Slavery, Rape, Madness and War!
- Thread starter SHARK
- Start date
mythago
Hero
The comment about your "attitude," btw, was IMO in reference to the snide remark that any woman who didn't say 'please' is counted as a rape victim.
Does anyone find it an enjoyable element of the game? No, don't answer that.
As has been pointed out previously, male-on-male rape is (and, in historical terms, was) pretty common. If you're going to have rape onscreen, so to speak, in your campaign, it seems reasonable to me to include that.
Does anyone find it an enjoyable element of the game? No, don't answer that.
As has been pointed out previously, male-on-male rape is (and, in historical terms, was) pretty common. If you're going to have rape onscreen, so to speak, in your campaign, it seems reasonable to me to include that.
SHARK
First Post
Greetings!
Wow. Rape. I sometimes wonder how people deal with this concept. For me, just as if I was writing a novel, rape can be used as a great dramatic point--with many different applications, including, but not limited to, the victim. Feuds, hatreds, rivalries, precedence in lineages and inheritance, redemption, forgiveness, and so on--all are many such concepts that can affect many different people in the situation, and even those who are considerably removed from it. In many great stories throughout literature, the Bible, mythology, dramatic plays, and through the romance novels of today--both good and bad,--rape has featured prominently in many different stories.
It is with thus, that I include rape in my campaigns, in addition to the incidental occurance of it en masse during military campaigns. It has been realistic, dramatic, and demanding superior emotion and characterization from npc's and players characters alike. This has combined to form, where I have included it, a game of greater depth an emotion for all involved in creating dramatic stories.
This, to my mind, is its purpose.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Wow. Rape. I sometimes wonder how people deal with this concept. For me, just as if I was writing a novel, rape can be used as a great dramatic point--with many different applications, including, but not limited to, the victim. Feuds, hatreds, rivalries, precedence in lineages and inheritance, redemption, forgiveness, and so on--all are many such concepts that can affect many different people in the situation, and even those who are considerably removed from it. In many great stories throughout literature, the Bible, mythology, dramatic plays, and through the romance novels of today--both good and bad,--rape has featured prominently in many different stories.
It is with thus, that I include rape in my campaigns, in addition to the incidental occurance of it en masse during military campaigns. It has been realistic, dramatic, and demanding superior emotion and characterization from npc's and players characters alike. This has combined to form, where I have included it, a game of greater depth an emotion for all involved in creating dramatic stories.
This, to my mind, is its purpose.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
David Argall
First Post
misc
" The comment about your "attitude," btw, was IMO in reference to the snide remark that any woman who didn't say 'please' is counted as a rape victim."
A great many of the popular statistics turn out to be wildly inflated guesses by some pressure group. This is true of figures on rape as well as other subjects. To make the figures sound as horrifying as possible, they took the widest possible definition of rape they could. Logically this is dubious strategy since by equating the woman who gives in to her boy just to stop his whinning to the one attacked by a random thug, one makes true rape a rather trivial crime. However logic has never been as important as emotional impact with the general public.
"male-on-male rape is (and, in historical terms, was) pretty common. If you're going to have rape onscreen, so to speak, in your campaign, it seems reasonable to me to include that. "
"Pretty common" is a matter of definition. If we delete the culturally violent and short of women situation [such as prison], the number is distinctly small. 90%+ of the rapists prefer women to start with, and the man is a tougher target as well. So while a campaign including rape almost has to have each female PC face a situation where rape does or could happen, the chance for the male PC is more like 1%, a figure that is low enough to ignore unless there is a plot element to hang it on.
" The comment about your "attitude," btw, was IMO in reference to the snide remark that any woman who didn't say 'please' is counted as a rape victim."
A great many of the popular statistics turn out to be wildly inflated guesses by some pressure group. This is true of figures on rape as well as other subjects. To make the figures sound as horrifying as possible, they took the widest possible definition of rape they could. Logically this is dubious strategy since by equating the woman who gives in to her boy just to stop his whinning to the one attacked by a random thug, one makes true rape a rather trivial crime. However logic has never been as important as emotional impact with the general public.
"male-on-male rape is (and, in historical terms, was) pretty common. If you're going to have rape onscreen, so to speak, in your campaign, it seems reasonable to me to include that. "
"Pretty common" is a matter of definition. If we delete the culturally violent and short of women situation [such as prison], the number is distinctly small. 90%+ of the rapists prefer women to start with, and the man is a tougher target as well. So while a campaign including rape almost has to have each female PC face a situation where rape does or could happen, the chance for the male PC is more like 1%, a figure that is low enough to ignore unless there is a plot element to hang it on.
mythago
Hero
That is a very different statement than the one you made originally. Do you really not see why?
The irony of your complaining about poor statistical sampling and then picking a 1% figure out of the air is charming.
First, women are most likely to be assaulted by family members or acquaintances (with men, it's by strangers)--so if your female PC is an adult, and the other party members are keeping their hands off her, she's pretty safe.
More importantly, let's consider that we are talking about an imaginary world. You can wave your GMly wand and social mores are whatever you say they are. You do not "have to have" female PCs face rape any more than you "have to have" them carry vorpal swords or wear pointy wizard hats. You, the GM, choose these things. Throwing up your hands and saying "Geez, I can't help it if the Evil Dark Lord wants to rape your character!" is a cop-out.
It's just as much within your power to decide that the vile warriors of the Blood Moon Clan are modelled on the ancient Spartans. They certainly wouldn't sully themselves by raping the party's cute elf bard--women are for making sons, and who wants a halfbreed running around?--but sex between men is, you know, manly, and they're far more interested in dominating and humiliating the party's hunky male paladin.
SHARK
First Post
Greetings!
Folks, I'd like to think that I'm a reasonably intelligent fellow, but there is just something I'm not really getting in the half-dozen or more posts included here, especially between you guys in particular. What exactly are you guys arguing about, really? I must confess that I'm stretching to see how relevant it is to the thread that I started here. Other people have even complimented me on starting this thread, and engaging in a relevant, mature discussion about the subjects that BOVD covers, but many previous threads seemed to fail entirely to do. Many have found it interesting and refreshing, even. See what I'm saying?
I'm sensing that this other discussion is increasingly poisonous, and less about substance. I'm not attacking either of you, but I might enjoy a clearly thought out explanation. I also have a suspicion that this tangental discussion has dissuaded others from posting their ideas to the thread. I would think that would be unfortunate. Certainly, I welcome everyone to contribute their thoughts and ideas. However, it seems to me that this tangent isn't really going anywhere, you know? There are some points that both of you have made that I agree with, and some that I don't. It remains though that this tangent isn't really accomplishing much, except to add gasoline to the conversation. Please, try and reorientate your discussion back to the thread's intent. If you desire, a clear explanation of your positions to me would be appreciated as well, as to what exactly you are saying, because I am confused at what precisely either of you are trying to say.
Fair enough?
Thankyou gentlemen.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Folks, I'd like to think that I'm a reasonably intelligent fellow, but there is just something I'm not really getting in the half-dozen or more posts included here, especially between you guys in particular. What exactly are you guys arguing about, really? I must confess that I'm stretching to see how relevant it is to the thread that I started here. Other people have even complimented me on starting this thread, and engaging in a relevant, mature discussion about the subjects that BOVD covers, but many previous threads seemed to fail entirely to do. Many have found it interesting and refreshing, even. See what I'm saying?
I'm sensing that this other discussion is increasingly poisonous, and less about substance. I'm not attacking either of you, but I might enjoy a clearly thought out explanation. I also have a suspicion that this tangental discussion has dissuaded others from posting their ideas to the thread. I would think that would be unfortunate. Certainly, I welcome everyone to contribute their thoughts and ideas. However, it seems to me that this tangent isn't really going anywhere, you know? There are some points that both of you have made that I agree with, and some that I don't. It remains though that this tangent isn't really accomplishing much, except to add gasoline to the conversation. Please, try and reorientate your discussion back to the thread's intent. If you desire, a clear explanation of your positions to me would be appreciated as well, as to what exactly you are saying, because I am confused at what precisely either of you are trying to say.
Fair enough?
Thankyou gentlemen.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
mythago
Hero
Gentlemen? *whaps SHARK with a BoVD*
All I'm arguing, really, is that one needs to approach sensitive topics in a game with sensitivity towards one's players.
I'd add that I think it's foolish to say that there is only one way to handle Evil Things in a campaign, and that the GM's hands are tied in regard to doing something different. So to say that slavery must match the kind portrayed in Roots or that only female PCs can be raped because that's the way it is where you live, is lame.
It's also out of place in a dark fantasy campaign, IMO. There should be no safe place, no comforting way for the PCs to reassure themselves they will be spared a horror. "Well, I'm a guy, so I don't have to worry about rape--and I have high social status, so I don't have to worry about slavery!" are sentiments that ought not to hold true, IMO.
Perhaps it's easier for the players and GM to hold those sentiments, as well.
All I'm arguing, really, is that one needs to approach sensitive topics in a game with sensitivity towards one's players.
I'd add that I think it's foolish to say that there is only one way to handle Evil Things in a campaign, and that the GM's hands are tied in regard to doing something different. So to say that slavery must match the kind portrayed in Roots or that only female PCs can be raped because that's the way it is where you live, is lame.
It's also out of place in a dark fantasy campaign, IMO. There should be no safe place, no comforting way for the PCs to reassure themselves they will be spared a horror. "Well, I'm a guy, so I don't have to worry about rape--and I have high social status, so I don't have to worry about slavery!" are sentiments that ought not to hold true, IMO.
Perhaps it's easier for the players and GM to hold those sentiments, as well.
NoOneofConsequence
First Post
Confessions of a thread hijacker
To SHARK:
Your point on tangential posting to this thread is well taken. As someone who was responsible I can only say sorry.
In my defence, I will note that as soon as I realised what I was doing I ceased posting to this thread - it seemed the only good mannered thing to do.
Also, the subjects of rape and sexual abuse are ones about which I have a great deal of personal and professional knowledge. As such, I often run the risk of being overly passionate when discussing them. With this in mind, and so as not to get dragged into another tangential debate on this subject, I won't be posting here again. I will continue to follow the discussion with interest though. Again, my apologies.
To SHARK:
Your point on tangential posting to this thread is well taken. As someone who was responsible I can only say sorry.
In my defence, I will note that as soon as I realised what I was doing I ceased posting to this thread - it seemed the only good mannered thing to do.
Also, the subjects of rape and sexual abuse are ones about which I have a great deal of personal and professional knowledge. As such, I often run the risk of being overly passionate when discussing them. With this in mind, and so as not to get dragged into another tangential debate on this subject, I won't be posting here again. I will continue to follow the discussion with interest though. Again, my apologies.
SHARK said:
It isn't really a question of whether they exist in the campaign or the world--these things *always* exist--but of how the story addresses them. Slavery, racism, insanity and other "mature" themes exist in Star Wars, LotR, the Homeric Epics and Vergil, etc., but they are not addressed in the kind of way that is potentially offensive to people (i.e. in a way entirely skill deficient)
Simply as a reply to your feeling that a campaign that doesn't incorporate these things might feel cartooney or limited, I have to disagree, citing as evidence what was until recently widely held to be the pinnacle of artistic achievement: the epic (art and it's derivative words no longer have any meaning, let alone a pinnacle). Yes, there is war in Homer and Vergil and Star Wars (I didn't want to say "Homer and Vergil and Lucas"; that would sure be inflating his achievements), and reference to human sacrifice (Iphigenia) and rape (Cassandra, both by Apollo and Agamemnon) and suicide (Dido) and slavery (again Cassandra, and Wookies, for that matter) and racism (fairly large in Star Wars), but these are heroic works and all of these things are absolutely cursory to the story except when they have some kind of negative moral force (like Iphigenia's sacrifice), in which cases how wrong they were is also central to the story.
Having said that, most of the ridiculous staples of D&D Fantasy have no place in an epic campaign either. Your game sounds really interesting SHARK, and if I or anyone else were going to explore "mature" themes (oi that seems an odd designation for them) we would probably be best served playing in a game like yours, and frankly that sounds a lot better than the average D&D campaign, which ignores a few and incorporates a few and generally just skips over most. However, if it is possible for a campaign to be as epic as a true epic, then I have a hard time believing that such a campaign would be anything less than equal to a campaign that perfectly explores less savory issues, which I doubt exists. Epic doesn't gloss over the tough stuff, it stares right through it.
In fact I think a truely epic campaign would be far more difficult to run than any other kind, but that's a book length discussion we won't get into.
*Oh how I hate following messageboard rules when somebody is so wrong you have the urge to smack them* (absolutely unrelated to the rest of this post and not aimed at SHARK).
Similar Threads
