How should IC discrimination be handled?
-
@ganymede said in How should IC discrimination be handled?:
You're avoiding the very clear, basic question.
Then make it a bit more clear for me, please, because I don't see where I've avoided answering anything.
-
@collective said in How should IC discrimination be handled?:
@ganymede said in How should IC discrimination be handled?:
You're avoiding the very clear, basic question.
Then make it a bit more clear for me, please, because I don't see where I've avoided answering anything.
Go back to @faraday's post and replace BSG cultures with your RL equivalent race of choice.
Voila.
-
@ganymede said in How should IC discrimination be handled?:
I may be misreading things, but I think you've got the gist of the policy.
I can understand the policy as it applies to 'if someone asks you not to type a slur on screen, please respect that'. Where I'm hazy on is how you opt-out of the more subtle stuff, like the examples I described.
@collective said in How should IC discrimination be handled?:
@faraday Show me a real life BSG minority and I'll worry about the question.
Look I was trying to use a fictional example to avoid offending anyone but I really do think you're smart enough to insert (oppressive RL group A) for Caprican and (oppressed RL group B) for Tauron and realize that the question goes beyond pretendy made up minorities.
-
@kitteh said in How should IC discrimination be handled?:
@deadculture I don't remember the details of the character trying it. Some noble. But it was right in the main, public area of the Temple. She was sitting in the pews praying, he sat next to her, and a pose or two later had a hand under her dress trying to... well, I'll leave it there, before I went scrambling.
sigh
I'm pretty sure the noble privilege shit started during the Taleo era. Of course, trust Gold Dragon nobles to take it to fucking eleven.
-
@faraday said in How should IC discrimination be handled?:
@ganymede said in How should IC discrimination be handled?:
I may be misreading things, but I think you've got the gist of the policy.
I can understand the policy as it applies to 'if someone asks you not to type a slur on screen, please respect that'. Where I'm hazy on is how you opt-out of the more subtle stuff, like the examples I described.
@collective said in How should IC discrimination be handled?:
@faraday Show me a real life BSG minority and I'll worry about the question.
Look I was trying to use a hypothetical example to avoid offending anyone but I really do think you're smart enough to insert (oppressive RL group A) for Caprican and (oppressed RL group B) for Tauron and realize that the question goes beyond pretendy made up minorities.
No offense, but if I rose to that bait, there would be fifty people screaming that I want to destroy their elf hate-boners. Which is stupid. I am not commenting on imaginary races and peoples.
Now, as for real people, it's pretty simple. I laid it out above.
Player One decides to unload with his character's hate fest, ICly.
Player Two asks that they not cover that RP ground. Like fading to black for a sex scene, not RPing torture, etc. A practice already widely accepted in MUs.
Player One politely accepts that or they don't have a scene.
No fuss, no muss, nobody gets hurt. The only change is that nobody is expected to participate in RP that they find hurtful and stressful in RL.
And yes, before you bring the point up, somebody at some point will say, 'But my character losing is harmful to me in RL'. That's where a simple, common sense rule of thumb applies. A staff decision, like a million others a day.
Not having to sit through bigotry is not the same thing as avoiding consequence or conflict. It's just saying that particular conflict is not something you wish to pursue. Like people who don't do combat scenes, sex scenes or scenes with imaginary kids.
-
I think @faraday's 'Taurons and Capricans' hits exactly why fantisizing it isn't actually that much of a cure all.
Especially there, the RL links are all too easy to draw, between the rich, high-class, sophisticated elite group and the rough poor agrarian / oh yeah they're criminals too group.
Heck, it allows it to push RL buttons even more widely because it's not specific to an earth race and yet hits a lot of markers of common rhetoric toward a variety of RL races. Bonus points!
-
@bored Yeah it's potentially arguably "less outright offensive" but that still doesn't make it "good". Which is why I don't think this idea is limited just to modern settings / RL discrimination at all.
-
I honestly don't care about imaginary minorities.
Nobody is going to come home after work, desperate to relax and have a little fun and have to deal with RP that hits a little too close to home, because like their character, they too are a Tauron, a werewolf or an elf.
On the other hand, I don't think it's unreasonable to hit the 'nope' button when a person who is black, gay or trans sits down and sees slurs that affect them and their real, lived experience scrolling across the screen.
Am I saying all RP with those elements is bad? Nope. Am I saying nobody should be allowed to pursue those story lines and attitudes? Nope.
All I am saying is that this one of those cases where RPing that stuff out should be consensual and not assumed.
That's literally it. All umpteen billion posts I've made in this thread saying exactly and only that.
And I still haven't seen anybody answer why the 'right' to pursue that RP unfettered is more important that somebody else's fun.
-
@collective said in How should IC discrimination be handled?:
And I still haven't seen anybody answer why the 'right' to pursue that RP unfettered is more important that somebody else's fun.
Probably because nobody has said it is?
People have expressed their personal distaste for games set in historical time periods that remove negative social attitudes to cater to modern sensibilities. That's...it.
I'm a Jewish woman. I wound not approve of a game set in 1930s Germany that removed the abhorrent antisemitism present in German society at the time, even if the focus was on playing time-traveling super hero vampires. I think it's far too important to the setting.
That's my opinion. You don't have to agree with me. You're allowed to have your own. It can be different from mine.
-
@collective said in How should IC discrimination be handled?:
That's literally it. All umpteen billion posts I've made in this thread saying exactly and only that.
And I still haven't seen anybody answer why the 'right' to pursue that RP unfettered is more important that somebody else's fun.OK I seriously don't know what I did to piss you off, but if you could tone it down for two seconds you might realize that I am on your philosophical side here. I am not attacking you. I am not saying you're wrong for wanting an environment where you don't have to face the same crap you do in RL. I am asking genuine questions about potentially sticky implementations of a policy you suggested, and you're alternately jumping down my throat or being extremely dismissive. Geez.
What you described sounds an awful lot like the FTB policy - written or unwritten -
that's been present on every game I've played in the last ten years. I seriously have never seen a situation - any situation - where somebody was forced to endure RP they found unpleasant. Endure the consequences? Sure. But not the scene itself. If all you're asking for is the ability to FTB out of abuse, then I don't see the controversy, at all. But it has not been clear to me that that's what you were asking for.I see 'opt-out' and my mind goes to consent-based games where you could nope out of being robbed, or beaten up, or killed, or having your house burned down, or any other consequence you didn't like. That is very different from FTB, and I and others have provided various examples of where that could be problematic to implement.
I can opt out of an assault just by saying "I got away somehow." I can opt out of dying by saying "The bullet hit a book in my pocket" or whatever. Yeah, it might stop you from "winning" but it doesn't force you to act in ways contrary to your character's belief system. Opting out of discrimination in its entirety might lead to things like "your bigot must hire my (group he hates) character" or "your sexist must treat my female character as an equal".
As for the fictional minorities? Nobody is trying to drag you onto the "Freedom for Taurons" bandwagon here. That's absurd. But it is equally absurd to dismiss the potentially-hurtful implications of the "Space British" heaping crap onto the "Space Irish" under a paper-thin veil of changing the names (to "Hibernians", because that makes it so much better). Is it as bad as seeing racial slurs hurled at fictional people like yourself? No. But that doesn't make it fun for everyone either.
-
As for opting out being a get out of jail free card, that would be on staff to stop. The difference between a reasonable use of a red card and an unreasonable one is usually pretty clear cut in my experience. Also, a person who abuses a system like that will soon find themselves lacking in RP partners.
I feel like a lot of this thread has been an exercise in trying to overly formalize what should be an organic and simple guideline. That isn't an attack, it's just an observation. Gamers like one size fits all rules because those are easy to grasp and easy to game. Rather than get mired in a thousand hypothetical situations I'm talking about a general ethos that can be applied.
Yes, it requires a little maturity and good will on the part of everybody involved, but I don't think the MU bar is so low that's impossible yet.
-
@faraday said in How should IC discrimination be handled?l
As for the fictional minorities? Nobody is trying to drag you onto the "Freedom for Taurons" bandwagon here. That's absurd. But it is equally absurd to dismiss the potentially-hurtful implications of the "Space British" heaping crap onto the "Space Irish" under a paper-thin veil of changing the names (to "Hibernians", because that makes it so much better). Is it as bad as seeing racial slurs hurled at fictional people like yourself? No. But that doesn't make it fun for everyone either.
Again, this is not an attack but a genuine question: Why do RP that isn't fun? If a situation makes me OOCLY miserable, I don't pursue that IC situation. Conversely, there have been plenty of times where my character is miserable but I'm having fun.
I'm not sure why somebody would want to make themselves unhappy in real life for the sake of RP verisimilitude. I'm not sure why they'd expect others to do that, either. RP with consequences, absolutely. RP where your character suffers or dies, yeah. That's the story sometimes. But RP where you get depressed over the abuse a character is taking? Why deal with that? There is enough pain and misery in the world without assuming fictional burdens.
-
@faraday said in How should IC discrimination be handled?:
What you described sounds an awful lot like the FTB policy - written or unwritten -
that's been present on every game I've played in the last ten years. I seriously have never seen a situation - any situation - where somebody was forced to endure RP they found unpleasant. Endure the consequences? Sure. But not the scene itself. If all you're asking for is the ability to FTB out of abuse, then I don't see the controversy, at all. But it has not been clear to me that that's what you were asking for.I see 'opt-out' and my mind goes to consent-based games where you could nope out of being robbed, or beaten up, or killed, or having your house burned down, or any other consequence you didn't like. That is very different from FTB, and I and others have provided various examples of where that could be problematic to implement.
I can opt out of an assault just by saying "I got away somehow." I can opt out of dying by saying "The bullet hit a book in my pocket" or whatever. Yeah, it might stop you from "winning" but it doesn't force you to act in ways contrary to your character's belief system. Opting out of discrimination in its entirety might lead to things like "your bigot must hire my (group he hates) character" or "your sexist must treat my female character as an equal".
FWIW, I described a consent-based approach to these subjects earlier, though it was on the basis of opt-in, not opt-out, so that confusion might be my fault.
So less 'I feel like noping out of the RP but am OK with the consequences' (that would be covered by FtB quite well in most cases) and more 'before you bring up a super controversial thread of RP, get (informed) consent from your scene partners'. There's a short list of controversial or sensitive subjects I'd (personally) require this about, but 'abuse on the basis of -isms' is definitely going on it.
This may require a mutual 'tone it the fuck down' from both parties and reasonableness while in groups, which is realistic enough if people have to work together for some reason.
For instance, going to the character who is an avowed sexist and demanding a job? Yeah, you should likely ask about that first OOC, too, to not attempt to or accidentally corner that player in the position of having to agree to something they wouldn't.
The respect thing goes both ways, or, well, like I mentioned before, it doesn't get very far.
-
That people are having a fevered argument over whether playing a character in the proper mindset or theme of a particular game is something that translates to OOC racism is idiotic.
There are adults who play these games who are not hypersensitive Cult of The Victim worshippers. Somebody losing their cool because they got called a fag IC while playing a homosexual character, it's perhaps the most pathetic thing ever.
It's players who are so insecure that they try and police things that are not against game policy or themes, that end up murdering all enthusiasm from those present (who tend to be more interested in immersion).
I don't think I've ever met a really competent or decent role player who got worked up over IC actions like this. It's not like unconsentual TS. MOST creative sorts would relish the opportunity to play that ASPECT OF THEIR CHARACTER.
Not write a 10 page MSB thread about it.
Theme is sacred and must be upheld. Look at the mess that is Marvel1963 for an example of immersion breaking destroying a decent concept.
Edit: I don't believe I've ever played up the bigot angle on a PC, but others doing so when it fits theme should be no problem. If you need a safe space from realistic RP, pick a place filled with SJWs. There's a ton of those, but fewer immersive MUing experiences every day. Stuff like this is why.
-
@the_generic_one said in How should IC discrimination be handled?:
That people are having a fevered argument over whether playing a character in the proper mindset or theme of a particular game is something that translates to OOC racism is idiotic.
...then don't participate in it?
There are adults who play these games who are not hypersensitive Cult of The Victim worshippers.
There sure are! And the people who don't want to deal with this in their pretendy fun times are almost universally amongst them -- 'them' being 'NOT hypersensitive Cult of the Victim' worshippers'.
Somebody losing their cool because they got called a fag IC while playing a homosexual character, it's perhaps the most pathetic thing ever.
And yet...
It's not like unconsentual TS.
Actually, it's exactly like that.
Some people actually don't care about non-consensual TS, though many obviously do.
This is for the same 'it's just a character, why should I get worked up about it?' reasons you're describing above in the case of those who don't care about issues of discrimination or -ism-based abuse.
Some people care about not getting shit they put up with all day shoved down their throat when they're trying to engage in some enjoyable escapism, and some don't.
-
@faraday said in How should IC discrimination be handled?:
But it is equally absurd to dismiss the potentially-hurtful implications of the "Space British" heaping crap onto the "Space Irish" under a paper-thin veil of changing the names (to "Hibernians", because that makes it so much better). Is it as bad as seeing racial slurs hurled at fictional people like yourself? No. But that doesn't make it fun for everyone either.
Just an FYI Hibernians isn't even changing the name it is simple using an older and less well known to US peoples name, after all the name Hibernian for Celtic/Irish things is still in fairly common use for things like fraternal organizations, Rugby clubs and soccer clubs. Such as this one located in Edinburgh https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hibernian_F.C.
-
@collective said in How should IC discrimination be handled?:
I'm not sure why somebody would want to make themselves unhappy in real life for the sake of RP verisimilitude.
I don't know why either, but I'm pretty sure this happens very rarely. I'd like to think gamers are smarter than this.
I'm not sure why they'd expect others to do that, either.
I think this is what most of us are dancing around.
@the_generic_one said in How should IC discrimination be handled?:
Somebody losing their cool because they got called a fag IC while playing a homosexual character, it's perhaps the most pathetic thing ever.
And this is why we're still discussing things.
My brother and I were going to write a science-fiction book where white American nationalists were rounded up and dropped into Syria to serve their hate crime sentences. We stopped because we weren't sure if it would be understood that it was satire and not a true modest proposal.
“It is better to live doing the things that you like. It is foolish to live within this dream of a world seeing unpleasantness and doing only things that you do not like.” -- Yamamoto Tsunetomo.
-
@ganymede said in How should IC discrimination be handled?:
@collective said in How should IC discrimination be handled?:
I'm not sure why somebody would want to make themselves unhappy in real life for the sake of RP verisimilitude.
I don't know why either, but I'm pretty sure this happens very rarely. I'd like to think gamers are smarter than this.
I'm not sure why they'd expect others to do that, either.
I think this is what most of us are dancing around.
Really? I would say people do that all the time. True consent games are a rarity these days, so virtually every game requires you to suspend consent to some degree or another and RP things that might make their players unhappy. I think that’s the fundamental point of contention here.
And just to reiterate - I have no issue with people FTB-ing anything that makes them uncomfortable. I have no issue with games removing -isms across the board for everyone. I’m less comfortable with the idea of allowing folks to opt out of consequences entirely, because it doesn’t quite seem fair to let some people have Plot Armor against certain aspects of the theme but not others just because of their players’ respective comfort levels.
-
@deadculture said in How should IC discrimination be handled?:
@kitteh said in How should IC discrimination be handled?:
@deadculture I don't remember the details of the character trying it. Some noble. But it was right in the main, public area of the Temple. She was sitting in the pews praying, he sat next to her, and a pose or two later had a hand under her dress trying to... well, I'll leave it there, before I went scrambling.
sigh
I'm pretty sure the noble privilege shit started during the Taleo era. Of course, trust Gold Dragon nobles to take it to fucking eleven.
As a person who PLAYED a gold dragon noble, I don't like being painted with broad strokes of a brush like that. Not every Gold Dragon noble was a skeezy fucker. In fact, it was kind of weird when I took the character how fast people /wanted/ me to take noble privilege with them and I was like... no. Am kinda glad my character ended up dying in war, never went back.
Heck it was Firan, maybe my denying people their rape RP was what got me killed.
Hello! Long time listener, first time caller...
-
@lithium Do you like feeling perpetually offended when someone makes a general, but truthful, statement? Congratulations on being an exception, and fighting off the advances. I mean, it wasn't exclusive to GD - Griffons had lots of that going on, too, for all that it was the 'egalitarian and polytheistic' rival clan to the Dragons.
