Quote from: Zalman;1095161If you're playing a game that's designed to explore your sexuality, then it makes perfect sense. If the game is supposed to explore, I dunno, say, heroic adventure, then a character's sexuality isn't included in the game. So yeah, it's just banner-waving. People get upset because they see that kind of empty virtue signaling bringing lots of harm to the world.

It's funny how "inclusive" people all presuppose that players are only inspired by playing characters of the same skin color, sexual preference, and genital makeup as the player themselves. Personally, I've played plenty of female characters over the years, and never once even stopped to think about my character's sexual preference or genital history ... because exploring sexuality isn't part of the games I play, and I don't want it to be.

For myself, it's not that a character is gay, trans, or bacon spirited, but it's the activism. The incessant clamor for every character to be gay, for every charcter to be a woman, for every character to be trans, for every character to be black. All at the same time. Most people can tell when a character is sincere, in that they're a simulacrum of a real person, and when a character is fake, when they're a mouthpiece for the author's ideologies.
There's been an awful lot of the second type, and less of the first type.

Quote from: Gagarth;1094993Are all the self-aggrandizing, blowhard extremists white males by any chance? Also how far are you going back with this "People who formerly couldn't say anything now feel they can"  60's, 70s, 80's, 90s, 00s? and what exactly are they trying to  say apart from White Man Evil.

I didn't say White Man Evil. You did. And no, not all extremists are white males. You went there with that, too.

As for who feels they can speak up, and maybe be heard these days, then, yeah, I'd say it's groups that aren't white dudes, or straight. Women and minorities are assuming more positions of power in government. They’re bringing an agenda that reflects their backgrounds, which is quite different from mine. I’m not afraid of it, and I’m not going to get defensive when someone makes an obviously true assertion.

But I digress. My point was that that social change seeps into everything, including tabletop gaming. Then, as with all media, it seems, the loudest voices sound off with deranged bullshit. Some of these voices are those responding with knee jerk defensiveness against reasonable criticism. I do not think sits exclusive to one group, of course.

Beyond that, TTRPGs, which really have featured more than their share of social misfits, really aren't as easy to lump in when it comes to exclusion. This does not mean, though, that the hobby wasn’t historically monolithic, or nearly so. And on that, I only stated the obvious -- it was very much a white dude's hobby back in the day, and it's less obviously so now. I didn't say that was an issue. I did say, or imply, at least, that said perception may have kept folks away longer than it should've. I wouldn't know. I'm one of those white dudes (though I wouldn't say I was a social misfit, because i never felt like, or was treated like one).

Anyhoo, I'm not making any political statements here. These are benign conclusions that you seem to be to turning  into an agenda that I simply do not have, at least, not on this question/topic.

Quote from: sureshot;1094865Just because most of the player base in my neck of the woods in the mid-1980s was male does not mean a systematic campaign of exclusion was being waged by us to get other POC or female gamers from the hobby.

I agree with that. Doesn't mean said perception, at least the "weird" tag, did not have an adverse effect, though. But, again, agreed, it's hard to make a case for systemic, intentional gatekeeping. It was hard enough finding players sometimes, in mysmall ass town.

QuoteEither way it is way too easy to say "well it looks like it was just a white male hobby to me". Implying no effort was made to recruit POC, gays, trans and female gamers. You know what else many who spout that nonsense ignore. One can't force anyone to game with anybody. If I put an ad out to recruit people for a new campaign and only white (mostly straight) males answer. I'm not going to put my campaign on hold for 3-5 years to get other non-white non-straight members.

No reasonable person would expect you to do anything more than play the game you want to play, with whom you want to play it, because (and assuming) it's a private activity. I think we all screen to eliminate assholes, of course.  I also think it's fine to admit it's historically been a white dude hobby and still make the case against intentional barriers being erected by said white dudes, in general (the occasional asshole makes us all look bad, of course). The statements aren't mutually exclusive. Now, I think there may have been some "unintentional gatekeeping" by some of us weirdos due to certain aspects of weirdness that go beyond even nerd/geek norms.:-)

Quote from: cranebump;1095184I didn't say White Man Evil. You did. And no, not all extremists are white males. You went there with that, too.

As for who feels they can speak up, and maybe be heard these days, then, yeah, I'd say it's groups that aren't white dudes, or straight. Women and minorities are assuming more positions of power in government. They're bringing an agenda that reflects their backgrounds, which is quite different from mine. I'm not afraid of it, and I'm not going to get defensive when someone makes an obviously true assertion. But I digress. My point was that that social change seeps into everything, including tabletop gaming. Then, as with all media, it seems, the loudest voices sound off with deranged bullshit.

Beyond that, TTRPGs, which really have featured more than their share of social misfits, really aren't as easy to lump in when it comes to exclusion. This does not mean, though, that the hobby wasn't historically monolithic, or nearly so. And on that, I only stated the obvious -- it was very much a white dude's hobby back in the day, and it's less obviously so now. I didn't say that was an issue. I did say, or imply, at least, that said perception may have kept folks away longer than it should've. I wouldn't know. I'm one of those white dudes (though I wouldn't say I was a social misfit, because i never felt like, or was treated like one).

Anyhoo, I'm not making any political statements here. These are benign conclusions that you seem to be to turning  into an agenda that I simply do not have, at least, not on this question/topic.

What pray tell is the common background of Women or minorities?

All women share the same experiences, both positive and negative?

Do all members of minority X?

Nope, and this shows the fail and hypocrisy of the 'diversity' advocates, they ARE saying that you need more people from group X BECAUSE of their background.

What does the son of a black millionaire have in common with the poor black from the ghetto? Skin color and that's it.

As for the huwhite dudes hobby talking point, women didn't want to get on board because it was a geek's hobby, and black folks to date don't want to get on board because it's doing white stuff. I'm paraphrasing but it's their take, by playing TTRPGs you are 'acting' white and being a traitor to your race.

To sum it up, if group X wanted/wants to participate they were never chased away by the vast majority of those already participating. So the talking point is shit and used only to gain control (or attempt to) by the ideological zealots.

Back in the day the religious right didn't want to participate, and tried to prevent us all from doing so. Then they made their own Christian RPGs, right now the intersectionality cult is busy doing that which the religious failed to.

Quote from: jhkim;1095164This is utter nonsense. Sexuality (as opposed to the act of sex) is a part of everyday life -- and has  been included in most stories and games of heroic adventure. It's included just by having a shopkeeper and her husband, or a child's loving parents, or a possible romantic interest, and so forth. In D&D, there's sexuality in the earliest modules - from Steading of the Hill Giant Chief and Village of Hommlet and most other modules.

It's possible to play without it, by having characters be asexual beings only interested in gold and/or killing - but it's also normal for sexuality to come up, if just in things like a character's appreciative whistle at a barmaid, or similar. It's a regular part of background and immersion for me.

I don't know about your games, but the sexual orientation of a player or a character has only come up once in my 38 years of actually playing tabletop RPGs because it is irrelevant to the majority of play. Most people don't give a fuck if the tavern keeper is gay just as long as he brings your character an ale when your character pays for one. Just like in Real Life, people don't go strutting around introducing themselves with their sexual orientation or gender because A) most people don't care and B) that's pretty fuckin' weird to do when you are buying a cheeseburger.

Quote from: jhkim;1095164I was born in 1970. For me, I learned about gay people from my Presbyterian church when I was younger than 12. A same-sex couple brought their adopted baby in for baptism, and I was confused about how two white men could have a black baby. I learned from that, though, and incorporated the knowledge and values in my life.

What I learned from my childhood was not to be a bigoted asshole. I raised my son with various straight and LGBT people around in games and events. Everyone were treated as regular people, as they are - with no talk about LGBT sex any more than about straight sex. When I talk to and get to know people, I find they're all just people with various different strengths and faults.

I'm glad you're up-front with your bigotry, but that doesn't mean I agree with it. I don't like people who are opposed to my family and friends. Just like I'm opposed to Aglondir's ethno-nationalism and other people's views.

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is a textbook example of virtue signalling.

Quote from: Opaopajr;1095154All those '70s music videos made me wonder how people watched them back in the heyday. I was of the VCR age and Mtv was just becoming a household name only a few years later. Yet these '70s videos look like super 8 stuff, ready for heavy tv or home reel rotation.

I wonder if the jet set gathered in homes to fire up the fondue, roll out the pink champagne & backgammon, and then for an afternoon delight sneak off to the projection room for some sweet accompanying music video BGM... :eek:

I am sure somewhere out there someone is finding this problematic... and exclusive. (SJW Mystery: "If you think what's being done is so bad, why do you want to be involved so badly?!")

That is a great question really. How did people watch the ABBA videos before Super Channel, MTV and similar channels? I'm not familiar with American music channel history. We only had two TV-channels here back then, lol.

Quote from: jeff37923;1095084Virtue Signaling - the action or practice of publicly expressing opinions or sentiments intended to demonstrate one's good character or the moral correctness of one's position on a particular issue.

I kind of like that definition, I think it's pretty serviceable. In part because it is concise, and in part because it doesn't presuppose the content of the signal. That will depend on the venue and the audience.

So for instance, in a "socjus" forum, virtue signalling may consist in showing the signaller is more "woke" than the run-of-the-mill wokesters. While in a neo-Nazi forum it will consist in being more hardcore Nazi than the rest. Makes sense to me. Virtue-signalling either way.

Quote from: GIMME SOME SUGAR;1095136Not only am I a moron. I also refuse to let the session around my kitchen table turn into a Pride festival. I am lord of my castle, my home is not somebody's LGBTQ demonstration. Within these walls my rules and my rules only apply. This is, in newspeak, my safespace from the outside madness. I'm heterosexual and all my friends are heterosexual. I don't have feminist cosplayers, genderfluids, furries or transpeople wearing muumuus in my gaming group. But I'm not a representative of the gaming industry, gamers or the people of this forum. I'm just me. And there are only two genders (male/female) in my world, the rest is delusion. Yes, I'm not only a moron, but an old-fashioned moron. Am I not entitled to be me? Must I bow before the bluehaired and woke Twitter army? Would it help to include people in the rpg hobby if I wore a garter belt and silk stockings? Or if I took a supporting shit for the rainbow-coloured LGBTQ cause in a gender neutral rest room?

I was born in 1972. When I grew up and started with roleplaying around 1984 there was no LGBTQ-movement in the Swedish rpg hobby. There certainly were gays and people were crossdressers/transvestites back then. But I don't think our parents would allow them to play with us 12 year olds. Times may have changed a whole lot but I haven't as much. Sometimes I wonder what's next on the woke agenda? Necrophiliacs in gaming ("Don't mind the rotten skull deepthroating my penis, guys. Hey, I brought cheetos and my character sheet.")? Pedo Pride Festivals? What's the next step, the next group to be included via angry Tweets?

You know what? I can support this stance. Why? Because this is the stance of a Viking Hat DM who is unequivocally stating that in his personal games in his personal space, he does not want any LGBTQ things going on. I disagree with his opinion, but part of freedom is allowing space for people with whom you disagree. He isn't trying to rally people against LGBTQ outside of his home, he is only focused on what happens to his game group at his kitchen table in his home.

Guess what, there isn't a damn thing anybody can do about it either.

Except disagree.

Quote from: ZalmanIf you're playing a game that's designed to explore your sexuality, then it makes perfect sense. If the game is supposed to explore, I dunno, say, heroic adventure, then a character's sexuality isn't included in the game. So yeah, it's just banner-waving. People get upset because they see that kind of empty virtue signaling bringing lots of harm to the world.

Quote from: jhkimThis is utter nonsense. Sexuality (as opposed to the act of sex) is a part of everyday life -- and has been included in most stories and games of heroic adventure. It's included just by having a shopkeeper and her husband, or a child's loving parents, or a possible romantic interest, and so forth. In D&D, there's sexuality in the earliest modules - from Steading of the Hill Giant Chief and Village of Hommlet and most other modules.

Quote from: tenbones;1095181Exactly how much gay-sex was going on in Hommlet? And at the Steading of the Hill-Giant?... or are you equating homesexuality<>heterosexuality as setting assumption in all RPGs?

Or is that a projection of cultural relativism?

tenbones - I'm including the quotes above to make clear again. Neither Zalman's post nor mine make reference to specifically homosexuality. The point is that modules and play commonly include heterosexuality.

Quote from: jeff37923;1095196I don't know about your games, but the sexual orientation of a player or a character has only come up once in my 38 years of actually playing tabletop RPGs because it is irrelevant to the majority of play. Most people don't give a fuck if the tavern keeper is gay just as long as he brings your character an ale when your character pays for one. Just like in Real Life, people don't go strutting around introducing themselves with their sexual orientation or gender because A) most people don't care and B) that's pretty fuckin' weird to do when you are buying a cheeseburger.

You're welcome to play however you like. I also find that sexual orientation or gender usually aren't important - but my games usually have a fair amount of detail that isn't immediately relevant. For example, I might include bits of color like "The bartender is a large man with dark black hair and a frequent scowl" or "The bartender is very protective of his shy wife Serla, who comes out to clean the tables every so often". These sorts of details are typically pure color bits, but it will occasionally come up. No one seems to object to my mentioning the bartender's hair color, say, or that he's a man rather than a woman.

Quote from: jhkim;1095164I was born in 1970. For me, I learned about gay people from my Presbyterian church when I was younger than 12. A same-sex couple brought their adopted baby in for baptism, and I was confused about how two white men could have a black baby. I learned from that, though, and incorporated the knowledge and values in my life.

What I learned from my childhood was not to be a bigoted asshole. I raised my son with various straight and LGBT people around in games and events. Everyone were treated as regular people, as they are - with no talk about LGBT sex any more than about straight sex. When I talk to and get to know people, I find they're all just people with various different strengths and faults.

Earlier, you wrote:

I'm glad you're up-front with your bigotry, but that doesn't mean I agree with it. I don't like people who are opposed to my family and friends. Just like I'm opposed to Aglondir's ethno-nationalism and other people's views.

I'm an honest guy. I'm slightly homophobic. Well, phobic is really the wrong word but it's the only one I know. I don't have any fear of gay men. I fear sharks, being eaten alive and big spiders. And no, I don't have a problem with gay men because I'm secretly longing for men sexually. To make you happy I can announce that I have nothing against lesbians, really. I enjoy them very much on the internet. And when it comes to the homosexual men it's not all of them either, but the ones who act feminine, those with limp hanging wrists, those who make handsignals like "talk to the hand" and shake their heads in a girly fashion. Those are the ones that irk me in the weirdest way. If a gay man acts more butch and maybe has a Tom Selleck moustache and a fading sailor tattoo, well...I wouldn't worry then. I could play rpgs with Rob Halford, Richard Chamberlain or Udo Dirkschneider any day without feeling antsy.

At least we know where we stand now, don't we? My honesty is not meant to hurt any gay people on this forum. And I have redeeming qualities too, you know? But I usually keep my warm and fuzzy feelings safe and secure in my heart-shaped box (no, not the Nirvana kind. I hate Nirvana) - a box that I only open for those that reciprocate. For the rest of the world I mostly serve up my spit in shot glasses.

Quote from: GIMME SOME SUGAR;1095197That is a great question really. How did people watch the ABBA videos before Super Channel, MTV and similar channels? I'm not familiar with American music channel history. We only had two TV-channels here back then, lol.

It is a good question, and one that may deserve a better answer than my failing memory can provide, but I just don't remember any videos being a thing in the 70s when ABBA was hot. Except maybe toward the very end of the 70s when I think you're already entering the MTV era. In the 70s, music outside of live concerts was heard not seen. Except when bands produced feature films, which are kind of different. Or Britain's TOTP, which laid the groundwork for music videos but were mostly just studio footage of the band, and not widely circulated if you weren't able to watch in the UK

Quote from: jeff37923;1095200You know what? I can support this stance. Why? Because this is the stance of a Viking Hat DM who is unequivocally stating that in his personal games in his personal space, he does not want any LGBTQ things going on. I disagree with his opinion, but part of freedom is allowing space for people with whom you disagree. He isn't trying to rally people against LGBTQ outside of his home, he is only focused on what happens to his game group at his kitchen table in his home.

Guess what, there isn't a damn thing anybody can do about it either.

Except disagree.

That is true. Everything I said only applies to my own home and my own gaming sessions. If I would have joined another group, outside my friendzone, I would accept other constellations, gaming with whatever gender there might be. I would just focus on the game.

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1095189What pray tell is the common background of Women or minorities?

All women share the same experiences, both positive and negative?

Do all members of minority X?

Nope, and this shows the fail and hypocrisy of the 'diversity' advocates, they ARE saying that you need more people from group X BECAUSE of their background.

What does the son of a black millionaire have in common with the poor black from the ghetto? Skin color and that's it.

As for the huwhite dudes hobby talking point, women didn't want to get on board because it was a geek's hobby, and black folks to date don't want to get on board because it's doing white stuff. I'm paraphrasing but it's their take, by playing TTRPGs you are 'acting' white and being a traitor to your race.

To sum it up, if group X wanted/wants to participate they were never chased away by the vast majority of those already participating. So the talking point is shit and used only to gain control (or attempt to) by the ideological zealots.

Back in the day the religious right didn't want to participate, and tried to prevent us all from doing so. Then they made their own Christian RPGs, right now the intersectionality cult is busy doing that which the religious failed to.

Just to be clear, I already said I didn't think white dudes were actively gatekeeping the hobby. I just said it's a white dude's game (but less so these days). I didn't even say that was a bad thing. But it is a thing.

Its interesting you assert that people's backgrounds are too diverse to be meaningful, then, at the same time, assert that women and blacks have respective common reasons for not gaming. Which is it? Nothing in common, or a general conspiracy? And I'm interested to know where you're hearing the "traitor to the race" thing because that, forgive me, just sounds like made up bullshit.

On the whole, I'd agree that It's reasonable to say that each person's experiences are different. It's unreasonable, however, to deny that certain cultures have had a similar history, which can lead to some commonalities in perspective that might be worth my while to know. In that, I think cosmetics can lead to a more shared experience that you'd think. I say this after reading "Between the World and Me," "The Fire Next Time," "Invisible Man," "The Autobiography of Malcolm X," and various poetry by black authors. There's a shared culture there that's certainly different from mine. I cannot, unfortunately vouch for having the experience manifest at my table, but I can say my own understanding is enriched by the readings.

I can’t say I’ve ever discussed race with my black friends, none of whom play D&D.  If we did play together, I feel like we’re really not there for a history/culture lesson. I mean, I'm just looking for some good people to game with. We can talk that other stuff outside the monster bashing. I think we're on the same page here, at least. The difference is I'm not going to slam diversity advocates because I know some populations have been shut out of much more important enterprises than stupid elf games. I don't see hypocrisy in their intention, but rather misplaced priorities. A bunch of bearded old grogs isn't doing anything other than wasting their own damned time.

P.S. I do indeed recall when members of the Religious Right (and others) attempting to make everyone stop gaming (which drove up sales, fittingly). Same thing happened with comics when I was a kid. And that's how stacks of what would now be vintage 1970s comics got tossed into a dumpster when I was 12.

Oh, and I would also like to state that I would have no problems with my friends making gay PCs if they want. Hell, when we were 12-13 years old, one of my friends made a bisexual barbarian (like a bi Conan clone, quite inclusive) who rode on an elephant. He was so strong that he easily manhandled the other PCs and forced himself upon them whenever he wished. Yes, there were very adult themes that were played out in my friend's basement. The kind of stuff that would make that sordid UK Games Expo GM cream his track pants.

Addition: Now that we are older, getting grey and grumpy, we are fewer in my group and we have slightly more varied tones to our gaming sessions. The guy who played the bisexual barbarian back in 1984 is dead and gone (R.I.P. Johan). But I want to state that NPCs of varied sexual orientations exist in our gaming sessions, depending on the game/era, etc.

But we usually play an old Swedish fantasy game and Call of Cthulhu (Gaslight and 1920s setting mostly) so there aren't really any modern LGBTQ-people that fit in the context.

Quote from: GIMME SOME SUGAR;1095204At least we know where we stand now, don't we? My honesty is not meant to hurt any gay people on this forum. And I have redeeming qualities too, you know? But I usually keep my warm and fuzzy feelings safe and secure in my heart-shaped box (no, not the Nirvana kind. I hate Nirvana) - a box that I only open for those that reciprocate. For the rest of the world I mostly serve up my spit in shot glasses.

Sure, and you've got a right to behave the way you want, particularly in your own home. I appreciate this as a free speech forum where I can talk to (Alathon) about his ethno-nationalism or you about your discomfort with LGBT people.

But I don't think either of those is a good thing, and I'd prefer it if those attitudes didn't exist. My family and friends who are LGBT have had to deal with a lot of crap because of attitudes like this. Particularly when he was younger, I wouldn't want my son being exposed to it, as I consider it a sort or bigotry.

EDITED TO CORRECT: Initially, I accidentally wrote "Aglondir" instead of "Alathon" as the ethno-nationalist. That was a complete mistake in naming. Alathon had described himself as subscribing to a version of ethno-nationalism, so I think I am correct there. I just inexcusably slipped up in the mildly similar name.