Emotional separation from fictional content

[Rook]

^^^ Exactly.

Adult-rated games have adult-rated themes and events and RP.

If you cannot deal with a subset of those themes, it is on you to advertise somewhere, in explicit language, what you cannot, will not RP or be involved in. On a game where dark, horror like themes are the norm - maybe you should have a few notes on what your triggers are. On a teen-rated game, one wouldn't expect the 'norm' of RP to include butchery, rape, soul-ripping, whatever, (such RP may be explicitly against TOS/Policies, too) so it should stand to reason that people shouldn't have to have notices about those things.

The onus is on you for 50% of this.
The rest of the onus is on those that run scenes, scene with you, for the other 50%.

Oh and while I'm at it: waiving your rights by explicitly asking for a scene with someone should also waive your rights for complaint after the fact, if the scene generally went in the direction you asked for. Complaining after the scene should get YOU disciplined, not the person that you talked into your requested scene. That's some for of bullshit entrapment, and should rank right up there with falsifying logs to 'prove' someone was cheating in combat scenes.

[Rook]

@surreality said in Emotional separation from fictional content:

saw her badgering behavior so it wasn't just a he said/she said sort of thing), after which, inevitably, she'd go on at length OOC about how disgusting they were that they had done so, even if it was only to get her to shut up and stop badgering them to do it.

Well, this makes me think of the player types that are attracted to the "dirtyness" of the content and the degrading, humiliating feelings that come from just imagining whatever acts. They like to talk about it, comiserate with others about how dirty and wrong it was. They like to highlight it's degrading and grossness in poses, emphasizing how humiliating it is. It's like a form of Dirty Talking or something.

I knew a guy once that was all about talking about how slutty this girl we knew (we were in high school) was. You know the type. He would sit and scoff and make shit up about her, in degrading and rude ways. Of course, you realize after a while that he wasn't disgusted by her, he had a huge crush. This kind of reminds me of that style of 'kink' or whatever. I am sure someone smarter can give a name to this.

I think that sometimes people like to dance along the lines of triggers for themselves. It's a danger play sort of attraction, or sometimes an attempt to heal from an earlier thing, and sometimes hapless RP partners get caught in the explosion.

[Arkandel]

For starters! I agree the TV show thing isn't necessarily relevant to what I posted, it just happened to be what got me thinking. And I suppose I drew a parallel between 'producer who stopped interacting with the audience after being flamed hard' and MU* staff/STs facing a similar treatment.

3. How do we achieve both (1) and (2) without discouraging people from running things which aren't either inoffensive or completely black and white? Or is it better in certain games that controversial themes are never ran, and staff plots/public PrPs are always 'safe'? If so, when?

If someone is discouraged by having to clearly label their content, I question whether they have the emotional maturity to run a plot, and I am reasonably certain they don't have the emotional maturity to run a game. Mutual trust and respect is not an easy thing, but some measure of it is required for these game environments to work at all.

See, the issue here is that labeling can only get us so far. Nevermind for a moment that this can be a code limitation (not all games have customizable/tag'able +event code) or even the fact no games as of now that I can remember actually require or even recommend the practice - which means we might be holding STs accountable for not doing things staff itself didn't prioritize enough to mention, it's still not that easy to pigeon-hole these things.

Now, let's assume an adult game and a ST here who's not an asshole - they're trying to run a plot, not to use shock value to cater to their own kinks or whatever.

Is "mature content, caution is advised" enough? What if we start with good ol' fashioned murder of adults by the bad guys but at some point there's a dead kid as well? Or how about unintended consequences - we hit the PCs with some hostages they need to rescue from a gang, and one of them is a woman who had a bruise on her cheek - was she beaten? Or the plot I already mentioned I ran which included abused animals.

What I'm saying is these things... they're a sort of minefield. You can try to be a good sport and warn players but you can't have laundry lists of everything that might be encountered in a plot ahead of time, including things posed spontaneously or without necessarily giving them a lot of thought - I can see myself posing the aforementioned woman's bruise along with other evidence of rough treatment for the hostages (they're dirty, dehydrated, one guy has a broken ankle, one girl has a black eye - shit!) and not think too hard someone might fixate on that.

Speaking of this though, one thing I've noticed is the insistence some STs have to go all-out on gore, substituting it for horror. Some plots feel like there's barely a step without stepping into someone's entrails or walking by to see gutted, brained carcasses rotting nailed on walls - I suppose there may be a separation between super-intense overemphasized grossness and signs of real world abuse but again, what's the solution? Because I've never seen anyone offering FTB for those segments in PrPs.

Would a "graphic violence" label suffice here? Does it need to be specific? Should it be?

[Rook]

With people's love for fucking #hashtags, I cannot believe that this idea has not made it into the MU* world in a profitable and positive manner. WTF? This is a perfect application.

+event Mouse Races
Saturday night, the Rose Committee will be holding a charity event to further community understanding of Sunburn Awareness. At this event, there will be speakers, open bar, dinner options and several side attractions including a ring toss, mouse races, apple bobbing and a dunk tank. Bring your dollars to support!

Rating: R (Violence, Sexual Content)
Tags: #Vampire #Werewolf #VictimChosenFromCrowd #Mutiliation #MouseRacing

This could be a thing.

Also: FuckYerHashtag.

[WTFE]

Fucking brilliant. Spread the single dumbest thing to have come out of the Internet even farther. Bravo!

[ThatGuyThere]

Not to be overly negative but if I say a +event with a bunch of hashtags, or as I like to all it pound symbols, I would immediately know the event was not for me regardless of the content it was advertising/warning about.

On the actual topic I don't think I could be completely emotionally disconnected from a character I played the amount i play an average MU character but I also put the responsibility of knowing where my acceptable lines and limits are and communicating that to others.
There are people in this hobby who will stop n those set up boundaries however, either through malicious intent or because they are just flowing with the scene and when that happens it is on the person transgressing though boundaries.
There is also a way to properly behave when you are feeling the emotions and not just flail everywhere regardless of what you may be feeling at the time. For example the one time I had a character PKed it was a character I had played for over 3 years and I was literally crying as I was typing out the end of the scene but I was not a jerk, the kill was fair both mechanically and through the story being told so I did not yell at folks, did not put my issues and have never said anything against the others involved. It would have also been fair for me to go hey I can't RP this out I'm just going FTB here.

[Coin]

lulzwhut at hating hashtags.

Like, I get it, a lot of people are supremely annoying with their (ab)use of hashtags, but what hashtags actually are are just an easy coded/visual was to recognize tags, which have been around for. fucking. ever.

Hashtags was just coders finding a symbol that wasn't widely used and applying it for a purpose, much the same way we use @ here to activate the code that calls up usernames, and how if you preface an active username with @ you get a link to their profile, and they get notified.

I'm just like, lulzwhut, hating hashtags. You can be grumpy about people who abuse them or tag stupid shit, but the hashtag is functional within the structure of how the internet and social media work.

Now, if you hate the internet or social media, well, have I got bad news for yoooooooooooooooooooou...

[surreality]

@Arkandel said in Emotional separation from fictional content:

See, the issue here is that labeling can only get us so far. Nevermind for a moment that this can be a code limitation (not all games have customizable/tag'able +event code) or even the fact no games as of now that I can remember actually require or even recommend the practice - which means we might be holding STs accountable for not doing things staff itself didn't prioritize enough to mention, it's still not that easy to pigeon-hole these things.

There aren't any that don't allow for a summary.

There is nothing whatsoever preventing (the hypothetical) you from adding a line at the bottom of the summary, ex: "Note: This scene may contain elements of child abuse and satanic rituals. If these things are not for you, do not attend."

Is "mature content, caution is advised" enough?

No, not by a long shot. "Mature content" is all the content on some games. That gives someone almost no information at all to the extent that it's borderline useless.

"There might be something that involves mature content in here!" doesn't allow players to make an informed decision at all because it is not, in most game settings in which this becomes an issue, at all informative.

People do not have an issue with "mature content". They have issues with specific forms of mature content, not any and all mature content on the whole.

What if we start with good ol' fashioned murder of adults by the bad guys but at some point there's a dead kid as well?

This? I would not consider a huge deal personally. If I was going to put in a notice, it would be 'involves witnessing the death of NPCs of all ages'.

Or how about unintended consequences - we hit the PCs with some hostages they need to rescue from a gang, and one of them is a woman who had a bruise on her cheek - was she beaten? Or the plot I already mentioned I ran which included abused animals.

If it relies on inference to guess at what might have happened (bruise)? No.

Abused animals? 'Involves cruelty to animals.' (Same would be true for a goat sacrifice or something in the above. <shrug>)

What I'm saying is these things... they're a sort of minefield. You can try to be a good sport and warn players but you can't have laundry lists of everything that might be encountered in a plot ahead of time, including things posed spontaneously or without necessarily giving them a lot of thought - I can see myself posing the aforementioned woman's bruise along with other evidence of rough treatment for the hostages (they're dirty, dehydrated, one guy has a broken ankle, one girl has a black eye - shit!) and not think too hard someone might fixate on that.

Again, inference is not the same thing as a scene that involves walking into a scene in which a husband is brutally assaulting his wife and I am reasonably sure most players are well aware of the difference; the slope is nowhere near as slippery or inferential as you're presenting it to be in this argument. Someone simply having a bruise is something one could encounter on almost any game. Walk into any given bar RL and you'll probably see someone with a bruise or injury, same with any grocery store or shopping mall.

Speaking of this though, one thing I've noticed is the insistence some STs have to go all-out on gore, substituting it for horror. Some plots feel like there's barely a step without stepping into someone's entrails or walking by to see gutted, brained carcasses rotting nailed on walls - I suppose there may be a separation between super-intense overemphasized grossness and signs of real world abuse but again, what's the solution? Because I've never seen anyone offering FTB for those segments in PrPs.

Would a "graphic violence" label suffice here? Does it need to be specific? Should it be?

I would include a gore warning, personally. In part, because it's not actually the act of witnessing the actual act of violence in this case, but that's sorta neither here nor there. 'Extreme gore factor' would cover it more accurately, since you can have gore without actual violence, and violence without actual gore, really. You could be running a pure investigation scene that involves a forensic investigation of the area you're describing above, for example, in the aftermath of whatever violence took place.

While I have no clue about how good or bad the rest of this site is, this covers some things fairly well, especially here:

Linked Article:

The idea for content warnings arose in order to recognize — and respect — the diverging struggles and experiences of others by supplying an easy, advisory mechanism for would-be readers.

This way, they’re prepared and are able to choose whether or not they wish to be subjected to content that may adversely impact their mental state.

However, there’s a tendency for people to claim that these steps are a form of coddling, rather than see them for what they really are: Simple and considerate notice markers that empowers would-be readers with the decision of choice.

Instead of this being seen as a way to appreciate the importance of mental health, more often content warnings are greeted with hostility by people not personally affected taking personal offense — as if their rights were being threatened or revoked.

Complaints range from “Why can’t people worried about reading content just stay off the internet?” to “Grow up” to “Just deal with it” — never once considering that they’re preoccupation with situations that don’t directly concern them. That, possibly, their well-being only reflects self-centeredness and a refusal to value the feelings, mental health, or anxiety of others.

Notice you felt the need to include a spoiler warning in this thread while reading the article, and think about that a sec. Now think about which is actually more important.

[Coin]

All this said, some people just pick the wrong damn game.

If you have severe issues with graphic depictions of violence, but you choose to play Werewolf, I'm going to stare at you. Same for Vampire, especially if you've got severe issues with depictions of submission, control, objectification, and I would go as far as to say psychological abuse. Ghouls are an integral part of Vampire, especially on MUs. I knew someone who'd been kidnapped, and they really wanted to play Changeling. They lasted two days. Two days.

If you have things that trigger you, really know the game you're playing, because those things might be integral to theme, some in glorfying ways (violence, usually), some in condemning, but still hard to process ways (kidnapping, psychological abuse) and sometimes... casually, which can sometimes be the worst.

That said, I think every game does a good job of outlining these themes in the books and if you read the books and think you can handle it, more power to you--but I don't think "violence" is a tag needed for a scene centered around werewolves, for example.

Beyond that, on a MU you're going to have to deal with other people playing their shit in public. A werewolf player isn't going to stop and ask, "is everyone okay if I pose tearing this person apart?" And a vampire player isn't going to not treat their ghoul like an object (if they would IC), nor ask if it's okay, in a public vampire space, where that's the cultural norm.

I'm all for trigger warnings and what not, but there is a context. You can choose not to play a game whose themes directly take you to your trauma.

BTW, "But in real life you can choose to never leave your house, too," is a stupid comparison and I am saying so before anyone makes it. These things are not comparable in scope or meaning.

[surreality]

@Coin said in Emotional separation from fictional content:

That said, I think every game does a good job of outlining these themes in the books and if you read the books and think you can handle it, more power to you--but I don't think "violence" is a tag needed for a scene centered around werewolves, for example.

I'd actually say a 'violence' tag is almost too general to be relevant on its own. OK, sure, if the scene is otherwise described as a garden party, noting that it isn't going to remain (literally?) hearts and flowers land is not a bad thing.

Otherwise, 'violence' on its own is not typically a trigger -- this is sorta like the 'includes mature content' to some extent. There's just not enough information to make a decision here. Specific forms of violence -- 'child abuse', 'domestic violence', 'sexual assault', 'torture' -- are common triggers, however, but someone horrified by one may not give a damn about the other three. A label of simply 'violence' is so vague it just doesn't give people the information they actually need to make their decision about participation.

[Coin]

@surreality said in Emotional separation from fictional content:

@Coin said in Emotional separation from fictional content:

That said, I think every game does a good job of outlining these themes in the books and if you read the books and think you can handle it, more power to you--but I don't think "violence" is a tag needed for a scene centered around werewolves, for example.

I'd actually say a 'violence' tag is almost too general to be relevant on its own. OK, sure, if the scene is otherwise described as a garden party, noting that it isn't going to remain (literally?) hearts and flowers land is not a bad thing.

Otherwise, 'violence' on its own is not typically a trigger -- this is sorta like the 'includes mature content' to some extent. There's just not enough information to make a decision here. Specific forms of violence -- 'child abuse', 'domestic violence', 'sexual assault', 'torture' -- are common triggers, however, but someone horrified by one may not give a damn about the other three. A label of simply 'violence' is so vague it just doesn't give people the information they actually need to make their decision about participation.

If you're triggered by "gore", which is an example you used, so I will switch to that--don't play Werewolf.

We like our gorey shit, over here in Werewolf.

[surreality]

@Coin Yes and no? If you're talking about a plot that's werewolf only, or on a werewolf only game, or even has a description about 'this is a scene about werewolves going on a hunt' this is self-explanatory to some extent.

Even then, if your writeup is otherwise 'this is the werewolf tea sipping society scene at the garden party center, formal attire required' (which, for the record, I am finding it hilarious to mentally envision at the moment), you may still want to stick a 'things won't stay that way and violent and gory interruptions are in the plans'.

...thank you, internets:

[Rook]

I mean no disrespect to anyone, and I mean that honestly... but why would anyone who has triggers to any of the common/possible thematic elements of a game play on such a game, regularly? At an extreme, it could remind of Ganymede's (I think) rant about cigarette smoking areas and non-smokers.

I totally get that those with these triggers have every 'right' to be on said game. Not arguing that, but.. if it were me? I'd have warning stickers on me. For self-protection?

[Auspice]

''this is the werewolf tea sipping society scene at the garden party center, formal attire required''

...I require this now.
Immediately.
Make it happen.
Please, for the love of god.

[Ganymede]

@Auspice said in Emotional separation from fictional content:

''this is the werewolf tea sipping society scene at the garden party center, formal attire required''

This won't happen because the Elodoth in W:tF 2E unequivocally suck.

[mietze]

Back when I was an active scene runner/prp person for vampire and werewolf and law, I just asked for the people signed up (or who'd requested I run a story for them) to privately disclose any "no go" areas/themes for them. Then I could privately advise them to either not participate or if possible alter some details that I knew about in advance.

To be honest, I think a lot of players like to be surprised/to feel unscripted/have to think on their feet. Unlike a published prewritten article, a plot is something that can change/move due to the dynamics of the people in it (in theory anyway). If you have to give a rundown summary that removes some of that element. Or it desensitized people to content warnings over time. I know some problematic people who will indeed file complaints/scream at people over certain content that regularly signed up for scenes in which warnings of a general but accurate sort were given. They had lots of friends going and didn't want to not sign up, and then targeted the runner for their abuse. Now the same thing could be said of privately asking, but I had a lot more success with it, both in being able to tailor the scene without anyone's knowledge into something enjoyable for everyone, including me--but also in feeling more entitled to then boot/remove a player being a dick afterwards and protect other players vs. needing to focus all my attention on a player freaking out after they'd been given a opportunity to proactively disclose their Do Not Go areas.

Yes, that is cold to some extent. But a) I no longer tolerated people using MUSHing as their therapy/other players as their whipping boys/girls due to other issues and b) got sick of the squeaky wheel/needy player in the scene in progress slowing things down/wasting the time of other players that were GGG (Good, Giving, and Game). I'm a nice, considerate person in RL and most of the time in game. But when it comes to running a scene or plot, I prefer to protect the experience of the quiet people too, and respect everyone's time by avoiding derailing ooc behavior.

I think as long as the runner has given each person ample opportunity to disclose their NOPE areas, then the responsibility lies on the triggered person to quickly and with minimal ooc disruption exit the scene. And I agree with Coin, that it also is very annoying when someone decides to roll into a sphere that is obviously not going to be something they can thematically handle, and then proceeds to bitch/try to change/vomit their discontent all over people who are playing canon theme.

[surreality]

@Rook said in Emotional separation from fictional content:

I'd have warning stickers on me. For self-protection?

This is 50% of why I worked up an 'RP preferences' system for wiki: so people can outline their personal limits (and, conversely, content wishlists) to whatever level of specificity they're interested in describing them.

The other 50% being 'it's a really convenient listing of what people are looking for right now' so people can know what the current crop of players are specifically wanting to see as plots, saving people time that might have been wasted on pure guesswork. Not only is this useful for staff and GMs, it's useful for every other player that player is interacting with, since everyone has access to the information equally.

Being able to do this in a way that allows people to write that up outside the context of a potential conflict or direct inquiry takes a little bit of the pressure off. People are not always comfortable talking about their sore spots (or sekrit dreamz) directly, or at least are not as comfortable with some specifics as they might be if given the ability to write out what they wish on their own. Then, if someone has questions, they can ask if needs be for any additional clarification.

[TiredEwok]

To play a bit of Devil's Advocate, here, not everyone's going to know something will trigger them until the scene gets to that point. Sometimes a person might be fine with something usually but they are triggered by the subject matter due to not having a good day or somehow being off their game. And other times, someone might be new to the style of offered RP and not realize it's a bit more than they can handle, emotionally, until it's too late.

[Ganymede]

@Apu said in Emotional separation from fictional content:

And other times, someone might be new to the style of offered RP and not realize it's a bit more than they can handle, emotionally, until it's too late.

At these times, I propose having that player duck out, and catch up with them later as to how their PCs would have participated, so that they are still included in the RP (sort of).

[Arkandel]

@mietze touched on several interesting issues so I'll go over some of them real quick:

@mietze said in Emotional separation from fictional content:

Back when I was an active scene runner/prp person for vampire and werewolf and law, I just asked for the people signed up (or who'd requested I run a story for them) to privately disclose any "no go" areas/themes for them. Then I could privately advise them to either not participate or if possible alter some details that I knew about in advance.

Did it work? In my experience asking players in general to do any amount of 'work' in preparation for an +event doesn't unless I know them well and feel free to poke them.

To be honest, I think a lot of players like to be surprised/to feel unscripted/have to think on their feet. Unlike a published prewritten article, a plot is something that can change/move due to the dynamics of the people in it (in theory anyway).

Two things about it:

• My experience has been ... well a mixed bag. Players - again, in general, not specific ones who're very good in general so of course they're better at plot participation as well - tend to want something formulaic, and taking them out of their comfort zone usually doesn't go well. I've had incidents where they weren't actually reading what I had typed either in posts or even in poses within the scene. And I've definitely had players ask me what 'medium risk' means and tried to make me explicitly reassure them it didn't really mean any danger. But on the other hand you are 100% right that if the scene feels like it's on rails they will - rightfully, that's valid criticism - complain.

• Similarly I like to think on my feet. In fact I always felt that was one of my strengths as a ST - I can come up with shit on the fly and it makes sense within the story's narrative. No matter what I'd very much like to retain that freedom; it doesn't mean "throw dead babies at the players for shock value" but it does mean not having to walk on eggshells either. Surely there must be a middle ground where failing to put in that "#animalsacrifice" tag still lets me slay a virtual goat's throat over an altar if the situation calls for it.

Yes, that is cold to some extent. But a) I no longer tolerated people using MUSHing as their therapy/other players as their whipping boys/girls due to other issues and b) got sick of the squeaky wheel/needy player in the scene in progress slowing things down/wasting the time of other players that were GGG (Good, Giving, and Game). I'm a nice, considerate person in RL and most of the time in game. But when it comes to running a scene or plot, I prefer to protect the experience of the quiet people too, and respect everyone's time by avoiding derailing ooc behavior.

Again I must +1 this. I am not a trained therapist; I'm just here to play a game. I don't want to be an asshole and hurt people, but I also don't know what's good for them. There's no question I'd try to accommodate someone who pages me and says "hey, sorry, but I'm feeling kinda icky about this goat thing, can you tone it down please?" and will bust my ass to accommodate them but there's a limit to how far I'm willing to go in that direction preemptively. That goes twice as much for my friends (or players I know are sensitive about something in general) but having some stranger slap me with their RL trauma out of nowhere is too much. Being considerate goes both ways.

That's why one of the main questions for this thread was "if shit goes wrong what's the best way to go about it?". It's bound to happen; we all have buttons that can be pressed, but where do we go from there?

I think one of the responses to that question is having an open, honest conversation. But for instance @Paris' mention of that incident earlier in the thread really irked me - someone has to play the bad guys, yet the fact doesn't mean their players are assholes. So if a player played that card with me despite efforts on my part to be accommodative I'd lose any willingness to work with them; at that point, frankly, I won't be dealing with them any more.