Sexism and the chainmail bikini

gufnork

Ok, I was hoping you guys might help me out here. Over on another site there's a Tunnels & Trolls forum(It's called The Trollbridge). I started a thread there entitled 'Girls are wimps...'. Now with hindsight, had I any idea how seriously they'd all take it I almost certainly wouldn't have bothered, but what happened was this,

• Someone in another thread comented on how quiet the place was.
• I decided to do something about it.
• I thought of a controversial(but amusing) subject to get people posting.
• People got upset and things got a little heated.
• The mods decided to start another thread called 'Life at the Trollbridge' where people could air their views etc in a bid to calm things down.
• Things got even more heated. People started to walk away from the forum etc.
• At this point I decided to voluntarily walk away from it all for a couple of weeks to let the heat die down.

So, my question is this. I realise that I probably do come across as sexist in the 'Girls are wimps...' thread, but did I deserve some of the coments that were directed at me in the 'Life at the Trollbridge' thread?


Thanks for your help.


p.s. I hope you don't mind me linking to the two threads in question but in this case I felt it appropriate.

Sarky

Sexism is pretty rife in gaming. It's not cool. It's unwise at best to try and joke about it with people you've likely never met over the internet, as half of them have probably been subject to said sexism and won't take kindly to glib assertions.

gufnork

Yeah, I'm beginning to wish I could turn back time at this point. I think what makes it worse in this instance is that the forum in question has a very small, very tight-nit group of regular posters, most of whom really, really took offense. I'm not saying they're wrong to have reacted that way, but I am a little surprised at just how much bad feeling it seems to have stirred up. I'll think very carefully before posting anything like that again.

gufnork

Well that didn't end well. One of the mods just posted asking me if I had anything to say in my defense. I fell on my sword(as it were). If I've learnt anything from all this it's that posting about contentious subjects is not a good move. Oh well, onward I suppose.

Toad Killer Dog

So the fact that you attacked and ridiculed Deva for being offended and for sticking up for herself later when it was your intention from the beginning to stir up trouble is just fine.

I mean hey you were not the one being attacked, and when others joined in against her you could have stepped in.

But no, no skin off your nose if she felt hurt.

Oh and anyone who stood up against the sexist bull you pitched was holier than tho, I mean just because you set out to troll for that reaction from the beginning was besides the point.

And then you had the gall to tell Deva to take some time off the board ( In a thread I notice you did not provide a link to ) and mock her with a nasty little crying smiley for being upset.

No matter that your intention from the start was childish, you have behaved like a twelve year old brat and your going to have to do a lot of growing up before you have the right to come looking for sympathy.

gufnork

Wow, I'm sorry you feel that way. I have already PM'd prof. and mahrundl informing them that I'll not be posting to the Trollbridge any longer. I understand your anger but I'm gone! I really don't see what else I can do at this stage.

I've clearly made a lot of mistakes and handled things very badly but whatever you or anyone else may think, I didn't intend to hurt or upset anyone. I'm certainly guilty of some very bad decisions and probably deserve a lot of the anger I'm getting but I've gone now. As for trolling well, if that's what I was doing by posting to other forums about it then I'll apologise for that too. In my mind I was simply trying to gauge other peoples reactions to the situation before I quit(or not) posting at the Trollbridge. That was clearly another of my many mistakes. But I assure you, it was simply a grave error of judgement on my part and nothing else.

To finish I can only repeat, it's been hours now since I PM'd prof. and mahrundl so I'm at a loss to explain why this is still am issue.

I'm truly sorry for all the trouble I've caused but I swear to you now, I AM DONE APOLOGIZING. PLEASE LEAVE ME ALONE!

Rev Hellfire

Personally I don't see a problem with proposing modifiers bases on gender in games as long as they are equatable. ie. the +1 Const / -1 Str proposal given in the thread you linked.
After all the purpose of these games is to have fun and as such they should be inclusive.

One thing I have noticed in later material is that illustrations are becoming more realistic, there's much less of the bikini warriors. But if we look at the cover of the D&D red box we can see that male warriors seemed equally clueless, a chain-mail t-shirt isn't going help much against that dragon


On a side note, I'm not sure its the place to air grievances with the running of other sites.

gufnork

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

On a side note, I'm not sure its the place to air grievances with the running of other sites.

I agree. It seems to be one of many mistakes I've made recently. Hopefully this'll be an end to it now. I appreciate your reply. Thanks.

Morag

Blanket modifiers which use gender for the most part work off a narrow gendered stereotype and are presumptuous.
Anything which limits people playing the type of Char they want is my bad imo.

Too assume that Raistlin Majere will be have a higher con and str then his half sister Kitiara Uth Matar due to their gender is wrong.

There is a greater range in humanity then stereotypes would lead us to believe and it's nice to be able to get away from this worlds sexism and racism when we play games.

Rev Hellfire

Morag wrote: »

Too assume that Raistlin Majere will be have a higher con and str then his half sister Kitiara Uth Matar due to their gender is wrong.

The premise was that if females where penalised for their lower muscle mass they would in turn receive a bonus for constitution.
Suggestion source, it's not an unreasonable suggestion if you where looking to introduce such mechanics into a game.

Morag

Again depends on the female and the type a person wants to play, I doubt such a modifier would make sense when you think of the female Olympic power lifters.

Rev Hellfire

Morag wrote: »

Again depends on the female and the type a person wants to play, I doubt such a modifier would make sense when you think of the female Olympic power lifters.

But female power lifters don't lift in the same upper range as male power lifters, its back to male vs female muscle mass and frame mechanics. The same would hold true for warriors with their heavy equipment.

But we're dealing a fantasy environment, so we don't have to restrict ourselves what is 100% physically/logically accurate.

I'm not against it as an idea once there is a balance struck and its not a simple male > females set-up.

Even going back to the warrior proposal, its not actually that bad if you really wanted variances based on gender in your game, slightly greater constitution versus slightly greater strength.

gufnork

I compared it to modifications for kindred, such as dwarf-STRx2, or elves-DEXx2 or whatever, unfortunately while this is accepted, voicing the opinion that female warriors aren't as likely to have the comparative STR of their male counterparts is soundly rejected. I would have thought it was simply common sense.

nesf

People won't play female warriors if they have a penalty to strength. Even if you gave them a boost to Dex making them the optimal choice for a different class it wouldn't satisfy some people.

da_shivsta

Of course there are issues with sexism! I mean my D&D group are all cool; there is me and another girl and the lads are always joking about 'the rule of two' (I'm a noob so dunno if that's a thing outside of our group) but it is just messing around. It's something which seems to be fading as more girls get involved (and involved as more than "the sexy one wearing half-nothing").

We all should know by now that humour/sarcasm doesn't always translate via text or whatever. Offending someone is easy.
Saying that, I think a PM to whoever you have upset is the right course of action on your other forum. Of course boards is a place for advice, but if you're looking for somebody to validate your actions, I think you're in the wrong place. I don't think, as someone else has said, that you need to be looking for sympathy here. If you want to be left alone, then close your account and don't bring the subject up on another forum.

I don't think gender mods are a good idea. I love playing female characters, I don't think anyone should be penalised for that. For me I like that it's the one place I'm actually fully equal.

gufnork

da_shivsta wrote: »

We all should know by now that humour/sarcasm doesn't always translate via text or whatever. Offending someone is easy.

Amen to that!

da_shivsta wrote: »

Saying that, I think a PM to whoever you have upset is the right course of action on your other forum.

Yeah, I've been apologizing since the very start. It's falling on deaf ears.

da_shivsta wrote: »

Of course boards is a place for advice, but if you're looking for somebody to validate your actions, I think you're in the wrong place. I don't think, as someone else has said, that you need to be looking for sympathy here.

I realise it probably does look that way. My original intention was to take a step back from that other forum and gauge opinion elsewhere rather than to court sympathy off others. However, I do take your point.

da_shivsta wrote: »

If you want to be left alone, then close your account and don't bring the subject up on another forum.

I suspect the post above from Toad Killer Dog was the last of it anyway now so I'll see how it goes from here on out, but it's certainly something I'll bear in mind.

da_shivsta wrote: »

I don't think gender mods are a good idea. I love playing female characters, I don't think anyone should be penalised for that. For me I like that it's the one place I'm actually fully equal.

I can see why being penalised for STR(for example) wouldn't appeal, but I'm not sure I understand why a positive modifier elsewhere wouldn't make up for it. OK, maybe CHR wasn't such a good suggestion, but surely a modifier on DEX(for example) would make up for it? A warrior I'm playing at the moment for example has extremely low INT(it makes him seem a bit of a thicko quite frankly) but his STR and CON are relatively high, so I accept it.

Or am I just being argumentative for it's own sake?

nesf

gufnork wrote: »

Or am I just being argumentative for it's own sake?

Certain people (not just women) will find it offensive if you codify real or supposed differences between men and women into a ruleset. Unless you enjoy being in the midst of a outraged flame war I really wouldn't bring up this idea or topic on a gaming forum. Do it if you want, but it's not going to be any prettier than going onto a woman's forum and defending the gender pay gap.

gufnork

nesf wrote: »

Certain people (not just women) will find it offensive if you codify real or supposed differences between men and women into a ruleset. Unless you enjoy being in the midst of a outraged flame war I really wouldn't bring up this idea or topic on a gaming forum. Do it if you want, but it's not going to be any prettier than going onto a woman's forum and defending the gender pay gap.

Yes, recent events have clearly proved you right. I think I'll leave this one here. Thanks for the replies guys(and girls...).

da_shivsta

Gender differentiation wouldn't enrich the game at all so I don't really see the point! I'd rather not be stereotyped... Although variation is great I just think this particular idea is just offensive!
Things are sorted with the first problem, don't start another :P Just don't piss me off