Yeah, if it exists and people aren't using it, then further guidance on how a game expects people to use it is needed (examples, provide language to use, restrict people to picking off a list and if they need something not there they have to ask for it). Gotta model the behavior before people will adopt it.
eta: like...'so you want to run a plot on this game, signup for a 15 minute training session to discuss how we expect these tools to be used'. I do NOT understand why more games don't do training sessions, it was always HUGELY helpful for keeping things running IME. I trained every one of my staffers; we had discussions about my expectations and how I wanted them to do things. I missed some terrible, glaring issues of course -- but taking 20 minutes to preload someone with what I needed them to be doing...was a lot easier than cleaning up the messes, let me tell you.
eta2: take this with a grain of salt. I also did essay tests for elder vampire applications to test their understanding of the material before I gave them a feature. this was bad. this was so bad. I had different tests for different power levels.
@saosmash said in Sensitivity in gaming:
Mostly in my experience this just means we have to tell people not to use warnings for stupid jokes.
It's not exactly easy to know the difference sometimes.
Is Content Warning: Underwater Horrors just a throwaway cheesy way to comment on scene content or an actual warning? What warnings should be included?
I disagree with @Tinuviel. If something is a strong trigger for you it absolutely is your job to let people know that, not the GM's job to read your mind.
Content Warning: Penguins might be great for that guy with that traumatic zoo experience, but to everyone else it just sounds stupid.
@derp said in Sensitivity in gaming:
This thread comes from a place of like -- gushing empathy, but there is an entire other side of the population that learn to professionally disconnect from emotional reactions and making decisions based on how people feel.
Right, but here's the thing--if you come home from the courthouse or the hospital or whereever and you can't reconnect? You're in serious shit, mental health wise. Yes, I've looked at autopsies and talked about dead people and examined detailed reports of sexual abuse of toddlers, and yes, I was able to leave that at the office and come home and sleep at night just fine.
But holy shit I did not adopt that as my primary way of living! You can't look at life like a courtroom or an operating theater. You just can't. It will wither your soul.
I know I'm going to regret asking, but:
@derp said in Sensitivity in gaming:
Content Warning: Penguins might be great for that guy with that traumatic zoo experience, but to everyone else it just sounds stupid.
Do you actually know/know of a single person who has ever asked for this trigger warning or been angry that this trigger warning wasn't included; or are you just crafting ridiculous examples for the sake of being dismissive?
eta: 2 minutes of research. Less than two minutes of research. This is simple, easily laid out, and explains the topic from top to bottom. If you're confused and think genuinely that this has anything to do with content warning: penguins, this should hopefully assist in at least understanding what people are asking for.
eta2: A quote:
While there has been much debate over the implementation of content warnings in the classroom, the debate stems primarily from a misunderstanding regarding what content warnings are, how their use can make a classroom more inclusive for students with mental health disabilities, and how they do or don’t impact instructor liability.
eta3: Another quote:
Many feel defensive and resistant to the inclusion of content warnings, feeling as though it puts restrictions on the instructor and coddles the students. The inclusion of content warnings is neither restrictive (it does not label anything as off limits to teach) nor coddling (it does not assume that students can’t handle the material, on the contrary, it treats them as adults who can and should attend to their own wellbeing with all available information).
It's not hard to tell at all. Content warning: snuggles is obviously a joke. I've seen people warn for content for profanity for a single swear word, which is the closest thing to an actually borderline case I've seen that I can recall.
Engaging with your hypothetical, I'll warn for penguins if I have knowledge that someone has been traumatized by penguins. It is no skin off my ass to do so, and if someone has undertaken the monumental act of emotional bravery to inform others they need a content warning for penguins, they deserve that 2 seconds of effort from me to give them the warning they've asked for even if others would think it looks dumb.
@greenflashlight said in Sensitivity in gaming:
or are you just crafting ridiculous examples for the sake of being dismissive?
I ain't saying is hyperbole, but if I have to explain it ...
No, it sounds like hyperbole or being dismissive.
A better example is, breath as a trigger/squick. If I have part of the scene involving trying to hold breath while swimming, I haven't considered all angles. I don't know if someone nearly drowned or lost a family member to drowning recently. Its not a major part of the scene, but maybe I get into describing how long one has to hold breath and the dangers involved and without knowing, I hit someone's trigger without warning.
Does breath holding need to be added somewhere or where does responsibility lie for acknowledging its a trigger? Up front, so a player can leave, in the middle? Does the player leave or the GM alter after like 2 players have made their roles and entered the secret cave?
I'm just a surge protector doing my job, sir.
@rinel said in Sensitivity in gaming:
You can't look at life like a courtroom or an operating theater. You just can't. It will wither your soul.
Agreed. But I don't look at MU like home. It's only barely life. It's a pastime that I share with strangers, only a handful of whom are actually in what I would consider a friend circle, and therefore they get the same distance as every other stranger.
@greenflashlight said in Sensitivity in gaming:
Do you actually know/know of a single person who has ever asked for this trigger warning or been angry that this trigger warning wasn't included; or are you just crafting ridiculous examples for the sake of being dismissive?
Fine. Substitute Canadian Geese, then. Or Spiders. Or the one I started with, the actual example given earlier, Underwater Horrors. I didn't make that shit up.
It doesn't matter what you put in here, people are going to take some things more seriously than others. You've already decided it's dismissive and ridiculous. I think that the expectation that people do this in the first place is kind of ridiculous, especially in the context where people were saying 'it is not my responsibility to let you know what my triggers are, it is your job to just deal with them'.
Racism isn't Tinkerbell. It doesn't need you to believe in it for it to exist.
@derp said in Sensitivity in gaming:
But I don't look at MU like home. It's only barely life. It's a pastime that I share with strangers, only a handful of whom are actually in what I would consider a friend circle, and therefore they get the same distance as every other stranger.
I see your point on this, I suppose, which is succinctly:
"MUSHing is a hobby in which I keep people at arms' length so I don't see any reason to give them any more consideration than I would a stranger I meet in court."
For me, though, it is because I don't know them that I feel compelled to be a little more cautious in my deportment. That is, I am more apt to watch what I say I do so as to not give unnecessary offense.
@derp said in Sensitivity in gaming:
Fine. Substitute Canadian Geese, then. Or Spiders. Or the one I started with, the actual example given earlier, Underwater Horrors. I didn't make that shit up.
Just to be clear though, the underwater horrors was NOT given as an example of a content warning that anyone was seriously asking for. It was a humorous anecdote about how you never know what someone's hangups could be... but if you do know about them, why cause unnecessary drama?
Literally nobody is seriously suggesting that you should put things like "spiders" or "canadian geese" or whatever into a content warning field.
The site/list that @Sunny cited is a good serious accounting of potential triggers, but again highlights some of the complexities involved.
It would be ludicrous to include tags for "death", "blood", or "violence" in a Battlestar Galactica plot. That's just a base part of the theme, and it should be made clear to expect that sort of thing when you walk through the door of the game.
But just because it doesn't fit every situation doesn't mean it has no value. It's a good starting point for consideration.
@faraday said in Sensitivity in gaming:
Literally nobody is seriously suggesting that you should put things like "spiders" or "canadian geese" or whatever into a content warning field.
Sounds like someone who hasn't been attacked by a Canada Goose.
(It's Canada Goose, by the way, yanks.)
@lotherio said in Sensitivity in gaming:
@greenflashlight said in Sensitivity in gaming:
or are you just crafting ridiculous examples for the sake of being dismissive?
I ain't saying is hyperbole, but if I have to explain it ...
No, it sounds like hyperbole or being dismissive.
A better example is, breath as a trigger/squick. If I have part of the scene involving trying to hold breath while swimming, I haven't considered all angles. I don't know if someone nearly drowned or lost a family member to drowning recently. Its not a major part of the scene, but maybe I get into describing how long one has to hold breath and the dangers involved and without knowing, I hit someone's trigger without warning.
Does breath holding need to be added somewhere or where does responsibility lie for acknowledging its a trigger? Up front, so a player can leave, in the middle? Does the player leave or the GM alter after like 2 players have made their roles and entered the secret cave?
In my experience, something like more often goes:
GM: talks about the held breath burning in your lungs, the distance to safety, the pressure of trying to hang on for just one more moment as the gas is pressing in
Player: Oh wow, I'm having a reaction to this; drowning is kinda phobic for me, and this is hitting that drowning thing even though it's not water. Can we maybe gloss?
GM: Oh, sorry, man, sure! Take a stamina roll - succeed and you get through the other side with no problems, fail and you take X damage. Narrate that how it's most comfortable for you.
Player: Thanks!
And then play goes on. A lot of rare or specific triggers aren't necessarily things that anyone expects a warning for. They're just things to be respectful about if they come up! The vast majority of players /are not dicks/. They want to have fun as much as you do. They are not setting out to try and make GMs or other players jump through hoops just to see if they will. People with unusual triggers are, IME, very aware that most people don't see anything traumatic or disturbing about X, and will take it on themselves to say, "Oh, I have a thing about Y. Is Y in this plot/session/campaign?" if you give them the space to do that, and they trust you.
I've seen far more people insist that they're Totally Okay with something that they're not actually okay with, and then have a miserable time, because they're scared of being the person who 'brings the game down' than I've ever seen someone playing 'trigger gotcha'.
There was once a scene I got through, even though it was.. pushing limits. I can't go back and read the log, because it creeps me right out.
@pyrephox said in Sensitivity in gaming:
In my experience, something like more often goes:
GM: talks about the held breath burning in your lungs, the distance to safety, the pressure of trying to hang on for just one more moment as the gas is pressing in
Player: Oh wow, I'm having a reaction to this; drowning is kinda phobic for me, and this is hitting that drowning thing even though it's not water. Can we maybe gloss?
GM: Oh, sorry, man, sure! Take a stamina roll - succeed and you get through the other side with no problems, fail and you take X damage. Narrate that how it's most comfortable for you.
Player: Thanks!
This too, I was trying to help give context where its not easy to forewarn but could be a trigger and how can we deal with it. This is how I'd do it too, but wanted to help conversation along (smiley face, but that's a peeve trigger for some folks)
@derp said in Sensitivity in gaming:
Fine. Substitute Canadian Geese, then. Or Spiders. Or the one I started with, the actual example given earlier, Underwater Horrors. I didn't make that shit up.
That's not the question, though. The question is whether you have ever in your life seen or heard of a person being upset that a trigger warning was not given for the example you provided. Because if you haven't, I am struggling to understand why you would make something up just for the sake of mocking it unless your goal is to damn all triggers by association with the one you made up specifically for the purpose of mocking it. Especially in light of previous comments you've made, it sounds very much as if you're constructing a world where it's okay to hurt people because they aren't legitimately asking you to respect their own pain, they're all maliciously out to get you personally by tricking you into thinking they're actually in distress.
Or, stripped of the obfuscating anger I'm using as a defense against my real feelings here, I'm trying to figure out how afraid of you I should be, because it comes off like you deliberately refuse to even entertain the possibilities that your actions might harm others or that it's a problem if you do, because compassion is a resource you limit to immediate friends and family.
Yeah, I think pretty much everyone who has unusual triggers is aware that their triggers are unusual. "Content Warning: Drowning" is likely going to be something someone with a problem brings up beforehand or does what @Pyrephox described above. They aren't going to get mad about it.
Now, if you casually drop sexual assault on your players without explicitly asking how they feel about such things? Yeah, you're a shitty person.
Despite how the "anti-SJW" crowd likes to portray folks, people who request trigger warnings are for the most part extremely reasonable people who happen to have experienced something really upsetting and would like to avoid experiencing it again.
ETA: gotta say @Derp I was surprised at your response, because
@greenflashlight said in Sensitivity in gaming:
because compassion is a resource you limit to immediate friends and family.
is definitely how I also took it. I hope I'm wrong.
@greenflashlight said in Sensitivity in gaming:
That's not the question, though. The question is whether you have ever in your life seen or heard of a person being upset that a trigger warning was not given for the example you provided.
And it's an irrelevant question, because the point was that everyone has different limits, and using an example that would be considered broadly ridiculous except for people that have that issue illustrated that there is not an objective line, and people are treating something wholly subjective as if it were some sort of objective social obligation. It's not.
So no, I'm not going to entertain that line of thought, because it isn't relevant to the purpose of the example in the context in which it was given.
@greenflashlight said in Sensitivity in gaming:
Especially in light of previous comments you've made, it sounds very much as if you're constructing a world where it's okay to hurt people because they aren't legitimately asking you to respect their own pain, they're all maliciously out to get you personally by tricking you into thinking they're actually in distress.
Ask is the keyword here. If someone asks me, specifically, to accommodate a thing for them, I am perfectly happy to do so. Go look at pretty much any of my staff +fingers or wiki profiles and you'll see that I give plenty of examples of what kinds of stories you can expect from me, and if you ask any of the players that I actually run for, if you ask me for something? I am perfectly fine with working with you, with the default option being to give you a graceful out if it's too large to just gloss over.
Others in this thread suggested that it is not the responsibility of the people with the issues to make those issues known, and that GMs should simply anticipate their needs.
I flatly reject that theory.
That is not how the world works, and I don't think it's how the world should work. Like any other condition that significantly impacts your life but throws you to the small parts of the bell curve of 'typical reactions', it is up to you to ensure that the people around you know your limitations and to request reasonable accommodations.
It is not my affirmative duty to proactively make sure that your needs are attended to outside of the steps that I already take: I give a broad overview of what to expect, and an escape hatch if we run into something unexpected.
My ability to empathize ends when I get the impression that someone feels I am obligated to cater to them. I am not. Entitlement is the quickest and surest way to find that nobody is feeling particularly charitable.
@rinel said in Sensitivity in gaming:
ETA: gotta say @Derp I was surprised at your response, because
@greenflashlight said in Sensitivity in gaming:because compassion is a resource you limit to immediate friends and family.
is definitely how I also took it. I hope I'm wrong.
I guess, as in all things, it comes down to a question of how we're defining 'compassion'?
Like, if you're having a bad day, I'm happy to give you a pat on the shoulder and a 'that sucks, buddy, I hope you get it figured out', with increasing levels of concern the closer you are to my friend circle.
But for 99.95% of the population? You're not in that circle. I'm not in your support network, and I'm not interested in joining. I'm not your therapist, I'm not your confessor, and I am certainly not obliged to do any emotional labor on your part, pretty-much-complete-stranger. I can feel bad that you're going through some shit, but I've got enough shit of my own, and that is where any obligation to take up another's cross ends for me.
You get more from me if we're closer than 'that dude that sits a few seats away from you in science class'. Which is a pretty good analogy for how I view the vast majority of MUSHers.
We don't really talk. We only know each other, at best, in passing, and we got assigned to this project together. We're not buds, and if you're having a bad day, then that sucks, but. That's a you thing. Not a me thing. I'm not obligated to drop what I'm doing and ask what you need. If you need something, ask, and we'll chat about it, but otherwise we are here for a specific reason and I'd like to maybe get to the end of it staying focused on the task at hand and not talking about what a terrible life you have had, random stranger whose name I only know because I heard the professor call it that one time.
So does that make me dangerous? Fuck, man, I don't know. But I also don't think it's an unreasonable position to take, either, and I do think that the idea that people are obligated to do any more than that is unreasonable. I don't owe anyone anything beyond what I choose to.
I have basic compassion, and can show common courtesy. But I feel that there are wildly different views on precisely where those lines are, and mine tend to be pretty damn conservative.
@derp said in Sensitivity in gaming:
And it's an irrelevant question
No. Stop that. You don't get to tell me what is and is not relevant to my process of trying to extrapolate an answer to a personal question which is not directly addressed by your statements but only prompted by it. If you don't want to answer the question, then just don't answer it.
I'm dropping this "discussion" now because I get the feeling we're two posts away from moving this thread to the Hog Pit, which I'd rather not do to anyone actually interested in the original topic.
@derp said in Sensitivity in gaming:
especially in the context where people were saying 'it is not my responsibility to let you know what my triggers are, it is your job to just deal with them'.
PEOPLE. What people? Where did they say this? Please quote or provide data point.
For the record, I wasn't implying that GM's should be mindreaders or that they should go out of their way to cater to every single person.
"This plot will involve violence/scenes of a sexual nature/excessive drug use/eldrich horror/etc" is all I'm asking for. Things that a reasonable person would understand to cause problems for some people.
Shit happens in a scene that can't be anticipated, but if you've got a plan that involves the mass murder of babies, that shit should probably be mentioned at the top.
He/Him
