Identity Loss (not the "roll for pick pockets" kind)

[howandwhy99]

Yeah, identity theft is another thread.

Here I'm wondering why there was such a huge dust up in the 80's about D&D players potentially losing their identities to that of their characters'? Identity dissociation or something like that.

Was it something to do with roleplaying? The big immersion argument? I do understand some games always had their players treated as "in-character" for entire sessions. Perhaps it is was solely believed by those outside the hobby who didn't know what was going on? A scare tactic. If so, why would they think that anyways?

On a side note, I seem to remember a Great American Hero episode that dealt with this (guest starring Gary Gygax). Why the need for an after school special in primetime?

Any ideas are welcome.

 

[Nifft]

Here I'm wondering why there was such a huge dust up in the 80's about D&D players potentially losing their identities to that of their characters'? Identity dissociation or something like that.

It's because if you play real D&D (1974), you learn real magic spells.

Cheers, -- N

Edit: more serious answer here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Role-playing "role-playing" was a training & behavioral therapy tool before it was a recreational game-playing tool.

 

[Umbran]

Here I'm wondering why there was such a huge dust up in the 80's about D&D players potentially losing their identities to that of their characters'? Identity dissociation or something like that.

Probably not that name. Dissociative identity disorder is more commonly known as "multiple personality disorder"- it is very, very rare, and I don't know of any one in the 80s who claimed it as caused by D&D.

James Dallas Egbert was probably the most popularized person who had an issue (he committed suicide in 1979, and those who are familiar with his case would term his problem a "psychotic episode" in the popular parlance - hallucinations and delusions. Egbert, however, was known to abuse drugs, and have other signs of major depression before his suicide.

Patricia Pulling's son Irving also committed suicide (in 1982), and he was also a D&D player. She's another source of some of the major negative associations between D&D and the human psyche.

There's a lot to read out there. You might want to start with wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dungeons_&_Dragons_controversies

 

[howandwhy99]

Probably not that name. Dissociative identity disorder is more commonly known as "multiple personality disorder"- it is very, very rare, and I don't know of any one in the 80s who claimed it as caused by D&D.

So what happened to Tom Hanks in Mazes and Monsters?
(Talk about best film roles in history for that guy...)

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

From my studies, its mainly an American phenomenon.

Essentially, there were a couple of relatively highly publicized incidents in the USA in which people got lost in RPG worlds of their own- roughly the same % of the population that goes bonkers and thinks they're Jesus or Napoleon or that their Judas Priest records are telling them to kill people- and acted out.

And along with people blaming Metal- both as outsiders looking for something to blame and those seeking to avoid responsibility- and the pop culture/pop news glorifying those claiming to be Satanists, it got blown out of proportion. American evangelicals began to preach against RPGs, Metal and other influences in society as being the work of the Devil.

Its commonly known as the Satanic Panic.

Eventually, the FBI concluded it was mostly Urban Legends...but the stigma remains.

 

[Dungeoneer]

I don't believe there are any well-documented cases of "identity loss" associated with D&D. I could be wrong, but I believe it is basically an urban legend.

That was one of the many bogey-men raised during the "moral panic" about D&D in the 1980's. At that time a few 'concerned citizens' held D&D responsible for the suicides of some troubled individuals. This turned into a firestorm of controversy about supposed Satanic practices and other crazy stuff. For a very in-depth look at a few of the major players in this, as well as an idea of where the mis-perceptions arose from, check out Michael Stackpole's Pulling Report.

 

[Wolf1066]

I used to be rightfully proud of the fact that I fell into so many categories that fundamentalist scaremongers deemed were "guaranteed to make you into a homicidal maniac" - owning firearms, watching violent movies, playing D&D and other "evil" roleplaying games, riding motorcycles and other similarly "antisocial" things.

And I didn't even actively seek out things that the "mundanes" deemed "evil" or "dangerous" - they were all things that I just happened to enjoy - and found out that "public opinion" was against them and "leading experts" deemed them to be antisocial and dangerous.

Still haven't murdered anyone, committed suicide, signed any pacts with demons/devils/betentacled-old-ones, or done any of the other antisocial/dangerous/illegal things that the self-styled "experts" (all speaking from outside of the various groups on which they claimed to be experts) said I was going to do.

I've actually had people tell me what I do in D&D sessions and any claims that I make to the contrary must be lies because they know what goes on because their Pastor told them and he knows for sure... (emphasis about average for such accusations).

Because, yeah, a Pastor who's received a tract put out by the likes of Patricia Pulling or Jack Chick obviously knows more about the game than someone who's been playing it for quite some time.

It did not take long for me to respond to their "Us vs Them" attitude by developing an "Us vs Them" attitude of my own and taking considerable pride in not being a "Mundane" - who were mostly (based on the evidence of the crap they spouted) moronic sheep that would believe any sensationalist Flowery language that they read.

I would wax lyrical as loudly, and as long, as I could about the moronic "D&D involves signing pacts with the devil", "Violent movies make you go out and shoot people", and similar, crap that filled the media and how anyone who took that crap seriously or repeated it was a moron of the lowest possible standard.

Why? Because if I'm going to be hated and reviled by idiots, I would prefer it to be because I'm an obnoxious, opinionated bastard that points out how unbelievably stupid they are - rather than because they think they know what I'm like because some loonie zealot wrote something in the paper. I'm an old fashioned sort that prefers to be vilified for his real faults, not imaginary ones...

 

[Umbran]

So what happened to Tom Hanks in Mazes and Monsters?
(Talk about best film roles in history for that guy...)

What happened to Tom Hanks was an extreme lack of good judgement on the part of a still-young actor.

What happened to the character he played would be considered a psychotic episode.

In dissociative identity disorder, a person develops multiple personalities, but when they are in command, those personalities will still largely agree with you about the contents of the world around them. In a psychotic episode, there's only one personality, but that one may have delusions and hallucinations that don't match reality.

 

[Ed_Laprade]

What happened was the Rona Barret, Pat Pulling, Jack Chick, et al saw a chance to make some quick bucks without bothering to do any research, and dove right in. After all, anyone who tried pointing out the truth about their lack of facts was obviously working for the devil and shouldn't be believed! And, of course, the sheep believed them, not us.

 

[Wolf1066]

You must spread some Experience Points around before giving it to Ed_Laprade again.

And because we are obviously not sheep, in their sheepish minds we must therefore be predators and therefore are as dangerous as those true predators - the ones fleecing them of their money - claim we are...

It's kind of nastily ironic that the truly evil make money from the good-and-gullible by claiming that good-but-different (and not remotely gullible) people are evil.

I well remember the "Satanic Panic" - it left me wondering if the "average" IQ isn't actually lower than 100. The proper statistical mean taken from a properly representative sample of the whole population, rather than what the testers think is "average"...

I think IQ tests fall down in many areas, one of which is failing to test the subjects "Gullibility Level". If a person can't tell that their leg is being pulled for the purpose of divesting them of their money, what does it matter that they can solve the "river crossing" puzzle or assemble blocks into a picture?