What It's Like For a Gamer Girl

[eryndel]

Well, I'll throw in my 2 cents into the debate.

I think one thing that might be getting lost in the argument is that there is no absolute set of gaming etiquette. In the end, each group defines basic rules of protocol among their members. I'm a guy who's been in all girl groups, all guy groups, and mixed groups and there has been as much variety in group protocol between different mixed groups as there was between the all girl and the all guy group.

I would hesitate calling the group Afrodyte is playing with "jerks" because of the ambiguity of the term. I would posit that they aren't accustomed to having a girl in the group and are prehaps being insensitive. There might be other sources of hostility as well. If the concerns you've brought to the list have at all been vocalized to the group, I'm not surprised that some members have been irritated. Any person (guy or girl) who enters an existing group situation and expect changes made to accomodate them will often find members of the group to be irritated at the changes.

1. Why is it that male gamers are often so condescending? If I ask a question, why does it seem like they think I am completely ignorant? Whether they know the answer or don't even understand the question, why is it that I often get the answer I'd say was reserved for (to put it politely) the lowest common denominator?

One thing that I haven't seen yet brought up is the Gamer Girlfriend Syndrome. This might explain some of the hostility. There used to be a large number of women entering the hobby who were interested in the game solely to do something with their boyfriends. I don't think this is as common nowadays, but it the late eighties an early nineties a lot of the girls in my groups came in by dating one of the members. In a lot of cases, these women barely were interested in learning the rules and relied on they S.O.'s to explain things for them. These women were not well liked by the groups in question because they tended to drag the game and occupied their boyfriend's attention away from the game.

I'm not suggesting anyone who here is one of these women; I highly doubt anyone who fits the profile above would be so interested in the game to frequent these forums. Most I knew left the hobby after leaving their boyfriends. However, it made a lot of groups I knew hesitant to let women into their games, and likely made it hard for women to be treated fairly. It might be some of this that you are getting from your group.

4. Must guys have an opinion for eeeeeverything? Is every statement up for debate?

Considering this thread is on page 4, I would have to say... yes

 

[Pielorinho]

Interestingly, a couple of counterpoints were raised while I was in the middle of my (very long) post, but prior to that the only two viewpoints raised were "guys aren't like that" and "Guys are like that and its GOOD, you whining pansy" (Hi Billy)

Huh? Are you claiming that "guys ARE like that"?

My point has been, and many others have said, that not all guys are like that. Do you disagree?

Frankly, your post DOES come across as just as broad-brushed as the OP. Disclaimers about how you're really talking about "the typical guy" don't cut it, cuz there ain't no such thing. Your tone is condescending and rude, especially to us XY folks who make an effort to interact honestly and respectfully with women and men both.

I'd love it if both sides would cut it out with the sweeping generalizations about members of one sex or the other. It's annoying enough to me when folks cite books like Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus -- but at least I disagree with their basic points. When folks make broad generalizations to support points that I basically agree with, as you're doing, it really gets under my skin.

Daniel

 

[Teflon Billy]

Oh - and I'd like to agree with Kahuna Burger: There are no unemotial human social interactions.

Would you agree there are overemotional human social interactions?

 

[howandwhy99]

Wow! I'm amazed this topic hasn't fallen under the no-politics/religion rule.

But moreso, I'm impressed by how people have worked to keep things mature, rather than regress into name-calling. Especially with some radically different beliefs being tossed around.

As to my own beliefs, I think D&D is still very much thought of as a male teenager activity by society at large. And do no see how the demographics of it have aged and diversified. I still see D&D as more male-dominated than, say, WoD LARPs. It's more difficult for me personally to find female gamers than male ones.

I think that with the renewed fame of D&D maybe these perceptions could be changed. I know that D&D has traditionally focused more on being the hero who slays the dragon, gets the gold, and rescues the lady in distress. This being more stereotypical male wish-fulfillment.

When asking many of the women I know who don't game if they'd like to join, I typically get an "Uhh... no". So, I prefer to incorporate play that allows for stereotypical female wish-fulfillment, too. Unfortunately, it's been a hard sell to the men in my past groups.

Imagine, instead of suggesting (to a female nongamer) "a night of D&D", one could say: "I'm roleplaying with several friends tonite. If you'd like to, you can come. We tend to play out a lot of romantic and fun stories. Most of the men are a damn good charmers. The women tend to be swashbucklers or courtesans. One is even playing a princess. If you have interesting character idea, I'm sure it could be included. What do you think?"

Granted this would work better with older rather than younger players. But maybe shifting to a more gender-balanced game at older ages would be a good thing? Then maybe we'd hear fewer stories like Afrodyte's. It saddens me that so many female gamers I've known can relate with their own stories. I'm all for ongoing evolution of the RPG's and I think a maturing of the hobby is occuring.

What I disagree with is the design and definition of the new 'mature' games.

 

[ThoughtBubble]

Afrodyte, I'm sorry that you're in a very difficult group. I know I've been miserable in groups where my reasons for playing were different than the rest of the group's reasons. It also sounds like there isn't a lot of consideration going on in the group, so I can see how it would be a tough time. I do have to agree with the consensus that you seem to be playing with a bunch of jerks.

I'm also a little amused and sad at the number of people saying "get over it". That is pretty well guy behavior there, which is probablly what you wanted to avoid.

Part of the problem is that it gets into this huge dichotomy. Ideally, you want to be treated differently. But you probablly don't want to be treated "like a girl." So if they do treat you in a special way, then it will still be bothersome. Just to compound the situation, treating you like a guy will probablly involve pointing out that you're a girl (useful in jibes, and bad attempts at witty humor). Similar things happen often, like the party wanting the leader to be strong and decisive, but dragging their feet because the party doesn't like following. Yours just is worse because of the compounded gender issue. It also may be (I don't know your group at all, so ignore me if I'm wrong) that some of them are showing off because there's a female around. Yeah, really. There's a large possibilty that they're being so annoying to try to impress either you, or the rest of the group.

Now, on to one thing that caught my eye.

Saying "I feel ..." is a staple of the world of shrinks. It's been a technique used to let someone say what is on his or her mind without needing to fear reprisal or contradiction. In my expierence, it backfired. Now starting a statement with "I feel..." means "Don't argue, listen to everything I say, and agree with it." And then it gets abused on top of that. "I feel bad when Teflon Billy makes fun of my DMing skills 'cause he's a jerk." And because we've invoked the I feel rule, Billy can't say anything about being a jerk or making fun of my DMing skills. So, from here a typical response might be "I feel frusterated when ThoughtBubble turns into a stupid crybaby panzy." Things will only further degenerate until we're all really pissed off. The horrible part is that using the clause of I feel literally has been broken into making something an unarbuable fact instead of just asking for a little notice of an emotional state. That's why it's threatining. By the rules, there is no recourse when someone says "I feel". That's why as a guy, I fear it when a girl breaks out that phrase. When it gets broken out, my opinions don't matter, the dialog turns one way, and either I agree, or I'm a jerk and a moron. Now, I know you don't mean for any of that to come up. All you want is someone to listen and try to understand. Try starting with a possible solution, it might help by giving the guys something to latch on to. "Could you stop X? I feel ..." Has the added bonus of the course of action ahead, and opens up possibilities of why X happens.

Using "I feel" style conversation may have something to do with why you get "You shouldn't feel that way," as a response so often. Emotions are pretty well final and unchangable. If someone brings them to a conversation, they are like large, threatning weapons of destruction. I will do my best to respect them (note that I grew up a crybaby momma's boy), but usually they're gone after as the biggest, most dangerous things around.

Again, you have my sympathy, because groups where you don't fit in aren't fun.

 

[fusangite]

Kahuna Burger makes a series of criticisms of behaviour as objectively bad in all situations; while her criticisms might be appropriate for behaviour in the public sphere, in public institutions, they have no place in the world of D&D.

Each D&D group is its own miniature discourse community. The nature of that community is based not on some set of absolute social standards but on the standards the DM and players collectively develop. Afrodyte is operating in a discourse community with a different set of standards; because this group is not a trade union, political party, church or other public institutions, it has no obligation whatsoever to adapt its standards to mainstream society's.

I was in a poker game for several years in which sexist, racist and homophobic remarks were very much the order of the day. Most of the players were friends of mine who were perfectly enjoyable company outside of the poker game. My reaction to this was not to demand that these people's behaviour conform to the norms of society so that I could feel comfortable; my response was to leave the game because I didn't fit in and playing poker with these people made the rest of my friendship with them less fun.

If a group dynamic is not to your liking, it is pointless to find it "objectively bad" and rail against it. The solution is to spend your time in a group dynamic that is more to your liking. It is not okay for us to encourage Afrodyte to stay in the group and try to change it because she is somehow objectively right. That course of action will make it less fun for the players in that group who will, in turn, make it less fun for Afrodyte. This gaming circle is not the Little Rock public school system -- there's no public issue here. It's just a bunch of guys who want to get together once a week and be who they feel like being.

Kahuna Burger's comments only make sense if D&D games are somehow re-classified into the public sphere. While her comments might make sense if we were talking about weekly meetings of a political party, or executive meetings of the Chamber of Commerce, they have absolutely no place in discussing voluntary, non-exclusive, private, recreational associations. The state doesn't register D&D games; D&D games don't charge membership fees; we don't all get annual licenses from the national D&D players' association. The same bill of rights which promises freedom from discrimination also promises freedom of assembly and association.

It is destructive for us to suggest that Afrodyte hang in there because she is "right"; she should be spending her energies creating a better, different gaming group that is actually fun. I would recommend one that has a higher female to male ratio so that the social dynamic that is created is more neutral and woman-friendly -- not because it's objectively better but based on the vastly more important criterion that it would be more fun for her.

 

[Umbran]

Arrogence is an emotion, hatred is an emotion, ego is an emotion no matter how level you keep your voice while you are expressing them.

Hatred is a proper emotion, but I'm not so sure about arrogance and egotism. One feels hatred. One does not "feel" arrogant, instead one behaves in an arrogant manner, or is arrogant. It seems to me that arrogance and egotism are states of mind in which certain emotional responses to specific situations are more likely.

As to whether emotional responses may be separated from rational ones, I don't know. There are some who would claim that any stimulus, be it an external physical one or an internal emotional one, may be ignored or overridden if the person practices sufficient self-control. While it may not be universally true, it seems to me that it is at least partially true.

 

[Trainz]

It is quite simple really.

You play with jerks, or you don't.

Over-analysis can only confuse the issue, and eventually escalate the not-so-tame discussion (I can feel the pression mounting, can you ? It's getting hot in here !) into a trans-gender flame fest.

There are guys and girls that are Jerks. I serve them every day, I work with them every day, they're everywhere. I wouldn't waste a D&D game on them.

It has NOTHING to do with the difference in sexes. There are, indeed, behavioural differences in the sexes, but they have nothing to do with if they will treat you well at the gaming table or not.

Girl with Guys jerks: They will make sexist remarks at you (a girl), they will be condescending, they will be insulting.

Girl with Girls jerks: They will single you out, they will gang-up on you, they will detect what is emotionally important to you and attack it.

Girl with Cool guys: Even though you are the only female, they will see your presence as an opportunity to enhance the RPG experience with a presence of both sexes at the table. The games will feel more real, ideas that would have never otherwise appeared will emerge, and the guys will thank your presence for that.

Girl with Cool girls: Well, not much to say here, but I'm quite convinced that an all-girl game must be fantastic. After playing for a few months, the all-girl group will welcome a COOL guy, which will probably have the same impact on their games as with the single Girl with Cool guys above.

Q.E.D. Nothing to do with the sexes. You're dealing with arse-holes, or you're not.

 

[leeann_the_lame]

Would you agree there are overemotional human social interactions?

Within each specific social context, of course.

I get the feeling you are attempting to show a point. But just as easily as Afrodyte can be overemotional in her reaction to impersonally meant arguments, the men she games with can be overemotional in trying to defend their own insecurities. I think it's hard to call it from here.

 

[Teflon Billy]

...I get the feeling you are attempting to show a point. But just as easily as Afrodyte can be overemotional in her reaction to impersonally meant arguments, the men she games with can be overemotional in trying to defend their own insecurities. I think it's hard to call it from here.

I think it's impossible to call it from here, but I wasn't attempting to.

I was responding to your comment....

I'd like to agree with Kahuna Burger: There are no unemotial human social interactions.

...and trying to point out that your statement, while true, didn't address the issue at hand.

Of course all social interaction has an emotional component. Agreeing with that is like agreeing that water has a "wet" component.

It is truly that some emotions that are more ok for women and some for men.

This sentence lost me entirely.