Players 'distressed' by gang-rape role-playing game

Riley37 said:

Well, we're fortunate that no one *here* is attention seeking. Gosh, that would sure be awful; if someone made himself the focus of this thread, that could distract us from thinking about those players in Rolfe's game, and how UK Expo 2019 shifted their experience of TRPG, and whether that's an experience anyone should take active steps to prevent from re-occurring.

Click to expand...

I am just participating in a discussion. I am not trying to make myself the focus.

Riley37 said:

Hints and innuendos. He's just *wondering* what's going on. What's wrong with wondering? How could anyone object to his curiosity? Open minds, right? He didn't say that THOSE adults were engaged in manipulation. He's aware, of course, that some people have used tears for manipulation. "People have, at various times and places in the last thousand years, used tears for manipulation" is a perfectly cromulent assertion. He's not actually asserting that *those particular people at the con, the ones who just recently heard Rolfe's narration of what men with guns tell their characters* are using tears for manipulation. How could anyone know?

How indeed, other than tracking them down and interviewing them, as John Dodd did; but can we trust John Dodd's account of his investigation? How could we possibly trust *his explicit declaration, made in his full name, with his hobby status on the line*, over a vague implication of manipulative tears?

Not that crying for effect is a gendered trope (the femme fatale employing the Wounded Gazelle Gambit). Not that any woman has ever pointed out that she's called an ice-cold bitch if she *doesn't* cry, and a fragile weakling if she *does* cry. I didn't say anything about gender. You can't fairly infer that from context. My intentions are good. Trust me!

Click to expand...

You are projecting all kinds of things onto my posts. I haven't attacked you at all. You've been very rude to me most of this thread, because we disagree over how best to handle an incident in the gaming community, and I haven't said anything back to you that I feel is negative. But I will point out, this is exactly the kind of cruelty I am talking about. People think because they believe they are so right, they can be nasty to other people.

MarkB said:

First, some traumas are a lot more commonplace than others. Second, you don't need to have experienced rape in order to find it highly disturbing when someone describes it happening to a character whose reactions you are portraying.

Click to expand...

People get mugged and violently assaulted all the time too. People are murdered, people have relatives who are close to them murdered. These things feature into games all the time. Someone who was violently robbed is probably going to have strong reactions to imagery that trigger that memory. But in games we routinely have bandits attempt to rob the party or have monsters or NPCs attack the party. No one would say this is because people are being insensitive to victims of violent theft.

I am not saying people should be raping their characters. I don't like that kind of stuff in my games. I once had a player try to have their character remove an NPCs clothing by force, and I told them I didn't want that kind of stuff in my game. But I can definitely see how in an 18+ game, a GM might think it is fair to explore that theme. And again, if they want to kick him out of the con, I think they can do so. I just don't think the hobby needs to make sure this guy never GMs at another con. Especially since this was the first time anything like this seems to have happened with him. And I don't know that the best solution to this sort of thing is making everyone use an X card (I just am not convinced that this actually helps people).

You can't argue basic human decency into somebody dead set against it, and it's a waste of time and energy to keep trying.

At a certain point you have to stop feeding the troll.

Gradine said:

You can't argue basic human decency into somebody dead set against it, and it's a waste of time and energy to keep trying.

At a certain point you have to stop feeding the troll.

Click to expand...

I am not dead set against human decency and I am not a troll.

Bedrockgames said:

You are projecting all kinds of things onto my posts. I haven't attacked you at all. You've been very rude to me most of this thread, because we disagree over how best to handle an incident in the gaming community, and I haven't said anything back to you that I feel is negative. But I will point out, this is exactly the kind of cruelty I am talking about. People think because they believe they are so right, they can be nasty to other people.

Click to expand...

No, you're being a dingus and everybody else has been rightfully calling you out on it. Most of those people have been mincing their words, but I won't, so here goes. You ing suck, my dear .

It would help if your arguments didn't oh so closely echo a certain subset of the population overly represented in the gaming community that is bona fide, out-and-out misogynistic, racist, and otherwise discriminatory, xenophobic, and just plain uncouth. Even if you profess that you aren't those things yourself, I'm more confident in judging you by the company you keep than by the words that come out of your mouth. Because you have given us absolutely no reason to believe that you're arguing in good faith and that you aren't just some pathetic slimeball shitbag desperately trying to hold onto the edge of the cliff that is an antiquated and hostile worldview that is crumbling day by day as it is more and more being exposed as ethically abhorrent.

Psyzhran2357 said:

No, you're being a dingus and everybody else has been rightfully calling you out on it. Most of those people have been mincing their words, but I won't, so here goes. You ing suck, my dear .

It would help if your arguments didn't oh so closely echo a certain subset of the population overly represented in the gaming community that is bona fide, out-and-out misogynistic, racist, and otherwise discriminatory, xenophobic, and just plain uncouth. Even if you profess that you aren't those things yourself, I'm more confident in judging you by the company you keep than by the words that come out of your mouth. Because you have given us absolutely no reason to believe that you're arguing in good faith and that you aren't just some pathetic slimeball shitbag desperately trying to hold onto the edge of the cliff that is an antiquated and hostile worldview that is crumbling day by day as it is more and more being exposed as ethically abhorrent.

Click to expand...

Again, this is projection. I am definitely not xenophobic or racist. Nor am I misogynistic. Obviously I don't share many of the key ideological assumptions present on this thread. But I am on the left and none of the things you accuse me of. And I would just draw a line once again to the degree of moral certainty people seem to be feeling and their ability to be rude and cruel.

Bedrockgames said:

Okay, I think I am being fairly mild here.

Click to expand...

The question isn't about severity. It is about the logic and form of the argument.

And I am not trying to say bad things about people to bolster a position.

Click to expand...

Oh, most times it isn't like Snidely Whiplash, twirling his mustache, going, "BWAHAHAHA! Now I will say bad things about people!" It is usually quite casual and seems reasonable until someone puts a spotlight on it.

You specifically pointed out how you think their testimony came from a desire to seek attention, and thereby *dismissed* it. You ascribed a personality trait to someone you've minimal information about, so that you could disregard something that would undercut your position. Classic ad hominem. Rhetorical weak sauce. You may disregard testimony when the speaker is obviously biased in some way, but to just decide they happen to be untrustworthy for no evidentiary reason is not cool.

And I daresay, your appraisal of their character is suspect - subject to confirmation bias. Pretty convenient, that the person saying things that undercut you *just happens* to be lying, isn't it? Your *feeling* about them is apt to be colored by your desired narrative, whether you like it or not.

When it comes to the crying, I am not trying to attack the person in question. But my honest reaction to a group of adults crying in that kind of situation (especially when the criers include the game convention personnel sorting out the problem) is this does not seem like normal adult behavior to me.

Click to expand...

My wife is a rape survivor. I cannot, within the rules of EN World, relay her opinion of that statement.

You could turn this around for a moment. For just a moment - accept what they say is true, and accept that they are not particularly abnormal. Just for sake of argument.

What does that say about the experience they had?

Umbran said:

My wife is a rape survivor. I cannot, within the rules of EN World, relay her opinion of that statement.

You could turn this around for a moment. For just a moment - accept what they say is true, and accept that they are not particularly abnormal. Just for sake of argument.

What does that say about the experience they had?

Click to expand...

I think people are mixing up what I am saying here. I am not saying a rape survivor crying is abnormal. I am saying a group of people crying in that way, together, as half of them are in a position of authority handling the situation, strikes me as very non-adult. I am saying something about the interview sets off alarm bells for me. You don't have to share that feeling. But I don't have to adopt your interpreting of it either.

Bedrockgames said:

I think people are mixing up what I am saying here. I am not saying a rape survivor crying is abnormal. I am saying a group of people crying in that way, together, as half of them are in a position of authority handling the situation, strikes me as very non-adult. I am saying something about the interview sets off alarm bells for me. You don't have to share that feeling. But I don't have to adopt your interpreting of it either.

Click to expand...

There is, strangely, a rather wide chasm between "We should trust that they feel what they feel and we are not in a position to argue otherwise." and "They're a bunch of whiny babies."

I have no idea why there would be such a difference between these positions though.

Also, your continued mischaracterization of the situation is annoying. In case my sarcastic tone was unclear.