The tag alias #57701 fantasy_racism -> speciesism has been rejected.

Reason: The "fantasy_racism" term is used as an not-so-accurate replacement for "specism" since specism can only occur in sci-fi/fantasy settings where humans are not the only sapient (or known as "sentient species" in media like Star Wars) species in those worlds.

the racism tag can only be applied in reference to real world politics which treads in controversial territory unlike specism which has escapism in its politics

Update: convincing counterpoint

EDIT: The tag alias fantasy_racism -> speciesism (forum #336763) has been rejected by @slyroon.

Fantasy racism is for racism against fantasy beings like elves and orcs (e.g. post #3382885). Specism is for interspecies discrimination (e.g. cats rule, dogs drool).

The tag isn't even spelled right and should be spelled like speciesism.

barefootslavedragon said:
The "fantasy_racism" term is used as an not-so-accurate replacement for "specism"

Why alias it then, if it's not accurate? Fantasy racism can also occur with magic, if the story considers magic users to be a different "race" even if they're still visibly the same species. Or people who go through slight mutation, but are still otherwise the same species (think The Witcher, where society is "racist" toward Witchers for looking different and having exceptionally high skill in an unpleasant line of work, but aside from some slight physical abnormalities brought on as a result of their training and various concoctions they drink, are still of the human species).

gattonero2001 said:
Fantasy racism is for racism against fantasy beings like elves and orcs (e.g. post #3382885). Specism is for interspecies discrimination (e.g. cats rule, dogs drool).

What's the distinction here? Is it only racism if it's humans doing it? Does the target have to qualify as humanoid? Otherwise I fail to see how you couldn't apply speciesism equally to a statement like "elves rule, orcs drool".

With that said, I still don't agree with the alias. If we define "racism" as discrimination within a species, they are mutually exclusive concepts.

wat8548 said:
What's the distinction here? Is it only racism if it's humans doing it? Does the target have to qualify as humanoid? Otherwise I fail to see how you couldn't apply speciesism equally to a statement like "elves rule, orcs drool".

With that said, I still don't agree with the alias. If we define "racism" as discrimination within a species, they are mutually exclusive concepts.

Some fantasty settings explicitly describe dwarves, orcs, etc as different races of human.

I don't know how relevant that is for present purposes, though.

nekozuki said:
The tag isn't even spelled right and should be spelled like speciesism.

I didn’t create the tag so someone can make an alias for it then

gattonero2001 said:
Fantasy racism is for racism against fantasy beings like elves and orcs (e.g. post #3382885). Specism is for interspecies discrimination (e.g. cats rule, dogs drool).

So in other words, fantasy racism can only occur when a species and subspecies have bigoted views against each other in a fictional setting (for example a Minotaur clan making the short horned Minotaurs as deserving of less rights) which I guess would work but it is a very specific scenario.

I imagine that elf against orc would be both speciesism and fantasy racism whereas human against lizardfolk would only be considered speciesism

barefootslavedragon said:
I imagine that elf against orc would be both speciesism and fantasy racism whereas human against lizardfolk would only be considered speciesism

Depends on the setting. In Elder Scrolls, for instance, orcs are a sub-species of elves. Werecreatures can also confuse things.

The tag alias fantasy_racism -> speciesism (forum #336763) has been rejected by @slyroon.