Sexism in Table-Top Gaming: My Thoughts On It, and What We Can Do About It

[Salamandyr]

Why not? What you characterize at "guilt tripping" I characterize as debating issues in public. We can all use loaded phrases (the OP does, and you have, too, with your "freedom" soundytes), but the crux of the matter is that debate is healthy, and that's what's happening here. You seem to be conflating the whole OP in a blanket "affront to freedom" envelope rather than looking at it as being what it is: someone raising an issue that a section of our community is being made uncomfortable, and that we should care about that.

Hard to discuss this without bringing in some real world stuff that's not really gaming related, but labeling something "sexist" isn't about debating the issues. It's about putting someone outside the bounds of civilized discourse. In some cases and places, it can lead to legal repercussions.

Whether or not rape, or child murder, or other things that different people find uniquely bad, are fit subjects for roleplaying games is a perfectly legitimate argument to have. As I've emphasized repeatedly, whatever your boundaries are, they're your boundaries, and you shouldn't be forced to participate in anything you don't feel comfortable with.

But at the same time, I shouldn't be forced to adhere to your boundaries. What I do in my imaginary storytime activities doesn't hurt you, any more than your imaginary storytime activities hurts me.

 

[Celebrim]

OP writes blatantly sexist and offensive post under guise of taking moral high ground.

No doubt he/she/whatever it doesn't matter also wishes to say how sexist I am for thinking so.

Look, I've gamed with many women over the years. They aren't a bunch of shrinking violets whose delicate sensibilities need to be protected. The only incident of attempted rape between PC's in my entire history of being a DM was acted out by two female gamers. I've found that in general female gamers are just as likely to get their characters pregnant fooling around with attractive NPCs as male gamers are likely to father illegitimate children chasing after cheesecake barmaids. (On the other hand, one female gamer retired her character to raise the kid, something I've never had happen with a male gamer.) You are stereotyping female gamer behavior and attitudes every bit as much as anyone. In a prior thread we had a female police officer gamer defend strength caps because she said it was realistic that female warriors would use other resources to win fights. Not all women have the same beliefs and attitudes. You can't sit here defining all women the same and in your image and not expect that I'm going to find that small minded and sexist.

You want me to advocate speaking out against sexism wherever I find it? Well ok then.

Your whole cavalier chivalry attitude as guise for squelching any content you find objectionable just needs to go.

PS: That whole 'women bear pain better than men because well duh childbirth' thing is myth. No scientific study has ever shown that, and in fact all studies have shown the opposite. The myth's origin is again, in stereotyping women and mystifying them - not in anything real. There is an argument that women on average live longer than men because they don't bear pain as well and so actually take care of themselves rather than trying to tough their way through it, but so much gender research right now is tainted by 'you can present any result you want so long as you frame it as women are better than men', that I'm pretty much treating all of it is suspect and tainted by bias until we get over as a society all this 'woe is me you are oppressing women' double standard thing.

 

[Morrus]

Hard to discuss this without bringing in some real world stuff that's not really gaming related, but labeling something "sexist" isn't about debating the issues. It's about putting someone outside the bounds of civilized discourse.

It's really not. On the contrary, your position will tend to shut down debate - which would seem to be the opposite of the principles you seem to be espousing. I mean, are you now saying that nobody should be allowed to say anything is sexist, or racist, or misogynistic? If so, that's an interesting position to take, but it sounds like you have a long uphill battle if you want it to get any traction. I'm personally opposed to it on principle, for a start.

Whether or not rape, or child murder, or other things that different people find uniquely bad, are fit subjects for roleplaying games is a perfectly legitimate argument to have. As I've emphasized repeatedly, whatever your boundaries are, they're your boundaries, and you shouldn't be forced to participate in anything you don't feel comfortable with.

But at the same time, I shouldn't be forced to adhere to your boundaries. What I do in my imaginary storytime activities doesn't hurt you, any more than your imaginary storytime activities hurts me.

But you are inflicting your imaginary activities on others if they have no choice but be exposed to them. That's where convention environments and behaviour and the like come in; and where we're making a section of our community uncomfortable, it's incumbent upon us as decent people to ask ourselves why that is, and what we can do to change it. What I'm not understanding is why that is controversial to you; it feels like basic decency to me.

And that's ignoring the fact that society in just about every has very categorically determined that certain material is illegal.

 

[Salamandyr]

It's really not. On the contrary, your position will tend to shut down debate - which would seem to be the opposite of the principles you seem to be espousing. I mean, are you now saying that nobody should be allowed to say anything is sexist, or racist, or misogynistic? If so, that's an interesting position to take, but it sounds like you have a long uphill battle if you want it to get any traction. I'm personally opposed to it on principle, for a start.

It feels like you're putting words in my mouth. Do I think that someone asserting sexism or misogyny or misandry, etc. should be looked at with extra scrutiny...sure? I would prefer before people resort to such words they start with "I think this is bad, because..." and then explain why. I guess I'm okay with "I think something is sexist, because..." okay, fair enough. If what comes after the because... supports the assertion, I'll even agree. In this particular case, what came after the because... didn't.

But you are inflicting your imaginary activities on others if they have no choice but be exposed to them. That's where convention environments and behaviour and the like come in; and where we're making a section of our community uncomfortable, it's incumbent upon us as decent people to ask ourselves why that is, and what we can do to change it. What I'm not understanding is why that is controversial to you; it feels like basic decency to me.

And that's ignoring the fact that society in just about every has very categorically determined that certain material is illegal.

So...you're asserting a right against offense? That people have an outright right to keep from being exposed to objectionable ideas? So I'm harmed by a TV show I don't watch, on a channel I don't have, simply because I know about it? Do I have a right to sue news companies for telling me about murders?

If what you're getting at is that people shouldn't be ambushed with objectionable material they didn't socially contract for, then I agree with you. I'm all for clearly labeling, so-called, "mature content" so people know what they're getting into when they play a certain game. Like for instance...calling your game "CthulhuTech" pretty much signals to me that some really horrible things are coming.

Upon re-reading it appears you're shifting the argument to "convention behavior", which I haven't said anything about. Agreed people should be treated politely.

As to the illegality point, fantasy depictions of illegal activities has not, at least in the US, with one possible exception, been declared illegal. And I wouldn't live in a country where it had.

 

[Salamandyr]

Actually, I do have something to say about Convention behavior and environments.

There is something I like to call, implied consent. For instance, if I show up at an anime convention (I spend a lot of time at anime conventions), I'm pretty much signalling by my presence that I think anime is pretty cool and something I find worthwhile to talk about.

But there's a lesser known but equally vital aspect to anime conventions; they're a big crossover with various alternative sexuality and lifestyles. And by being there, you're implying that you're okay with that stuff too. Some of the stuff I find objectionable, but by being there, I kind of implied that I was cool with it, so I keep my mouth shut.

If I went to Mardi Gras, I wouldn't take offense that someone offered me beads to expose myself.

 

[Morrus]

Actually, I do have something to say about Convention behavior and environments.

There is something I like to call, implied consent. For instance, if I show up at an anime convention (I spend a lot of time at anime conventions), I'm pretty much signalling by my presence that I think anime is pretty cool and something I find worthwhile to talk about.

But there's a lesser known but equally vital aspect to anime conventions; they're a big crossover with various alternative sexuality and lifestyles. And by being there, you're implying that you're okay with that stuff too. Some of the stuff I find objectionable, but by being there, I kind of implied that I was cool with it, so I keep my mouth shut.

If I went to Mardi Gras, I wouldn't take offense that someone offered me beads to expose myself.

Of course. And I wouldn't suggest that you should be. But Gen Con has a public policy which folks rely upon when buying their tickets. And that policy was violated - in your terms, consent was not given.

Now, don't get me wrong. I'm not saying this particular example is akin to great crimes; it's a low-key example, for sure. I'm. I'm even 100% sold it is an example; but we're talking the principle here, not the details.

 

[Morrus]

So...you're asserting a right against offense? That people have an outright right to keep from being exposed to objectionable ideas? So I'm harmed by a TV show I don't watch, on a channel I don't have, simply because I know about it? Do I have a right to sue news companies for telling me about murders?

Rights? No, I'm not discussing rights. I don't for a second disagree that folks have the right to say and do what they want (in this context; obviously crimes are a different conversation). In fact, I'm not even touching on that - I feel that's so obvious that I'm surprised it's even part of this conversation.

No; rights are not the subject of my posts. Decent behaviour is. I feel you are confusing the two.

As to the illegality point, fantasy depictions of illegal activities has not, at least in the US, with one possible exception, been declared illegal. And I wouldn't live in a country where it had.

I'm sure you're thinking about the same exception I am - child pornography. Can we, at least, agree that that - extreme example though it is - does harm? And that distribution of other materials can do, too? Other examples might include things related to security, or things that should be confidential. There is no absolute acceptability of published content. In any country.

 

[Salamandyr]

Morrus, I think we're getting a bit far afield. To an extent I think we basically agree, except you're more generous to the intent of the original poster than I am. I do think she's talking about stopping people from playing games that offend her.

I agree with you that elementary politeness should rule. I wouldn't drop a rape scene into a pick up D&D game for instance. But I might include one in a campaign with adults I knew did not mind dark material.

As to child pornography...I recall a great issue of Daredevil that involved him and his girlfriend breaking up a child pornography ring. So it's a fair subject for fictional treatment, but I would agree that glorification of it is objectionable. Keep in mind that the OP's objection was to rape depicted even in a negative context.

But that said, harm isn't the issue. Making your fellow human beings uncomfortable is.

I've met people who can get offended by someone announcing their political preferences. So I prefer something more akin to a "reasonable person" standard on offensiveness, than letting the most easily offended person decide the bounds of discourse.

But I would never force someone to play in a game with material they found objectionable. If it was a game I was running, I would do my best to find some way to accommodate their feelings. But I would not feel bound by their preferences when I was playing games without them.

 

[Morrus]

I do think she's talking about stopping people from playing games that offend her.

Well, in that case you don't need to worry. She can't. I don't agree with your assessment though.

As to child pornography...I recall a great issue of Daredevil that involved him and his girlfriend breaking up a child pornography ring. So it's a fair subject for fictional treatment, but I would agree that glorification is objectionable.

No, I meant the child pornography itself. I'm sure that issue of Daredevil didn't actually include any child pornography.

 

[Salamandyr]

Well, in that case you don't need to worry. She can't. I don't agree with your assessment though.



No, I meant the child pornography itself. I'm sure that issue of Daredevil didn't actually include any child pornography.

No, it didn't. But we weren't talking about being approving of actual rapes either, but games where such a crime could occur fictionally.