14 year old girl wants to join my game

[Arcturion]

Personally, I'd feel somewhat uncomfortable allowing someone that young into my group, girl or not, unless accompanied by a responsible adult and/or legal guardian.

I've had a somewhat similiar situation crop up in which a 17-year old girl wanted to join a game I was running. I believe I was 23 at the time and most of the other players were older folks in their 30s and 40s (both guys and gals), half of them married, with one guy being around 18-19 and in college. The girl was introduced to us by her aunt (also a player), so as long as she was around, it was all good and no one saw any problem in inviting her to games.

As it turns out, the girl had been in a previous situation in which an older married couple invited her into their home to role-play, hang out, play cards or video games, etc. And the seemingly normal husband guy turned out to be a real creep, according to her, making sexual innuendo and gestures that could be construed as unwanted advances.

The wife seemed oblivious to the situation, though, but when the stuff hit the fan (the girl told her family about it, threats were made, maybe even of the litigious sort), the wife accused the girl of making everything up and sided with her husband. Of course, it was all he said, she said, and no charges were ever brought up. The thing is, the couple have continued to invite other young girls into their home and that kinda creeps me out and makes me wonder just how oblivious the wife actually is concerning her husband's predatory behavior.

Well, to make a long story short, eventually the girl and I became fast friends and really seemed to hit it off, much to my own initial misgivings about the whole thing (I was worried about falling into the exact same trap) but over the course of a year or two, and with the blessing of her aunt and family (really nice folks), we got to dating. The age difference was always in the back of my mind and, of course, how it looks from the outside looking in.

She's my ex-gf now, but in retrospect, it was kinda of a chancy thing. By the time we started dating, she was 18, so everything was legal and it was a bit funny in that she was sort of the initiator in pursuing a relationship (I'm no lady's man by my own admission), but the fact that she approaches you first doesn't excuse any factor for being legally underage. Consent is not an excuse in court. Had she been any younger, I definitely would have backed off. These days, I'm a little older and a little wiser, and have a career to think about, so if the same situation happened to crop up again, I'd choose to be just friends and leave it at that.

Well, this is just my own personal experience. If I were DMing a tabletop group again nowadays, I'd definitely not allow anyone that young into the game unless accompanied by a legal guardian or a trusted adult family member. If I was a player, I'd bring my concerns up to the DM and the other players in private as the presence of a player that young (without adult supervision) would make me somewhat paranoid and uncomfortable.

 

[Mieric]

I've known a situation where a guy tried to slander another guy by accusing him of molestation, and actually had it do some damage. Barring women doesn't save you from that possibility.

It might not prevent it, but it minimalizes it. Which is the reason I said that having my house completely wired for video and sound makes me safer - notice I didn't say completely safe?

That I have to go to such lengths to feel secure in dealing with people in my own house.... pisses me the hell off, but at least I'm safer from false allegations than I would be without it.

[Qoute]And based on what I've lived through and witnessed, I find that making blanket judgements does absolutely *jack* to actually make you safer. It just gives false security at the cost of cutting yourself off from something. You *can't* reliably make yourself safer just by excluding a specific demographic from your presence and calling it a day.[/quote]

You can however - limit your vulnerability to allegations by limiting interactions with what is considered the common victim(s) to public places or avoiding interaction with them completely.

Which is exactly what we did - until my house (ie. the non-public place we game) was completely wired for visual and audio recording. Now that that's in place, our policy of gender exclusion has been reversed.

The likelyhood of you being charged with statuatory rape decreases dramatically if you .... don't hang out (much less sleep) with people of [insert legal age here]. While not making you completely safe from allegations of statuatory rape.... the likelyhood of it occuring if you don't interact with people under the age of 20 is smaller than if you do.

Avoiding children and avoiding places where there are children dramatically cuts down on the chances of having child endangerment, child molestation, or child abuse charges filed against you. Which again is limiting your vulnerability by excluding a demographic.

 

[Plane Sailing]

A topic which understandably gives rise to strong feelings.

However, I must remind everyone to steer clear of the politics, and to be especially careful in how you converse with and debate with others in such a thread.

Thanks

 

[Thurbane]

Do you not permit women in your group? One women among a group of men is opening yourself up to the same sort of false accusations.

Oh come on now, you're being a bit disingenuous there. We both now about underlying social assumptions about 40 year old men who socialize with 14 year olds (of either sex, assuming not their own children) as opposed to 40 year old men who socialize with adult women.

For the record, I truly believe that the OP would have nothing but the best of intentions. But society at large loves to think the worst of people, especially when constantly fed with the paranoia inducing half-truths and outright lies that the tabloid press spreads.

 

[Thurbane]

So... it's still a double-standard to me. 16 and 17 still isn't legal age, so you can't use that excuse. To me the only difference is that she's a girl (be honest, if the 14-year-old was a boy, would this thread even exist?).

I would type up a lengthy response, but I think it's already been summed up nicely:

She is not legally responsible for herself, the adults around her would be, not just the OP, but his whole group. Her level of maturity matters not one iota in a court of law.

He is not only legally responsible for his own actions (liable) but could be held responsible for actions that happen around him (conspiracy, negligence, accessory)

..and my 2 cents? The fact it's a girl is totally immaterial. A minor is a minor.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

Personally, I wouldn't game with a minor unless a relative of theirs was already in the group, and I had talked to their parents first. I did run a one shot at a gameday with two minors in it both of whom were fine players, so I don't rule out them being acceptable additions to the group, but the age gap is too great for me to socialize without a "hook" to that particular teen. (the hook would also serve as a maturity reference.)

 

[Thurbane]

So in the name of safety, we have a society where children are mollycoddled from learning how to make their own choices/mistakes and handle consequences, are emotionally isolated from non-family adults, and where it's so easy to slander someone who did nothing wrong that we have to live in fear of doing what should be perfectly legal and innocent actions because it might "look bad".

*I* shed tears for that.

That's drawing a very long bow, don't you think?

I also endorse young people going out there and discovering things for themselves, and not being mollycoddled from the real world. But there is a reason that minors are legally treated as minors - they (generally speaking) don't have the real life experience or even cognitive decision making skills that an "adult" does. Even the difference between a 14 year old and 18 year old in terms of maturity and life experience is generally very large.

Is the logical extension or your argument that children, 14 (or maybe younger) should be allowed to smoke cigarettes or drink alcohol if they chose to? Isn't telling them they must wait until 18 (or 21) some sort of horribly overbearing Big Brother stance that should be discouraged?

I don't know about shedding tears for the overprotection of children, but if any of my friends or relatives children were molested as a result of not wanting to stifle their decision making, I would shed real tears... :\

 

[Jeysie]

It might not prevent it, but it minimalizes it. Which is the reason I said that having my house completely wired for video and sound makes me safer - notice I didn't say completely safe?

Which creeps me out a little, TBH. If I was that worried about my ability to correctly judge which people were and weren't OK to game with, I would rather game in a public place than turn my house into a survellance compound.

You can however - limit your vulnerability to allegations by limiting interactions with what is considered the common victim(s) to public places or avoiding interaction with them completely.

Thus cutting yourself off from potential friends and allies for a little bit of security, rather than simply being willing to judge character on an individual basis (which you're going to have to do anyway for the supposed "safer" demographic).

Plus, how do you pull that off, anyway? Refuse to go over the houses of people with wives or children, or allow your friends to bring over their families? Never help out by babysitting, volunteering to be a tutor, helping parent friends with their kids' birthday parties, giving a female friend a ride who's car broke down, etc. etc.? What about going to a fair or amusement park (lots of kids at those, after all)?

I mean, I tend to feel more comfortable hanging around men than I do hanging around women... so if I wanted to be more stereotypically "safe" I'd need to avoid the one demographic I enjoy the most. Yeah, not going to happen.

If I avoided every stereotypically "bad" demographic, I'd have missed out on several great friends, allies, and life experiences. Likewise, I've known crummy people who were in stereotypically "safe" demographics. I quite sincerely can't think of any one demographic where if I had avoided it the net prevention of danger would be greater than the loss of the good sides. People just aren't that easily put into little neat compartments.

Living is a risk. I'd rather simply be aware and careful, but still willing to be open to things, than be utterly paranoid and cocoon myself away. You can be cautious without cutting yourself off and thinking there's monsters everywhere. Because honestly... there isn't.

Peace & Luv, Liz

 

[Thurbane]

Plus, like I said, I actually *remember* being a teenager.

Just curious, you keep reiterating this - are you assuming the rest of us don't remember our teenage years? I may be 35, and may enjoy the occasional tipple, but I do still remember being a teenager!

...and I also remember some of the stupid, irresponsible things I did.

 

[Jeysie]

Even the difference between a 14 year old and 18 year old in terms of maturity and life experience is generally very large.

In my experience... no, it really wasn't when I was that age. A difference? Yes. A large one? No.

Is the logical extension or your argument that children, 14 (or maybe younger) should be allowed to smoke cigarettes or drink alcohol if they chose to? Isn't telling them they must wait until 18 (or 21) some sort of horribly overbearing Big Brother stance that should be discouraged?

Honest answer? Yes, I do. There are a lot of teens who sneak cigarettes and alcohol behind their parents' backs. And because they're sneaking it, they're far less likely to drink responsibly or be fully aware of the consequences of what they're doing. If a teen is mature enough to understand of the consequences of what they're putting in their bodies, then it's their right to choose to do it anyway, just like it's an adult's right if they choose to be dumb. Besides, quite frankly, I've known legal-age folks who should never be allowed near alcohol.

I don't know about shedding tears for the overprotection of children, but if any of my friends or relatives children were molested as a result of not wanting to stifle their decision making, I would shed real tears...

Considering that all the kids I've personally known who suffered abuse suffered it at the hands of classmates, family, other household members, or family friends (and as others have stated, that's statistically far more likely) I'd say that being paranoid about strangers wouldn't have helped any of them.

Peace & Luv, Liz