D&D General Ravenloft, horror, & safety tools...

[Faolyn]

Not believing in the efficacy of RPG safety tools, being skeptical of behaviors in the community that seem a little performative, there is nothing right wing about that. There is a lot of left wing people who make these arguments too.

See, if you ever acted like you read and understood what people are writing, things might be a bit different.

Here's what Remalthilis wrote:

"There are two groups of people. A.) Those who, by circumstances beyond thier control cannot work and need assistance to survive (the deserving poor) and B.) Lazy Jackholes who don't want to work and would rather survive on charity (the undeserving poor). Since some people who could work but don't want to could get charity, the only way to make sure the undeserving poor don't get benefits is to make sure the deserving don't either. Some people might suffer unjustly, but it's a small price to pay to make sure no one abuses the system."

Yeah, I've heard that one before. When you're interest is in preventing systemic abuse rather than using the system to help, every system looks like a bad idea.

For some reason, you chose to ignore the actual point and focus on your incorrect belief that they were saying you're conservative. Which is not what they were saying. Remalthilis didn't say you're conservative or republican or anything like that; they said you were using the same rhetoric they do.

You have literally said that one of the reason why the horror safety tools are bad or unhelpful is because some people are faking or exaggerating mental illness. Even ignoring that the safety tools aren't solely about mental illness, you are throwing the proverbial baby out with the bathwater here and focusing on the "fact" that there are people whom you believe don't really have mental health issues. This is exactly what Remalthilis referenced!

And just to ask again, how are these tools bad or unhelpful? So far, the only answers you have given are:

* You think (some) people are going to somehow exploit them in some way.

* You think (some) people are faking their mental health issues to be popular.

* You think that using them will cause people to "obsess" about their mental health issues.

But you haven't provided even a single real-life example for any of this! The closest you've gotten is talking about celiac disease--and as I said, this is a case of "better safe than sorry" because you don't want to actually make someone ill just because you think they're lying about having the disease to be popular.

So my suggestion is: either come up with some evidence to support your claims, something that just isn't "it stands to reason" or something equally hypothetical, or maybe stop posting to this thread.

 

[Faolyn]

Which "hypothetical" of mine are you citing? Can you be specific or would that require reading the posts?

Your entire thing about Bob and Alice is a completely hypothetical scenario.

More importantly, you are choosing to ignore everyone's advice on the matter and are continuing to claim that the form is bad because it doesn't have enough space. No, that just means that people can write additional words on another piece of paper, or via email or DMs, or you speak to them in person about it.

And you're ignoring that you don't even have to use the form! I don't; I just go right to talking to people. You can use the form as a guideline or list of speaking points.

 

[Faolyn]

instead of a form with a handful of semirandom or even maybe common phobias abusive situations

Much like the movies I talked about before, the people who created the safety tools had to appeal to a general audience. So they went with generic but common issues.

You know what you're going to run, so make a checklist based on that.

 

[Bedrockgames]

For some reason, you chose to ignore the actual point and focus on your incorrect belief that they were saying you're conservative. Which is not what they were saying. Remalthilis didn't say you're conservative or republican or anything like that; they said you were using the same rhetoric they do.

I understood his point. My point is rhetoric is rhetoric. It isn't aligned with any political point of view. It is just a way of communicating your position. So why draw the comparison in the first place?

 

[Bedrockgames]

* You think (some) people are going to somehow exploit them in some way.

* You think (some) people are faking their mental health issues to be popular.

* You think that using them will cause people to "obsess" about their mental health issues.

But you haven't provided even a single real-life example for any of this! The closest you've gotten is talking about celiac disease--and as I said, this is a case of "better safe than sorry" because you don't want to actually make someone ill just because you think they're lying about having the disease to be popular.

So my suggestion is: either come up with some evidence to support your claims, something that just isn't "it stands to reason" or something equally hypothetical, or maybe stop posting to this thread.

I am observing something we can all see. This isn't the sort of thing where you are going to have handy evidence to point to. What I am saying is, I look at what is going on, and I think like a lot of people who just aren't saying anything because they can see the kind of reaction this generates, they are thinking this doesn't quite add up. It seems a little over the top. Something isn't quite right with how many people seem to be having serious mental health issues at the table. M y explanation for that is we have kind of worked ourselves up into a bit of a moral panic over the issue. I could be wrong. but I have seen moral panics before. I have seen performative behavior before. This looks like that to me.

On the celiac point, you are missing what I was trying to say

 

[Bedrockgames]

* You think that using them will cause people to "obsess" about their mental health issues.

My point about that was there is a difference between talking about your feelings, getting help for mental health issues, and obsessing about them. There are unhealthy levels of focus you can place on feelings. If you train people to constantly think about triggers, I don't think it will be surprising if people who don't really have triggers start thinking they do have them.

 

[Ash Mantle]

I am observing something we can all see. This isn't the sort of thing where you are going to have handy evidence to point to. What I am saying is, I look at what is going on, and I think like a lot of people who just aren't saying anything because they can see the kind of reaction this generates, they are thinking this doesn't quite add up. It seems a little over the top. Something isn't quite right with how many people seem to be having serious mental health issues at the table. M y explanation for that is we have kind of worked ourselves up into a bit of a moral panic over the issue. I could be wrong. but I have seen moral panics before. I have seen performative behavior before. This looks like that to me.

On the celiac point, you are missing what I was trying to say

Or because, nowadays, the topic is less taboo and more people are willing to speak up about the issues they are experiencing. Some people find catharsis in talking about their issues and sometimes talking about their issues can help other people talk about their issues or offer empathetic understanding. Nowadays, people with mental illnesses are not simply locked up in mental asylums but are ideally holistically treated and with empathy and compassion, and their concerns not simply dismissed as something drummed up for drama.

 

[Umbran]

There is no way this can be proven. It isn't that kind of observation.

Then it is not an observation at all. It is an unsupported assertion.

I think it is entirely fair to say whether I think the behavior is genuine or not

No, it isn't fair at all. In fact, this is highly inappropriate and problematic gatekeeping of mental health. Your experience in life does not make you a mental health expert. If there is one thing that has damaged the cause of mental health, it is unqualified people making such judgements!

You lack any and all standing to make such an assertion, and it should therefore be discarded from consideration.

But we can all clearly see this change occurring.

We can? Really? I haven't seen many (or any?) here agree they see this ill-defined change. I think I have to ask you to stop insisting you know what we all see, please. You don't get to dictate what others think, know, or have observed. Your appeal to our knowledge is not support for your position.

I am not pointing to something that isn't actually happening.

You have provided zero evidence that it is happening. Your personal assertion has no weight. Sorry.

I think it is reasonable.

I see very little solid reasoning in your position, so I cannot call it "reasonable". I don't doubt that you feel your position is justified, but the evidence and logic are not present. I see unsupported assertions and inappropriate conclusions, nothing more.

I must, sort of officially say that the gatekeeping you showed above is highly inappropriate, nearly to being red-text worthy. Please don't continue to claim you know the mental health state of others. That denial amounts to gaslighting, and if you repeat that, it may become actionable.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

You have provided zero evidence that it is happening. Your personal assertion has no weight. Sorry.

Not only that, but @Bedrockgames said in this post that they don't have to provide evidence in this case (under point 4). Not only is there no evidence for a harmful assertion, but they insist that they don't have to have evidence to say that it's true in a debate.

 

[Azzy]

I am observing something we can all see.

Nah, it looks more like you jumping at shadows.

This isn't the sort of thing where you are going to have handy evidence to point to. What I am saying is, I look at what is going on, and I think like a lot of people who just aren't saying anything because they can see the kind of reaction this generates, they are thinking this doesn't quite add up. It seems a little over the top. Something isn't quite right with how many people seem to be having serious mental health issues at the table. M y explanation for that is we have kind of worked ourselves up into a bit of a moral panic over the issue.

So, you admit you have no evidence. Instead, you're perceiving an imagined threat or panic.

I could be wrong.

You are.

but I have seen moral panics before. I have seen performative behavior before. This looks like that to me.

Being considerate of other people's boundaries is not a moral panic. It just called not being an ass.