genuinely his reaction to REH's writing. Based on that, I'm pretty sure that he hasn't read the entire REH corpus, given that he didn't like it.

I enjoy much of Howard's writing, but I don't feel any need to say that people are objectively wrong if they don't like it. For example, I can understand how a gay man like Justice finds no romance or beauty in the Conan stories.

I might respond that I enjoy Howard's stories to a fair degree because they are brutal and unromantic, and also primal and visceral and sensual, expressing in a powerful and iconic way key male fantasies. I don't agree with Howard's racism, and especially as a Christian, I don't endorse the savagery that he extols as a philosophy in real life, but I can still enjoy it as fantasy.

What the actual f....?  In one breath you assert:

QuoteIt's not postmodernist to think words like "racism" should have a consistent and objective meaning...  It's moral relativism to say that the same terms don't apply to people from a different society.

Just because someone comes from a communist society, that doesn't mean that they're not communist. They're still a communist - it's just that their reasons for being communist should be considered to fully understand them. The same applies for racism.

Then you follow this up with:

QuoteI enjoy much of Howard's writing, but I don't feel any need to say that people are objectively wrong if they don't like it. For example, I can understand how a gay man like Justice finds no romance or beauty in the Conan stories.

So, you object to relativism when it comes to racism, but find it perfectly fine when it comes to claims of beauty , romance, and grace?  Hypocrisy much?

See, you cannot on one hand claim that there is an objective meaning to the word "racism" that is true for every person in every time period, then excuse Justice because he doesn't define "beauty," "romance," and "grace" the same way we do.  No!  Just no!  Either the word "beauty" has a clear, permanent meaning, or "racism" doesn't.  You don't get to be a relativist when it is convenient.  You must hold Justice to the same standard you hold the people here to.

I'm not even going to go into your complete conflation of descriptive moral relativism vs. metaethical moral relativism, because if I thought you were simply ignorant such a discussion might be productive.  But you have given me no evidence (and numerous counterfactuals) that your mistakes are innocent and not simple disingenuous strategy.

Now, to answer your question clearly and honestly (something I doubt you are capable of):

My statement previous is totally dependent on the definition of racism, which is highly fluid depending on time and context.  If we take racism to mean "a belief that human beings have certain heritable traits due to their race that will determine that all members of one race will be inferior to the other," which is the classic definition of racism, it is arguable that some REH stories may contain racist themes, but such an argument is not cut and dried.  It has a lot to due with the definition of the word "inferior," which is definitely contextual, and on the categorical nature of the claim (is the cause of the "degeneracy" the membership in the race?  Or just a description of those members of a race?).  But I would entertain the argument as being in good faith, and also be open to agreeing with it, having done my due diligence in reading the stories, context, and themes.

On the other hand, in a modern context, "racism" has been defined as "attributing some quality or behavior to members of a racial group based on statistical preponderance or personal experience, especially if those qualities might be viewed negatively."  Under this definition, there's a lot of the writing in REH's works that would fit.  This standard is exactly the standard used to argue that Sheetz convenience stores have discriminated against black applicants by requiring a criminal background check.  This is the same standard that is used to claim that making fun of BVE (ebonics) is racist (despite the fact that the majority of black people in the world don't even speak English).  This is the same standard that asserts that objecting to the tenets of Islam is racist against Arabs (a claim that is made frequently under the term "Islamophobia," but is defined as a kind of racism).  Heck, based on this definition, you have made racist statements on this very website about the Japanese.

And there are more than just these potential definitions of racism.  You've complained that racism has a permanent and unchanging definition (which is patently false, descriptively speaking), but you've never actually articulated that definition and its predicates.  So, if we are going to discuss racism in REH, we need to delineate the meaning of the term.

Of course, that would then mean that we can speak of "beauty" as an objective standard as well, so you could evaluate Justice's claims as being true or false.  So, none of your bullshit relativism.  Is there no beauty in REH's Conan stories, or is Justice wrong?

Quote from: Eirikrautha on May 29, 2024, 10:43:21 PMSo, you object to relativism when it comes to racism, but find it perfectly fine when it comes to claims of beauty , romance, and grace?  Hypocrisy much?

To clarify, I am opposed to MORAL relativism. I do not believe that different moral system are all equivalent, and that we cannot judge people from a different system. I think we need to be informed about other views, but just like there is an objective scientific reality, there is also an objective reality in morals. I'm not always sure what the right thing is, but I think that there is an objective truth that I'll search for.

However, I think relativism is fine to apply to things like beauty and taste. I think it is pointless and dumb to argue with someone that they are wrong about their favorite flavor of ice cream, or which movie star is hottest.

Quote from: Eirikrautha on May 29, 2024, 10:43:21 PMIf we take racism to mean "a belief that human beings have certain heritable traits due to their race that will determine that all members of one race will be inferior to the other," which is the classic definition of racism, it is arguable that some REH stories may contain racist themes, but such an argument is not cut and dried.  It has a lot to due with the definition of the word "inferior," which is definitely contextual, and on the categorical nature of the claim (is the cause of the "degeneracy" the membership in the race?  Or just a description of those members of a race?).  But I would entertain the argument as being in good faith, and also be open to agreeing with it, having done my due diligence in reading the stories, context, and themes.

OK, fair enough. Have you read "The Last White Man"? As I mentioned to Krazz, it is short. I'll give the link again.

https://archive.org/details/howard-collector-05-1964-summer/page/22/mode/2up

Krazz asked for arguments to demonstrate that it is racist. I'm still compiling those arguments, but I'll try to present them for both you and him.

I think your classic definition of racism is fine, and I'll try to stick to it in my arguments regarding "The Last White Man".

EDITED TO ADD: On reflection, I have some doubts that definition, because it allows for things like anti-miscegenation laws and "separate but equal" in general. I believe that anti-miscegenation laws are racist - but that might be covered by thinking that mixed-race people are inherently inferior, though. Anti-miscegenation has at its root the idea that racial purity is a pure good, and thus mixed race people (like myself) are inferior. Also, someone could say that they think black people are dumb, but it isn't racist because they also think black people make up for it by being good at sports and dancing and rhythm - so they're not really inferior. I'll try to clarify that "race essentialism" is the unscientific belief that race is more important than it is in reality. It often overlaps with racism but there could be some distinction.

So, looking over "The Last White Man", and looking for racism defined (by Eirikrautha) as "a belief that human beings have certain heritable traits due to their race that will determine that all members of one race will be inferior to the other."

Note that I will use "white race" and "black race" to describe the groups in the stories, because that is what the story describes -- but I also think this falls into racial essentialism, thinking that those are objectively important categories as far as genetics, and are important for dividing masses of people.

But sticking to just the racism part:

---

Let's take direct descriptions of the races. From the opening paragraphs, here's how the story describes the white race:

Quote from: R.E. HowardThe man was a wonder, physically. Over six feet in height, his chest and shoulders were those of a giant. Weighing far over two hundred pounds, he yet gave the impression of sinuous speed. His face was sullen, savage, almost primitive, small black eyes glittering through tangled strands of sandy hair. In one hand he clutched a rifle. A curved scimitar of surprizing proportions lay beside him.

He was a splendid example of a wonderful race. A race which reached physical perfection, sank to the depths of degeneracy and then regained the heights just before their fall. He was the last.

and also

Quote from: R.E. HowardThere had been an age when his race had ruled the world. Their cities dotted the fertile plains. Their ships had furrowed the seas, bringing back the wealth of every land. Their armies had gone forth conquering and subjugating.

None could stand before them in the more peaceful sports. Their athletes defeated all others with ease. They were all giants, physically and mentally.

Emphasis mine there in the end.

Now, the story also says that the blacks were strong, but it describes them differently. Here's a description of them:

Quote from: R.E. HowardThe blacks were physical giants, mighty fighting organisms, whose highest wish was slaughter and plunder.

and

Quote from: R.E. HowardThe black race was doomed. They were destroyers, not builders. When they slew the white men, progress ceased. The blacks reverted to savagery. They did not even know the art of making weapons. They had destroyed and could not rebuild. And they were going back to bestial savagery, and to a slaughtering of one another which even their animal-like rate of birth could not control.

Now, blacks are described as strong when here at their prime, but they are clearly mentally and morally inferior to the whites. Physically, there is some see-saw described. Whites are described as superior physically at first, but they lost their physical edge, only gaining it back towards the end. On other fronts, the blacks are clearly inferior, except for their "animal-like rate of birth" which I don't think is intended as a positive trait.

---

Beyond the direct description, though, the events of the race wars show this. The blacks lead the charge to wipe out all the white of Europe, then invade the U.S. to invade there. That is a negative portrayal of black people, which demonstrates their desire to "slaughter and plunder" even if the story hadn't used those exact words to describe the black race.

Also, in the end, they charge using only spears - which illustrates how they are unable to create weapons like rifles. The story says that they can't create weapons, and it also illustrates it by how they attack.

The general theme of the story is the danger of the black race, who will wipe out the whites if given the chance. That is the future being portrayed, which he described to his friend Tevis Clyde Smith via letter as a "warning to the white races" (from jeff37923's link).

---

The leader of the blacks was not black himself, but that isn't a counter to the idea of black inferiority. As the story describes the leader:

Quote from: R.E. HowardThey were a strong, young race. Their day was yet to come. All they lacked was a leader.

And a leader had risen. A mixed-breed Arab, whose ambition was without measure, whose genius was Satanic.

He welded them into one great mass, gave them white man's weapons, furnished by Americans and Europeans who would have as quickly and readily sold their own sisters' souls if the price were high enough.

Describing him as "Satanic" is clearly a negative. Moreover, it implies that the blacks are unable to have a leader of their own race. I don't think that is a positive for either black people or mixed-breed people.

---

I'll stop there for now.

As a brief aside, Eirikrautha said this about me earlier:

Quote from: Eirikrautha on May 26, 2024, 10:54:09 AMReally, I feel kind of sorry for him.  I'm sure he's sitting at home, convinced he's owning us chuds, and bringing civilization to the savages on the RPGSite (though he could never frame it that way... because "colonization" and [insert woke verbiage here]).

So, around here I will sometimes argue like I think I'm right. Again, I appreciate the Mos Eisley atmosphere of this forum, and Pundit's strong free speech position. Sometimes I'll be blunt, without putting a lot into sparing other people's feelings.

Even so, I think I'm at least above-average as far as talking respectfully to people I disagree with by theRPGsite standards, rather than treating them like chuds.