Comfort withcross gender characters based on your gender

Lanefan · Jun 2, 2018

Lylandra said:
Good question! To be honest, I've never seen someone playing a male character who was playing a sexy doll that was clearly meant as imaginary turn-on first and foremost. Or who was solely portraying toxic stereotypes. I guess I'd have a harder time spotting these stereotypes as well.

Now I guess I'd find them obnoxious, but slightly less troubling. Because 1) there is a difference whether you are playing a character matching your own characteristic and 2) unless the player is homosexual, the character is most likely not created and played to be an imaginary sexy doll *for the player* but rather as an opportunity to heavily flirt around with NPCs or other PCs. One is more objectifying than the other.

There's a third option: that the player, who in real life might be having internal issues with their own perceived attractiveness or sexiness, is playing a sexy doll as a form of compensation.

Put another way, the sexy doll isn't there for its own player to lust over, it's there for the other players (be it in or out of character) to lust over; and when they do so it gratifies the doll's player by making him/her feel vicariously more attractive.

Lanefan

Eltab · Jun 2, 2018

Riley37 said:
the culture of "everything is a debate, never ask questions, attribute some preposterous extreme position to the other guy and watch HIM refine it"

I don't have a coherent argument on this yet. It's percolating.

The section in quotes leads to an 'argument' rather than a 'debate'.

I'd be willing at bet that one reason it's so tough to discuss these subjects is that nobody turns to a dictionary to find the word closest to the meaning they have in mind.
And the audience doesn't check a dictionary either, to see if 'what was said' was 'what was meant'.

Riley37 · Jun 2, 2018

Lanefan said:
The basics are covered by the laws of pretty much all nations. It's the refinements that get argued over; along with how those basic laws are or are not always fairly and evenly applied or seen/perceived to be fairly and evenly applied

Indeed. Thich Nat Han has a metaphor about water and tea, where water is justice and we all need it, while tea is flavor and each culture flavors justice with different specifics, sometimes including religion.

Lanefan said:
see the recent harrassment threads for examples both good and bad.

It has been much on my mind. Among the posts from those interested in change, there were a range of disagreements, mostly respectful to each other. There were posts favoring "the status quo is fine" and those generally had a less respectful interaction with those interested in change. (That is, of course, my opinion, and it's not a consensus summary of a long and involved thread.)

Lanefan said:
There's a vague universality, I think, to expected norms of behavior among players. The variance - and it's a wide one - comes in how rigidly those expectations are accepted/adhered to/enforced.

Indeed, and that's where I see utility in Session Zero. Have you ever participated in a Session Zero, and was it boring and useless, or otherwise?

I am curious what quote might appear in the middle of your next signature. Who else, other than lawyers, might build a legal system?

Lylandra · Jun 2, 2018

Bagpuss said:
You've never seen a Conan or Bond like character?

Yikes, Conan as turn-on? No, I've never seen anyone who played their barbarian like a sexy walking stick. Usually, these characters are played as power/competence fantasies by male players.

What I did see were women portraying gay male characters as their wish fulfilment and/or - see [MENTION=29398]Lanefan[/MENTION] s comment - way to explore their sexuality. They were rarely sticks, most of them did have a personality, but I guess they'd carry many toxic stereotypes about gay men that would make them feel uncomfortable. (google Yaoi if you'd like to inquire further.)

Not getting this whole "imaginary sexy doll" idea. Since the player doesn't get to have sex with his own character, even imaginary sex. At worst he'll be having sex with imaginary NPCs while imagining himself in the body of a female character.

I'm trying to understand how playing a female character as a male would ever work as a sexy doll idea?

There is this third-person narrative kind of play ("She does XYZ") besides the fully immersive first-person play ("I do XYZ") where players play their characters, but not *as* their characters. It is far more common than you'd think.

Also, there is not much of a difference - besides having full "remote control" of the character - between a character in an RPG and a character in a movie or novel. And just think about how many characters are there for fanservice only. How many characters, even in novels, are defined by their looks and availability first and foremost.

If you cannot see the connection, then fine. You'll certainly create no such character in your RPGing carreer then

Riley37 · Jun 2, 2018

Eltab said:
I'd be willing at bet that one reason it's so tough to discuss these subjects is that nobody turns to a dictionary to find the word closest to the meaning they have in mind.

If you are proposing more frequent use of dictionaries as a primary method for change in this dynamic, then you and I have radically different views of what's working badly and what would be an improvement. Which is consistent with our track records across many threads.

If you believe that *everyone* here is trying to communicate with intellectual honesty, playing all their cards face up on the table, following debate rules, and that everyone here welcomes everyone else as an equal participant, then you and I have radically different views of what's working badly and what would be an improvement. Which is consistent with our track records across many threads.

Umbran · Jun 2, 2018

Eltab said:
I'd be willing at bet that one reason it's so tough to discuss these subjects is that nobody turns to a dictionary to find the word closest to the meaning they have in mind.

Hm. That may be one reason, but I don't expect it to be the dominant one.

There is a basic flaw with the adversarial mode for discussion. Each participant stakes a position, and then must defend it. It starts with the position that you already know the truth, and that no exploration actually needs to happen! And, if it turns out that the position you staked out is incorrect, well, then you were *wrong* and you *lose*. In terms of human ego, this is a lousy place to be, and few folks ever admit to having taken the wrong position.

This works well enough in a court of law, or even in a formal debate, where a third party decides what is correct based on the information given. But that's not what we have here - no third party votes on who was more persuasive, and nobody ever has to consider the matter settled.

If, instead, you enter a discussion without a position, you have no stakes to lose, and you can explore without the fear of bruised ego. And yes, if you don't start with a position that you claim is already correct, you have to ask questions and listen far more than you need to make statements and proclaim things.

Patrick McGill · Jun 2, 2018

We're role playing around a kitchen table not performing high theater. If you don't figure out that someone at the table is playing a character that identifies as female until the fifth session they didn't "fail", it just hasn't come up yet.

If someone in a group I was playing in told me I had failed to role play properly because they just now figured out I was playing a different gendered character my reaction would probably rhyme with "huck off".

Maybe I'm misreading but why would there be a sudden impetus to somehow telegraph your character's gender simply because it's different than yours? I don't work to telegraph that my character is male and that is apparently not a problem. Why assume the gender to begin with as my own if you're going to start grading my role play performance if it's different than what you expect?

The gender of the character should matter little beyond window dressing in the grand scheme of the portrayal in my opinion. It reminds me of a quote by George R.R. Martin during an interview. He was asked how he writes such good female characters, and his response was basically, "Well I've always considered women to be people."

Hussar · Jun 3, 2018

TheSword said:
I play female characters probably 50% of the time. Mainly inspired by classic tropes, I have had a lot of fun playing variants of an Aes Sedai style character, using Druid, Oracle of Flame, and Wizard at various times over the years. All to great success. I’m currently playing an elven swashbuckling fighter/rogue and loving it.

I don’t see that playing a female character means you need to have romance elements to your characters storyline (any more so than a male character) nor do I feel a burning desire to work maternal instinct into the character. I play them for fun and make sure they contribute to the party.

If I may ask, what about playing female characters makes them fun for you? What, specifically related to the gender of your character, makes it fun?

Lanefan · Jun 3, 2018

Riley37 said:
Indeed, and that's where I see utility in Session Zero. Have you ever participated in a Session Zero, and was it boring and useless, or otherwise?

Only as a roll-up-the-characters and rule-change-explanation session (so, pretty boring), which morphed right into Session 1 (much more exciting!) without skipping a beat once everyone had their ducks in a row.

I don't do the tone-set thing at Session 0. It's done as part of the invitation to be a player in the first place, along the lines of "here's the sort of thing I vaguely have in mind <insert some amount of info here, including game system>; if you're interested in playing you're invited to do so.". That way, combined with our history and all knowing each other, by the time you say "Yes I want to play in this" you already kind of know what you're getting into.

I am curious what quote might appear in the middle of your next signature. Who else, other than lawyers, might build a legal system?

Common folks using plain common language and good common sense, accessible to and understandable by all, would be my preference. No loopholes, no technicalities, etc.

Hey, I can dream, can't I?

Lanefan

Yaztromo · Jun 3, 2018

ccs said:
What? The older the player gets the more real life XP they have to draw on & this somehow helps them? Shocking!

You are confusing GMs and players. They are not necessarily the same things and sometimes, as the GM ages, the players perhaps not, as you don't GM all your life for the same persons.