Consent in Gaming - Free Guidebook

[Celebrim]

While most players of both sexes don't want that stuff in a D&D game, IME the ones who do have been disproportionately female, and the freaked-out disproportionately male.

I've been very careful not to try to stereotype here who is being exploited and who is being abusive. I don't think that really matters, and that there are some hidden sexist concepts involved in making appeals to protect women in as much as they are playing on a stereotype of women as helpless and needing protection. Assault disproportionately effects women because of the very real differences in average phenotype between men and women, but studies show that both genders equally report incidents of unwanted aggressive non-consensual sexual contact.

 

[Celebrim]

I going to link what I consider a powerful video by a person who in many ways could be considered near the opposite end of the political spectrum from me, and certainly is not as our host fears 'alt-right', because this is an area where I think that there ought to strong consensus across a broad political spectrum of gamers - even if we don't always agree in the details, the broad outline of the problem this represents, and the agreement that this perspective on the problem and its solution is harmful ought to be there.

 

[Arnwolf666]

Pretty much that's one of my complaints in a nut shell. Some of these things are not like the other.

In game sexual assault, particularly backed up by the possibility that the person doing it may be 'getting their rocks off' is a totally different class of things than "things that might trigger a hypothetical person with serious emotional issues related to that thing". Like you, I think it goes without saying that rape isn't going to be a focus of play, and if it ever were to be a focus of play then I'd only start a story line like that by saying, "Hey, so I'm thinking of a game which involves some seriously wacked adult situations, like rape, and I'm planning to handle that as tastefully as a I can, but I recognize that this is serious topic of general distastefulness to pretty much everyone."

I am never going to think, "I can't introduce scenarios with intense heat because somewhat might have had heatstroke and that was intensely traumatic experience for them." And if someone were to actually say, "That heatstroke experience I had was so intensely traumatic that anything that reminds me of it tends to cause psychotic episodes for me.", I'd probably be like, "That sounds serious. I'm not qualified to provide that sort of therapy and emotional support. Role-playing is often used as part of a clinical therapy treatment, and if you are having such serious emotional issues telling fantasy from reality, I'm not sure I'm comfortable engaging in recreational role-play with you. However, if you are willing to tough it out and risk it, then I can say that I promise to give you a supportive and safe environment. I can't however promise that you won't undergo stress at times, and if you need to take a break, I'd totally understand. Your call."

But you know what, that would be a really unique and unusual circumstance I think. And really, most people I know who have had legitimately traumatic experiences don't have that problem with getting triggered easily in that way, and frankly I would not encourage anyone to expect that just because they have had traumatic experiences that being actually triggered is in any way normal, expected, or healthy. Stressed, sure. Feeling intense emotion, sure. But most adults have coping mechanisms to handle intense emotional experiences, and some fraction of my players are playing precisely to engender safe but intense emotional experiences of various sorts which would be rare and entirely unsafe in real life - which is pretty much the same reason many of us read novels or watch movies.

Intense sexual experiences are however generally off limits at tables I've played at. Or really, sexual experiences at all, precisely because - aside from often being distasteful - that tends to blur reality and fantasy in a way that makes a social situation not feel safe.

But again, we are in perfect agreement that 'sexual assault' ought not be remotely in the same category. It not only trivializes the issue, but I think would tend to creep out the majority of my female friends to see it treated like that. It sure as heck wouldn't feel 'inclusive'.

I guess Dark Sun isn’t allowed anymore.

 

[Celebrim]

I guess Dark Sun isn’t allowed anymore.

"If I hear not allowed much oftener, I'm going to get angry." - Sam Gamgee, "The Scouring of the Shire", J.R.R. Tolkien's "The Lord of the Rings"

 

[billd91]

But isn't the opt in system is as presented in Consent in Gaming equating those things? The RPG Consent List at the back of the booklet lists natural disasters (flooding?) in the Mental and Physical Health category sharing the space with sexual assault, genocide, and heatstroke. (Seriously, does anyone think heatstroke belongs on the same list as sexual assault, self harm, and torture?) From my point of view, it goes without saying that I'm not going to introduce sexual assault into a game without talking about it first. But not in a million years would I think I had to worry about heatstroke being a source of trauma in a game where we're routinely hacking off limbs and searing the meat off of bones with fireball spells.

If someone had survived the 2004 tsunami at Phuket, I might be disinclined to belittle their problems with flood scenarios. In fact, I might be inclined to not belittle anyone over the traumas they have experienced... including heat stroke, particularly since it could represent childhood friends or their own kids dying while trapped in cars.

I might even suggest that anyone who doesn’t understand how traumatic any single one of the listed issues could be should perhaps shut the hell up until they do a little research.

 

[Arnwolf666]

So if I was stabbed by a sword then it is not allowed at the game. Or if someone punched me repeatedly in the face there is no more punching allowed in the game. Because that was a traumatic experience. I had a loss of agency and was humiliated.

 

[MGibster]

If someone had survived the 2004 tsunami at Phuket, I might be disinclined to belittle their problems with flood scenarios. In fact, I might be inclined to not belittle anyone over the traumas they have experienced... including heat stroke, particularly since it could represent childhood friends or their own kids dying while trapped in cars.

I haven't belittled the problems of others at all. But what are the odds I'm going to sit down at a table and play some D&D with a survivor of the 2004 tsunami? In 2015, only 315 Americans died from heat stroke so what are the odds I'm sitting at a table with someone who has been negatively affected by this on a personal level? Not that it really matters as I can't really think of a single time heat stroke came up in any game I've played.

I don't care for the opt in because I cannot present my players with a list of every conceivable thing I might bring into the game that might stir up traumatic memories. It's better if they tell me at the beginning of the game if there's something they don't want to see, or, if that doesn't work out, to let me know during game play. In my nearly thirty years of gaming I've only had it pop up twice and I've already told the spider story earlier in the thread.

I might even suggest that anyone who doesn’t understand how traumatic any single one of the listed issues could be should perhaps shut the hell up until they do a little research.

That was entirely uncalled for. You have no idea whether or not I've experienced anything on that list.

 

[MGibster]

So if I was stabbed by a sword then it is not allowed at the game. Or if someone punched me repeatedly in the face there is no more punching allowed in the game. Because that was a traumatic experience. I had a loss of agency and was humiliated.

While I have my problems with the opt in system, I don't believe this is the conclusion anyone should come up with. At it's core, the authors' are arguing that we should respect people when they say something is too much for them which is a good thing. It's not really what's allowed or isn't allowed as a general rule. It's about making sure everyone at a particular table is comfortable.

 

[Campbell]

I do not find it all that helpful to address these tools in terms of need. You do not have to need something to find it helpful. I have personally found lines and veils, checking in, and taking a breather after particularly intense moments to be useful tools in the context of play that focused on emotionally charged content. Like anything else these tools can be used responsibly or irresponsibly. I mean if we are not gaming with people we have functional creative relationships with no techniques are going to help.

 

[Arnwolf666]

Maybe a solution is to have tables where some are G rated, some PG rated, other R rated. Kind of like the movies. GM’s can have consent forms ready a few days before a session starts. That way potential players can review the form before signing so they won’t have an immediate pressure to sign and get involved in the game on the spot.

It seems to be working for the film industry. I think that would definitely be a good thing for the industry as whole.