Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Void__Dragon wrote:

Smireland wrote:
I didn't read this entire thread - 'cause I ain't got time for that - but I can confirm there's a lot of misogyny and general issues that can happen. As a (early transition) transgender person who identifies as female, until I moved to a larger and accepting city... I avoided most non-female dominated gaming groups and often wasn't invited back otherwise. This included having to search out the groups that sometimes just didn't exist across all mediums and basically created a gaming drought for me for quite a while.

Honestly, it felt like they were surprised I'd take offense, like I wasn't a real woman to them or whatever, but, yes. I'd say I went through a good two year period of living in places where I felt ostracized for wanting to play without being made uncomfortable.

I'm a little confused.

Were you discriminated against because you're trans, or because you're a woman? Both are valid concerns to have about gaming communities (If not necessarily reflective of the games themselves), but I'm not sure which applies here.

It was both. There was the overhanging 'you don't count because you have man-bits', which often left me feeling none-too-great, but in addition a lot that was said (either in seriousness or half-jest - I can take a joke,) was hurtful and/or triggering for me, which.. Well. I understand my past is mine and no one is responsible for making me feel so-and-so way, especially the first time. But when I go out of my way and put myself in a vulnerable position to be like, 'hey, that made me really uncomfortable/totally made me not enjoy myself, could you be a little more mindful of what you say/do, for me?' And normally the response was no, which means they care far less than I even would've assumed pre-discussion as a "new" person to the group.

None of you know me, so there's always the argument I could be an awful player who whines and such, but I'm actually very quiet and generally too sweet for my own good, so I agree. It sucked a lot.

As long as you didn't put those 'man-bits' out on the table I don't think anyone I have played with would care, but I also know it is a problem for others and not something I would deny is a problem in general.

I've played since the Red Box first came out and there was only person in all that time that brought up rape and it was in the past two years and the same guy who got booted from the game store for having issues with everyone/everything up to and including the store owner. This also wasn't the first or the last place to ban him either.

 Manchu wrote:
Finally a real answer -- even the word "absolutely" ... oh no wait, more weasel words:

Now, let me see, it is absolutely the case ... depending ...

Your passive-aggressive comments didn't work on ADB, and they certainly won't work on me.

If someone is playing a lawful good paladin then obviously raping would be entirely out of character for them. A chaotic evil barbarian from a viking-esque culture? Possibly in-character.

Portraying rape in tabletop RPGs is fine as long as everyone at the table is on-board with it.

There, that's your cue. Are you going to say something clever? Go on. Say something clever.

Now now, we've already been over this kind of objection. If my question is a "false dichotomy" or "boiling a complex issue down," that would be because the point that provoked ("murder is worse") it is inadequate.

Depriving someone of their life can have context to make it more necessary. It's the difference between following someone home and slitting their throats and killing a man who came behind you to slit your throat in the ensuing struggle. There is context, and your attempts at dodging it is illogical.

Now, rape? Pretty much never "justified" (Though I hate using that term) in any situation from an in-universe standpoint. It's essentially a fixed moral point. If you fight back a rapist and kill him or her it is understandable how that happened. If you fought back and raped them in turn, then you are now going out of your way to inflict suffering on them (Though some would honestly defend the use of rape as a punishment). "Two wrongs don't make a right".

Killing as a reaction to a threat on your person is better than rape.

Killing without provocation? Both are entirely morally wrong.

Stop making the complex issue more simple than it actually is. "Oh but others were doing it fir-" I don't care. You're a mod. Act like one.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 LordofHats wrote:


Not what I'm really getting at. I'm attempting to point out the one dimensional nature of rape compared to how multidimensional we are about murder, theft, assault etc. in the sense of how we often portray rape. Rape is often thrown out as a token evil deed. It's rarely treated as a complex act (even though in reality it's often very complex), and is simply reduced to a tired old plot device.

For something as serious as rape is, we rarely treat it as seriously as we pretend to. I think that the one dimensional nature of the depiction of rape in a lot of fiction is a major contributor to the problem (along with how insular we are about sex to start with).

But why do you think it is handled in such a simple, uninspired way?

Because it is such a complex issue and more to the point not as well-understood by the masses as killing it.

It's a vicious cycle. Because it is so complex it is often handled in a very simple and stupid way, which in turn reinforces the problem you're talking about.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Smireland wrote:

It was both. There was the overhanging 'you don't count because you have man-bits', which often left me feeling none-too-great, but in addition a lot that was said (either in seriousness or half-jest - I can take a joke,) was hurtful and/or triggering for me, which.. Well. I understand my past is mine and no one is responsible for making me feel so-and-so way, especially the first time. But when I go out of my way and put myself in a vulnerable position to be like, 'hey, that made me really uncomfortable/totally made me not enjoy myself, could you be a little more mindful of what you say/do, for me?' And normally the response was no, which means they care far less than I even would've assumed pre-discussion as a "new" person to the group.

None of you know me, so there's always the argument I could be an awful player who whines and such, but I'm actually very quiet and generally too sweet for my own good, so I agree. It sucked a lot.

I'd advise you not play then.

It's pretty gakky to be with a group that doesn't give a feth about things that bother you (I haven't had your problems but it has happened), and if they aren't willing to consider or talk about them then feth them. It sucks, but some donkey-caves aren't going to change just because you want them to. You shouldn't be expected to deal with that.

I lucked out and was friends with most of my current group before I was ever a fellow player, so it doesn't matter as much. If you can do the same hopefully that will be true for you too.

 Void__Dragon wrote:

I'd advise you not play then.

It's pretty gakky to be with a group that doesn't give a feth about things that bother you (I haven't had your problems but it has happened), and if they aren't willing to consider or talk about them then feth them. It sucks, but some donkey-caves aren't going to change just because you want them to. You shouldn't be expected to deal with that.

I lucked out and was friends with most of my current group before I was ever a fellow player, so it doesn't matter as much. If you can do the same hopefully that will be true for you too.

That's pretty much what I did. I didn't have many options for most of that time and thus didn't play.

Now that I have plenty of options, I still don't prioritize or stereotype any group before getting to know them, but it's nice knowing that if it's a bad fit I have somewhere to go, others to meet, etc. I'm still not exactly happy about the looks I often receive with my flamboyantly painted nails and obviously male voice, but regardless, things are much better.

While I do have possible comments on the topic of rape in D&D and other RPGs, I will sadly have to opt out of sharing because it's definitely one of those things I get emotional about on a personal level, so my points could only come from that side of things (despite they'd be flavored by my own perceptions and such.)

My only comment is that I think rape is worse than murder because there aren't murder survivors, but plenty of the former (and that's only ruling out families, other impacted parties, etc.) The psychological damage can be extensive and make surviving very hard.

 Ahtman wrote:
As long as you didn't put those 'man-bits' out on the table I don't think anyone I have played with would care, but I also know it is a problem for others and not something I would deny is a problem in general.

I've played since the Red Box first came out and there was only person in all that time that brought up rape and it was in the past two years and the same guy who got booted from the game store for having issues with everyone/everything up to and including the store owner. This also wasn't the first or the last place to ban him either.

Flopping the bits out on the table are reserved for special sessions, Ahtman.

But it's nice to know there are others out there who wouldn't have minded. I would've been extra grateful to have found some of those myself, at the time, I wager.

 Void__Dragon wrote:
won't work on me

Work on you? Okay, whatever you say.

 Void__Dragon wrote:
Portraying rape in tabletop RPGs is fine as long as everyone at the table is on-board with it.

Tautological and irrelevant. It is clear that you agree with my point, however, whether consciously or otherwise:

 Void__Dragon wrote:
Now, rape? Pretty much never "justified" (Though I hate using that term) in any situation from an in-universe standpoint. It's essentially a fixed moral point.

Or as Peregrine put it earlier:

 Peregrine wrote:
Most "murder" in games isn't murder at all. Killing an enemy on the battlefield isn't murder, defending yourself from bandits isn't murder, etc. And even when it would be murder (for example, if you're playing as the bandits) it's usually just a means to an end, not something done just for the sake of murdering people. Rape, on the other hand, has no such justification. It doesn't accomplish anything besides making a character suffer and proving how Evil you are.

It really is quite simple, after all.

 Void__Dragon wrote:
You're a mod. Act like one.

As a mod, I advise you to stop trying to bait me.

getting snippy, are we?

I'm sad we can't allow a mod to have opinions and beliefs reflecting a personal nature within some sphere of conversation.

It's less that, but the perpetuated "passive threat" of him/her just having us banned. it does not hellp that the final part of his/her comment seemed very much to be a flat out threat.

 the shrouded lord wrote:
but the perpetuated "passive threat" of him/her just having us banned

Some posters try baiting moderators under the assumption the moderator will be too embarrassed to suspend their accounts but that is not the case. There is no special threat here. Flamebaiting any user is against the rules all the time.

 daedalus wrote:
I'm sad we can't allow a mod to have opinions and beliefs reflecting a personal nature within some sphere of conversation.

It is actually not a problem with the vast majority of posters as the last eleven pages demonstrate.

Moving back on topic, we have post after post where people say either they have never or hardly ever encountered rape brought up while playing D&D or that they themselves have no interest in playing rape scenarios in D&D.

I don't have any other data to back it up but I would not be surprised if this was pretty representative of RPGers generally.

But then again, there's this point:

 Peregrine wrote:
And you know what else is amusing? On the very first page we had denials and claims that rape isn't really a thing in D&D and the FATAL crowd are an irrelevant minority that shouldn't be used to make the majority look bad, but here we are in an argument where people are proudly explaining how they think that there are good reasons to have rape in their D&D games.

 Manchu wrote:
It is actually not a problem with the vast majority of posters as the last eleven pages demonstrate.

Moving back on topic, we have post after post where people say either they have never or hardly ever encountered rape brought up while playing D&D or that they themselves have no interest in playing rape scenarios in D&D.

I don't have any other data to back it up but I would not be surprised if this was pretty representative of RPGers generally.

I know. I'm just sad that even one person would resort to that kind of attack. I don't always agree with you, but I've never seen you use Modhood as a means to leverage your point, and it irritates me that someone would try to play that card.

To the remainder of your comment, I agree entirely. I think I know of one group that would have gone there, and I have made it a solid point to never darken their doorstep for many years.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Peregrine wrote:
And you know what else is amusing? On the very first page we had denials and claims that rape isn't really a thing in D&D and the FATAL crowd are an irrelevant minority that shouldn't be used to make the majority look bad, but here we are in an argument where people are proudly explaining how they think that there are good reasons to have rape in their D&D games.

#ohnoitsperegrine

For the sake of keeping this thread on-topic, I request any discussion of moderation policy be taken to PM (withe me or with any other staff member) or to a thread in the Nuts & Bolts sub-forum.

why so serious?
OT, this thread is probably just going to continue on the same spiral so I'm leaving.

 daedalus wrote:
#ohnoitsperegrine

Well, I do think he has a point. The hypothetical inclusion of rape in a RPG session, based on some kind of (as at least one poster put it) very-specific context, is being pretty consitently defended in this thread even despite most posters claiming no interest and little experience with it in practice.

There's a difference between there is a consistent misogyny culture or rape culture in d&d and the stand that rape does pop up in d&d as story elements. Don't try to mix the two

 Manchu wrote:

 daedalus wrote:
#ohnoitsperegrine

Well, I do think he has a point. The hypothetical inclusion of rape in a RPG session, based on some kind of (as at least one poster put it) very-specific context, is being pretty consitently defended in this thread even despite most posters claiming no interest and little experience with it in practice.

Frankly, I was considering a new installment of Ravenloft, with the PCs being effectively Victorian era orphans in an orphanage. The audience is closed doors and I've known most of them for about 10 years. Being period appropriate and trying to make the campaign super serious despite our unspoken group taboo, I was considering it as a possible literary device. One of the people involved in me setting up the game has even suggested the idea of playing a girl pretending to be a boy "as was typical of the era, for obvious reasons".

I'm not intending on raping any PCs directly, nor am I going to have it be an "on camera" thing. Of all the people involved, There are going to be vile and terrible things happening in the background as part of the nature of what's going on around them, which I feel only solidifies their intentions to see the world become just and right. I'm pretty sure that I'm the one who is most disturbed by the concept of rape. That's significant to me in a lot of ways, but setting up heroes to destroy those responsible is a good thing in my mind. The worst part for me in light of this thread is that I can't decide if the notion is a juvenile theme, or a very adult theme.

Sining wrote:
There's a difference between there is a consistent misogyny culture or rape culture in d&d and the stand that rape does pop up in d&d as story elements. Don't try to mix the two

I agree:

 Manchu wrote:
On point, there is a lot of "taken for granted" stuff about rape in D&D. As Orlanth pointed out -- half orcs and yuan-ti and drow ... all examples of rape in the background that is just assumed, whether or not some uber creeper is describing it in lurid detail to the table. That stuff has been there, in one form or another, since 1974 and before. As Trammell points out, go to Appendix N and you'll find the same kind of stuff. And yet Appendix N is not a bibliography of rape porn.

I think, and I stress that, I think that kind of stuff is not really a problem. Trammell's point seems to be that it is part of the problem.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 daedalus wrote:
The worst part for me in light of this thread is that I can't decide if the notion is a juvenile theme, or a very adult theme.

I have played an adult character who was a victim of childhood sexual abuse. This started as just the kind of superficial plot element that has been criticized ITT -- that is, I added the abuse angle to explain and justify the PC being evil. Over the course of playing the character, I discovered a lot of depth in her personality beyond the simple recipe of a victim lashing out. The experience was ultimately very rewarding.

 Manchu wrote:
I have played an adult character who was a victim of childhood sexual abuse. This started as just the kind of superficial plot element that has been criticized ITT -- that is, I added the abuse angle to explain and justify the PC being evil. Over the course of playing the character, I discovered a lot of depth in her personality beyond the simple recipe of a victim lashing out. The experience was ultimately very rewarding.

There was an audiobook my former roommate had, I want to say it was something by Brent Weeks, that involved a male who allowed himself to be sexually abused by another male to protect someone else. It made for an very interesting character and a relationship between him and the person he martyred himself for. I'll see if I can dredge up the title.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I think it was "The Way Of Shadows" based upon the wikipedia entry.

 Manchu wrote:

 daedalus wrote:
The worst part for me in light of this thread is that I can't decide if the notion is a juvenile theme, or a very adult theme.

I have played an adult character who was a victim of childhood sexual abuse. This started as just the kind of superficial plot element that has been criticized ITT -- that is, I added the abuse angle to explain and justify the PC being evil. Over the course of playing the character, I discovered a lot of depth in her personality beyond the simple recipe of a victim lashing out. The experience was ultimately very rewarding.

This is a large part of why it's important to not exclude or condemn "sensitive" topics from use in RPGs played by adults. A lot of the fun - and self improvement through challenging such complex issues "in character" - comes from these complex issues that you can choose to tackle in a safe, fictional environment. I'm confident my ethics have improved thanks to pen and paper and computer RPGs constantly challenging my morals from good, evil and other perspectives.

nomotog wrote:


What was the point?

Why is rape as a story device, in contrast to the other examples provided, the SUPER ULTIMATE evil?

ITT: People reminding me why I won't go near unvetted players or GMs with a 20ft pole.

 Chongara wrote:
ITT: People reminding me why I won't go near unvetted players or GMs with a 20ft pole.

ITT: People reminding me why I'm grateful my country was founded on convicts rather than puritans.

Well, it's his choice if he wants to live in a hug chamber

 Yonan wrote:

 Chongara wrote:
ITT: People reminding me why I won't go near unvetted players or GMs with a 20ft pole.

ITT: People reminding me why I'm grateful my country was founded on convicts rather than puritans.

I believe that one of my ancestors was a general who moved to australia.

 Sigvatr wrote:

nomotog wrote:

What was the point?

Why is rape, as a story device, in contrast to the other examples provided, the SUPER ULTIMATE evil?

I don't know if I can fully answer that, so I will just post a link to a video. http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/jimquisition/5972-Rape-vs-Murder

I don't agree with all their points, but it makes a case as to why people consider rape worse then murder.

I could only watch the first 4 minutes - it's a terrible video. It mixes up killing with murdering and draws direct conclusions from real life rape (victims) to fictional rape (victims), which is a terrible, terrible conclusion.