Sexism in your campaign settings

[Elf Witch]

As a female gamer I have experienced what Stalking Blue has. In my main group I play with has five guys and two gals including myself. The other female player has complained from day one that there is a lot of sexist behavior at the table. I did not notice it during the first thre years that we were playing 3.0. But the last year it has become very noticeable.

The guys often don't listen to our plans. Neither of our characters will ever be allowed to be a leader even if that is what the character is designed to be. It gets to be frustrating. Some of this is because when we started gaming we did not have the years of gaming experience that they did so we made mistakes in strategy. But that is no longer the case.

the reason I think I did not notice the sexism as much in our first campaign was that unlike the other female player who was playing warrior types. I played an elven sorcerer who was designed mainly for party support. She never tried to be leader and she used her "femmine wiles" to get the party to do things. Appealed to their better natures. She was a very caring compassionate character and the guys seemed to respond to it.

In our current campaign it has changed quite a bit. I played a female warrior and during this game I noticed the same thing happening to me at the table as what had been happening to the other female player.

At this point we both have accepted that this is the way it is going to be and try to ignore it. Though I have some hope we have a new player and he does not do this to us.

I would like to add that the guys I play with are good guys. They are not female hating pigs. I think a lot of their behavior is because of their age they are in their 30s grew up playing DnD with few female players.

I sometimes play with my sons group they are in their early 20s and they don't have this sexist behavior. At the table my plans are listened to the same as anyone elses.

 

[StalkingBlue]

...If StalkingBlue doesn't enjoy S'mon's game and he places more importance on "verisimilitude" than on her enjoyment, her best option is probably to drop the game.

To be fair to S'mon, as a general statement that isn't true.

S'mon ran a couple of low-level sessions of the Conan RPG for us a while ago, the first session mostly solo for me. In that setting I was able to play a female Cimmerian Barbarian and to feel free to expand and make the world my own in a way I've never been able to feel in his high-level homebrew game. S'mon and I both love the strong female characters in the original Howard Conan stories - until recently I thought he took the same stance for his homebrew world.

Even in his homebrew he's very interested in working with players towards making individual PCs cool. He's put a lot of effort into customising rules for my character - in fact we both invested tons of time and work in a concept we're currently playtesting - so we'd be able to achieve a nature-witch flavour for his world that we both like. It's much more stylish than the PHB druid or the rather lame DMG witch. The PC's access to the spirit world and rapport to local spirits (and in some cases allied spirits from strange faraway places) is very cool, and I still think has great potential if we can work out a way I can play her and not be frustrated.

I guess the best of both worlds for me would be to still be able to continue to play my high-level witch, in whom both S'mon and I have invested a lot, yet also to be able to feel that I can expand in the game and make the world my own without hitting anti-female bias at every turn.

Seeing more non-stereotype NPCs would help I guess. Seeing more of powerful women in the setting than their relations to 'their men' would also help. What would help me most of course would be to feel that my PC has by now earned a place as an 'honorary man' in the setting. Who knows - if NPCs start taking her seriously, PCs might actually start picking up on the same thing?

Tall order, perhaps...

I'm extremely grateful for some very well-considered replies in this thread. It's helped me see clearer on what my problem in the game is, even if we don't yet seem to have found a solution.

 

[StalkingBlue]

...At this point we both have accepted that this is the way it is going to be and try to ignore it. Though I have some hope we have a new player and he does not do this to us.

Gods below, how frustrating! Crossing my fingers that you'll be able to start making some changes with the new player. That doesn't sound like a healthy situation to be in.

 

[RPGgirl]

I don't know how much help this will be, but here is what I did. Back in year one I started playing LG with my husband. We joined an existing group where we knew no one, and there were very few females. I made up a sorcerer with pretty much the same stats in everything. I was thinking it would be a well rounded and therefore well like character. What ended up happenning was this ...

1. I was someone's wife which automatically put me in a subordinate role at the table. I eventually started playing without my husband.
2. I was one of a few females and like Stalking Blue I was often overlooked, or given the polite nod, and then that was it.
3. I had orginally designed my character to be Neutral Good and help to augment the party, which turned me into even a bigger door mat for the men at the table.

So, what I did was make a drastic change in how my character was run. As I gained levels I dropped the buff spells in favor of the damage dealing blow-em-up stuff. I stopped offering to buff the party as my first course of action, and instead either cast defensive spells on myself or just started blazing the way with fireball, lightning bolt, etc. And finally, I made a conscious change in alignment from little-miss-goody-two-shoes to a true Neutral killing machine. Even now, when I sit at a table with people I don't know (and it is usually all or mostly men) I start off with the same sexist attitudes, but those quickly go by the side when they realize I am a force to be reckoned with.

This is just a thought and what I did to overcome falling into the background. I do not think anyone should have to change their character because of outdated sexism, but if you can't get the system to change, sometime you need to change in order to get along in the system.

 

[mythago]

But it's not "the system." It's a group of players, and a DM, who by their actions and behavior are shaping the game. It's not as though these guys are sitting around saying "Geez, we'd love to treat you as an equal, but my character is stuck with the Juvenile Behavior feat."

 

[Elf Witch]

Gods below, how frustrating! Crossing my fingers that you'll be able to start making some changes with the new player. That doesn't sound like a healthy situation to be in.

Most of the time I have a good time. They guys are great guys and fun to be with. Outside of the game it is very different we don't see the sexist behavior.

I think a lot of the problem is since we don't have the years of playing they do we are not as set in our ways. So we are willing to try a different apporach to a problem than they are. There seems to be these hard fast rules that are never to be broken. For example never split the party. I once put forth a plan to split the party in half and approch the enemy from opposite directions. Nope we can't do that we must charge in as a party and let the fighters get in the way of the area effect spells.

As I said before there were mistakes made in the early days that put the party in danger and that to has been hard to live down.

We don't have the same glass ceiling you have we may never become party leaders but we can and do make a difference in the game world.

It sounds to me that a lot of your problems are world oriented you don't see the same problems in your midnight campaign. The DM has the power to change that. He needs to get rid of that glass ceiling and allow your PCs to be as important as the male PCs.

I do have a question have any of the male players played a female character and if they did they experience this glass ceiling?

 

[Nisarg]

I'm afraid, sir, that it is you who are incorrect.You are making the assertion that the simulation-aspect of D&D takes precedence over the game-aspect. It is here where I think you make your most egregious error. A historian writing a history, or even an author writing historical fiction, has a responsibility to Accuracy and Believability above all else. A history's purpose is to create an accurate representation of the past. A historical novel, to create a believable representation of the past.

Not so with a game. A game's responsibility is to see to it that all participants are having fun. If S'mon's game is not fun for all its players, it has failed.

I'd argue that the game aspect is very important (and believe me I'm a huge advocate of remembering its a game, just check out the posts on RPGnet I've made if you don't believe me). But it doesn't discount what I said.

The game aspect means that the DM has a responsibility that the PLAYERS and the ENVIRONMENT of the game are not sexist or cause conflict to a female gamer. In other words he should avoid her getting hit on or harassed or demeaned in the REAL LIFE environment of the gaming group.
In the play of the game itself, however, the simulation is the "consensus reality" that all agree to play in. If it makes sense that in that world the attractive female CHARACTER is going to be hit on or harassed by a male CHARACTER, then it should happen. It should not happen in real life, but in the simulated world of the game.

To demand otherwise would be like a feminist playing in a chess championship and demanding that the game be about capturing the queen rather than the king, because the current model is sexist. Or arguing that a square board is a "sign of the patriarchy" and that the game must be changed to a round board which is more appropriately "female".

You create a fair environment in which to play the game. Within the reality of the game itself, the principle rule, and what is nescessary for the "fun" of the game, is that it be an understood simulation. This might mean that the DM explains beforehand that the world isn't sexist, but if the world itself is sexist that doesn't mean the game is. It also doesn't mean that a woman couldn't have fun playing a female character in such a world. After all, RPGs are all about challenge. ANd if the challenge is fighting the 8th level wizard or if the challenge is playing a woman in a sexist setting, both are a form of challenge that can both be "fun" if the goal is playing in character and making choices to overcome said challenges.

Nisarg

 

[Elf Witch]

I don't know how much help this will be, but here is what I did. Back in year one I started playing LG with my husband. We joined an existing group where we knew no one, and there were very few females. I made up a sorcerer with pretty much the same stats in everything. I was thinking it would be a well rounded and therefore well like character. What ended up happenning was this ...

1. I was someone's wife which automatically put me in a subordinate role at the table. I eventually started playing without my husband.
2. I was one of a few females and like Stalking Blue I was often overlooked, or given the polite nod, and then that was it.
3. I had orginally designed my character to be Neutral Good and help to augment the party, which turned me into even a bigger door mat for the men at the table.

So, what I did was make a drastic change in how my character was run. As I gained levels I dropped the buff spells in favor of the damage dealing blow-em-up stuff. I stopped offering to buff the party as my first course of action, and instead either cast defensive spells on myself or just started blazing the way with fireball, lightning bolt, etc. And finally, I made a conscious change in alignment from little-miss-goody-two-shoes to a true Neutral killing machine. Even now, when I sit at a table with people I don't know (and it is usually all or mostly men) I start off with the same sexist attitudes, but those quickly go by the side when they realize I am a force to be reckoned with.

This is just a thought and what I did to overcome falling into the background. I do not think anyone should have to change their character because of outdated sexism, but if you can't get the system to change, sometime you need to change in order to get along in the system.

With our group if I play a character like my sorcerer I felt that I actually did more. It is hard to put into words but I will try. That character was important to the group she was needed. She help define who the group was and what they stood for. She had the power to make changes to a world.

But in the new game I have played so far a rogue/fighter/ranger, straight brute fighter, rogue, combat sorcerer and now a fighter/courtier. I tried to play these woman as tough smart warriors except for the rogue and I ended up feeling that all I am is a meat shield. You stand there and take damage but don't offer any planning and if your character dies just make another one because the characters themselves are not really that important in of themselves to the party. We have six players so it is sometimes hard to find a niche.

I don't know if I explained this well or not.

 

[Minicol]

IMC, I first differentiate between cultural and geographical areas of the campaign : not everything is the same everywhere.

Then, there is some sexism ICM, but it does not stop women from achieveing power or authority in any field they choose, just makes it slightly harder. But a strong willed woman will get what she wants eventually, just as in real life. If you look at medieval times, things were certainly harder for women, but they could still with a lot effort have any role they wanted, even in the military.

Another thing worth considering : women can be just as conniving as men and wield more power than them from the shadows in a subtler maneer... without any man ever noticing.

 

[Dark Jezter]

The guys often don't listen to our plans. Neither of our characters will ever be allowed to be a leader even if that is what the character is designed to be. It gets to be frustrating. Some of this is because when we started gaming we did not have the years of gaming experience that they did so we made mistakes in strategy. But that is no longer the case.

I don't know about your group, but my group has an aversion to party leaders, be they male or female. In my expirience, "party leader" usually translates to "someone who bosses around the other PCs, takes all the credit when the party accomplishes something, and has most of the campaign's story centered around them (to the exclusion of the other players)".

So, neither of the D&D groups I'm currently participating in has a leader. Decisions that affect the party are usually decided after a minute or two of discussion among the PCs.