Sexism in your campaign settings

[Thanee]

No problems with anything, as long as it doesn't make anyone feel uncomfortable. That'd be the point, where I think "realism" has to step back.

Generally (not true for every single culture in a game world), males and females should be treated as equals (especially by the game mechanics). Social sexism is just something that - if not present - would make a game world less realistic, really.

It would be boring, if in every country and race the genders would be equal. In most, ok, but in some the women could have the upper hand, while in others it's the men. On average it should probably turn out about equal, just for fairness.

Bye
Thanee

 

[S'mon]

DrifterBob - interesting stuff, BTW what's the female equivalent for "Jarl"?

 

[S'mon]

No problems with anything, as long as it doesn't make anyone feel uncomfortable. That'd be the point, where I think "realism" has to step back.

I don't think they feel uncomfortable with my GMing or the world as such, but they sometimes feel impotent in eg political negotiations, an important part of my campaign. They've said that they don't mind the world being sexist as long as that doesn't apply to PCs; a Simulationist (PCs are inhabitants of the world, same as NPC) vs Narrativist (PCs are the stars, different rules apply) problem I have difficulty dealing with.

 

[Thanee]

Well, as long as there are other areas, where the women are more potent and the males have to shut up, I don't really see the problem. You can't be good at everything and everywhere.

Or making it harder for them to gain a position of respect in the political struggle is surely ok, if that area is male-dominated, it just makes sense, that they would not easily accept a woman as an equal, but once they are there they shouldn't get penalized further.

Just because they are PCs they shouldn't automatically be treated differently, but they should have a fair chance to stand out.

And of course, it would be nice, if it was the other way around someplace else.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Gez]

In particular they find it seems easier for male PCs to be taken seriously by (male) NPCs.

Ah, it's a problem I don't have. Typical adventurers are always outcasts, so they're never taken really seriously by NPCs. More seriously, the established society rules don't apply as much to individuals to which everything, from clothing to lifestyle, says "EXCEPTIONAL AND DANGEROUS PERSON".

 

[the Jester]

There are sexist elements to my campaign (just as there are racist and other bigoted elements), but mostly it's a gender-neutral world. I think that in a world with magic, psionics, divine intervention and other methods for someone to get ahead without physical strength, there's no innate reason for a sexist culture to exist. However, I also think a good bigoted culture, leader, bad guy or what have you can make for some damn fine adventuring!

As an aside, how many people have blacks in their campaign world? If you do, are they seafaring people? Do they live in hot climates? Are they primitive? This one is actually alot less historical and (in my opinion) a much bigger problem. Personally, I tend to make the base of operations for the PCs predominantly white (as all my players are white and are in all likelihood going to play white characters). But, as I said for matriarchal societies, I tend to use all different cultures in my campaigns.

Of the main human ethnicities imc, one is pretty much northern-european white, one is a sort of slightly green oriental looking group, one is a pasty pale ethnicity and one is black-skinned with wavy dark hair.

The Thulians (the black-skinned humans) had a thriving culture until a BBEG pretty much destroyed their continent; now they're rebuilding and doing it well. The Thulians have traditionally been seen as politically savy and culturally advanced.

 

[hong]

Well, as long as there are other areas, where the women are more potent and the males have to shut up, I don't really see the problem.

... of course, shifting the campaign from one area to another isn't always easy, even with teleport. Not to mention that this just replaces one problem with another: disempowering the guys isn't much better than disempowering the gals.

 

[Janx]

I think another simple twist to your campaign is to not accentuate sexism.

The big lead-off to male dominated games is the fact that most NPCs end up being male.

It's OK if the majority of your NPCs are male.

Simply don't bring up any condescending remarks towards the female characters. Basically, treat them as equals (as adventurers, they must have earned it). This basically makes it more invisible.

As you make more NPCs, consider making some of them female. That starts equalizing things.

In my campaign, I don't tend to make a lot of female NPCs. But I will never have any sexist events happen to a PC if I can help it. I'd prefer not to explore those themes.

 

[Thanee]

Complete disempowering is probably a bit much, yeah.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Mallus]

Operating on the principle that conflict --and the irrationality that its often born from-- is vitally important to an exciting campaign, there's all kinds of sexism/racism/bigotry/etc. in my current game. Peoples response to you depends on who/what you are and where you hail from.

And as DM, I'm an equal-opportunity discriminator. I don't make it impossible to play any[i/] race/class/gender/nationality. But no matter what you choose to play, you can rest assured that someone, somehere, will categorically dislike you... at least at first.