When a man plays a woman

[TalenOfTheKeep]

I've been playing for over 30 years, and the only thing I refuse to play is a human male (I play one everyday IRL). I've played many female characters over the years, and it's like any other role play. Give them a personality, and a rational behind the personality.

Two of my more memorable characters are both human female. One was raised on the streets, (a rough and tumble rogue) who spoke like someone who grew up in taverns, surrounded by sailors, and had the added problem of attracting unwanted male attention. Her sister was raised in a cloister, rarely saw the outside world, and learned everything she knew from books.

How does this translate into role play? Simple.
Sister 1 would frequently hint to a guard of a good time if they just followed her, only to end up getting ambushed. Sister 1 did not like paying for meals or nights at an inn. Her solution was to find a patron, get a free dinner and drinks, and follow him up to his room for the night. Other than disease checks on occasion (started by our GM once he got on to her not paying for anything), we left what happened in the room off table unless it was part of the plot (she got kidnapped once, and the party had to go rescue her).

Sister 2 is more of the quiet fountain of knowledge. She is shy and has poor inter-personal skills (think of Sheldon from the Big Bang Theory). She was female, but other than men hitting on her, it never really became relevant.

Like any other characters, make your players come up with a reason for the personality. Male or Female makes about as much difference between Dwarf and Elf. The character has a story to tell, just like everyone else.

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

"I think of a man, then take away reason and accountability." - Melvin Udall, As Good As It Gets

Actually, I've played a great number of female characters - PC's and obviously NPC's. I would assume that back when I was a teenager my female characters were two-dimensional and prone to adolescent male fantasy stereotype. I would HOPE that these days they have more than such superficial, even offensive depiction, but personalities of genuine interest and depth.

I seem to recall Michael Caine once talking in an interview about various roles he'd taken where he had no idea what the character's job was really like or what life was really like for them. He noted that Method actors, for example, would research parts and as much as possible try to actually LIVE the life of a character they were playing, whereas he felt that as an actor the tool for him to use was his own imagination - he didn't need to LIVE a role to understand it, his job was more like pretending he knew. I take that kind of attitude when it comes to portraying female characters. I have an imagination and I can FAKE IT, so to speak.

If I'm putting forth a reasonable effort to portray a character with enough dimension and believability to fit that characters place in the game that's good enough. I don't have to be a woman to properly play a female character without surrendering my Man Card or offending women - at least no more than any woman would have playing a male character.

 

[ad_hoc]

The inherent problem here is that people are seeing gender as a character trait.

A problem in storytelling, particularly Hollywood, is that anything that makes a character not a cis-het white man is seen as a character trait.

This is because the assumed default is cis-het white man. Any divergence is seen as a deliberate choice by the author. Then they need to answer why, and the why is that it is part of the story.

The following is my favourite way to explain privilege.

A white man is asked to briefly describe what he is: He says, "I'm a person."
A white woman is asked to briefly describe what she is: She says, "I'm a woman."
A black woman is asked to briefly describe what she is: She says, "I'm a black woman."
Their sexuality was not described at all, so the assumption placed on all of them is that they are cis-het.

I play in a mixed gender group, though I don't ask the players what their genders are. It's not important to the game (though I do know their pronouns). Characters in the game are a variety of genders. Gender has never taken the spotlight or been an issue.

 

[Lylandra]

Yep, I agree that there are far too few female/other race/X roles out there in Hollywood movies, especially in more action-oriented flicks (that doesn't necessarily mean action movies, but also thrillers, some dramas, superhero movies etc.). TV series are improving in this regard and I for one can see the impact that this increased diversity has on the stories that are being told. Problem is that every writer starts with him- or herself as a starting point and if you happen to be a white man, you will include more "people like you" in your script. I've witnessed it myself when I was writing my first adventures or novel ideas... almost all NPC were white (or alien) women. Ouch.

So because I am aware of this rule, I sometimes switch genders of NPC quite liberally. Unless there is an ingame reason why this or that group should be all-male or all-female, i try out shuffling them around until I have a roughly 40-60 to 60-40 representation. For example, if all "key NPC" a PC group could interact with in a major hub are male without reason, I include some women. I also try to include other races if everyone you can speak to for major plot points is human, but your town is, say, 30% elves/70% humans, unless there is an intended power imbalance between races.
(For those familiar with WotBS which I am currently DMing, I did switch Headmaster Simeon to a fierce, dark-skinned Simeonne because the who's who in Seaquen felt so strangely male after the previous adventures. I also made some nobles change race and gender in Dassen to match its past and present people. My players tend to stick to my female NPC anyway for reasons I don't fully understand yet and they especially love Simeonne, so I guess I did do it right for them^^)

In many cases, gender is irrelevant except for getting a general feel of who a PC/NPC is. But in my experience, it totally depends on your group. I've played female PCs who were more or less wary around people of the opposite gender (or a certain race/gender combo). I've had PCs who were romanciers (but hetero) and who tried to flirt with every other female NPC. I've had pregnant NPC and single mothers/fathers with small children and young girls who had a total crush on the "sooooo handsome" elven PC. In some cases, your setting even says that gender is not irrelevant. Most famous example are the Drow, but any society with an imbalance of power or different societal roles for different genders will impact your choice.

Not every group does include this kind of social interaction or does design societies like that and, as I said previously, whether or not you could or should include romance and mature themes like having a personal responsibility or having a traumatic past or whether your affairs can have consequences is totally up to your group.

 

[pemerton]

Has anyone here had an experience of playing someone of a different gender identity? What was it like and how did you play that character?

I don't play that often, and mostly play male PCs. The last time I remember playing a woman PC was a long time ago now at a convention, in a CoC freeform. The basic framing for the three-session game was that my character's son had been taken to hell by his father (my (ex-)partner). The other PCs were my daughter, her boyfriend, and my son's friends.

The issue of family drama/trauma was pretty central to the game. As it happened, at the time I had a couple of very close former school friends (sisters) whose father had recently abandoned the family. I was close to their mother also, and I used my knowledge of her experiences and responses as a basic template/guideline for playing my character. It seemed to work fine (I got the tournament prize for that particular PC).

In my regular games I've had a few male players over the years play female PCs. It's never been a big deal. Sex tends not to be a very big part of our games, so being a woman rather than a man is mostly just an issue of flavour/characterisation.

In the BW game that I'm currently running, one of the PCs is a woman played by a man. On a couple of occasions, there have been situations where women NPCs are threatened by male NPCs (not necessarily sexually, but BW if a fairly gritty game with a somewhat S&S tone, and so the undertones of gendered violence have been present). On those occasions the player has played his PC - who is a sort-of necromancer/assassin - as feeling particularly protective of the women NPCs. In the context of our RPGing, this is quite a heavy foregrounding of PC gender.

 

[Anon Adderlan]

Any character concept which violates the boundaries of any player at the table should be changed. Full stop. Our experiences are irrelevant to your discomfort or concerns.

That said, in my experience men playing women and visa versa has never been a problem, but I've yet to encounter anyone playing a sexual abuse survivor who hates all men, so can't help you there. I have however encountered plenty of actual sexual abuse survivors, and while they all deal with it differently, most of the time some level of (hyper/hypo)sexualization is a part of it, which I'm almost certain would be difficult to express without coming off as creepy. Think Annie Reilly from Copper.

Regardless there'll always be some level of stereotyping to account for in an RPG, and people naturally tend to overemphasize the biggest differences from themselves when playing a character.

What's interesting is the character I currently play is sort of a mix of exaggerated feminine tropes - she's a Courtesan, Diva-ish type but also Disney Princess-ish. Basically she's more of a drag queen than I ever could be, lol. It'd be pretty hard and potentially insulting for a (cis het) guy to play a character like that. Some of the lewd jokes(while I try to keep it to a minimum most of the time, as it's not that sort of game) would be particularly jarring for someone who's not a woman

For some this would be offensive regardless the source. I mean Ru Paul can't even get away with it anymore. And how would you know if a person playing such a character was a cis het guy anyway?

as a brief stint as a camgirl and having experienced some pretty nasty slutshaming as a result, along with engaging in a lot of SW activism, I am in a place where certain words are a bit more mine to reclaim.

I was in special-ed, consistently bullied, and called 'retard' up until College. Guess I've got the same legitimacy to take back that word as you do yours.

Wonder how well that'll work out.

I suppose you could get into the territory of "Is drag offensive?"(personally I don't regard it as such, depending, a lot of young white trans people don't know their history that well & there isn't always a clear separation)

#Drag seeks to violate cultural norms while #Trans seek to become them. They're diametrically opposed despite the superficial similaritiy. So #Drag is 'offensive' by its very nature.

I actually know lesbian sex workers,

So you have black friends lesbian acquaintances. Guess that means you're qualified to speak on their behalf.

I'm white, though I am Irish so until somewhat recently we were affected by such things[/B]. I was adopted by a Romani family, so I can see the harm "gypsy" stereotypes cause(even if the Roma themselves aren't always aware of them). I'm a convert to Islam, and I can see how the use of Islamic & Middle Eastern imagery and concepts can be harmful. Most of the people I talk to are non white(Despite living in Ireland, not even sure how that happened!), and a large number are activists educated on their cause.

I guess that means you're qualified to speak for all those groups too, especially the #Roma who are apparently too dumb to see when certain representations are harmful without their great Irish savior.

Here's a thought: Perhaps it's not that they don't see them, but that they simply don't agree.

As someone who played a busty eleven sex worker fairy/bard/mage it does sound like he was trying to be edgy/clever, lol.

And this entitlement even extends to fictional minorities, lol.

How would I feel if someone else played a trans character? If it's a character that's non-binary example - it's kind of normal for Fey/Elves to have nonspecific genders for example - it probably wouldn't be a big deal. But a character that had been through a specific analogue of transition might be difficult

Then you should feel free to share your concerns and ask that player not to do it.

Has anyone had this around a table? The 5E PHB encourages it, technically.

No it doesn't. #Monsterhearts encourages it, D&D 5e just suggests that if you wanted to play such a character there's nothing stopping you.

Somehow something that's a beloved part of someone's culture has become a safer part of someone else's.

At least you got this right, and why only the 'dominant' culture can engage in it. There's even parallels when it comes to shaming transwomen for wearing dresses while celebrating cis het guys for doing so. Thing is the dominant culture isn't always white, and the problem isn't white people wearing bindis and dreads, but minorities being punished for it. So the solution isn't to start persecuting white people, but to stop persecuting minorities.

The idea that "all cultures borrowed from each other throughout history" actually hides a very brutal history that white westerners want others to forget - a history of imperialism, colonialism, mass starvation and killing.

If you're involved in imperialism, colonialism, mass starvation, or genocide, then by definition you're trying to wipe out 'inferior' cultures, not borrow from them. German Nazi's did not adopt Jewish culture. White colonials did not adopt Native American culture. British imperialists did not adopt Indian culture. Spanish Conquistadors did not adopt Aztec culture.

On the other hand Modern America and The English Language adopt culture almost indiscriminately and have been insanely successful because of it.

Do you know what happens when people say stuff like this? Most of the time, instead of arguing the case, PoC especially those from heavily exoticised cultures, back off. They don't come here. They don't reveal their ethnicity. They may even feel like not being involved in the hobby.

Are you a PoC? No? Then let them speak for themselves and don't dismiss them when they do...

and not just that one black guy on youtube who holds views that are convenient for people that don't much care about what most subaltern peoples have to say.

...like here. And you did so by dismissing him as a person based solely on his race and how 'convenient' he was for other people (and wasn't for you). Now if he came to this site and read what you wrote about him do you think he'd feel welcomed?

I on the other hand like to raise minority voices up, so here's what Some Black Guy, nappy headed black girl, SomethingSomething Love, Aba & Preach, Ross Mckelvy and a couple of Brilliant Idiots have to say about dreads and cultural appropriation.

the difference between appropriation and exchange, as with the subject of "A man plays a woman" is respect.

So who determines what is respectful? Because obviously it isn't 'that one black guy'.

I don't see anyone calling for censorship here. This always comes up with anti-social justice arguments. Cultural practices can be outlawed or made "undesirable" by way of employment discrimination etc.

You don't need to call for it because it's being 'outlawed' in exactly the same manner. Just ask a teacher, cop, actor, artist, or anyone else SJWs have sought to get fired or made unemployable for what they said.

There's honestly very little I find worse in the world that people trying to take an argument designed to protect the dignity and the marginalised and trying to turn it around saying "NO U R THE REAL RACISTS LOL". I'm really not sure you understand all that much about "race and ethnicity" but I'm too exhausted to get into it.

There's honestly very little I find worse in the world than hypocrites who use their 'oppressed' status to judge and speak for others, except for maybe those who also disengage when their conclusions and legitimacy are challenged.

I don't much want to bring things into a game that I have to deal with at work that could trigger me from my own vicarious trauma.

Fair enough, but are you also saying you can claim someone else's trauma as your own vicariously? Because if true then boy howdy do I have a lot of baggage.

Socially awkward people can learn social skills and cooperation through a structured game.

But how often does that honestly translate to social ability outside the game? Because I've seen people with good social skills get worse after playing an RPG more often than the contrary.

I also don't think one can argue that D&D didn't start out with cultural or sex biases, as the first few editions outlined very specific mechanical penalties for playing a female.

Chainmail didn't. D&D didn't. AD&D limited female characters to 18/50 STR max. 3rd Ed didn't. 4th Ed didn't. 5th Ed certainly doesn't.

Perhaps you meant one.

As for cultural appropriation, it most certainly is a thing. This is something I won't even try to argue. If you deny it, then there just isn't enough common ground between us to even have a discussion.

When conclusions are challenged, disengage! And whatever you do, don't try and find out if the problem is simply different definitions for 'cultural appropriation'.

As for the issue of respect you mentioned, if you felt attacked or disrespected, that was not my intention.

I went back and tried to figure out why in the world you thought I was troubled by you disrespecting me, and I couldn't.

I care little if someone attacks or disrespects me in the conventional sense you mean it.* I generally don't get upset about that sort of thing. The sort of things likely to provoke me to aggressive commentary have more to with what I see as intellectual laziness and unconsidered words.

This is exactly the kind of misunderstanding you get when dealing with someone who priortizes feelings over facts, which may be no less legitimate, but the difference is still a leading cause of conflict on the internet. Me? I'm a facts guy. Because taking the internet too seriously is a leading cause of conflict in the real world.

One of the things I always look for in an ideology, is if that condemns something as wrong, it gives a functional description of how a person in the wrong can amend their behavior. And I really think one of the big problems with "cultural appropriation" as a description, is it isn't coherently proscriptive. Any attempt to describe what someone guilty of the crime should do, or how one should avoid the crime, invariably runs into wishy-washy thinking, self-contradiction, and most of all appointment of a preferred priesthood who can speak "authentically" on the particular subject.

That's because the point is to make an example out of someone, not correct their behavior. It's an ideology of fear and intimidation, where nothing short of lifetime ostracization, unemployment, and public shaming is enough.

"authenticity" in a racial context proves to be racist,

Indeed, I'd love to see someone make claims about what makes someone an authentic PoC or woman without it being intensely marginalizing.

Anyone looking to work out personal issues regarding basically anything outside of silver-age alien smashing needed to look elsewhere. My table is not therapy for you, neither is it an opportunity to live out abhorrent power fantasies.

The minute you treat an RPG session as therapy is the minute you make the GM accountable for being a therapist, your fellow players patients there for the same reasons you are, and any character choices as evidence of 'issues'.

On the other hand, being able to call myself a therapist would lend an air of legitimacy to my statements

I've seen males play females done poorly far more often than well.

The ones who do so poorly seldom get a second chance.

And how many of them ended up coming out as transwomen? Because I've seen this happen before, and the 'quality' of roleplay was never a significant indicator.

D&D should never be a ‘safe space’, at least by default, because the very concept is intellectual poison.

Contrary to popular belief a safe space is not a padded cell full of hypoallergenic kittens, only an environment where you are free from the demands and judgements of others.

#SpotTheIrony

I've have seen many players play opposite genders in my game and not once have I seen a player use the gender to deliberately play the gender poorly, but neither have I seen them play the gender with any genuine depth.

How would you know?

That all said, the depth of background to form genuine role play motivations is a problem for any player, regardless of gender. All player project a portion of themselves (to make the character relevant to them) as well as their own understanding of a characteristic they wish to use to shape the character. But unless the player have genuine experience (real personal experience) that matches the background of the character, it is contrived.

You sure use the word 'genuine' alot. Makes me think you don't actually have a coherent argument backing your conclusions. Does this mean a transwoman is not a 'genuine' woman?

If someone is having difficulty handing some event at a table, whatever that event may be then there should be an open dialogue and the table should reassess if whatever the triggering event was was inappropriate, or if the reaction to the triggering event was inappropriate.

This comes dangerously close to demanding someone justify their feelings and experience based on someone else's, or worse dismissing them entirely. So what exactly do you consider 'inappropriate' reactions?

By the way, when you play a woman, be sure to roll the random check to see if your character is menstruating.

And finally Gentlegamer, aptly demonstrating why this is still even an issue.

 

[pdzoch]

Edited -- response not needed

 

[Roseweave]

Wow that was the biggest load of crap.

Sorry, I've been too exhausted from arguing with actual Nazis lately to care about the people "SJWs" get fired. Or deal with your attempts to turn the argument around on me being a white saviour while dismissing minority concerns yourself, as if you actually care about tropes like that. Nope nope nope. In a more ideal environment I wouldn't need to speak up on behalf of others. But this isn't it. And I'm pretty tired of people who don't experience the same level of daily subjugation presenting themselves as "facts" not emotions - it's pretty easy to feel that way when you're not affected by it first hand. But that means your "facts" aren't being observed from a place of experience either.

Your assessment of Drag vs. Trans is also wrong. Trans people merely by existing are subversive. And there isn't always a clear distinction. Just to be clear, while you're so concerned about transphobes, racists, aggressive misogynists and fascists getting fired, people like me struggle to find or hold down jobs. The intersection of employment rates for being trans, autistic, and wearing a headscarf is stupid low. So again, don't feel bad for bullies on this one. If anything it makes it all the more fitting a punishment.

Let's be clear - "ostracization, unemployment, and public shaming" is exactly what people like me experience for EXISTING. The vast majority of bullies get away with their . Heck you can be a fascist bully and be elected to positions of power. Trying to make me feel bad for the people that either hate me or try to undermine attempts at progress towards a world that doesn't hate me isn't going to work. It seems like your "fact" book is missing a lot of statistics on how crap things can be for trans people.

There's honestly very little I find worse in the world than hypocrites who use their 'oppressed' status to judge and speak for others, except for maybe those who also disengage when their conclusions and legitimacy are challenged.

As opposed to people who talk down to minorities and tell them their own issues? Or try and garner sympathies for their oppressors? Yeah no thanks.

Re: the Roma, I'm not saying I know better than them and you're pulling a disingenous trick then. Because I know people like you love to use examples of minorities that "disagree" to fuel your arguments ven when the majority might not be on their side. The fact is that the Roma are very focused on survival and quite cut off from the mainstream. For that reason, they're often not fully aware of certain aspects of the "gypsy" stereotypes, but almost all of them suffer from some form of it and recognise it to some degree. Those who are more integrated - the ones I learn my politics/activism from - will recognise these tropes as negative and call them out. My problem is that there will always be members of groups that DON'T - as you say "disagree" and you will hold these up as somehow more "valid" because they are more convenient to you(which is exactly what you goddamn do posting those youtube videos), without unpacking why someone might answer that to begin with.

You call me a white saviour but your whole argument seems to be about centering you and your experiences and perspectives. The worst thing is - I do agree that Cultural Appropriation discussions do requires more nuance. But what you're proposing isn't nuance, it's just finding people who already agree with you and holding them up as examples of model minorities. Meanwhile, all the others who say otherwise are ignored. But who cares about Black/Trans feelings right? When we have normative cis white men & friends with their "facts" to sort us all out and set us straight because aside from a precious few enlightened that agree with the mainline cis white guy position, we obviously need guidance. Thank goodness we're not listening to some "white saviour" instead! Oh, wait...

 

[Sunseeker]

This comes dangerously close to demanding someone justify their feelings and experience based on someone else's, or worse dismissing them entirely. So what exactly do you consider 'inappropriate' reactions?

Like punching someone. Spitting in their face. Screaming and yelling. The group is under no obligation to accept and tolerate someone being offended, especially if that someone is demanding that others change for them and is unable or unwilling to provide any reason for their offended-ness.

 

[Morrus]

When terms like "SJW" are being thrown around, this thread is clearly no longer about gaming. As always, keep politics out of it, please, along with general discussion of social ills or your perceptions thereof. There are plenty of places on the web (i.e.: everywhere else) you can discuss those those things.