NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 7822405" data-attributes="member: 4937">So the term "sea lion" is a way to shut down conversation sort of like the term "social justice warrior", only well, more so.   You see, all these people who are really just trying to practice niceness, don't want to have a conversation.   The point of the term is that anyone who doesn't see thing there way is actually a "sea lion" and once they've been corrected by them pointing out to you how good and noble their intentions are - like for example that this is intended to support "inclusivity" - if you refuse to agree with the plan, no matter how civil you are, no matter what reasons you offer, it's because your intentions are ignoble and you may be dismissed as a, well, a "sea lion".   Clear now?Now, for my part, I've made it perfectly clear I'm willing to discuss...a) Emotional spillover, how to watch for it, what we should do about it, and so forth. It's not a new thing, it's a relevant topic of conversation, and we may have finally reached the point where we can talk about it without the majority of people claiming that I'm allied with B.A.D.D. and denying that there was anything to talk about because they could always separate fiction from reality. That would be great. Some times I feel like that advocate for the comic book code who has always been called a prude and now people are actually going, "Well, maybe he had a point." in a way that they would never actually come out and say. But if the a priori terms of that discussion have to be that I accept terms like "bleed", "alibi", and "magic circle" as constructive ways to think about emotional spillover and over identification and how to handle it, then you are definitely going to get pushback. In particular, there are some statements in the essay on "bleed" about "alibi" that strike me as just flat out validating the old sow about "I was just doing what my character would do" as if your person wasn't involved in that decision making. And ironically, the people insisting that I engage with emotional spillover in terms of "bleed" and "alibi" just a few months or years ago, came down far harder against "I was just doing what my character would do" as an alibi for bad behavior than even I do. But no, if the group has declared "bleed" and "alibi" protect the group, then all their former beliefs get tossed out the window and any critical thinking is me being a "sea lion". Because niceness. Or something.b) Accommodating players feelings at the table, especially when there might be difficult topics at the table. Great topic. But if the in order to discuss it I first must publically profess that "X-Cards" and check lists of negative and affirmative consent are a great idea, and that we engage with that topic through veto and not communicating, and if you are not doing it that way you are some sort of heartless Nazi, then yes I'll push back and you'll just have to keep calling me a Nazi or a Sea Lion or whatever you think the nice thing to do is.c) Social contracts, formal and informal, and whether it's always a good idea to formalize them and when and why. That might be a good conversation as well.Again, the reason the "Sea Lion" thing has come out though is we aren't supposed to discuss this. We aren't supposed to push back against the group. The group, defined as the ones that matter and who get to make choices, have voted and this is the way we are doing things. And if you don't like it, and if you think it is a bad idea, then understand there is nothing you can do about it anyway. Because niceness.You notice, we aren't actually having a discussion about those things. Ever. We are always arguing particulars with an unspoken eye on politics. Because this isn't about niceness or solving problems, it's about power and putting it to use. No body really wants to start with some first principles, stick to things that have to do with gaming, ask what your experiences are, find out if these things have been a problem for you, whether you've dealt with them in the past, find out what you think, whether they effect you or not, and what might be some common sense guidelines around gaming which there could be widespread agreement on. Introducing these topics in a controversial way as a fait accompli is what is done, because any discussion is "sea lioning" and they well know that if they dissent they'll be the next shouted down.</blockquote>

Verification