Gaming and Identity Politics

In this thread I had an immediate and visceral reaction when another poster conflated the games I like most - stuff like Apocalypse World, Burning Wheel, and Don't Rest Your Head with the play style of Vampire - The Masquerade. I had an almost violent need to say "We're not them and they are not us". A certain amount of clarification is helpful, but at times I definitely crossed some lines.

What it really brought to my mind is the way I feel the need not to just define myself as part of the role playing community, but a specific part of that community and go to bat for it as it were. To me this seems like the stuff of identity politics. Like it's not enough to say we play role playing games, but there seems to be a certain desire to cut ourselves off from other parts of the community. After all they don't like exactly the same sort of games I like and therefore their opinions about stuff doesn't really matter.

This is something I kind of struggle with. I mean I like different sorts of role playing games, but like being associated with a game I didn't like made me a little angry. I'm not really sure what to make of that. I just kind of wanted to get it off my chest.

What do you think? Do we as a community subdivide ourselves too much? Am I thinking too hard about stuff because I had half a day today and not much to do?

Campbell said:

.What do you think? Do we as a community subdivide ourselves too much?

Click to expand...

Yep. No question.

There is the normal human tendency to divide into Us and Them.

On top of that, I think we have an aspect of "Sayre's Law" - "In any dispute the intensity of feeling is inversely proportional to the value of the issues at stake."

Do we divide too much?

That probably depends on the reason for the lines of division. If the delineation is for clarity in helping people find communities which actually care about the same things as they do, or to explain the differences between things, then it can be helpful. If it is merely to keep others out of your clique, then its an undesireable thing.

For instance, if I want help learning to crochet, then being pointed to a needlepoint website is not going to help me. There needs to be some recognition of the difference. If, on the other hand, I get angry when a non-crafty person lumps needlepoint, crocheting and knitting all into a single group of crafts, then I am probably overreacting.

So, if I was playing Burning Wheel, I would most certainly point out the differences, if people cared, between that system and WoD. But if a DnD player groups all non-DnD systems into a whole lump of "other games," its probably not something that you should worry about.

Yeah, we do. Which is a shame, because there aren't that many of us.

Wicht said:

Do we divide too much?

Click to expand...

No. Do we divide *ourselves* too much? The difference is material.

Drawing distinction between activities is usually fine. Drawing boundaries between *people* is another matter. It isn't about whether we are looking at a crochet or a needlepoint website - it is about the distinctions between "those who crochet" and "those who do needlepoint".

Umbran said:

No. Do we divide *ourselves* too much? The difference is material.

Drawing distinction between activities is usually fine. Drawing boundaries between *people* is another matter. It isn't about whether we are looking at a crochet or a needlepoint website - it is about the distinctions between "those who crochet" and "those who do needlepoint".

Click to expand...

I think the "ourselves" can be legitimately read either way; but tomato, tomahto - I don't think we are actually disagreeing on the principle.

Yeah, identity politics are not at all the appropriate analogy here, at least not in the way you seem to have defined them. As has been said, these are self-segregation by way of personal preferences, nothing more. It should be noted that neither of these are inherently divisive by nature; people who engage in identity politics find comfort in shared life experiences but most often ultimately seek to celebrate what makes people different. That happens, on an obviously much smaller scale, in many role-playing communities. You or I don't have to really get what it is that draws people to the World of Darkness to recognize and appreciate that it appeals to a community not that different from our own.

The problem comes when people start to place unequal value on particular preferences, which is where your analogy falls flat. What you're really talking about are fandom nerd wars, and these are not things that exist within any serious identity politics circles. Your reaction, for example, most likely stems from the things you've decided about 1: what Vampire - The Masquerade is, 2: what sort of gamer that game appeals to, and 3: why you and the games you enjoy are inherently better than it and them. It's not even that you've decided you didn't like the game; that alone wouldn't spark that severe a reaction. It's clearly more than just being associated with a game you dislike; you make that clear when you say "We're not then and they are not us." It's about the people. It's that you've decided you're superior to the type of person Vampire appeals to, so when you were lumped together, even indirectly, it probably felt like the exact kind of insult you would think about Vampire fans.

I'll admit I could be off base, and I apologize if I am. I'll note that this pretty much human nature at work here. We all have biases and they, by definition, affect us on a subconscious level. So it's easy to not notice when we conflate our feelings the preferences we're passionate about (which are fine- great even!) with our feelings about the people who do or do not share our preferences (which is where the problems you've described start to crop up).

The trick is separating our feelings about games from the people who play them. We need to recognize that as distasteful as the style of play Vampire seems to encourage is to us, it is a game that appeals to gamers whose preferences are no more or less valid than our own. We ought to celebrate that role-playing is such a broad and massive pastime that it can appeal to such wide and diverse groups of gamers. We don't have to understand why Vampire appeals to anyone to appreciate that a game exists for folks who would otherwise have no reason to share a hobby with us; and to appreciate the depth they can add to the conversation as our hobby moves forward.

Maybe this sounds a bit hippie-dippie. Maybe you weren't too far off when you brought up identity politics. Or maybe it's just enough to remember to follow Wheaton's Law.

Gradine said:

people who engage in identity politics find comfort in shared life experiences but most often ultimately seek to celebrate what makes people different.

Click to expand...

I am not sure that's what's at the core of identity politics at all. We may need to deal with the semantics for a moment. Looking at Wikipedia as a starting point:

"Identity politics are political arguments that focus upon the interest and perspectives of groups with which people identify. Identity politics includes the ways in which people's politics may be shaped by aspects of their identity through loosely correlated social organizations. Examples include social organizations based on race, class, religion, gender, gender identity, ethnicity, ideology, nation, sexual orientation, culture, information preference, history, musical or literary preference, medical conditions, professions or hobbies. Not all members of any given group are necessarily involved in identity politics."

Nothing there about seeking to celebrate being central. It is about political arguments that center on identity. It seems to me that seeking fairness for your group is the more common form of identity politics. "I think Group X, of which I am a part, does not get a fair shake, and would like to see this thing done to fix that..." is identity politics, but doesn't necessarily have to do with what you find comfort in, or what you are seeking to celebrate.

What you're really talking about are fandom nerd wars, and these are not things that exist within any serious identity politics circles.

Click to expand...

I don't think that's telling. What we may have is the equivalent of small-town politics. No, none of our issues are present in the national debates; nobody outside a very small circle gives a rat's patootie. But that doesn't mean it isn't a form of politics. It just isn't *BIG*, national scale identity politics.

I'm going to move this to the media lounge and give it a politics tag. There's no way the subject can be adequately discussed otherwise.

You might be right, but I don't think you can ever really discuss identity politics in such a vacuum. As someone who regularly engaged in social justice work I can say that the political activism described by Wikipedia is inextricably linked with the building of support networks and the celebration of differences (multiculturalism). One rarely exists without the others, and where they do usually suffers for the lack. Furthermore, it's these other aspects I mentioned which relate most closely with the types of things the OP is discussing. I don't think anyone is talking about Vampire players advocating for fair and equal treatment on a national level.

You do hit the nail on the head with regards to small ball local politics, which are far more likely to devolve into the kinds of divisive tribalism the OP describes. That is probably the best analogy, at least politically, we're going to get.