14 year old girl wants to join my game

[Thurbane]

Yes, I'm not sure how much stock I'd put in those figures I quoted, but my main point was that, at least according to this source, a 14 year old and 17 year old are quite different in terms of maturity and decision making abilities.

I'd be inclined to agree, as it backs up my own firsthand experience. I was a totally different person at 17 than I was at 14 - but then, I may not be typical, having to go out and work from 16 onwards. Most of my friends who went on to further education, and those of us who didn't, changed quite a lot from our early teens to our late teens.

Thats the point I was trying to make. YMMV.

 

[GrumpyOldMan]

We know that 99.9% of the time nothing would happen. The 14-year old would join the game, play well, and have fun. Everyone else would treat her properly, and she'd be safe. It would probably be a good experience for both sides.

But the costs of that 0.1%, a false accusation (or even, god forbid, a true accusation), are just so amazingly high that it's not worth it. Losing your reputation, job and livelyhood is way too high a risk for a D&D game.

This strikes me as a strange attitude for gamers.

If I told my players: roll a d1000, if you get 000 you fail and die horribly and painfully, any other roll succeeds, they’d roll the dice not walk away.

I’d wager that the odds of you being accused are less than the odds of you being killed while crossing the street. But you’d cross that road.

 

[Jeysie]

You were born about the year I started gaming lots has changed from my birth to yours to and through until now.

Well, yes, a lot has changed since your childhood and mine. I just feel a little weird saying "Well, when *I* was a kid..." when I'm still so young. :\

Other children were/are pretty nasty (being forced to sleep on a stone floor by my cousin comes to mind), but the trust of adults I think is what this is all about.

Well, yes, it is. I just had more reason to trust adults when I was a kid than my peers. When I think back to all the people who hurt me, they were all kids or teenagers. :\ But I had many adults who helped me out in many ways.

Peace & Luv, Liz

 

[GrumpyOldMan]

This is one of the best things said in this debate

Judge everyone on an individual basis, not on blanket terms of gender or other factors.

Age is certainly one of those other factors.

Yes, I'm not sure how much stock I'd put in those figures I quoted, but my main point was that, at least according to this source, a 14 year old and 17 year old are quite different in terms of maturity and decision making abilities.

Unfortunately, this is another general statement. I know kids who were as sensible at 14 as others are at 17. I’m the father of two sons, the youngest is now 17. The eldest could cook his own breakfast at 14, the youngest still can’t, though he’s outstripped his big brother in tests at school. I’ll accept that most 14 year olds are less good at decision making than most 17 year olds, but this all boils down to the fact that you can’t be specific, a 17-year-old may, or may not work. The original poster has made his choice, for reasons that seem best to him, but that doesn’t mean that there is only one answer.

 

[GrumpyOldMan]

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?... <snip>

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.

I find this attitude very disturbing. It would make me feel very unsafe. Anyway, it can’t be true, unless you do have the sound and video in the toilet (which is an extremely disturbing thought in itself). I certainly would not game under these conditions. When I leave the game room are you recording me breaking wind on the way to the bathroom? Picking my nose as I walk down the hall? Creepy!

There are enough nasty things on U-tube without me agreeing to be videoed. With enough footage you could make a fool of anyone.

 

[Nifft]

Anyway, it can’t be true, unless you do have the sound and video in the toilet (which is an extremely disturbing thought in itself)

Not quite true. You don't have to prove you weren't having sex on the toilet if you simply refrain from joining your female companion in the bathroom. And I can't think of a good reason you would do that.

You don't even need sound.

And the mind-control satellite lasers are watching you anyway, so you're not actually giving up your privacy -- you didn't have it to begin with. You're just deriving a benefit from exposure, instead of giving up that benefit in trade for the comforting illusion of privacy.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Mieric]

Not quite true. You don't have to prove you weren't having sex on the toilet if you simply refrain from joining your female companion in the bathroom. And I can't think of a good reason you would do that.

Exactly

 

[Harmon]

Well, yes, it is. I just had more reason to trust adults when I was a kid than my peers. When I think back to all the people who hurt me, they were all kids or teenagers. :\ But I had many adults who helped me out in many ways.

Peace & Luv, Liz

Ya, different experiences.

 

[Felix]

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.

Peace & Luv, Liz

Have kids. See how you feel about mollycoddling them, because there are a whole lot of worse things that you could be shedding tears for.

 

[Felix]

Wow, just wow.

You admit that some adults will have their lives ruined by mistake

Don't be so surprised. It's called Alpha error and Beta error. I won't insult your intelligence by explaining it to you, but the choice is between falsely accusing adults and not prosecuting potential sex offenders.

I find your perspective baffling, and your disregard for protecting the innocent (as in people who haven't committed crimes) frightening.

Children aren't innocent?

Put aside your fright for a moment and make the choice: do you let molesters go free or do you wrongly prosecute some adults? Because if you strengthen the adult's position, some criminals will take advantage of that to get free and enter the wonderful world of repeat offending.

It's a choice of evils; at least I understand a choice is being made.