Harassment in gaming

[Taneras]

True. And if for most of gaming history the pinup-art were a niche thing, I don't think anyone would really complain about an occasional game using such. But that's not really been the case, now has it?

There is something wrong when the industry as a whole fails to notice that they're being sexist in their artwork. Once that has been corrected for a while, I think you'll find the complaints will die down. The more appropriate standard needs to be firmly established before the old style won't raise eyebrows.

I'd like to point out that its very likely that most of the complaint about sexuality in games would be aimed at games with a mature ESRB rating.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/gaming/2013/02/06/esrb-ratings-mature-games/1893507/

9% of games created, at least in 2012, had a mature rating (the above article mentions it was 5% in 2010). So I'm sure we're only talking about ~10% of the industries creation actually fitting the bill. I'd argue that's niche. Games rated "E" (for everyone) made up nearly half of the marketplace (45%). Moreover, of these ~10% games, what portion of these games have sexual material within them? The Witcher 3, for example, does have sexual elements but what portion of the gameplay would you say actually contains said sexual material? 2 or 3%? Human sexuality exists and is a big part of life, ~10% of the games created having some sexual themes hardly seem like an issue to me.

Even if it weren't a small porting of games made I'd still have an issue with this line of reasoning (targeting the industry as a whole). If Companies X, Y, and Z create a lot of wonderful selling products that have the "pinup-art" theme what does that have to do with a new company that's just establishing itself from creating another similar game? I guess they have to pay the price, by not creating the sort of game they wanted, for an industry that they had no hand in creating?

You can't blame anyone specifically when looking at the industry as a whole, and perhaps that's why this viewpoint is gaining so much traction lately... Because blaming someone specifically would likely look bad, why can't someone create what they want? That argument won't work well. But it makes it easier to have the industry as a whole shoulder the blame as its not someone in specific.

 

[Umbran]

I'd like to point out that its very likely that most of the complaint about sexuality in games would be aimed at games with a mature ESRB rating.

Dude, the ESRB is the Entertainment Software Rating Board. They don't rate tabletop RPGs, and we were talking about art in RPG books. And, no, that has nothing to do with whether the game has a "mature" rating. Chainmail bikinis and midriff-baring "armor" don't get you a mature rating, but they are still usually kinda sexist.

Also that statistic is, I think, about number of titles published. As opposed to units sold, or total gross dollar sales. There can be a bazillion "E for Everyone" titles that nobody buys, and 20 "M for Mature" that get 50% of the units sold for the year. So, that percentage doesn't speak to much of anything.

 

[Taneras]

Dude, the ESRB is the Entertainment Software Rating Board. They don't rate tabletop RPGs, and we were talking about art in RPG books. And, no, that has nothing to do with whether the game has a "mature" rating. Chainmail bikinis and midriff-baring "armor" don't get you a mature rating, but they are still usually kinda sexist.

My mistake, I saw talks of "products" and "games" and assumed the talk had moved past just tabletop games and into gaming in general. I should have read.

Still, though, I wonder if we've established that tabletop gaming really is loaded with sexual content or is that something we just assume is the default? I'd imagine many would claim that the video game industry is oversaturated with such games but the statistics would show otherwise. If it's assumed the video game industry is like this and its not, is it fair to assume the tabletop industry is also like this?

Also that statistic is, I think, about number of titles published. As opposed to units sold, or total gross dollar sales. There can be a bazillion "E for Everyone" titles that nobody buys, and 20 "M for Mature" that get 50% of the units sold for the year. So, that percentage doesn't speak to much of anything.

Even assuming this is true, what does it show? That the majority of the gaming population likes mature games. It's sorta hard to peg this on the industry when they're putting out a lot of titles and the consumers are buying, mostly, specific titles. So who's left, the consumers? I don't think its fair to blame the consumers for buying what they want to buy.

Also, looking at the top games sold in 2012:

1. Call of Duty: Black Ops 2 (360, PS3, PC, Wii U)
2. Madden NFL 13 (360, PS3, Wii, Vita, Wii U)
3. Halo 4 (360)
4. Assassin's Creed III (360, PS3, PC, Wii U)
5. Just Dance 4 (360, PS3, Wii, Wii U)
6. NBA 2K13 (360, PS3, Wii, PC, Wii U, PSP)
7. Borderlands 2 (360, PS3, PC)
8. Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 (360, PS3, Wii, PC)
9. Lego Batman 2: DC Super Heroes (360, PS3, Wii, PC, 3DS, DS, Vita)
10. FIFA Soccer 13 (360, PS3, Wii, Wii U, Vita, 3DS, PSP)

Madden, Just Dance, NBA, Lego Batman 2, and FIFA Soccer are all E. So half of the top 10 best sellers are rated "E" for Everyone. So while I'm sure the mature game labels do have a high representation in the top sellers despite being a small amount of the titles produced, overall sales don't favor mature games.

To ground this into the tabletop discussion I guess it should make us pause before assuming that the tabletop industry is one way or another as, again, I'm sure many here would just assume that the video game industry is full of sexual content.

 

[Nylanfs]

So wasn't this thread about harassment in gaming?

 

[Hussar]

Where did I do this, exactly? What I was comparing was a swords and sorcery game that depicted attractive, scantily clad people (which is a particular style of fantasy setting) with a Western or Space Opera game, which are different kinds of settings. I don't know where you got slavery or non-consensual sex from (although for the record, if adults want to play a game about slavery and non-consensual sex, I wouldn't presume to tell them they can't).

We were talking about games that contain offensive content were we not? A couple of pin-up art images probably isn't going to cause any sort of ripples. A "sword and sorcery" game, that contains all the elements of early sword and sorcery goes quite a bit beyond that. If we're doing a "true to Howard" style S&S game, it's going to be bigoted and misogynistic.

Now, as you say, vote with your wallet and don't buy. Fair enough. OTOH, it shouldn't be a problem for a reviewer to say, "Hey, this game is offensive as all get out." without receiving numerous death and rape threats. It should never be a problem to call out material as offensive. We should never have to fear for our safety just because we call something out as offensive.

Now, I totally agree that if a group of adults wanted to use, say, D&D, for a Howardian game (or Lovecraft for that matter, or pretty much any Fantasy genre author from before about 1960) as a base, in the privacy of their own home, then no problems. What you or I do in a private space is no one's business.

OTOH, if you want to run that game in a public space, such as a convention or an FLGS, then I think it's perfectly acceptable for you (and I mean you in the generic sense here, not you personally) are going to be subject to some serious criticism. I wouldn't particularly appreciate my twelve year old daughter walking past your table and having to hear that, never mind actually making the mistake of sitting at that table and being subjected to that.

So, no, it's not the same as just choosing to play a "wild west" game or a "science fiction" game. Context matters. Where you are playing, and who you are playing with matters a great deal. That's kinda the whole point about these harassment threads. People, quite likely without any malice, putting material into public without any consideration for the feelings of other people.

I mean, sure, if you're playing "Confederate Soldier the Gathering", then ok, yup, there's going to be slavery in that game. But, perhaps playing that game in a public space is not the best idea. At least not without making it absolutely clear what's going on. And, if your game of "Confederate Soldier the Gathering" isn't being played ironically, but, rather, the slave owners are the heroes of the story, then it's completely fair to expect that reviews of that game are going to be less than favorable. At no point should there be threats of violence being made. Ever. Against anyone.

And that's the bottom line.

 

[Umbran]

Still, though, I wonder if we've established that tabletop gaming really is loaded with sexual content or is that something we just assume is the default?

It isn't really "sexual content" that is the issue. It is more basic, "women depicted as eye candy for males". And D&D has, *as folks have already noted* improved greatly in this respect, so that the largest game is not currently a culprit.

Ultimately, it isn't men's place to count and score the representations and pass judgement as to whether they were "really loaded" with off-putting depictions. Enough women report it was a problem for them. You don't get to say they shouldn't have had a problem.

Even assuming this is true, what does it show?

I don't think it shows anything relevant to this discussion, to be honest.

 

[Taneras]

Ultimately, it isn't men's place to count and score the representations and pass judgement as to whether they were "really loaded" with off-putting depictions. Enough women report it was a problem for them. You don't get to say they shouldn't have had a problem.

I don't think it shows anything relevant to this discussion, to be honest.

Likewise, enough women have pointed out the same line of reasoning as I have here. Actually a female YouTuber, I believe it was shoeonhead, brought up the stats I mentioned earlier about video games. I have no idea how the tabletop industry is as a whole because I've only played D&D but I'd be willing to bet "enough women" would also make the same complaint about the video game industry and after looking at the statistics of that industry it's a much harder argument to make. In fact, I'm sure those statistics have changed some women's minds about the video gaming industry, so they were entirely open to an argument that attempted to tell them that they shouldn't have a problem because there isn't one.

Please don't pretend this is a man vs woman thing, there are lots of men and women on each side. If your saying that questioning this assumption isn't appropriate for this thread then I can understand that. But it is a conversation men and women will be having in more open spaces.

 

[evilbob]

Wow.

First, the meta: this is easily the most civil discussion board on the internet, at least from what I can tell. To be fair, these two harassment threads have also drastically increased my blocked list, so I am intentionally missing out, but the fact that you CAN actually ignore all the people being less civil is a great sign. Kudos to the mods of ENWorld, seriously. You folks set an example that I sincerely wish the rest of the internet would follow. I have said time and again that it CAN be done, and this board proves it.

Second, the link: wow. I mean, you hear about this stuff all the time, it affects literally every woman in gaming to various levels, but that woman's experiences are truly shocking. They are also so incredibly not isolated and so sadly common that it's good to keep getting a light shined on these dark places. It helps to remind the rest of us what the minorities in gaming have to put up with all the time, and remind everyone to keep their eyes and ears open, and know that yeah - it's happening, and yeah - you're probably oblivious because you can be. The police thing was sadly a new one to me - although I'm sure it happens every single day. I mean, I knew the police had effectively given up on enforcing harassment / threat / stalking crimes committed online (unless they were against a police officer, of course) but I didn't realize how hard it STILL is to get them to enforce those laws in real life. That's part of what's always shocking about these stories: it's freakin' 2016. Why haven't we fixed this yet?

Third, the blowback: also wow. It never ceases to amaze me how far people will go to discredit, blame, harass, and otherwise intimidate someone who speaks up about how women are serially mistreated in geek culture (which, ok, let's stop pretending: the correct word for "geek culture" is officially "culture" now). Ironically calling women "too sensitive" is always a fun one (since they are the ones so sensitive to being told they might be in the wrong) but that's never where it stops. And yeah, it IS a culture change that has to happen. It is happening. It will happen. Nothing can stop that, no matter how many gamergaters go around to all the different forums and messageboards and try to defend the systemic misogyny (typically with acute misogyny). The truth is: this woman just happened to be exceptionally smart and articulate, and like most millennials she's been raised to think that she shouldn't have to just roll over for oppressive, systemic injustice - and she is right. The intensive retribution she's suffered for simply stating her case proves her right time and again. This thread proves her right.

And lastly, I know it's been dropped as a topic but the title of her essay was 100% right and on point. Islam has a terrorist problem - but that doesn't mean that all Muslims are terrorists. Gaming has a white male terrorist problem - yes it does. It's painfully obvious, and yeah - that's exactly the right word for it. Swatting is an act of terrorism. Constant death/rape threats is an act of terrorism. But it also doesn't mean that all white males into gaming are terrorists. And if it makes you uncomfortable to know that you are associating with terrorists - great! The article just created a tiny sense of cognitive dissonance in your brain. Don't double down on your existing beliefs: I encourage you to consider the alternative for a moment, and see if it is really you who is under attack, or gaming culture - or if it is really institutional sexism.

 

[Springheel]

We were talking about games that contain offensive content were we not? A couple of pin-up art images probably isn't going to cause any sort of ripples. A "sword and sorcery" game, that contains all the elements of early sword and sorcery goes quite a bit beyond that. If we're doing a "true to Howard" style S&S game, it's going to be bigoted and misogynistic.

The "offensive content" I was referring to is scantily-clad people, which some people find offensive and some do not. You went into non-consensual sex and racist content, which I wasn't defending. I know it's easy for lines to get crossed in 25 page discussions, but I just want to make sure my position is clear.

Now, as you say, vote with your wallet and don't buy. Fair enough. OTOH, it shouldn't be a problem for a reviewer to say, "Hey, this game is offensive as all get out." without receiving numerous death and rape threats. It should never be a problem to call out material as offensive. We should never have to fear for our safety just because we call something out as offensive.

I agree. Threats of violence for sharing an opinion is never acceptable and I would never defend such behaviour. On the other hand, people shouldn't expect that any claim of offense should be met with complete agreement and/or immediate action.

OTOH, if you want to run that game in a public space, such as a convention or an FLGS, then I think it's perfectly acceptable for you (and I mean you in the generic sense here, not you personally) are going to be subject to some serious criticism. I wouldn't particularly appreciate my twelve year old daughter walking past your table and having to hear that, never mind actually making the mistake of sitting at that table and being subjected to that.

I think we mostly agree here as well.

So, no, it's not the same as just choosing to play a "wild west" game or a "science fiction" game. Context matters. Where you are playing, and who you are playing with matters a great deal. That's kinda the whole point about these harassment threads. People, quite likely without any malice, putting material into public without any consideration for the feelings of other people.

I'm not sure how you get to this, however. I agree context matters, and who you are playing with matters. But I was talking more about companies having the right to create games that some people might find "offensive" than what people play at public conventions. If I'm making a Lovecraftian game, should I have to consider the feelings of people who believe the game is not only offensive, but literally dangerous, because they believe in the occult? Should I not be allowed to make such a game because of the complaints of those people? My argument is that the proper approach is to say, "Hey look, this game isn't for everyone...if you don't like occult material, you shouldn't play it". Are we in agreement on that point? I can't tell.

 

[Hussar]

/snip

I'm not sure how you get to this, however. I agree context matters, and who you are playing with matters. But I was talking more about companies having the right to create games that some people might find "offensive" than what people play at public conventions. If I'm making a Lovecraftian game, should I have to consider the feelings of people who believe the game is not only offensive, but literally dangerous, because they believe in the occult? Should I not be allowed to make such a game because of the complaints of those people? My argument is that the proper approach is to say, "Hey look, this game isn't for everyone...if you don't like occult material, you shouldn't play it". Are we in agreement on that point? I can't tell.

You miss why Lovecraft would be offensive. Call of Cthulu is very careful to distance itself from the source material of Lovecraft himself which is incredibly racist and bigoted. Look, this isn't some secret, this is widely known. H. P. Lovecraft would make the average Klansman blush. He was a truly hateful person and it came out in his writing all the time.

Now, if you want to publish a Call of Cthulu game, and you keep those elements in there, true, you have that right. Actually, thinking about it, that might depend on country because, as a Canadian, we have Hate Speech laws, so, it might be illegal in Canada. Not sure, and since this is hypothetical, we can't really know. But, in any case, something that is true to the source material is going to read like a White Power screed. And, frankly, the hobby should condemn any publisher who does this (at least in an unironic fashion).

If, in your S&S new game, female characters can only be whores, then that's a problem. And the publisher should absolutely be criticised for it. Simply not buying the game isn't enough. There needs to be a public conversation as to why this game isn't being bought and what's wrong with it.

On the other hand, people shouldn't expect that any claim of offense should be met with complete agreement and/or immediate action.


Read more: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?482661-Harassment-in-gaming/page31#ixzz45wIsCinM

Why in the hell not? Remember, we're discussing harassment in gaming. Let's keep this on topic. If you complain to the management (whether at a con or at an FLGS) that someone is offending you, shouldn't you expect them to do something? Isn't that a basic expectation? Even if it's just pulling the other person aside and having a quiet word. So long as the offensive behaviour stops, that's the entire point. I should never have to "prove" that I was offended by something. That's not for you to judge. There is no threshold of offence that I have to reach in order to expect action to be taken.

I am offended is all it should take. Why or how much is NEVER a question that needs to be asked. You should never, ever have to justify why you are offended.