TheRPGSite

How do you feel about the issues above appearing in your RPGs?

I've seen post on other boards before about how some players don't like such issues in their fantasy games because they see enough in real life and they just want escapism. It's down played or none existant in many fantasy games. While they may have some simularities with medieval Europe, women are on a equal footing with men, unlike in historical period.

They seem to be more common themes in Modern, Near-Future and Sci-Fi games. For example the meta-human hate common in Shadowrun is just racism in another form.

Do these issues appear much in your games?

Racism: A question of scale. "Black" and "White" don't matter nearly as much if there's also "Green, scaly, and fire-breathing."

Sexism: I see this coinciding with a lot of boring periods in history anyway, at least in the sense that most people mean it (that women are hindered). When there's killing to be done, those that are good at it do it and those that don't like it shut up out of fear of those that are good at it. That said, the sexes are still never quite going to see eye to eye, regardless of egalitarianism or what have you.

Homophobia: Dude, RPG characters don't have sex lives. That's why they find it necessary to vent their frustrations on poverty-stricken goblinoids in random dungeon-crawls. If my answer to sexism is the French Revolution, my answer to homophobia is ancient Greece. Homophobia is a social construct, not a necessary reality. Also, like with race, you've got bigger fish to fry. You're worried about getting your brains eaten by mind flayers... what's so scary about getting hit on by a dude?

Racism:  Well, in the idea of completely different races, such as Humans and Orcs, I think the issue, however handled, is present in most standard fantasy games of today--it's just a matter of how it's handled.  The dwarf in your party grumbling about the elven wizard being a tree-hugging wussy, or the continued animosity/genocide between a clan of mountain dwarves and orcs is a form of looking at race relations I suppose, though I doubt very much any of us assign any meaningful study to it.  In my games, and very much in my homebrew setting, people are generally disposed towards seeing people who are different from them in a certain light.  I don't make any social commentary, but I also don't try to make it where prejudice doesn't exist in some form.
 
Sexism:  I think this is definitely an area in which most gamers (myself included) are more lax.  Females in most pseudo-medieval settings aren't limited to Peasant Wife, Lady of the Estate, Salt Wife, or Dock Whore, and that's fine with me.  I suppose if I were to play something attempting to accurately portray medieval society (which would be a never-ending quagmire and flame war to end all others), things might be a little different, but I can't see myself telling a new female player at my table her character will be starting off as a Level 2 Housefrau, or that her belief system revolves around "making supper and heirs--not neccessarily in that order".
 
Homophobia:  Hoo boy.  This came up in a sidebar from a regular game a while back, with one player claiming that in ancient Rome homosexuality was a-ok.  In actuality, Rome (and you can back me up or correct me here, Pundit) had a complex system where the amount of acceptability or shame of the practice was derived from one's relative, er..."position" in said relationship. Then we started talking about Sulla and Metrobius...
 
Anyhow, point being, this shit gets complicated, fast.  At my table, some characters are gay, some care, some don't.  I don't portray it as right or wrong, but rather just the way some folks are.  If characters are prejudiced against them, then that's part of their character.  Players, on the other hand, need to behave themselves--I've never had an issue with homophobia at my table, and I don't intend to start.  Leave the OOC politics and religion (which it seems to tie into a lot these days) away from the table.

I get enough of this type of shit in newspapers and in real life, so Im not interested in incorporating into my games.

I think that they add flavour to a campaign world if you know how to deploy them intelligently.

For example, there's nothing more dull than fantasy that pointlessly regurgitates the social conservatism and racial attitudes of the pre-war generations as in the LotR and the Narnia books.

Similarly, if the writer of the source material is clearly more racist than he should be then there's no point keeping it in the game.  I'm thinking of Lovecraft here whose letters are beyond the pale; he describes being in New York standing in line next to "Hideous negroes who look like gigantic chimpanzees" and "rat-faced jews" and occasionally he goes off on a proper Lovecraftian rant about the "semitico-negro-mongoloids" who ooze from door to door with the sweet and yet rancid stench of decay and foreign food following them in their wake.  Mercifully his books display the kind of casual racism of Lovecraft's class and period rather than the full-blooded neurosis and hatred he clearly felt.  I see no need to be "true" to the source material in cases such as Lovecraft or Robert E. Howard who is another one for talking about "ape-like negroes".

However, I'm slowly gearing up towards maybe running a game set in the Early Modern period of european history and it'd be remiss of me to not make the game about the struggles between Protestants and Catholics with all the ensueing hatreds that come with it.

I tend to get a lot of my inspiration (particulary for modern and future games) from newspapers and T.V. News.

I've just written about 5000 words about sexual attitudes in one particular game setting so I guess I should have an opinion about them.  Like Mr Analytical says, they add flavour if they're deployed intelligently

beejaz: If your running a game about building a community then you bet the characters will have sex lives.  Incidentally, I may have written the first published RPG rules for the use of artifical contraception

In the games I run I tend not to mention it, typically because I like a light-hearted game, with a comedy subtext if not an actually comedy game.  I'd use it if I needed another way to indicate that the bad guy was a baddie

Quote from: Hastur T. Fannonbeejaz: If your running a game about building a community then you bet the characters will have sex lives.  Incidentally, I may have written the first published RPG rules for the use of artifical contraception

Nah man. I was just kidding on that point. Maybe an [/sarcasm] would have been in order.

As a GM I all of these use these constantly. As a designer, I leave that to the GM. In my world, GM trumps designer every time.

-clash

Quote from: beejazzDude, RPG characters don't have sex lives. That's why they find it necessary to vent their frustrations on poverty-stricken goblinoids in random dungeon-crawls.

Hah!  Don't stop being awesome, beejazz!

This is how sexism, racism, and homophobia manifest in my games:

Sexism

"Is the drow cleric hot, DM?"
"I spend 1000gp on ales and whores."

(I'm not even sure that second one qualifies, since if a PC ever went looking for a male sex worker they'd find one at the same rates.)

Racism

"My ranger hates gnolls so much he gets +1 to hit."
"Whaddya mean we should parlay with them?  They're orcs, for thorssake!"

Homophobia

"Dude, I know buying just one room at the inn is cheaper and we're short on cash, but I ain't sharing a bed with you.  Don't ever suggest that again."

When I run modern games these issues come up even less, because the PCs are too busy being eaten by Cthulhu to have any conversation of the non-"Aieee!" variety.

Also:

QuoteIn my world, GM trumps designer every time.

That's golden.

Racism comes up a fair bit in any more primitive setting. It's often the motivation for villains.

Sexism, less so. As much as it might be repugnant in the state it exists in modern life, the particular issue of victimization of women is a touchy one for me. I used to run some villains as sexual predators, but eventually became uncomfortable portraying such base villains that I've defaulted to less beleivable but ultimately less disquieting villains who don't have much interest in abusing a position of powers over captured/dominated females. I guess most of my male villains these days might as well be Ken doll anotomically. (I also guess this might be a reason I frequently use female villains... I find it easier to beleive a female villain who wouldn't become a sexual predator.)

Quote from: Caesar SlaadRacism comes up a fair bit in any more primitive setting. It's often the motivation for villains.

Sexism, less so. As much as it might be repugnant in the state it exists in modern life, the particular issue of victimization of women is a touchy one for me. I used to run some villains as sexual predators, but eventually became uncomfortable portraying such base villains that I've defaulted to less beleivable but ultimately less disquieting villains who don't have much interest in abusing a position of powers over captured/dominated females. I guess most of my male villains these days might as well be Ken doll anotomically. (I also guess this might be a reason I frequently use female villains... I find it easier to beleive a female villain who wouldn't become a sexual predator.)

A villain doesn't have to be a predator to be an asshole.
Take Gendo Ikari for example. Did he sleep with and then betray Katsuragi (and her mother, for that matter)? Yes. But was it consenting adults? Yes.

Of course, all this falls apart where he violates Rei in ways that aren't even physically possible in an attempt to bring his dead wife back from the grave (or, rather, to go to her... it's all kind of vague considering how he fails and Rei pretty much steals his arm and all).

Can't we all just get along and use Greek myth or Shakespeare for morality examples? ;)

It depends on the genre, and on how it's handled by the group.

Quote from: JongWKIt depends on the genre, and on how it's handled by the group.

Which is why I leave such things to the GM, other than the most general points. The GM knows his or her group better than any designer could, and knows best how to implement such things - or not.

-clash

The other thing I was thinking, is in an historic setting, it may well be that a PC/NPC that is otherwise a good-guy could well be sexist or even racist to a degree that isn't acceptable nowdays, just because it was the norm of the period.

Fighting against such prejudices can be as an interesting and rewarding conflict as fighting an ogre.

My group generally uses all the tools at our disposal for story and roleplay. This includes the less pleasant aspects of humanity. For example, in our Shadowrun group, the ork isn't widely trusted within the group to do anything involving brains, despite the fact that he's proven himself time and again to be intelligent. The woman in the group is often talked down to by the male leader, using lots of condescending terms. And this is just within the group. Nevermind the fact that the aforementioned ork PC is often pulled over by police, even brutalized, for "being an ork in a 60 kph zone", the woman gets leered at by everyone, half the group is constantly skirting a sexual harrassment suit, and there's more sodomy inferred in our games than a prison movie.

And you should see what elf ears sell for on the black market.

Quote from: BagpussThe other thing I was thinking, is in an historic setting, it may well be that a PC/NPC that is otherwise a good-guy could well be sexist or even racist to a degree that isn't acceptable nowdays, just because it was the norm of the period.

Fighting against such prejudices can be as an interesting and rewarding conflict as fighting an ogre.

I have always found it so. In a racist culture, such as the early 20th century US, my players are going to find both sympathetic and non-sympathetic racists. and both nice and nasty non-racists. Moving against such internalized and deeply embedded cultural prohibitions is always difficult, and to me heroic. Usually, though, an otherwise decent person in such a setting tends to manifest this cultural racism in a casual or thoughtless manner as opposed to joining the KKK and organizing lynchings.

-clash

Quote from: BagpussThe other thing I was thinking, is in an historic setting, it may well be that a PC/NPC that is otherwise a good-guy could well be sexist or even racist to a degree that isn't acceptable nowdays, just because it was the norm of the period.

Don't forget that the reason why Achilles was sulking in his tent in the Illiad was that Agamemnon took the captured woman he had given Achilles to rape back because he had to give the woman he had picked for himself to rape back.  He took back the captured woman he gave Achilles so he'd still have a woman to rape and poor Achilles was upset because he didn't have his woman to abuse.

Talk about cultural context... I mean, shit, here I am writing from South America where the very definitions of "Racism", "sexism", and "homophobia" are utterly different than in north america (and it is MORE complex than just saying that latinamericans are racists, sexists, or homophobes; because in reality its that they view the whole thing from a different angle, and have strong but alternative definitions of all three).

How much moreso if you are running an historical game?

I mean shit, if you're running D&D, then its like what Jrients said, above.  If you're doing anything that is meant to emulate history, however, those are three pretty classical issues, that you really can't help but present. I mean shit, homosexuality as we know it is really only a 20th century invention.
The ancient Greeks wouldn't have understood what the fuck you were on about if you were trying to talk about "homosexuality", as it would fit nowhere in their society.

Besides that, racism, sexism or homophobia can be pretty significant issues, if addressed in a meaningful way, that can add depth to a game.
The WRONG way to do this is to either turn it into a sophomoric excuse for people to display this sexist, racist or homophobic attitude with the excuse that they're "just roleplaying it"; or to turn a game into a heavy-handed diatribe from a 21st century context about the "evils of racism" with all the moral profundity of an After-school Special.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPunditTalk about cultural context... I mean, shit, here I am writing from South America where the very definitions of "Racism", "sexism", and "homophobia" are utterly different than in north america (and it is MORE complex than just saying that latinamericans are racists, sexists, or homophobes; because in reality its that they view the whole thing from a different angle, and have strong but alternative definitions of all three).

  Pffft... dude a few hundred trannies and some mangy old indians does not a completely different definition of racism (or homophobia) make.

Quote from: BagpussDo these issues appear much in your games?

Yeah depending on the game I'm running and if the players are interested. And these traits are not just for the baddies either. One of the most interesting but draining games I ever ran was CoC based in a Southern City in the 1920's with all the pcs playing black characters. Rasicm, Sexism and Homophobia was so overt both from inside and outside the group. Interesting but draining.

Regards,
David R

On Dragon Earth it works like this: There is no racism or sexism in the traditional sense. It's more a matter of in-group versus out-group. You're part of the in-group you're cool. You're part of an out-group you walk careful around the in-group.

Each species has its own races or ethnic groups. Ural and Chukchi orcs for example. Probably the biggest difference is that between Bavarian and Tamil kobolds. Yet those two populations get along famously. (Probably has something to do with the fact they only recently rediscovered each other after some 20,000 years or so.)

Slavery was not unknown back when, but never became as popular as it did in the real world. For one thing, elves and goblins tend to be rather individualistic, and never took to being owned. Both discouraged slave owning in other species as well, with the last official slave holding state, Brazil, freeing theirs in 1855*. Though it is rumored that the Saudi Principalities still have slaves in contravention of their own laws.

Sexism is another matter. By halfling standards gnolls would be considered extremely sexist. Thing is, no is no apreciable sexual dimorphy among halflings, while gnoll males are usually about 3 times as large as gnoll females.

Another thing which plays a role is the fact religion did not develop as it did here. Goblins tend to be rough on their women. The human Israelites, eager to show they were better than the goblin tribes they fought with, determirned to treat their women better. Thus the Dragon Earth Hebrews allowed women priests in The Temple, and had women kings.

Homophobia on the other hand just never developed. Because the concepts of homosexuality and heterosexuality never developed. There are those who prefer men, and those who prefer women. But it is a rare person who has exclusive sexual relations with one gender. A gent may like the ladies a lot, but he is not necessarily adverse to a little cuddle and poke time with his best bud.

Where the young are concerned, the availability of truth magic and telepathy is of great assistance. Helps a lot in determining the truth of claims of consensuality or rape. Acknowledging that very young children can consent to sex has also helped in developing devices and magic aimed at the children.

It has also helped in identifying and apprehending sexual predators. One might see a grown man and his 11 year old boy lover assisting the authorities in the apprehension and arrest of a sexual predator and his grown male victim.

As you can see, it's a very different world than ours. One that could upset a lot of people. But they are comfortable with it, and things tend to work out for the best.

*The United States of America freed the slaves in 1836 as a result of the Dred Scott decision. The plaintiff's lawyers successfully argued that it wasn't right that human beings should be held in involuntary servitude, when such as elves, halflings, goblins, dwarfs, and orcs were not. The state of South Carolina threatened to secede if the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in favor of the plaintiff, but President of the U. S.  Sam Houston moved troops into place and South Carolina calmed down.

I use most of that sort of thing as a plot device.

For example, in a recent campaign I had an evil rapist sorceror. There was a prophecy that his children "will destroy and rule the land." So he thought he'd better have a lot of children! To this end, he changed his appearance to that of someone a particular woman either loved or feared or could be intimidated by; a husband, brother, uncle, next-door neighbour, etc. Then he seduced them or forced them.

So basically this sorceror was evil because he was a serial rapist. He turend out to be the father of one of the PCs, but wouldn't acknowledge her, "I acknowledge no daughters." I figured it's a bit hard to be a rapist without being somewhat sexist... Later when she turned out to be magically-able like him he was willing to acknowledge her - so he was a selfish prick, too!

The PCs really came to hate the guy, and were quite happy to slay him in the end.

I put racism in, in the form of "this little land is our world, and everyone outside it is a savage or a crazy guy." That's the general attitude, but players are free to choose whichever attitudes for their own characters they wish.

Homophobia isn't really an issue for my recent campaigns, because they've either been in ultra-modern settings - in the modern developed West, where people aren't very prejudiced (compared to other cultures and times) - or in pseudo-medieval worlds; and before about 1600, homosexuality wasn't regarded as an identity, but a behaviour. There was sex, love and marriage, and those three didn't always come together in the form of one other person. "Yes, yes, we know you'd rather sleep with boys. Who wouldn't? But you still must marry and produce an heir, and be kind to your wife. Do your duty. And keep the boys somewhere out of your wife's sight, just like Joe does with his three mistresses."

Depends entirely on the game.  All flesh, not so much.  Who cares about racism and such when someone's trying to eat your face?  Exalted tends to be concerned with more epic events, and racism may exist between fictional cultural groups but that's hardly moving.

Buffy on the other hand deals with these issues quite a bit.  It's sort of the central conciet - life's problems cast as mythical threats.  Even the idea of the Slayer is ironic, turning the typical weak feminine stereotypical victim into a champion.  In actual play we've dealt with this a couple of times, people assuming the Slayer is a weak girl.  Homophobia was set up - one character was bi and in the closet with a crush on her 'best friend'.  We had some humorous uncomfortable moments, but the character went other directions and we really never got to explore it.  Racism, only obliquely.  One character has demon blood in him and is going through an identity crisis.  It could be seen as an allusion to racism though it wasn't intended that way, and to be honest the idea that it could be only occurred to me just now.

So it depends on the game, and modern games are going to be much more likely to deal with these problem.

Wow, mythusmage, Dragon Earth sounds fascinating!

I've put a lot of thought into this for my own setting, and have yet to resolve things evenly to a satisfactory answer. Of late, my leaning is towards having different cultures, represented by different geographical locations, have vastly different attitudes about various aspects of culture.

The most sophisticated culture, with the most central location of the "known world," is extremely cosmopolitan, overall, and progressive in attitudes. Nonetheless, it is composed itself of individual groups; whether racial, religious, neighborhood, which may hold variations of their own on matters of sex and gender. Slavery is permitted within tightly described limits, but only through a loophole and against the personal opinion of the City's steward (he is sworn to uphold the law he has received as received, and it says nothing about slavery, a thought abhorrent enough to the founders that they didn't even think to forbid it.

One of the three southern cultures is agricultural, and while homosexuality isn't unknown or forbidden, it is looked on somewhat askance. The second group is divided between a maritime group and an agricultural group. The maritimers are dominated by a dark, sacrificial religious cult, but their gender equality and sexual tolerances are broad; while the agricultural highlanders are extremely egalitarian in legal senses but maintain traditional gender roles in most ways.

The northern cultures are much less tolerant, the first openly sneering and denigrating the issue, and the next absolutely intolerant. The second culture also treats its women as chattel.

I don't like allowing discrimination and irrational prejudice in my setting, but find them after quite a bit of thought to be important for story-telling purposes--they give me the tools to compare and contrast actions, activities and outlooks without having to resort to "good" and "evil"--I want my world to be many shades, not just black and white, as a place in which to play.

Quote from: Mr. AnalyticalPffft... dude a few hundred trannies and some mangy old indians does not a completely different definition of racism (or homophobia) make.

Buh?

Quote from: mythusmageWhere the young are concerned, the availability of truth magic and telepathy is of great assistance. Helps a lot in determining the truth of claims of consensuality or rape. Acknowledging that very young children can consent to sex has also helped in developing devices and magic aimed at the children.

It has also helped in identifying and apprehending sexual predators. One might see a grown man and his 11 year old boy lover assisting the authorities in the apprehension and arrest of a sexual predator and his grown male victim.

Whu??

Quote from: mythusmageWhere the young are concerned, the availability of truth magic and telepathy is of great assistance. Helps a lot in determining the truth of claims of consensuality or rape. Acknowledging that very young children can consent to sex has also helped in developing devices and magic aimed at the children.

It has also helped in identifying and apprehending sexual predators. One might see a grown man and his 11 year old boy lover assisting the authorities in the apprehension and arrest of a sexual predator and his grown male victim.

(http://i77.photobucket.com/albums/j43/Maddman75/Misc/holylivingfuck.jpg)

You know that other thread where I said I was cool with a game with an agenda I didn't personally agree with?  Yeah, well turns out there are lines and this is WAYYY the fuck over them.  I would walk right the hell out of a "pedophiles are A-O.K. because our psychics say the kids totally like it" game and never come back.

Quote from: mythusmageIt has also helped in identifying and apprehending sexual predators. One might see a grown man and his 11 year old boy lover assisting the authorities in the apprehension and arrest of a sexual predator and his grown male victim.

:wtfsign:

Oh good.  It wasn't just me

But surely magic can only discover what the child wants?  The issue isn't whether or not a child wants to have sex but whether or not that child has the mental capacities to make an informed decision to give his or her consent.

Whether or not a child is telling the truth when they say they enjoyed it is neither here nor there.  The fact is that paedophilia is wrong because kids don't have the emotional and intellectual maturity to understand sex.

Having said that, there's paedophilia in Huxley's with a similarly questionable justification.

I don't know whether "Approved by the NAMBLA" would be a selling point for a game...

I think I'd have to see a bit more of the game before I made a judgement call on it for certain, but this does sound like one of those cases of "sending a message".
More often, its the "anti" crowd which sends these kinds of messages.

In any case, to me it is really a question of trying to present things as they are, rather than making a convoluted effort at prosletyzing in some way.

For example, in ancient Rome the values on things like sexuality were totally utterly different from our own.
There was an awful lot of what we today would call pedophilia going on.
Not just that, but some of the very BEST emperors would have been labelled pedophiles today.
They also would have been labelled as "homosexuals", even though that isn't strictly correct either; its certainly nothing to do with how they would have likely viewed themselves.

So what can you do with all this?
Well, you could make a game where you impose 20th century values on ancient Rome, making it blatantly clear that "pedophilia (or homosexuality, if you happen to think that way) is evil" and making sure that, in the game, absolutely every incidence of this act ends up having terrible negative consequences, even though that isn't really the case historically.
Or you could, I suppose, turn it around, the way some gay academics have to try to present the "good emperors" as having been good BECAUSE they were gay, and turn the whole thing into a glorification of 20th century homosexuality, even though ancient roman homosexuality was nothing like modern homosexuality (or, substitute pedophilia for that if you happen to think THAT way...hell, I understand that Hadrian has been turned into something of a "poster boy" for NAMBLA).

Or you could, instead, make a game where you present the facts as they were, prejudices and habits of that time delineated such as they were, with no need for a "20th century commentary". That's usually what I choose to do.
But what makes that scary for some people is that it demonstrates how utterly relative many of what we believe to be our "absolute" values really are.

Meanwhile, when you figure out what things really are the same between us and the Romans (or other historical cultures), that's where you clue into what the REAL absolute human truths are.

RPGPundit

That's what I liked about Rome, the TV series. They went quite far in portraying the morals as they were then, especially compared to previous works (well, apart from "I, Claudius" maybe). But I didn't expect PC morals when John Milius is executive producer...

I always find it rather disturbing when people assume there's some kind of moral evolution where the next step is by definition better than the previous one. It gets even more disturbing when someone tells me that the last step was done 2000 years ago...

Human nature hasn't really ever changed.  We're still all about getting fucked up, killing our enemies and shagging something young and energetic.

At the moment in Britain there's something of a moral panic going on about binge drinking but the thing is that the residents of these isles have always been complete piss-heads going back to Rome.  I mean the Romans used to drink their wine waterred down... the early British didn't though.

It's actually something I find quite comforting.  Whether we're decadent romans or goose-stepping Nazis we all want to acquire status, get wasted and maybe fuck something before going to sleep.

You're absolutely right about those universal values, analytical.  Mind you, I also think there are others too, some that might be seen as a little more "virtuous", but really I think that there's a lot of virtue to be had in recognizing human nature warts and all.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPunditIn any case, to me it is really a question of trying to present things as they are, rather than making a convoluted effort at prosletyzing in some way.

Quote from: RPGPunditMeanwhile, when you figure out what things really are the same between us and the Romans (or other historical cultures), that's where you clue into what the REAL absolute human truths are.

The thing is, people who proselytize often feel that they are trying to show things "as they are".  Indeed, you feel that you're communicating the real absolute human truths by showing things "as they are".  That's a form of proselytizing.  

Conversely, I believe that a game can have unhistorical characters -- i.e. good guys who are truly good, and villains who are capital-E Evil -- without feeling like a clumsy diatribe.  I think the difference in how well-executed and reasonable the portrayals are, not whether they say anything.

Quote from: jhkimThe thing is, people who proselytize often feel that they are trying to show things "as they are".  Indeed, you feel that you're communicating the real absolute human truths by showing things "as they are".  That's a form of proselytizing.

And how does that impact the issue of "realism" in role-playing games?  That's exactly the sort of issue I had in mind when I was talking about the subjective perspecitive that everyone has of reality.  We don't have to rehash everything that we've been going round and round on in other threads but I'm curious how this statement fits in with your other views about "realism" in role-playing games.

Quote from: RPGPunditYou're absolutely right about those universal values, analytical.  Mind you, I also think there are others too, some that might be seen as a little more "virtuous", but really I think that there's a lot of virtue to be had in recognizing human nature warts and all.

RPGPundit

Keeping this in mind will serve a GM well when attempting to create credible characters.

Regards,
David R

Well, at least no one is going on at great length about how their elves and dwarves are different! :p

I think it all depends on what the DM and players are comfortable with, specifically the level of submersion* they are seeking.

Some groups are comfortable with familiar tropes lightly sketched and can have a grand time with it, others may want to develop a setting which is very alien in mores and tone but has its own internal consistency and distinct feel.

*Immersion is like getting wet. Submersion means you intend to stay down for a while :)

I once played in a game where one of the characters had sex with a gnome. She was later executed for beastiality.

Quote from: RPGPunditFor example, in ancient Rome the values on things like sexuality were totally utterly different from our own.

In what ways were they totally utterly different?  

Do Roman views on male-male sexual relations really differ from what you'll find in an American prison?  Do you really think there weren't critiques of these things and other moral issues from other Romans?  

For example, have you read Tacitus' Germania where he contrasts the Germans with his own culture by saying, "In truth, nobody turns vices into mirth there, nor is the practice of corrupting and of yielding to corruption, called the custom of the Age."  Aren't you also turning "vices into mirth" and "corrupting and yielding to corruption" and calling it "the custom of the Age"?

Would you say that Tacitus was writing a "20th century commentary"  nearly 19 centuries before the 20th Century?

Quote from: RPGPunditWell, you could make a game where you impose 20th century values on ancient Rome, making it blatantly clear that "pedophilia (or homosexuality, if you happen to think that way) is evil" and making sure that, in the game, absolutely every incidence of this act ends up having terrible negative consequences, even though that isn't really the case historically.

Actually, there were a lot of terrible negative consequences.  They were simply willing to accept or overlook those consequences, much as people are willing to accept the consequences of drinking, smoking, or random sex with strangers.  The 100 or so dead newborns found in the sewers of Askalon, whether the result of prostitution or something else, suggest a pretty nasty underside to life in the Roman world.  

Quote from: RPGPunditOr you could, instead, make a game where you present the facts as they were, prejudices and habits of that time delineated such as they were, with no need for a "20th century commentary". That's usually what I choose to do.

You make it sound like the principles of the "20th century commentary" are somehow alien to earlier times.  I think that's cultural relativism running amok.

That a real Achilles might have ignored the screams and tears of the captive women he raped does not change moral implications of raping captive women or the fact that there would be screams and/or tears.   An Achilles would likely have not liked to find himself or his mother in such circumstances.  All it means is that an Achilles, despite whatever other virtues and military prowess he might have had, was indifferent to the pain and suffering of his victims.  He was a pouty prima donna.  And it's not as if modern Americans don't excuse and even admire pouty prima donnas, even those accused of rape (I can think of many examples, including sports figures, movie stars, a director, musicians, authors, politicians, and so on).

Quote from: RPGPunditBut what makes that scary for some people is that it demonstrates how utterly relative many of what we believe to be our "absolute" values really are.

Read Tacitus.  Look at how and why Christianity spread throughout the Roman empire, particularly among women of social standing.  The values and consequences were always there.  You can find evidence of them in Romans writing about themselves, for example in the writings of Tacitus.  An unless you want to argue that male-on-male rape in modern American prisons is morally acceptable there because it's part of the prevailing culture in those prisons, I think you need to realize that there is often a huge disconnect between what people know to be right and wrong and what they allow and practice.  And that people do things because they feel forced to do them doesn't mean that they consider them good or would continue to do them if they had a choice.

Quote from: RPGPunditMeanwhile, when you figure out what things really are the same between us and the Romans (or other historical cultures), that's where you clue into what the REAL absolute human truths are.

And what do you think those are?

On Dragon Earth pedophilia is seen as an illness. It is a psychiatric disorder in which the victim has a need to dominate and control. Invariably young children. Sometimes very young.

Consent has nothing to do with it. Often consent is unwanted, the pedophile wants rejection so he can overpower the child and have his way. It gives him a sense of power. A pedophile is nothing more than a serial killer who focuses on the immature. Under most legal codes on Dragon Earth pedophilia is defined as a form of rape. Often aggravated rape. The usual penalty is life imprisonment without the possibility of parole.

When a ten year old girl decides she wants to bond closer with her dad's friend, then arrangements are made so this bonding can proceed safely, and to the benefit of the child. The parents are supportive, society is supportive, her lover is supportive. And there are numerous cheap or free contraceptives available, along with "morning after" or even pregnancy termination techniques available just in case.

The people of Dragon Earth don't see consensual sex the way we do. They especially don't see it as harmful to the young. They do react as much as we do when children are harmed, for they are as dedicated to seeing their children grow up to be productive, contributing members of society as most of us.

Then you have pixies and fairies and critters like that. About as smart as you'd expect an animal with a brain that size to be. When a pixie swarm holds an orgy on a school ground, you'd better believe the kids are going to see it. A long time ago people decided it was better to teach the young how to do it right, them leave them ignorant. (Dragon Earth fairies are enthusiastic about copulation, but they are piss poor lovers.)

As for Dragon Earth adventurers, it wouldn't register. It's part of normal life. Now an eight year old boy getting beat up by his eight year old girl friend for trying to put it in the wrong hole would get attention, and few laughs, but nothing more than that. And except for the very young most people keep their sex private. Some cults engage in public sex acts on specific dates, and fertility rites always include public sex as part of the celebration, but the vast majority do it where they won't be interrupted by nosy parkers and bratty kids.

One last thing. Dragon Earth adults keep an eye out for the kids because of malevolent undead, ghouls, and fiends. When your hope for the future might end up an ambulatory corpse or eaten alive, their sexual behavior becomes a petty concern.

John: I'm not arguing that there wasn't a contemporary polemic about sexual mores, there was all kind of contemporary polemic. Tacitus was just the tip of the iceberg.

I'm saying that the nature of their debates and arguments were somewhat different. Some of their taboos were the same as ours, others were different. There were people like Tacitus, the emperor Augustus and others who were moralists of a sort, and had their particular causes or interests.  There was certainly condemnations of decadence, especially of the decadence of the courts of people like Caligula, Nero, or Domitian.  We know of Hadrian's wife's reaction to his behaviours as well.

Certainly, there was a reason for the promulgation of Christianity, and its virtues of chastity as well as its condemnation of "men lying with men".

What I'm saying is that some of the concepts of morality were nevertheless from a very different basis than ours. St. Augustine married a 10 year old girl because it was considered "more moral" for him to do so than to continue living in sin with an adult woman he appeared to love. Likewise, the concept of modern, 21st century homosexuality would have been almost totally foreign to the Romans. Their view on sexual identity worked from a different perspective, as do many cultures.

What I'm saying is that there's a tremendous difference in an RPG between approaching the views a (historical) culture would have on things like race, sex and sexual identity; or the logic of views that a fantasy society may have, and to simply slap on a 20th century point of view on these issues even though it creates a wierd kind of unbelievability or turns your game into a 21st century morality play.

As to what I think those objective values are; i think that the importance of family, the concept of things like individual liberty, valuing Truth, responsibility to the sources of one's virtue (be that the gods, one's personal philosophy, or the state, or the clan), the desire to better one's self and the next generation, cynicism and distrust of authorities.  There are surely many others that I'm forgetting at this late hour.

RPGPundit

Quote from: mythusmageOne last thing. Dragon Earth adults keep an eye out for the kids because of malevolent undead, ghouls, and fiends. When your hope for the future might end up an ambulatory corpse or eaten alive, their sexual behavior becomes a petty concern.

The "ambulatory corpse" bit aside; history and even modern realities seem to show this as the exact opposite.  Subsistence cultures (whether due to primitive conditions or due to third world poverty) almost consistently seem more concerned with the sexual activities of all their members, to the point that we see things like people in certain countries today being willing to see their children killed (or kill them themselves) rather than have them "dishonoured" by inappropriate sexual conduct.

RPGpundit

Quote from: mythusmageWhen a ten year old girl decides she wants to bond closer with her dad's friend, then arrangements are made so this bonding can proceed safely, and to the benefit of the child. The parents are supportive, society is supportive, her lover is supportive. And there are numerous cheap or free contraceptives available, along with "morning after" or even pregnancy termination techniques available just in case.

Has a pc ever had a relationship with a (npc)child in your game? The reason why I'm asking is that I have found pcs who are potrayed as racist, sexist or homophobic but never once have I encountered someone who is willing to portray a paedophile - even in your context of DragonEarth sexual mores.

I'm not shy about tackling issues - but I just don't see your justification working. I've read a lot of fiction both historical and otherwise about the sometimes provocative sexual morality of real or imagined settings, but playing a character who would subscibe to such notions is anathema to me.

If I have misconstrued your posts in any way, please feel free to correct me.

Regards,
David R

When writing YotZ, I have to address racism, sexism, and the nastier part of the human psyche.

It ain't easy, and has led some people to believe I put an overemphasis on sex and the abuse of women, but from what I've seen of anarchist areas, and from what research has shown me of modern day slavery...

Reality is far, far worse than what I've put in my products.

There's a LOT of nasty motherfuckers out there who only deserve a rope, and maybe dirt kicked over thier dead fucking faces.

There's some racist motherfuckers out there, and not even RaHoWa or FATAL can REALLY approach just how fucked up some people are.

So yeah, it does show up in my games.

Elves hate half-elves and half-orcs, and orcs.
Orcs hate elves and half-elves.
Dwarves hate gnomes due to a war several centuries ago.
And the majority of the races in my homebrewed campaign warn children: "Don't stray far from the den, lest a human leap from the bushes and rape you!"

In YotZ?

The P-NAN's are the worst. Vile, slave trading/keeping misogynists and racist motherfuckers who deserve any bullets the PC's throw their way.

Quote from:  mythusmageThey especially don't see it as harmful to the young.

I'm sorry but the more you describe this setting, the more it sounds like I should find the NAMBLA seal of approval somewhere on the game.  Is Judith Levine listed as an inspiration somewhere?

[ADDED: To clarify, this is not intended to apply that Judith Levine is a member of NAMBLA or supports NAMBLA.  Judith Levine is a mainstream advocate of lowered ages of consent and was included in this comment as a possible arguably "mainstream" source of the perspective that sex between adults and children is not necessarily harmful.]

Quote from: John MorrowI'm sorry but the more you describe this setting, the more it sounds like I should find the NAMBLA seal of approval somewhere on the game.  Is Judith Levine listed as an inspiration somewhere?

I'm struggling a bit too.  What on Earth prompted such a detailed justification of this in the setting?

I also seriously question the psychology outlined, which fundamentally misses Mr A's quite correct point that consent really is not the issue, the issue is more of whether consent can be meaningful at that age and frankly I'm not persuaded it can be.

I do wonder in designing a game world why so much time was spent on this particular topic and making it acceptable.

Quote from: RPGPunditThe "ambulatory corpse" bit aside; history and even modern realities seem to show this as the exact opposite.  Subsistence cultures (whether due to primitive conditions or due to third world poverty) almost consistently seem more concerned with the sexual activities of all their members, to the point that we see things like people in certain countries today being willing to see their children killed (or kill them themselves) rather than have them "dishonoured" by inappropriate sexual conduct.

RPGpundit

I agree, the thing is in a subsistence environment an unwanted birth is a serious issue.

Of course, this rather odd setting has contraception for 10 year olds, so history may be a poor guide.

Quote from: BalbinusI do wonder in designing a game world why so much time was spent on this particular topic and making it acceptable.

  Quite. It's the same problem with FATAL really... the issue isn't whether or not the rules for anal rape work or capture the phenomenon but why someone would sit at a computer thinking about how best to deal with the anal rape issue before writing out the mathematical formula allowing GMs to calculate the degree os elasticity of a character's anus.

   In this case it boggles the mind that someone would actually think through the ramifications of magic in the context of people wanting sex with under-aged kids far enough to actually think up cases where an NPC and his 11 year old lover would interact with the PCs.

Quote from: John MorrowI'm sorry but the more you describe this setting, the more it sounds like I should find the NAMBLA seal of approval somewhere on the game.  Is Judith Levine listed as an inspiration somewhere?

Okay, what is NAMBLA and who is Judith Levine ?

Regards,
David R

Quote from: Mr. AnalyticalIn this case it boggles the mind that someone would actually think through the ramifications of magic in the context of people wanting sex with under-aged kids far enough to actually think up cases where an NPC and his 11 year old lover would interact with the PCs.

This is what I'm trying to get at.

Regards,
David R

Quote from: BalbinusI also seriously question the psychology outlined, which fundamentally misses Mr A's quite correct point that consent really is not the issue, the issue is more of whether consent can be meaningful at that age and frankly I'm not persuaded it can be.

Look up Judith Levine and the controversy surrounding her book advocating more and better sex for kids.  Yes, folks, that's the slippery slope you see slipping.  Don't say you weren't warned.

Quote from: BalbinusI do wonder in designing a game world why so much time was spent on this particular topic and making it acceptable.

There are people in the real world spending their time trying to make this issue acceptable.

Quote from: David ROkay, what is NAMBLA and who is Judith Levine ?

Google is your friend.  

http://www.google.com./

Quote from: John MorrowLook up Judith Levine and the controversy surrounding her book advocating more and better sex for kids.  Yes, folks, that's the slippery slope you see slipping.  Don't say you weren't warned.

  Yeah but a slippery slope is a fallacy, yeah?

  Wikipedia says that Levine argues for a liberalisation of the US age of consent, which strikes me as fair enough... it's 16 in the UK.  She also argues for the view that kids are sexual beings, which from personal experience rings true... if from the age of about 13 onwards a woman had offered me sex I would have taken her up on it.  Anyway, the Wikipedia article seems to suggest that the book was more concerned with arguing against the view that people aren't sexual until they reach the age of 18

  The campaign world in question suggests that it's okay to shag 11 year olds.

  In general I'm not all that horrified by discussions of lowering the age of consent, partly because I know I was a horny little shit but also because I think it's healthy for a society to re-evaluate its most basic principles.

Quote from: BalbinusI agree, the thing is in a subsistence environment an unwanted birth is a serious issue.

No, that's not the main issue.  In most cases, the main issue is paternity.  Unless the setting has reliable paternity tests and an infrastructure for child support payments, the objective for men is often to make sure that their children really are their children and not some other guys kids.  Many men still divide women into those they have fun with and those they'd consider marrying for a reason.  There are also other debatable social issues, too.

Quote from: BalbinusOf course, this rather odd setting has contraception for 10 year olds, so history may be a poor guide.

Contraception is also a major problem for any subsistence culture.  Much of the Western world currently has a birth rate in the 1.3 children per woman range.  That's a shrinking population.  While it remains to be seen if that will be fatal for Western countries, it would almost certainly be fatal in a dangerous high-fatality environment.  That's why I loved the scene in the new Battlestar Galactica where Adama, looking at Rosalyn sitting in front of the population number, points out that abortion really runs counter to what humanity needs to survive, which is more people having children, not less.

That's a big part of why I wrote the population essay that ultimately got published in the Tribe 8 Companion.  There we have a high fatality setting and I wanted to explain how the various tribes reproduced and could grow rather than dying out.  For example, if the Joanites are sending all of their women into battles to die at a young age, how do they reproduce?

Quote from: Mr. AnalyticalYeah but a slippery slope is a fallacy, yeah?

Sometimes.  What you need to demonstrate is that the slope is actually slippery for it to be valid.  Often it's not and it's a fallacy.  Sometimes it is and it's not.  

Quote from: Mr. AnalyticalWikipedia says that Levine argues for a liberalisation of the US age of consent, which strikes me as fair enough... it's 16 in the UK.

I'll spare you the lecture on Wikipedia's biases.  Try Google. You'll find articles pro and con.

Quote from: Mr. AnalyticalThe campaign world in question suggests that it's okay to shag 11 year olds.

Arguably, so does Levine.  From what I understand, she thinks that sex between an adult and a 12 year-old should be legal so long as it's "consensual" and doesn't involve "exploitation", since she supports the laws in the Netherlands which she seems to think allows consent at 12 (even if it doesn't, in fact, do so).  If you can find a source that disputes this, I'd be interested in seeing it.  Or do you think there is a big difference between a 12 year-old and an 11 year-old?

Quote from: Mr. AnalyticalIn general I'm not all that horrified by discussions of lowering the age of consent, partly because I know I was a horny little shit but also because I think it's healthy for a society to re-evaluate its most basic principles.

It sounds more like she's standing up a straw man and knocking it down to me, since I don't think anyone seriously argues that children magically become sexual at 18.  And I would argue that discussions about re-evaluating certain basic principles are often a bad sign, not a good one.

I think one can certainly legitimately discuss the age of consent, it varies hugely country to country.

I also think though that arguing for knocking a couple of years off is a world away from the kind of stuff NAMBLA is advocating.

If, in a historical game, characters had 14 year old mistresses, well that happened.

If, by contrast, a game spends ages on how to get 10 year old mistresses, I think a line may have been crossed.

Where the age is people can and do reasonably differ, we are after all talking about an absolute legal limit for an individual developmental issue.  Below a certain age however and I think you'll find no reputable developmental psychologist arguing in favour.

I'd also add that, perhaps undeservedly, I get a bit suspicious when people get really interested in the issue and they are not near the age in question or health professionals.

I mean, I can see why a 17 year old dating a 15 year old would care, and I can see why a health professional should care.  I start to struggle to see why it is an issue of great concern to a single guy in his mid thirties or forties who is not involved in teenage health or welfare issues directly or indirectly.

I have no view on Levine, I know nothing about her.

John, spot on with respect to the paternity issue, it occurred to me after that post but I didn't think to edit.  Thanks for the follow-up.

You said it.  There is something inherently creepy about a forty or fifty-something year old unaffiliated guy lobbying or endorsing young age of consent or legalizing child-adult sexual relationships.

Quote from: John MorrowLook up Judith Levine and the controversy surrounding her book advocating more and better sex for kids.  Yes, folks, that's the slippery slope you see slipping.  Don't say you weren't warned.

To be fair, some of the controversy surrounding that book is due to exagerrated claims made by some very conservative politicians.  Her book wasn't particularly inspired, but it was basically a piece of feminist academia, not a kiddie-sex manifesto or whatever the fuck it was made out to be.

Her basic arguments is that Americans have serious issues with thinking of children as beings with any kind of sexuality, including adolescents (which is true), and contrasting this with other countries where there is a slightly more realistic view of child and adolescent sexual identity (which is also true), and that age of consent laws should be drastically cut back because they oppress the freedom of young people to have sex (which is opinion, and arguable; I certainly think its pretty idiotic to consider a "17 and 11 month" year old a child who cannot under any circumstances consent to sex but magically consider an 18 year old acceptably mature for the same, and given that without a doubt adolesecents ARE sexual beings something like Canada's age of consent at 14 is something a bit more reasonable).

Anyways, my point is there's a pretty huge fucking gap between what she's about and what something like NAMBLA is about.

RPGPundit

Thanks to all for their views on Judith Levine and NAMBLA. I was working late and google was not an option - sites were blocked - for reasons which were explained to me by the kindly rotund night shift manager, who besides wanting to know why I was interested in "these sensitive sites" what was all this "RPG business" about - when I showed her this site.

So over coffee and smokes - the former which she excepted gratefully - she was breaking fast - the latter I got a mild lecture and envious glances - she was trying to quit.

I can safely say, that therpgsite has got a new lurker - a middle aged Malay woman in Malaysia, who just learnt about roleplaying last night. (Don't worry Pundit  -  D&D was my only example and I advocated that D20 should be the system her kids (they loved LotR and Harry Potter) start with :D )

Back to the topic at hand. I would be really surprised if the players of DragonEarth were comfortable with the subject matter as described in the post. Discourse on the age of consent is all well and good, but actually playing - with others no less -  to my mind at least, in such a creepy setting is another thing.

Now, I realize that I don't really have much info on exactly what happens during a game - but here's the thing, when a setting defines what is socially acceptable , and by this I mean behaviour which is sanctioned legally, and something that pcs would conceivably do, and this behaviour regarless of any debate about the age of consent in real life is reviled (and subject to the harshest punishment of the law) and rightly so - sex of any kind between adults and children - I get pretty disgusted, it's troubling that grown adults would actually feel comfortable playing in a setting like this - or rather they would be comfortable in each others company while playing in a setting like this.

Regards,
David R

NAMBLA as a whole can take a long walk on a short pier, with weights tied to their ankles. NAMBLA will accept anybody who will support them, even predators.

On Dragon Earth sex and the young are background. The party paladin wants a night with a 16 year old prostitute, he pays her fee and they retire to her place for the encounter. The curtain is drawn, and the players engage in innuendo, allusion, metaphor, and other such risible matters.

It's a part of life. The language is earthier, as is the art. But in some ways the people are actually more reticent regarding sex than we are. They're more into romance, seduction, and good old-fashioned cuddling. It's not that unusual to see two young men pitching woo while their wives are off buying baby clothes for their upcoming "blessed events".

BTW, people on Dragon Earth have terms for various sorts of sex. there is...

•Pleasure sex
•Obligation sex
•First Night sex
•Comfort sex
•Pity sex
•Reconciliation sex
•Initiation sex (Used with virgins.)
•Healing sex
•Fun sex
•Interspecies sex (Mostly between species of Human, but non-humans can be included as well. Non-humanoids are right out.)
•Duty sex

In the end it comes down to, it is how the world works in part. It is a way for people to bond, to build community. It is how they celebrate life, the gods, and God himself. It is an act of defiance against darkness and The Elder Night. It's even fun.

The most important thing is, advertising in modern day Dragon Earth is nowhere near as blatant, overt, agressive, or hostile where sex is concerned. Yes, beer ads do feature pretty girls, but the message is more along the lines of, "With our beer pretty girls will want to spend time with you." than the "Drink our stuff and the girls will impale themselves on your wang." message the real world sends out.

BTW, they do have pornography. It's viewed mostly by young kids, and when their parents catch them Mom or Dad will go over it with the child and point out where the stuff falls short of the reality. The goal is to keep the child from treating people as objects, and for the most part they succeed.

Quote from: mythusmage•Pleasure sex
•Obligation sex
•First Night sex
•Comfort sex
•Pity sex
•Reconciliation sex
•Initiation sex (Used with virgins.)
•Healing sex
•Fun sex
•Interspecies sex (Mostly between species of Human, but non-humans can be included as well. Non-humanoids are right out.)
•Duty sex

The normalcy keeps coming.

You have my pity, considering how absent your real sex life must be for you to have the time, energy, and motive to pursue this ^ instead.

Was that mean? I'm thinkin' maybe I should lay off them stimpacks (zerglings GAA!!)

Yeah, ummm...what everybody else said re: Dragon Earth.

I mean, it looks like you've done an awful lot of work on the setting. Taken as a whole, I'm sure it's one hell of an opus, a living breathing world rife for adventure, thorny social issues, and really compelling play. I'm certain that, provided you got the players and the system and got things rolling - and maybe you have - it'd give you awesome gaming from the get-go. But!

Here I'd like to make it clear I don't want to offend or appear to cast judgement on you. I've never seen anything from you that suggests you deserve either, and I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt that you're really a wonderful human being.

But when I discover that the GM has, in fact, taken a special amount of time - even ten minutes of thought - composing justifications for widespread sexual relationships between adults and children, I make semi-sincere apologies while I edge my way to the door. I don't care if it's social commentary or an attempt to put something different from our world in the setting, it squicks me pretty hard and I wouldn't be able to focus.

Props on the depth of work, though.

Shit, and here I thought Ed Greenwood was just a little bit creepy with the amount of attention he put into sex in his Forgotten Realms...

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPunditShit, and here I thought Ed Greenwood was just a little bit creepy with the amount of attention he put into sex in his Forgotten Realms...

RPGPundit

Oh geez, wasn't it on some German or South American message board where he really cut loose with some of the stuff, like how things are "handled" in Silverymoon and whatnot?

Did you read Greenwood's "Silverfall" of last year? To my increasingly disturbed eye, it read rather like a series of progressively brutal violations in seven chapters, and the thread of "plot" meant to tie the whole thing together seemed rendered a mere excuse by the denouement. Creeeepy.

In any case, I'd assume that the creepier characters in a setting were NPCs... I think I'd feel very uncomfortable DM'ing a player who wanted to play a sadist or predator or suchlike from the get-go. I'd not DM an "evil" character for a player, either--they can be nasty, or difficult, or what-have-you, but I'd greatly mislike overseeing a character created expressly to slaughter or inflict pain on the innocent in the hands of a player who really seemed to find their main enjoyment in such.

Kind of like the Therans in Earthdawn games... their culture is extremely twisted in many ways, with child slavery, blood magic, despotism--it's completely normal for them... but they are the NPCs, who are there to stand in contrast with the steadfast Barsaivians, assumed to be the players.

Yes, I've heard of some groups running as Theran adventurers, which is is, I suppose, entirely their option--I only hope that they didn't draw out a lot of the more elaborate ramifications. I would be uncomfortable running a game for ghareez PCs (the albino, secretive master torturers of Thera) because I'm real sure I wouldn't want to talk through the "feats" those PC classes would have! (Much less have to make up charts and tables to cover them) :)

Quote from: RPGPunditTo be fair, some of the controversy surrounding that book is due to exagerrated claims made by some very conservative politicians.  Her book wasn't particularly inspired, but it was basically a piece of feminist academia, not a kiddie-sex manifesto or whatever the fuck it was made out to be.

Out of curiosity, have you read it or are you judging it by the claims made about it like I am?  Since I haven't read it, I'd take this assessment more seriously if you've read it.  If not, are you simply accepting the word of liberal academics who jumped to its defense, who are not necessarily any more reliable or less prone to exagerration than the conservative activists who critiqued it?  

I've read both sides and while the conservative claims may have been exagerrations, can you dispute the key accusations that Levine supports the lowering of the age of consent to 12 (one year above the age given in the setting example) or used sources associated with the publication PAIDIKA (don't do a search on that one from work, either)?

Quote from: RPGPunditHer basic arguments is that Americans have serious issues with thinking of children as beings with any kind of sexuality, including adolescents (which is true), and contrasting this with other countries where there is a slightly more realistic view of child and adolescent sexual identity (which is also true), and that age of consent laws should be drastically cut back because they oppress the freedom of young people to have sex (which is opinion, and arguable; I certainly think its pretty idiotic to consider a "17 and 11 month" year old a child who cannot under any circumstances consent to sex but magically consider an 18 year old acceptably mature for the same, and given that without a doubt adolesecents ARE sexual beings something like Canada's age of consent at 14 is something a bit more reasonable).

As I said before this is a straw man argument because the age of consent is already 14 in a couple of US states and is 16 in many of the other, not 18 and the age of marriage goes down to 14 or even lower in several states, too.  I doubt that anyone but the most delusional person believes that sexuality magically happens at a certain age, let alone 18.  Can you find any example of anyone making the claim you are attributing to Levine's enemies?

The debate is whether encouraging children to engage in sexual activity is good or not and what actually constitutes encouraging children to engage in sexual activity.  

So what, then, is the real point of the book, especially given that Levine's academic credentials have nothing to do with psychology?  

Quote from: RPGPunditAnyways, my point is there's a pretty huge fucking gap between what she's about and what something like NAMBLA is about.

When a person thinks that sex between adults and 12 year-olds should be legal, no, not really.  When a person advocates that sex between adults and pre-teens might be harmless or even healthy, no, not really.

Quote from: John MorrowWhen a person thinks that sex between adults and 12 year-olds should be legal, no, not really.  When a person advocates that sex between adults and pre-teens might be harmless or even healthy, no, not really.

  Dude, when one pillar of your opposition to an argument is "Well it's legal in some states to have sex at 14 anyway", you really don't get to climb up on your moral high-horse about someone suggesting it should be 12.

  If you want to take issue with her argument I suggest you:

A) Actually address her argument as opposed to stand around huffing and puffing about how outrageous it is, and
B) Find out what her actual fucking argument is.

  You really shouldn't condemn books without reading them, especially when that involves dragging someone's name through the mud in a potentially libellous manner.

  If you're interested in the issue of age of consent politics, I suggest you go out and read some books about it rather than wallowing in self-righteous fury about a book you haven't even read simply because some right-wing websites tell you to.

Quote from: beejazzYou have my pity, considering how absent your real sex life must be for you to have the time, energy, and motive to pursue this ^ instead.

FYI, a large part of the reason why I have any interest in the subject is because I read William Dear's book on the disappearance of 14 year-old James Dallas Eggbert III, the kid who supposedly disappeared playing D&D in the steam tunnels of MSU.  Let's just say that it wasn't D&D that took him out of the state.

Some friends of mine and I compiled our experiences (or lack thereof) with teenaged and childhood sexuality once.  Our conclusion was that kids should be locked into chastity belts until their thirtieth birthdays.

There's no magic age at which you're able to handle sex, but I'd bet it's closer to fifty than fifteen.

Quote from: John MorrowFYI, a large part of the reason why I have any interest in the subject is because I read William Dear's book on the disappearance of 14 year-old James Dallas Eggbert III, the kid who supposedly disappeared playing D&D in the steam tunnels of MSU.  Let's just say that it wasn't D&D that took him out of the state.

Yeah... read the quote in my post to see what I'm referring to. I mean, the debate is fine, but whether or not it's okay to fuck eleven year olds doesn't generally cross my mind when I'm designing RPGs. In any case, this might be because it has NOTHING TO DO WITH GAMEPLAY. Or also because I don't have any desire to roleplay a pedophile (and I've roleplayed some pretty horrible people... I'm just more comfortable with violence, sadism, necromancy, multiple personality disorder, and religious persecution as opposed to fucking children).

Also, I might spend long periods of time calculation dicepool probabilities for my game, but I won't do the same for coming up with a billion lame excuses for sex that won't happen (pity sex, duty sex, I can't afford the rent sex, there's nothing good on TV sex). I'll leave that for whoever writes the scripts of porno flicks and bad sitcoms (the origin of the fictional "pity sex").

Wait wait wait...

People have sex with you to make up for poor sitcoms?  You're not Matt LeBlanc are you?

Quote from: Mr. AnalyticalWait wait wait...

People have sex with you to make up for poor sitcoms?  You're not Matt LeBlanc are you?

Wow... I actually laughed at something on the internet. It's been a looooong time, and I thank you.

Nah, though, I was making a comment about one of the less-creepy-more-lame Dragonworld posts (can't remember who posted it) and noting that sitcoms nowadays actually do toss around terms like "pity sex."

Although... I guess I've heard dumber excuses than that IRL.

Quote from: mythusmageBTW, people on Dragon Earth have terms for various sorts of sex. there is...

•Pleasure sex
•Obligation sex
•First Night sex
•Comfort sex
•Pity sex
•Reconciliation sex
•Initiation sex (Used with virgins.)
•Healing sex
•Fun sex
•Interspecies sex (Mostly between species of Human, but non-humans can be included as well. Non-humanoids are right out.)
•Duty sex

Yeah... I was referring to this.

Quote from: Mr. AnalyticalDude, when one pillar of your opposition to an argument is "Well it's legal in some states to have sex at 14 anyway", you really don't get to climb up on your moral high-horse about someone suggesting it should be 12.

I'm not saying that I approve of those laws, though I would argue that most children go through some fairly significant changes related to puberty between 12 and 14.  I'm saying that the arguement that Levine was somehow bringing the light of truth to benighted idiots who don't know that those less than 18 years of age might be sexual is absurd.  I think almost of her right-wing critics are well aware that children can be sexual beings.  

Quote from: Mr. AnalyticalA) Actually address her argument as opposed to stand around huffing and puffing about how outrageous it is, and
B) Find out what her actual fucking argument is.

I know more about her argument than what I've said.  There are plenty of articles on it, pro and con.  I've suggested that people do their own Googling (though not from work) and make up their own mind.  I'm not trying to convince you that Levine is the anti-Christ.  But I would suggest that her left-wind defenders are not necessarily any more objective than her right-wing critics, but by all means read both sides or her book, if you want.

Quote from: Mr. AnalyticalYou really shouldn't condemn books without reading them, especially when that involves dragging someone's name through the mud in a potentially libellous manner.

OK.  To make it clear since you are concerned with libel, I do not think Judith Levine actually supports NAMBLA.  I do think that advocating sexual relations which children as young as 12 years of age, especially when talking about issues such as "consent" with a child of that age is making an argument that effectively supports the agenda of NAMBLA and, in many ways, (probably unintentionally) parallels the arguments used by pedophiles who don't think they are doing children any harm and, in at least some cases, seem to think they are doing children a favor.

Quote from: Mr. AnalyticalIf you're interested in the issue of age of consent politics, I suggest you go out and read some books about it rather than wallowing in self-righteous fury about a book you haven't even read simply because some right-wing websites tell you to.

Have you read any books on the subject?  Have you read her book?

Going back to my original mention, Levine's argument, as summarized in every article I've read on the book, is that children can be sexual beings.  She also doesn't seem to see anything inherently wrong with sex between an adult and a 12 year-old (I'll happily look at evidence or quotes to the contrary, which given that this is a core criticism of her work, shouldn't be hard to find if she actually doesn't support such a thing -- maybe I'm just missing them).  That idea does seem to be at the core of the setting that more people than I seem to find troubling, unless you think that the difference between a 12 year-old and an 11 year-old makes a big difference in the morality of the situation.  Unlike NAMBLA, Levine is a mainstream source with some mainstream support.  Assuming that the author of the setting in question is not a supporter of NAMBLA, I'm honestly curious if they instead got their ideas from Levine, since her book seems to be the lightning rod book on the issue.

I'm well aware that right-wing websites exagerrate and distort, which is why I've read pro and con arguments.  It's often not that difficult to tell where the lies and exagerrations are when you read the arguments and counter-arguments.  In fact, a large part of why I haven't provided a more detailed summary of her arguments is that I think people should do their own research.  By all means make up your own mind.  

What I look for are specific claims and counter-claims.  Generally, when a claim is false or exagerrated, it's not difficult to find refutations.  Maybe I'm just missing them.  I'll happily look at any source that provides a detailed refutation of the arguments made against her and her book.

There's the debate on the age of consent and then there's the discussion on sex education for kids - both primarily dominated by adults. I'm more interested in the latter.  With all the problems going on with child rape, prostituition, exploitation etc carried out by adults - and I'm talking about crimes committed by adults here - I find that a setting any setting that attempts to normalize situations in which adults have realtionships with children repulsive.

Children experimenting between themselves is one thing. Adding adults to the mix brings nothing but trouble. There is too much room for abuse. There is an unbalance of power. Now some if not all of this is applicable to relationships children have between themselves - but I feel this is where education comes into play.

I have no objections to sexuality in games. In a post apocalyptic world issues such as safe child bearing ages, abortion etc could possibly be a factor depending on how realistic one wants the setting to be.

Regards,
David R

Quote from: John MorrowI think almost of her right-wing critics are well aware that children can be sexual beings.  

  ...and yet these are the people who oppose any form of sexual education for kids apart from telling them not to engage in it.  Sounds to me like not only do they have trouble grasping the idea that kids are sexual beings but they also have trouble understanding how a sex drive even works.

  Clearly, the American right needs to learn a few lessons about childhood sexuality and as such I think it's a good thing that a mainstream book be written on the subject.

QuoteBut I would suggest that her left-wind defenders are not necessarily any more objective than her right-wing critics, but by all means read both sides or her book, if you want.

  The substance of the debate should be one dealt with by empirical science.  Where does psychology stand on the issue?  It's not about left and right-wing bias, it's about psychological facts.  Any discussion of the subject that doesn't engage with that side of things is a waste of everyone's time.  Politics doesn't really enter into it at all.

QuoteI do think that advocating sexual relations which children as young as 12 years of age, especially when talking about issues such as "consent" with a child of that age is making an argument that effectively supports the agenda of NAMBLA and, in many ways, (probably unintentionally) parallels the arguments used by pedophiles who don't think they are doing children any harm and, in at least some cases, seem to think they are doing children a favor.

  That's a fallacy too.  It's called poisoning the well.
 "Well she says X and paedophiles also say X therefore she must be wrong"

  NAMBLA could very well stand for the lowering of the age of consent.  In fact, every paedophile in the world could agree with Levine and it wouldn't matter a jot to whether her argument is worth listening to, let alone whether or not it's correct.

  In fact, if Levine's position is what you claim it is and it turns out that she has the psychological facts right then it could very well be that many of the people who are in jail right now for trying to shag 12 year old's are being unjustly persecuted because their partners in fact could and DID give their consent.

QuoteI'm well aware that right-wing websites exagerrate and distort, which is why I've read pro and con arguments.

No... you've read for and against arguments because you're too lazy to actually read a book that you feel justified in commenting about, especially when you've made such sweeping and damning accusations as you have about not only the content of the book but the content of LeVine's character.  

There's a reason why the first item on a university reading list is invariably the source material because if you don't actually read the text itself you're not commenting on it, you're regurgitating old (and quite possibly tired) opinions.

It's not even as if this book is some dense and complicated work of academic theory; it's a mainstream book written by a mainstream author for a mainstream audience.

I have to say, it chills me to the bone that you actually get to vote.  What do you do when the elections come around? listen to the adverts both sides air and then toss a coin?

Analytical, you're coming across like a moron in this one.  Calm the fuck down and try to salvage what little dignity you have left.

Guys, I don't know why we're pussy-footing around with this.

Quote from: mythusmageOn Dragon Earth it works like this...

Where the young are concerned, the availability of truth magic and telepathy is of great assistance. Helps a lot in determining the truth of claims of consensuality or rape. Acknowledging that very young children can consent to sex has also helped in developing devices and magic aimed at the children.

It has also helped in identifying and apprehending sexual predators. One might see a grown man and his 11 year old boy lover assisting the authorities in the apprehension and arrest of a sexual predator and his grown male victim.

mythusmage, you are obviously a pervert. Take your fat-arsed, trenchcoat-clad, cat-piss smelling, parents' basement-dwelling body, out of our fucking hobby. Go play WoW or something.

Quote from: Mr. Analytical...and yet these are the people who oppose any form of sexual education for kids apart from telling them not to engage in it.  Sounds to me like not only do they have trouble grasping the idea that kids are sexual beings but they also have trouble understanding how a sex drive even works.

There is quite a range of opinions on sex education on the right.  I find it curious that you are doing exactly what you accuse me of doing further on in your reply.

Quote from: Mr. AnalyticalClearly, the American right needs to learn a few lessons about childhood sexuality and as such I think it's a good thing that a mainstream book be written on the subject.

There are plenty of mainstream books on the subject, just not ones that go quite as far as this one.

Quote from: Mr. AnalyticalThe substance of the debate should be one dealt with by empirical science.  Where does psychology stand on the issue?  It's not about left and right-wing bias, it's about psychological facts.  Any discussion of the subject that doesn't engage with that side of things is a waste of everyone's time.  Politics doesn't really enter into it at all.

Is this author dealing with empirical science or does she have an ideological axe to grind?  Don't you find it the least bit curious that her field is not psychology?  In a pro-Levine article, I found this quote:

"If sexual expertise is expected of adults, the rudiments must be taught to children," insists Levine.

Is that a personal opinion or psychological fact?  And does she also believe that if we don't teach children how to drive at 12, they'll never master it at 17, 18, or even later in life?

Quote from: Mr. AnalyticalThat's a fallacy too.  It's called poisoning the well.
 "Well she says X and paedophiles also say X therefore she must be wrong"

Or, "Well he says X and right wing nuts who oppose teaching childre anything about sex also say X, there fore he must be wrong," right?

Quote from: Mr. AnalyticalNAMBLA could very well stand for the lowering of the age of consent.  In fact, every paedophile in the world could agree with Levine and it wouldn't matter a jot to whether her argument is worth listening to, let alone whether or not it's correct.

True.  But it does suggest that the agenda of those looking to lower the age of consent may be no more apolitical or morally pure than the agenda of those looking to teach children nothing about sex.  If a mainstream book were released proposing that sex for children is largely bad and that abstinence is the best form of sex education for children, wouldn't you question their credentials, sources, and agenda precisely because their argument just happens to be similar to an argument you apparently think is absurd?

Quote from: Mr. AnalyticalIn fact, if Levine's position is what you claim it is and it turns out that she has the psychological facts right then it could very well be that many of the people who are in jail right now for trying to shag 12 year old's are being unjustly persecuted because their partners in fact could and DID give their consent.

Is that what you honestly believe, or does it fail to pass even a sniff test for obvious reasons?  Have you ever read William Dear's book about the disappearance of James Dallas Eggbert III?

Quote from: Mr. AnalyticalNo... you've read for and against arguments because you're too lazy to actually read a book that you feel justified in commenting about, especially when you've made such sweeping and damning accusations as you have about not only the content of the book but the content of LeVine's character.

OK.  Please tell me exactly where I've made a sweeping and damning accusation about her character.  Please provide the quote and why you think it qualifies.  

No, I haven't read her book and freely admitted as much.  I don't have time to read every book on every subject I'd like to opine about and nobody does.  It's not laziness.  It's about the world being too full of information and the reasonable expection, based on various quotes I've read even in the pro-Levine articles, that I'm not going to learn anything else from reading the whole book.

I raised her originally because we have a setting being presented in which adults having sex with children is depicted as harmless.  Levine's book seems to be the primary mainstream work making an argument like that.  Assuming that the author of the Dragon Earth setting is not an advocate of pedophilia, a possible source of such opinions was a mainstream book on the subject -- like Levine's.

Quote from: Mr. AnalyticalThere's a reason why the first item on a university reading list is invariably the source material because if you don't actually read the text itself you're not commenting on it, you're regurgitating old (and quite possibly tired) opinions.

Yeah, and there's a reason why therpgsite.com isn't a credentialed university, I'm not paying tuition, and RPGPundit isn't handing out diplomas.  If it becomes one, I'll read original sources and write footnoted papers.  Until then, please spare me the ivory tower indignation.

As I've said repeatedly, feel free to dispute what I'm saying, especially if you've read the book (something you haven't yet answered).  If you have, I'll take your commentary on it seriously.  If you haven't, then you are on no firmer ground than I am.  

Quote from: Mr. AnalyticalIt's not even as if this book is some dense and complicated work of academic theory; it's a mainstream book written by a mainstream author for a mainstream audience.

Have you read it?

Quote from: Mr. AnalyticalI have to say, it chills me to the bone that you actually get to vote.  What do you do when the elections come around? listen to the adverts both sides air and then toss a coin?

And I'm quite happy that people like you don't get to decide who does or doesn't get to vote.

Yeah, adverts and coin flips are the same as reading pro and con articles and books, right?  No, no straw men there.  What do you do?  Trust whatever the candidates say about themselves as the truth or trust whatever the side you agree with says about both of the candidates and then follow their lead?  Yeah, that's a lot more reliable.

MythusMage seems to have left the building.

I definitely agree with pundit about not making a game a place for polemics against another time/culture's values unless this is explicitly known and approved by all participants. Wouldn't recommend it either for suspension of disbelief...

This thread is the longest abuse-dump I've seen in a while. Fun.

Mr A's and John Morrow's discussion aside, I just felt, that this setting was pretty fucked up. Okay, the thing is, I don't want folks reading this thread and not remembering the context of the age of consent discussion that followed, and coming to the conclusion that this hobby of ours is filled with folks like MythusMage or that therpgsite is in anyway associated with this kind of bullshit.I mean folks are prone to focus on the fucked up stuff and forget about context most times.

I don't want this forum in any way to be known as that site.

Regards,
David R

I'm certainly not here to champion Levine.  I'm just saying that her writing has to be taken in a certain context: ivory-tower academia, specifically marxist-feminist academia.  This is a pretty particular context, and it really should not be mixed up with the idea of groups like NAMBLA.

I'll admit I haven't read Levine's work, but I'm well on track with the criticism its generated and the reviews of the work itself. The point is that the right-wing extreme reaction to the book all comes outside of academia, that are using her book as something it really isn't and probably wasn't ever meant to be. It should be noted that there's also a wealth of liberal ivory-tower elite left-wing criticism about the book, but these are real critiques done within the academic context of the book itself, rather than ideological opportunism.

I have no doubt that like most of the ivory-tower academia's work, Levine's book starts out with a number of very reasonable premises and then makes some absurd conclusions.  Like most feminist-marxist academia, she probably lacks serious citation and research to back up her argument, as well.  In the new academia, that doesn't really seem to matter nearly as much as if your pet theory is controversial and fashionable.

RPGPundit

I have a message for certain parties. If your prick offends you, cut it off.

"It is icky and it makes my skin crawl."

If you think that's bad, did you know that all nursing infants are cannibalizing their mother? :eek: :p

Quote from: mythusmageI have a message for certain parties. If your prick offends you, cut it off.

I can't parse any kind of good meaning out of this. Matter of fact, the only thing I can manage to draw from it is "If you think justifying sex with children, fictional or not, is icky, well, just abstain from sex completely!" And man, there's so much wrong with that...

Quote"It is icky and it makes my skin crawl."

Thinking about widespread sexual predation and its apologists should really do that.

QuoteIf you think that's bad, did you know that all nursing infants are cannibalizing their mother? :eek: :p

Hey, I don't like children either. But may I refer you to the kitchen table/ISS experiment of another thread, re: differences between what we're talking about and your reply?

It's a shame this isn't a higher traffic site.  This was truly a troll of legendary proportion.

Quote from: John MorrowIs that a personal opinion or psychological fact?  And does she also believe that if we don't teach children how to drive at 12, they'll never master it at 17, 18, or even later in life?

  Out of its context it's impossible to know whether it's a conclusion based on psychological and anthropological study or just someone pulling a fact out of her arse.  If it comes at the end of a chapter wherein she carefull,y constructs the case for each premise of that statement then I have no problem for it.  It's it's like the first line of the introduction then it's clearly someone talking out of their arse (unless it's a rhetorical gambit).

  Okay look, I apologise for being an arsehole.  Looking back on the thread, you made an off-hand comment and then Pundit and I essentially goaded you into commiting yourself to a view on a book you haven't read.  I apologise, that's not cool.

Quote from: David RI have no objections to sexuality in games. In a post apocalyptic world issues such as safe child bearing ages, abortion etc could possibly be a factor depending on how realistic one wants the setting to be.

In Havens I've only alluded to those particular subjects.  Miscarriage is incredibly dangerous for the mother for reasons I don't discuss further than saying that the mother will instantly succum to the zombie infection.  The shortage of adult women "will push the age of consent to a level that would be considered obscenely low before the Rising." and that section is headed by a quote for Cindy, explaining to a young mother that she will probably need an elective ceasarian as her pelvic girdle isn't yet wide enough "... and for future reference, hon, it doesn't matter how much you think you love him - just because your old enough to bleed doesn't mean your old enough to bleed."

I don't believe that anything more needs to be said

On the other tentacle I have written the most complete rules for contraception I've ever seen.  Quick reality check: I've set the DC for the Will save to effectively use the Withdrawal method at 15.  Too high? too low?

Quote from: Hastur T. FannonOn the other tentacle I have written the most complete rules for contraception I've ever seen.  Quick reality check: I've set the DC for the Will save to effectively use the Withdrawal method at 15.  Too high? too low?

Even with a successful will roll this should result in half damage, no damage if the character has the Moneyshot feat.

Quote from: SosthenesEven with a successful will roll this should result in half damage, no damage if the character has the Moneyshot feat.

Don't tempt me ;) (http://www.therpgsite.com/node/439)

Quote from: Hastur T. FannonOn the other tentacle I have written the most complete rules for contraception I've ever seen.  Quick reality check: I've set the DC for the Will save to effectively use the Withdrawal method at 15.  Too high? too low?

Surely it should be a Concentration check, it might explain why Clerics recommend it?

Quote from: Mr. AnalyticalOkay look, I apologise for being an arsehole.  Looking back on the thread, you made an off-hand comment and then Pundit and I essentially goaded you into commiting yourself to a view on a book you haven't read.  I apologise, that's not cool.

I went back and added context for why I included her name alongside NAMBLA in my original post.  I can see why you and RPGPundit read the association I was making more strongly than I intended and, for that, I apologize.

Quote from: BagpussSurely it should be a Concentration check, it might explain why Clerics recommend it?

Not a class skill for any of the base classes in the MSRD ;)

At this point in the discussion, I'm in a Kirk-like struggle with myself to avoid cheap shots about orgies and attacks of opportunity...

Quote from: SosthenesAt this point in the discussion, I'm in a Kirk-like struggle with myself to avoid cheap shots about orgies and attacks of opportunity...

You can always take it to my blog ;)