Sexual themes in roleplay
-
Logically, reasonably no I don't, this is true. However, I've found myself in this position before. I've directly and politely objected to being sucked into a omg! I were raped! plot and things chilled significantly. In retrospect, I think it was a reaction to being called on the fact that you can't steamroll over people IC and OOC. The player in question at the time had that MO. It was exhausting and unfun and I thinky take away is my pretendyfun is worth something but the price tag isn't being slagged with a lot of OOC abuse and head trips.
The more important question is why staff permit this to happen. If TR ever did anything right it was the policy that was put into place by @EmmahSue about this. The staff I'm currently dealing with just kinda shrugs and ambivalently mealy mouthes their way through spluttering excuses as to why this isn't worth their time to deal with, so they're making players deal with instead.
That's I guess a whole other element to this situation: apologist or evasive staff.
-
@7Wonders said:
The more important question is why staff permit this to happen. If TR ever did anything right it was the policy that was put into place by @EmmahSue about this.
Which policy are you referring to? Could you quote it please?
- He who takes offense when not intended is a fool. He who takes offense when intended is a greater fool.
-
Someone still playing on TR will have to pull up the exact language. Basically, however, in a nutshell:
This is exhausting for staff to deal with. It makes everyone unhappy and sad and it's a mass waste of everyone's time. But if you must, you have to give everyone the ability the right to refuse IC and OOC to even pretend this is happening and don't be a dick and punish them for it.
-
If only 'don't be a dick' was enough. Hell, these forums would barely have a reason to exist any more.
-
I will admit, dealing with the OOC aftermath of this sort of thing fills up my deep and abiding reservoir of UGH ennui. If you want to play rape-plot, do your thing. But if someone doesn't want to be involved, back the hell up. Help them find a way to not be involved. You are not your character. You are a ST who happens to have some skin in the game.
ES
-
@EmmahSue said:
If you want to play rape-plot, do your thing.
The only way I would ever allow a rape-plot or rape RP is if the player who allegedly committed the rape did so with an NPC victim off-screen. If you want to play a villain, that's fine. Be prepared for strong, harsh reactions.
Otherwise, upon receiving notice, I would investigate the truth of the allegations, and, if verified, I would probably boot the offender and and all of his/her PCs off the game. If the offender and the victim consented to the RP, I would probably warn them, retcon the entire situation, and warn them very sternly not to do that shit ever again.
While one can make a philosophical or sociological statement regarding the harshness of the penalty, and I don't mind discussing that, that does not mean I, as staff, do not have the authority and discretion to deal with what I believe to be inappropriate behavior harshly and with prejudice. I am old and mature enough to deal with the consequences.
-
While one can make a philosophical or sociological statement regarding the harshness of the penalty, and I don't mind discussing that, that does not mean I, as staff, do not have the authority and discretion to deal with what I believe to be inappropriate behavior harshly and with prejudice. I am old and mature enough to deal with the consequences.
The harshness of the penalty isn't at issue, the hypocrisy of singling it out as if it's special is, along with the absurdity of the alternative which is spreading the umbrella to cover 'You may not RP anything which will cause other players on the game OOC distress or force staff to deal with uncomfortable OOC drama because of that distress.'
-
I agree it's fair to say that singling it out over other traumas is irrational and makes no defensible sense.
I'm also basically OK with a staffer nixing it if they decide it's too much drama. I don't need every game fiat to make empirical sense if the person putting it forward truly feels it creates a better play environment. We might disagree on what that "better environment" is, but as long as they're clear and direct about what goes and what doesn't, that's fine, and I can make my own decisions about whether or not to play there. I would probably consider a 'We don't have rape plots just 'cause we don't' rule a good sign for my own personal enjoyment of a thing, for what it's worth.
-
@HelloRaptor The thing is, I've objected to rape RP on non-sex games and been called a prude and/or intolerant of TS and sex before. I don't personally conflate the two, but. I figured I'd head it off at the pass this time.
-
The first mush I ever played on: LAmush had a "no rape" policy. And I don't think it ever caused anyone extreme agitation. I'm not entirely sure why it becomes "ZOMG HYPOCRITES! FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION!" when someone says "please don't RP rape". Why? Because most places don't say "please don't RP murder"? The truth is most places do ask that. They ask that by not allowing antagonist spheres. They ask that by typically not approving PCs who only goal is to go after other PCs and force them to play being killed by another PC.
-
@Cobaltasaurus True, but most games don't also have people calling for murder to be a bannable offense or the RP nulled if murder takes place. The scale of response is just different.
@silentsophia said:
The thing is, I've objected to rape RP on non-sex games and been called a prude and/or intolerant of TS and sex before.
It's not justified to call anyone anything based on their personal response to a certain form of RP. We all have buttons and something will invariably push them in an adult game.
I think what's important here is just what 'objected' means in this case.
- He who takes offense when not intended is a fool. He who takes offense when intended is a greater fool.
-
@HelloRaptor said:
While one can make a philosophical or sociological statement regarding the harshness of the penalty, and I don't mind discussing that, that does not mean I, as staff, do not have the authority and discretion to deal with what I believe to be inappropriate behavior harshly and with prejudice. I am old and mature enough to deal with the consequences.
The harshness of the penalty isn't at issue, the hypocrisy of singling it out as if it's special is, along with the absurdity of the alternative which is spreading the umbrella to cover 'You may not RP anything which will cause other players on the game OOC distress or force staff to deal with uncomfortable OOC drama because of that distress.'
I don't see how any of those things follow. A game-runner is allowed to say, "This is what this game is about. This is what this game isn't about, and this is what we absolutely don't want here. If you absolutely want what we don't, find another game." We don't make people empirically justify why they're running a Vampire game and not, say, a Werewolf game. And if someone came onto a Vampire game, and insisted on playing a Werewolf, even if they were a GREAT Werewolf, showing them the door wouldn't generally be considered inappropriate. Every game is not required to fit the needs or wants of every gamer, and there are enough games that if someone absolutely cannot live without on-screen PC on PC rape, then they can find a game for them. Shang, if nowhere else. If there is, for some reason, a critical mass of players who find the lack of rapey funtimes a turnoff, then the game will fail. No harm done.
-
@HelloRaptor said:
... the hypocrisy of singling it out as if it's special is, along with the absurdity of the alternative which is spreading the umbrella to cover 'You may not RP anything which will cause other players on the game OOC distress or force staff to deal with uncomfortable OOC drama because of that distress.'
There's nothing hypocritical about finding one form of RP more disgusting, disturbing, and unacceptable than another, and therefore prohibiting it. It may be unreasonable in your opinion, but it's not hypocritical.
The line between rape RP and other sexual RP is not fine. I'm pretty sure you can figure out the difference. To make it clearer, lump in child-sex RP with rape RP, since they are practically and legally similar.
-
Singling out rape RP as if it's special makes sense if it is special, which it is.
I am sympathetic to the idea that theoretically storylines involving rape could be interesting and worth exploring.
The actual practice I've seen and apparently most other people have seen is an endless succession of clusterfucks and drama bombs that make prohibiting all rape storylines out of hand the eminently sensible decision.
One can speculate why it's so constantly a source of friction that actively harms games while contributing nothing of value, while other storylines with equally horrific and horrible things happening to PCs and NPCs aren't, but it's just pretty much an empirical observation. Rape storylines are awful and harm games.
It's basically the same reason most games don't allow underage PCs, right? In theory those can be played well. But this is mostly not what happens.
-
@Three-Eyed Crow
I would probably consider a 'We don't have rape plots just 'cause we don't' rule a good sign for my own personal enjoyment of a thing, for what it's worth.
An absence of rape related plots or roleplay would do the same for me, but as a rule I try not to consider very personal tastes and preferences (even my own) a basis for game policy about what other people can do in terms of roleplay.
@Cobaltasaurus
Because most places don't say "please don't RP murder"? The truth is most places do ask that. They ask that by not allowing antagonist spheres. They ask that by typically not approving PCs who only goal is to go after other PCs and force them to play being killed by another PC.
That's kind of a false equivalency. I don't think anybody (certainly not me) would object to staff putting a foot on the neck of someone who app'd a character as a self-described serial rapist and saying no.
It's especially false as a statement if you consider how often people on games, and on forums discussing those games, go out of their way to champion the idea that if you're going to PK someone you should roleplay through it. Games even sometimes give bennies if you murder them through a scene instead of telenuking.
None of which has any real bearing on roleplaying rape, but the quoted statement does not support its premise.
@Cobaltasaurus
I'm not entirely sure why it becomes "ZOMG HYPOCRITES! FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION!" when someone says "please don't RP rape".
It's never been anything about freedom of expression, but given that I've more than a few times seen people who decry rape RP, in particular people responsible for game policies about it, either engaging in pretty fucked up (but not rape so it's okay) RP or responding to complaints by people exposed to such RP by reading them the 'This is a WoD game that deals with adult themes, you're free to log off or excuse yourself or fade to black but these sort of things happen in the game you're playing.' line? Yeah, hypocrisy is a reasonable description.
Rape is not the only fucked up, traumatic thing that happens to people. It's not even the only fucked up, traumatic thing that happens to a significant number of people. It is, however, pretty much the only thing people seem generally comfortable banning from games as if they're doing a public service. That they do so without banning other fucked up, traumatic things that people take issue with, is usually hypocrisy.
There's nothing hypocritical about finding one form of RP more disgusting, disturbing, and unacceptable than another, and therefore prohibiting it. It may be unreasonable in your opinion, but it's not hypocritical.
Most games are ultimately in the hands of one or two people, who are ultimately responsible for game policy. If said person(s) wanted to ban a particular line of roleplay because they personally had issues with it and didn't want to deal with it there's not much I could say. But to pretend that's not what it is, and act as if that very specific sort of subject matter deserves to be stepped on because it makes some nebulous percentage of the population too uncomfortable to allow while virtually every other subject matter that makes some nebulous percentage of the population uncomfortable is A_OK? Meh. You can say unreasonable, but I'm fine with calling it hypocrisy.
The truth is that if you started banning roleplay that even a significant portion of the game population found objectionable, distressing, or uncomfortable to deal with/be exposed to, the list would be entirely too long. The World of Darkness has included examples of violence and molestation against children, cannibalism, truly gruesome and inhuman torture, physical and emotional abuse of family and friends, bestiality, and worse.
Shit, there are people who won't play, or play with Vampires, because the descriptions of the central element of their survival have often been far too close to rape. Whether or not others feel that's the case, there are those who do and that discomfort keeps them away from an entire sphere. If a show of hands were to indicate that the number of people who felt that way was significant, would anyone who didn't feel that way think it reasonable to excise the vampire sphere from a game? Probably not. I mean, except me, because I'm always down with banning Vampire. It is such a shitty game.
-
@Arkandel I said that I am uncomfortable with rape RP on games because it's such a sensitive subject matter and a lot of players handle it poorly OOCly. It's just too much drama for me. I don't care if it's someone's fetish, but all too often it ends up being a claymore field of unhappiness and arghlebarghle.
But I also dislike LOLRAPE jokes and people saying someone got raped when they get stomped on in games. So maybe I am intolerant and/or part of a giant feminist pussy cartel or something.
-
@HelloRaptor said:
Most games are ultimately in the hands of one or two people, who are ultimately responsible for game policy. If said person(s) wanted to ban a particular line of roleplay because they personally had issues with it and didn't want to deal with it there's not much I could say. But to pretend that's not what it is, and act as if that very specific sort of subject matter deserves to be stepped on because it makes some nebulous percentage of the population too uncomfortable to allow while virtually every other subject matter that makes some nebulous percentage of the population uncomfortable is A_OK? Meh. You can say unreasonable, but I'm fine with calling it hypocrisy.
Sure, you can call it that, but that's not what the word means.
As I said, I'm old and mature enough to deal with the consequences of banning a particular form of RP. I've stated the reasons for banning rape RP, and set the boundaries for it. In this case, I think it is easier to justify the ban on rape RP than to justify permitting it for the sake of moral absolutism.
-
Sure, you can call it that, but that's not what the word means.
Banning a subject of roleplay for the stated reason that it causes people OOC distress and drama, while engaging in roleplay that causes people OOC distress and drama, seems pretty spot on.
Saying that people shouldn't drive cars because they're bad for the environment, while driving a truck, is still hypocrisy regardless of the fact that you're not actually driving a car.
-
Only if we're ignoring issues of scale and other variables. Maybe the other roleplay doesn't cause as much distress and drama and/or has other features that justify allowing it.
Like, maybe IC politics cause more ooc distress and drama but they're also often embedded in theme and also creates lots of opportunities for fun.
Experiences may vary but I have absolutely never heard of a rape storyline creating fun and interesting RP for anyone.
-
Experiences may vary but I have absolutely never heard of a rape storyline creating fun and interesting RP for anyone.
I have. See above re: anecdotal evidence being the best kind etc.
Only if we're ignoring issues of scale and other variables. Maybe the other roleplay doesn't cause as much distress and drama and/or has other features that justify allowing it.
Like, maybe IC politics cause more ooc distress and drama but they're also often embedded in theme and also creates lots of opportunities for fun.
Yes, IC politics was totally the parallel drawn. Not other stuff people routinely find squicky, like child abuse, torture, PTSD, physical and emotional abuse and torment, etc. Just IC politics. You totally nailed it on the head.
