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

Riley37 · Jun 11, 2019

Bedrockgames said:
a character being raped in a game concerns me less than a person's life in the hobby being affected forever.

You say that, as if a player being told their character had been repeatedly raped while unconscious, and was about to be raped again, or murdered, or both, was an event which could not possibly affect THAT PLAYER's life in the hobby forever.

I can imagine a real-life rape survivor, playing in Rolfe's game, who afterwards flinched, every time she remembered Rolfe taking delight in her shocked face. If that flinch made her too uncomfortable to enjoy gaming, ever again, at ANY con... then I could not blame her for that flinch. That is: HER life in the hobby was affected forever.

I'm not really saying this for your benefit. I've seen your responses so far, so I know what to expect. You're on record as denying that *crying* is an understandable response to thinking about the time (or times) one was raped. I'm pointing out that Rolfe is not the ONLY one whose gaming life is affected, for any reader who benefits from my drawing lines to connect those dots.

Bedrockgames · Jun 11, 2019

Hussar said:
@Bedrockgames, instead of making allusions, why not actually quote the things that trouble you? Because right now all it looks like you’re doing is victim blaming. Even if that’s not your intention, that is what it looks like.

I am not victim blaming. But I do think we don't have to leave our judgements at the door just because someone is a victim or because they have a history trauma. We have to use our own judgments in these situations. And I don't think a person being positioned as the victim, means everything they say is automatically true or all of their reactions are appropriate. Again, like I said, I think the con was fine in shutting the GM down if they felt that needed to be done. Most of my concerns come in the broader discussions of where this should lead (i.e. should he be banned from other cons, should cons have a blanket policy policing game content at their conventions, should X cards always be used at convention tables, etc).

Riley37 · Jun 11, 2019

MarkB said:
To be absolutely completely fair, the players' description was in post #242. Post #213 was a reply by Hussar, and post #214 was the original link to John Dodd's blog, and contained no excerpts.

That is indeed a valid point. I don't see all posts, because of blocking; so the numbering in MY browser view, is not the same as the numbering in yours. The full, unblocked count is the more universal and appropriate reference for directing a participant back to a previous post. I cannot blame BRG for confusion on that particular point.

I don't think it would make a difference, in eventual outcome; but thank you for bringing up the point, and making me aware of my miscommunication. I'd rather be held to rigorous standards, than participate in a conversation which didn't practice rigorous standards of honesty and process, on this sort of topic.

I tried to get a URL specific to the post with the excerpt. I only got a URL which included that post on the same page; and even that might not be universal, because, again, blocking.

I wish that the post count in my browser view included the ones I can't see (despite the jumps in the series)! In the meantime, is there a better way for me to refer people back to a specific post?

Bedrockgames · Jun 11, 2019

MarkB said:
Here's what I don't get. You can somehow hold in your head the position that people talking about someone having to stop running public games at conventions is a cruelty that you need to speak out about, while also holding the position that someone straight-up confronting someone with a scenario of being raped is no big deal, and not worth making a public fuss about.

I have to head out but I want to respond to this before I do. It can be very difficult in a thread like this to clearly lay out my position. I am fielding a lot of very negative and hostile responses where I am being forced to answer difficult questions, often framed in a way I would normally object to. First off, I don't think people talking about this guy is cruelty. I think the cruelty comes in when people have zero hesitancy or remorse when talking about dishing out harsh punishments (like global bans from conventions or publicly shaming the guy). Keep in mind this isn't limited to this thread, but what I've seen on social media here and elsewhere (particularly in places like twitter). Holding up ostracizing as a tool, is something I find particularly cruel and I don't think gamers in general are good at wielding it in a way that doesn't produce bad collateral damage. I've just seen a lot of these social media blow ups where people get painted into much greater villains than they really are, and I don't think it is a good idea to say nothing when they arise (even if you are the only person speaking against a large number of posters). Believe me, I would much rather spend my day in a thread about sandboxes or in a thread where everyone thought my posts were marvelous. That said, I am not saying this is not a big deal. I am saying it is a bad game session where people were made uncomfortable. That happens. That is the sort of thing where I think the best response is to excuse yourself from the table. If it rises to the necessary level, you can alter the people at the con. But I just don't see it as particularly news worthy. I am against cruelty but I am also in favor of people being able to live in the world and figure this stuff out themselves. I think we are now prioritizing 'safety' (in a sense that has little to do with physical safety) in a way that is unhealthy in this hobby.

Bedrockgames · Jun 11, 2019

Riley37 said:
You're on record as denying that *crying* is an understandable response to thinking about the time (or times) one was raped. .

That is not what I said. I said that the reaction which involved other people (and by the player's account it seemed the people handing the situation at the convention) was odd. I can totally understand an individual who was traumatized crying. But I have also seen people use tears to manipulate people. And if you have a group of adults crying over something like this, it makes me wonder what is going on. At the very least, it is not, in my view, a typical reaction. I would expect con organizers not to cry while handling a complaint like this. And trust me I understand. I have experienced PTSD myself. But I also think there are healthier and less healthy ways to deal with that kind of thing.

Hussar · Jun 12, 2019

Bedrockgames said:
. But I have also seen people use tears to manipulate people. And if you have a group of adults crying over something like this, it makes me wonder what is going on.

But of course you’re not victim blaming at all by implying that the folks here were being dishonest in their reactions. :erm:

Good grief.

You have a very strange definition of cruel if it’s okay in your mind to drive people away from a table because of the content (the best reaction would be to walk away) but apparently not letting someone drive people away in the first place is a bridge too far.

Talk about toxic.

MarkB · Jun 12, 2019

Riley37 said:
I wish that the post count in my browser view included the ones I can't see (despite the jumps in the series)! In the meantime, is there a better way for me to refer people back to a specific post?

It may be browser dependent, but clicking on the hashtagged post number in the very top right of the post (or right-clicking and copying the URL) should get you a link that jumps straight to the post.

Riley37 · Jun 12, 2019

Bedrockgames said:
And if you have a group of adults crying over something like this, it makes me wonder what is going on.

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!

Riley37 · Jun 12, 2019

MarkB said:
It may be browser dependent, but clicking on the hashtagged post number in the very top right of the post (or right-clicking and copying the URL) should get you a link that jumps straight to the post.

Like this?

https://www.enworld.org/forum/showt...ang-rape-role-playing-game/page37#post7618947

Riley37 · Jun 12, 2019

Bedrockgames said:
But people also sometimes seek attention and this kind of incident, especially when the people involved in helping resolve it are crying as well, strikes me as potentially attention seeking.

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.