How should IC discrimination be handled?

[Thenomain]

Many games have an ethics or behavior document.

Any game worth its salt has a theme/setting document.

This is where a warning goes.

This is where expectations of players and an introduction to basic communication goes.

Where there are gaps, it is staff’s job to educate.

If there is misunderstanding, staff should look first at what they could do better and decide if the onus is upon them or if they have taken reasonable steps.

(For example, a 20 page document may be too long...@surreality. Just saying.)

I am starting, in my old age, to feel that there is something wrong if we have to keep reminding people not only that it’s okay to talk to others, but how to do so. The former? WoD and Firan have beat people down for so long that it’s understandable. The latter? I have no idea. I don’t think it’s staff’s duty to teach people how to be decent human beings, but a reminder with light examples isn’t onerous so I think each game should at least touch on it, respectfully as possible.

[surreality]

@thenomain Even I'm on board with 'nine miles of warning re: every potential subject' as excessive.

While the focus requested here is just for one specific theme -- homophobia -- there are so many equally valid forms of discrimination and controversial content that if a login screen has to list them all out, it's... not going to fit in the buffer, or you're going to have the appearance of only prioritizing warning/concern for one subject above all the others.

[Thenomain]

@surreality

Which brings up the dangerous question: What forms of discrimination are not valid? This was the core of my responding to @Ganymede a while ago. At what point do you tell people to ignore the other person? Which discriminations are not worth your time to combat?

Let me put out my personal list of things that people need to have full understanding of what they’re ICly discriminating against and need to make sure that others know that this isn’t your discrimination:

• Sexual orientation
• Race/skin color
• Economic class
• Physical defects
• Mental defects
• Religion

Once on Fate’s Harvest, a bunch of us atheists were banging on about the harm of organized religion, and someone piped up to say they were Christian and the conversation was making them uncomfortable. So we stopped.

As long as people are this way OOC, I think we could give them a lot more latitude ICly.

[surreality]

@thenomain There's also the authenticity argument. Bear with me a sec on this, because it's not the authenticity argument that's been used thus far in this thread, namely, 'the setting includes X so authenticity'.

It's the 'if you are playing something different from yourself, how much information should you need to have/understand to make that portrayal something other than a (potentially very offensive) stereotype' authenticity argument, which also has some validity to it worth considering, because it's another way inherent biases can surface in ways that make fellow players very uncomfortable or hurt.

[Thenomain]

@surreality

That is a world building question, not an ethics question. Though it’s still stereotype, ignorance is an excuse. Now what any of us do with education, that’s an ethics question.

For example, at one point I did not know that”oriental” was as offensive as “nigger” or “kike”, and the woman who told me I respected so much that I felt physically ill after she told me just how offensive, and why. (Her telling me was, “If you were anyone else I would have hit you unconscious.” That’s how I knew she was hurt.) Even if I didn’t, I would be an absolute asshole telling someone that they have no right to be offended.

But what about someone who is offended by, I don’t know, people who won’t use neutral pronouns for their gender fluid character? How far down the rabbit hole do we go? At what point is it okay for me to say, “Look, just no.”

[surreality]

@thenomain I think that's part of the question, really; all the systems on a game are interdependent. You can go further re: what's permissible in the world if you have policy that addresses how such content is to be handled, for example, and OOC community standards that foster a cooperative and communicative environment. These things go necessarily hand in hand.

Innocent ignorance is a thing. And it's a thing that should be generally accounted for under 'benefit of the doubt'. Someone with decent intentions is, by and large, going to react exactly as you have: apologize, feel bad for the offense, and revise behavior. In a way, it's really not hard to tell good actors from bad on this.

As for 'how far down', I think that's up to the individual game to define. Where I often get wordy is that I would rather spend the time (and words) to do that as clearly as possible than hope everyone is on the same page with a generality, because more often than not, we're really, really not.

The basic generality is good to put in place, because it's ultimately the 'spirit' of the rule. Linking to included examples and supplemental information provides players with expanded detail if they're curious about why, or are not sure how that generality comes up in the first place.

Ex:

Don't be an obnoxious asshat.

• Snarky metaposing is not OK. (Link to examples of this with an explanation of why this is obnoxious.)
• Slut/Prude-shaming is not OK. (Link to examples of this with an explanation of why this is obnoxious.)
  ...etc.

[Ganymede]

@thenomain said in How should IC discrimination be handled?:

But what about someone who is offended by, I don’t know, people who won’t use neutral pronouns for their gender fluid character? How far down the rabbit hole do we go? At what point is it okay for me to say, “Look, just no.”

I think that if you legitimately cannot RP around what the other player wants you to do, you are within your rights to request a retcon of the scene and move away. Presuming that the other player respects you, they should respect the choice of wanting to avoid an avenue of RP from the "aggressor's" end.

If we're respecting one another's boundaries, that includes respecting when other person cannot accommodate you and finding the middle ground where no one's being hurt or inconvenienced.

[surreality]

@ganymede I agree with this, though there are some instances in which there really is no middle ground to be had that doesn't involve 'just don't interact with that person'. That's a valid option, in my view, but there are folks who will simply not accept anything but their way all the way, and nothing in between, and will be very aggressive about it.

There are also folks who will take this very aggressive approach, and force the other party (who may have been happily willing to compromise as described in a middle ground) into the 'avoidance is the only means of peace' territory, then orchestrate things in such a way as to ensure that person is forced out of play in a much broader way.

And by 'folks', I suppose I mean 'Spider', but she's not the only one who has been known to pull this kind of crap.

[Arkandel]

@thenomain said in How should IC discrimination be handled?:

Which brings up the dangerous question: What forms of discrimination are not valid?

Although that's a good question, to me it's at least of equal if not great importance to be clear about its application in terms of its impact on the game's intended theme.

For example let's say you have a Far West game. The setting is supposed to showcase certain discriminating themes (racism, sexism, etc) but every player you run into plays a liberal character yet NPCs stay on the age-appropriate side of the political fence.

There comes a point where, unless staff takes exceptional efforts to inject theme with regular doses of the aforementioned -isms, the NPCs' views won't make an impact; PC-to-PC interactions vastly outnumber every other, and if most characters' superiors and employers are typically tolerant and progressive then the game can easily end up in this bipolar state where something is supposed to be happening, people IC refer to it happening but aside from the occasional PrP no one actually experiences it.

Yet stories are about telling, not showing.

[Ganymede]

@surreality said in How should IC discrimination be handled?:

I agree with this, though there are some instances in which there really is no middle ground to be had that doesn't involve 'just don't interact with that person'. That's a valid option, in my view, but there are folks who will simply not accept anything but their way all the way, and nothing in between, and will be very aggressive about it.

Those are people you complain about.

[peasoupling]

@arkandel said in How should IC discrimination be handled?:

For example let's say you have a Far West game. The setting is supposed to showcase certain discriminating themes (racism, sexism, etc) but every player you run into plays a liberal character yet NPCs stay on the age-appropriate side of the political fence.

There comes a point where, unless staff takes exceptional efforts to inject theme with regular doses of the aforementioned -isms, the NPCs' views won't make an impact; PC-to-PC interactions vastly outnumber every other, and if most characters' superiors and employers are typically tolerant and progressive then the game can easily end up in this bipolar state where something is supposed to be happening, people IC refer to it happening but aside from the occasional PrP no one actually experiences it.

Which can also be frustrating for someone who is playing a supposed target for the -ism.

See also: you chargen a poor struggling character who finds herself having to resort to shady work to make ends meet, and within five minutes of hitting the grid some slumming billionaire is throwing wads of cash at you and buying you a gold-plated scooter.

[Auspice]

@peasoupling said in How should IC discrimination be handled?:

See also: you chargen a poor struggling character who finds herself having to resort to shady work to make ends meet, and within five minutes of hitting the grid some slumming billionaire is throwing wads of cash at you and buying you a gold-plated scooter.

So every nWoD game ever? XD

[Arkandel]

@peasoupling said in How should IC discrimination be handled?:

See also: you chargen a poor struggling character who finds herself having to resort to shady work to make ends meet, and within five minutes of hitting the grid some slumming billionaire is throwing wads of cash at you and buying you a gold-plated scooter.

I think that's a separate issue; game-wide resource (mis)management.

Money is meaningless if there's an infinite amount of it because giving it away doesn't detract from your reserves, and because past very specific mostly cosmetic things they can't buy you anything useful (not even love).

[Lithium]

Re: When is to much to much...

There are always people who are going to try and break setting and theme to be the special snowflake. On some games it gets to the point that the special snowflakes outnumber the original setting and theme intent and it can take over a game.

I've seen this happen on a number of games, and the only real way to combat it is at chargen. It's why backgrounds are important or at least a series of questions about the characters motivations, personality, and activities.

Staff need to proactively run stuff that enforces and uses the theme and setting, not just monster of the week plots. This will hammer the setting home as well as make people have fun playing in that setting and theme rather than forced to use their own imagination.

Nearly every single game system is designed around /someone/ being the story teller, the game master, the dungeon master, there's always a head honcho running the show. There's only so much we can expect our players to do before the train comes off the rails. Once that happens, once all there is is bar RP and TS, theme and setting go out the window.

As for how to deal with something being uncomfortable to you, politely ask if the scene focus could shift as you're uncomfortable OOC, if they refuse, then log what you've got, move away from what is so badly interrupting your pretendy fun times to something more enjoyable. Alert staff if the interaction was a policy violation.

I personally dislike Retcons on general principle, but sometimes they are absolutely necessary to put out a dumpster fire.

[surreality]

@arkandel (The dreaded!) ...yes and no?

I do see how it's relevant in this context, since some people are describing how they are choosing <disadvantaged/discriminated-against group membership> wholly aware, because the story they want to tell involves overcoming that obstacle, and the struggle along the way.

Waving a magic wand to erase that struggle steals that story potential from them just like 'poverty doesn't exist in this world' or 'money isn't a thing' does, and how 'sexism has never been a thing' would for someone interested in playing through the struggle of overcoming a sexist environment.

I mean, sure, in that specific scenario, it's possible to find ways to roll with it -- but generally they don't work really well. 'No thanks' IC or OOC doesn't tend to go well, and a perfectly human-reasonable IC suspicion (even a mild one!) regarding the stranger that just handed you a billionaire lifestyle for no apparent reason really just doesn't go over well at all, in my experience.

[Arkandel]

@surreality I see it less of a risk when someone hands you a free car, and more... well, let's say you want to play a homeless person because it's an integral part of the character as he/she starts out, and in the first scene you have a random stranger goes "hey, you can come stay with me! I'm hardly home as it is, and the fridge is always full! No strings attached!"

If your PC has no reason to doubt the 'no strings attached' clause then there goes the concept, unless you specifically made them around the idea of not accepting freebies.

[Thenomain]

@arkandel

We see it so often because it's a hook to further RP. Not a good hook, but a hook.

[Ganymede]

@thenomain said in How should IC discrimination be handled?:

We see it so often because it's a hook to further RP. Not a good hook, but a hook.

It's not a bad hook. I mean, it's Lesson 2 in Vampire Feeding 101.

[Autumn]

My first thought in situations like this is: why is the character homeless in the first place? If the only thing she needs to get a desk job and a 401k and a Mercedes E-class in the driveway is a place to stay for a couple of nights and free meals, then yes, someone who offers you those things gratis is going to make for some adjustments in characterization.

If a character is based around being X, then the reasons for that character being X, and why she might continue to be X even in the face of determined attempts to make her otherwise, should probably be things the player gives some thought to before starting play.

It's not that I don't believe in characters changing radically in play -- a thrillseeking Acanthus who believes in never spending two consecutive nights in the same bed or passing out with an unspent dollar in her pocket could certainly evolve into someone who keeps a household and is a sort of passable foster mom. But the impact of that evolution is lost if the only reason she was a lazy trickster in the first place is "because her player thought it'd be a laugh."

[ThatGuyThere]

Kind of along the lines of what Autumn said for me it depends on the character.
I tend ot make a lot of low end money chars because in Cgen there really isn't enough points ot go around so unless the concept requires money I go poor to save the points. In some cases they end up improving their lot in some cases not.
I will admit though some of the most fun scenes I had on a college student char were him blowing though a wad of cash he was given. In that case since the character was 19 and was given free money I had him ICly spend it like an average 19 yo would given free money. With in a few weeks he was back to broke with nothing to show for it but a car and stories.