I think Pundit's reference to Furry Fandom is really spot-on.

In the early 90's, antropomorphic animals were all the rage.  Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, Usagi Yojimbo, and Alebedo were ground-breaking comics that pushed the boundaries of what comics were, while rediscovering the inherent humor and metaphorical power of Funny Animal Comics (a trope that had been slaughtered by the rise of the Super Hero Comic).

While it started in comics, it quickly spread to other mediums: cartoons, movies, toys, etc.  It even infiltrated mainstream comics as characters like Feral and Wolfsbane became more prominent.

Two of my favorite RPGs of all time, Justifiers and TMNT & Other Strangeness, are strongly rooted in the genre.  The animal-as-character trope is especially powerful in RPGs, where saying "The guards are both boars." conveys loads of information about characters quickly.  Players will assume that the guards are thick-headed, dimwitted, quick to anger, and likely to frenzy, while they will assume very different things if the GM says "The guards are both hawks."

And now 15 years later, I'm loathe to make any attempt to defend the genre.  It's been perverted by a very small group of sickos who used the internet and conventions to promote their vision of furry fandom, which was mixed up with their disturbed sexuality and bizarre beliefs.  The term "furry" has become a put down and a joke, and has absorbed such bizarre perversions as "plushies" into it's definition.

The real question though is this:  Is the RPG hobby more like furry fandom, or more like comic fandom?  Because comic fandom is this much larger market than furry fandom was, and when furry went to a bad place, the comic fandom simply cut that segment off and drew a line.  Either you're a freaky furry and like animal-people with boobs and giant dicks, or you're a normal comic book fan and eschew that weirdo stuff.

I think the RPG hobby as a whole is big enough and strong enough that the Story Games segment can only ultimately damage themselves with their quest for greater perversion and weirdness.  They'll disappear into their own little ghetto of twenty sales per book, and eventually (already?) the RPG market will divide into two camps and have nothing to do with each other.

I think "hobby" is a dirty word.

However.

I vigorously oppose anything that has a chance, however tiny, of shrinking the available pool of hawt chicks for an eligible strapping metrosexual such as myself by trickling down into the pop imaginary, i.e. when against all odds some stupid local paper runs a story on it, AP picks it up, and next thing you know it's in the Times, which is when *I* will officially leave the "hobby," only at that point it's too late anyway, and then what.

Anyway, what's really sad about all this is that this silly little piece of nonsense was one of the very few actual new releases at GenCon. That's why it's even talked about--because there's nothing else to talk about.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;255910There's a difference between having some sexy content and being sexualised. It's like the difference between a drama movie with a quick shot of a couple having sex, or glimpse of six-pack abs on a hot guy, and a porno. In one meal it's a flavouring, in another it's the main course.

This nuance hardly matters when it comes to the perception of non-gamers of the hobby. In fact I'd argue that having dodgy covers for the sake of selling books is way more damaging to the hobby, not to mention what it says about gamers in general than the actual sexual content of a small group of games. Furthermore if one were to compare sexual content, I would think a game like Black Tokyo is more porn (using your analogy)than say something like Maid (which seems more Benny Hill)

I don't think your analogy holds though. Some people may object to any sexual content in their games, I'm thinking of gamers with a distatse for WW games, but this hardly makes Vampire , Werewolf etc damaging to the hobby. In fact - even though some may not think this is a good thing - these games have actually introduced gaming to folks who may otherwise have no interest in the activity.

The real question is I think, should certain subject matter be off limits ? And if so, is said subject matter damaging to the hobby ?

Regards,
David R

To address one issues, if something fits into 'bedroom roleplaying', rather than 'game table roleplaying', then it's not part of the 'hobby' and should not be sold as or in a game.

Just do what you (Abstract 'you') obviously want to do and write a how-to guide for 'bedroom roleplaying' and quit misrepresenting your product.

Quote from: David R;255918This nuance hardly matters when it comes to the perception of non-gamers of the hobby.

I think it does. Again, people can tell the difference between a movie which uses sex to sell - like a zillion thriller movies - and a movie which is about sex - like a porno. People can likewise tell the difference between a movie which has sadistic murder scenes in it, and a movie which asks us to empathise with a sadistic murderer. It's the icing and the cake. People can tell the difference.

Quote from: David RIn fact I'd argue that having dodgy covers for the sake of selling books is way more damaging to the hobby, not to mention what it says about gamers in general than the actual sexual content of a small group of games.

I don't think those covers help, either. However, in Western society virtually everything uses sex to sell, so rpgs don't stand out much in that regard. But if they become about sex - or sexual violence - then they'll stand out.

I mean, here's a Mazda advert,



do Mazda car owners have a poor image because of that? Yes and no. Using sex to sell can make the thing they're selling seem like it's for dorky guys who are in some way losers. But even toilet paper gets the sexy treatment.



So again, I don't really see how rpg covers can stand out in that regard. Again, it's not great - but I think that rpgs are generally invisible to the general public, not scorned because they have some saucy covers. What could make rpgs visible? All sorts of things - but being associated with violent deviance could make them visible in not a very good way.

Quote from: David RThe real question is I think, should certain subject matter be off limits ? And if so, is said subject matter damaging to the hobby ?

It's not really the subject matter as such, but the treatment of it. Consider two American films about white racism against blacks - Birth of a Nation and Mississippi Burning. Or two films about murder - Cold Blood and Saw. The issue really is that reprehensible things are treated as k3w1.

If you went to a guy's house and found his DVD collection consisted of all five Saw movies, of Birth of a Nation, Triumph of the Will and the like, his book collection of The Anarchist's Cookbook, Mein Kampf, The Turner Diaries and so on, with pictures of violent BDSM on his walls, I daresay you'd be a bit unnerved at the least.

Now, such a guy probably doesn't exist, even freaks are not one-dimensional. Nonetheless, it's that sort of one-dimensional freak which becomes the image of a subculture or hobby when deviant sexual interests come to represent it.

I am not convinced that games like Maid and Poison'd and FATAL really risk harm to our hobby, threaten to make us look like freaks. As I said, they may or may not do harm - I don't know. But they don't help, that's for fucking sure.

I approve of Kyle's last post.

Guys and girls, can we not start using "sexualisation of RPGs" as a jargon term. This would mean that we consider the game itself to have sexual characteristics, not merely that it touches on sexual content. A hot topic is the sexualisation of children; sexualisation of RPGs is a nonsense term.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=sexualization

If not sexualization, then what term would you suggest? Because your post is not very useful without an alternative.

Quote from: The_Shadow;255931Guys and girls, can we not start using "sexualisation of RPGs" as a jargon term.

I simply distinguished between things which had a gloss of a certain subject, and things which were actually about that subject. The term's useful for that.

Of course, some people prefer diverting conversations into semantics so they don't have to defend their weak ideas.

Quote from: Narf the Mouse;255932If not sexualization, then what term would you suggest? Because your post is not very useful without an alternative.

I don't see that he needs to make an alternative suggestions.  Just the folks who are flinging the term around need to find it.  Otherwise you just like Ron Edwards and redefining wordsto make them mean what you want them to mean.

Quote from: Narf the Mouse;255932If not sexualization, then what term would you suggest? Because your post is not very useful without an alternative.

Depends on what you want to say.

"I am against the sexualisation of RPGs" doesn't make much sense, but "I am against RPGs explicitly incorporating sexual elements into the rules" might be better.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;255933Of course, some people prefer diverting conversations into semantics so they don't have to defend their weak ideas.

Hehe. Care to name names?

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;255791Having a hobby attract creepy weirdos never helps the hobby.

Congratulations you've described every hobby out there.

Quote from: James McMurray;255846Roleplaying has always been a haven for dorks and social misfits, and it always will. Chase them away and you kill the industry, because people with "real lives" and girlfriends usually have better things to do with their time then pretend to be Legolas, Lancelot, and Merlin killing Smaug.

Not all of us have to choose, thanks! I mean I have a wife, a girlfriend or two, and still manage a healthy game! I think you're right that Roleplaying will always, by it's very nature, attract some odd ducks-but we have plenty of just plain old ducks as well. (So sue me, I'm sick of squirrel metaphors! )

QuoteDon't game with them if you don't like them, but if you think that gaming can survive without their sweaty palms and allowance money, you're just a tad naive.

I agree, 110%.

Quote from: droog;255880But seriously, folks: society at large doesn't give a shit about 'the industry'. They barely know it exists.

True that. So very true.

Quote from: Bradford C. Walker;255892There is no room for fools that wish to make RPGs into a second Furry Fandon.

Amen.

Quote from: David R;255918This nuance hardly matters when it comes to the perception of non-gamers of the hobby.

I think that can be true, but isn't always true. Common, but not pervasive necessarily.

QuoteThe real question is I think, should certain subject matter be off limits?

I hope not-I mean obviously I hope there's no market for Pedophiles, and the like but I'd rather speak with my dollars than ban something. I think this should be your, and my decision as players. You do what seems best for your group.

QuoteAnd if so, is said subject matter damaging to the hobby?

I don't think so.

Nothing wrong with sexual content; acknowledging that RPG characters may have sexual encounters and even *Gasp* marraige is a good thing.

Where I draw the line is at four places:

1) The material becomes pornographic.
2) The material becomes psychologically sick in its portrayal.
3) How the RPG deals with the sexual material is no longer within a context that could be called a 'Role-Playing Game'.
4) The depiction is not respectful of the content matter. This last, I believe, is easy to grasp if one's head is screwed on forward. Rape is not a game and should not be treated as such; marraige and deep relationships can exist in a role-playing game.

Any 'game' which explores, say, rape in a deep and meaningful manner (Rather than as exploitation or pornography) is not a game but a psychological tool and marketing it as a game is false advertising at the least - And deeply suspicious.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;255928I think it does. Again, people can tell the difference between a movie which uses sex to sell - like a zillion thriller movies - and a movie which is about sex - like a porno. People can likewise tell the difference between a movie which has sadistic murder scenes in it, and a movie which asks us to empathise with a sadistic murderer. It's the icing and the cake. People can tell the difference.

I disagree. What has given gamers a bad rep ? Sex covers for all to see or discussions on gaming boards? Most times, first impressions count. Nobody - non gamers - is going to take the time to appreciate the difference between an rpg with a dodgy cover (which may have nothing to do with the game itself) and subject matter which may be pretty vile but with a relatively tame cover.

QuoteI don't think those covers help, either. However, in Western society virtually everything uses sex to sell, so rpgs don't stand out much in that regard. But if they become about sex - or sexual violence - then they'll stand out.

I agree but do these kind of covers really attract gamers ? My thinking is, that it does more harm than dodgy subject matter. Also what kind of  dodgy content are we talking about here? Some examples would be good. Leave aside the obvious will ya'...

QuoteSo again, I don't really see how rpg covers can stand out in that regard. Again, it's not great - but I think that rpgs are generally invisible to the general public, not scorned because they have some saucy covers. What could make rpgs visible? All sorts of things - but being associated with violent deviance could make them visible in not a very good way.

You don't see how a cover displayed for all to see is more damaging to the hobby than what goes on in discussions sites? Do non gamers even consider the content of rpgs ? They think we all play D&D and pretend to be elves. And really some of these covers go beyond just racy. It's exploitative and it seems to imply that gamers view women and fantasy as such.

QuoteIt's not really the subject matter as such, but the treatment of it. Consider two American films about white racism against blacks - Birth of a Nation and Mississippi Burning. Or two films about murder - Cold Blood and Saw. The issue really is that reprehensible things are treated as k3w1.

So what type of games are you talking about here ? Most gamers think Rahowa is crap and would not touch it with a ten foot pole. As far treatment goes, the knee jeek reaction is that most risky subject matter is off limits. Nobody even considers (at least around here) that the designer may want to explore certain themes.

QuoteIf you went to a guy's house and found his DVD collection consisted of all five Saw movies, of Birth of a Nation, Triumph of the Will and the like, his book collection of The Anarchist's Cookbook, Mein Kampf, The Turner Diaries and so on, with pictures of violent BDSM on his walls, I daresay you'd be a bit unnerved at the least

See, this is why I think you're confusing the issue. Seriously what kind of games are out there (even those with risky subject matter ) which are even comparable to the films you mentioned. Are we talking about all Forge games ?

QuoteNow, such a guy probably doesn't exist, even freaks are not one-dimensional. Nonetheless, it's that sort of one-dimensional freak which becomes the image of a subculture or hobby when deviant sexual interests come to represent it.

You're not the Pundit so I know you are not just simply saying this, but where exactly are these sexual deviants. I know more gamers who play mainstream games in the most vile way and have such a low regard for women (and it shows in their behaviour in public) than folks who play games with risky content and which the majority of gamers have not heard of.

QuoteI am not convinced that games like Maid and Poison'd and FATAL really risk harm to our hobby, threaten to make us look like freaks. As I said, they may or may not do harm - I don't know. But they don't help, that's for fucking sure.

I have not read Maid or Poison'd so I can't really comment. I do think the majority of gamers think FATAL is a load of crap. I don't think non gamers have even heard of FATAL, but I do know that they (non-gamers) think we are a bunch of immature morons because of the kind of covers out there and the way how some of us behave at conventions.

When fucked up games and by fucked up I mean games like FATAL and RAHOWA achieve mainstream success, then yeah I'll say the hobby has been damaged, but don't expect me to buy into this whole sexual content is ruining the hobby, when it has always been around in various guises and the games that do seem to attract unwanted attention is because their designers belong to a small subset of gamers and the thinking around here at least is that they should be chased out of the hobby. Not to mention that these so called sexual games themselves aren't really sexual at all.

Regards,
David R

Quote from: Pseudoephedrine;255830While none of us are too bothered by it, some of the guys have had problems over the years with bystanders or sit-in players taking it the wrong way. One dude's girlfriend was pissed off at him for a week or so after she walked in midway while his evil PC was raping some NPC, frex.

Yeah, what the hell?  It's not like he was being paid to perform a role he had every opportunity to turn down, like an actor.  And it's not like rape is about de-humanizing the victim in the first place.  What's the point in playing an evil PC if you can't rape a few milkmaids here and there?  It's not like all women have been sexually assaulted at some point in their lives, it can't possibly be a trigger for every woman out there.

I mean, if you can't kick back with the guys and intentionally imagine raping some woman as part of your hobby, what is the point in even picking up dice?

Did she not realize that you are a group of artistes, pushing the boundaries for the greater good of art?