RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Or, really, you could just use "feminist," cuz that's what feminists want.Almost makes me want to start a new term (maybe something like "True Humanists" if it's not already taken) to indicate "We're into equal treatment of everybody and also recognize we're not there yet and change needs to happen to get there".Well, except that some MRA types have started using "humanist" as a way of saying "We're the ones who are REALLY in favor of equality, not those fake feminists", so I'd like to know exactly what such a statement is supposed to mean.Yup. The whole "humanist/egalitarian" response to feminism is generally used, these days, to protect a biased status quo. Actually being a humanist or an egalitarian is a good thing, just as caring about men's rights is a good thing. Unfortunately, just as "Men's Rights Activist" has been coopted by men who see rights as a zero sum game, and therefore advocate for attempting to lessen women's rights (and legalize rape, etc.), "egalitarian/humanist" has been coopted by men who argue that women are already treated as equal to men and any efforts to improve the treatment of women are unnecessary or harmful.
I would think "feminist" would be better suited as a term for folks who, despite being in favor of equality on all fronts, are focusing their own efforts specifically on the gender issue. For a person/group that tries to spread its efforts equally among multiple aspects of equality (gender, race, orientation/identity, economic status, age, etc), I would think "feminist" would be a misleading term to use. What do you think?
I would think "feminist" would be better suited as a term for folks who, despite being in favor of equality on all fronts, are focusing their own efforts specifically on the gender issue. For a person/group that tries to spread its efforts equally among multiple aspects of equality (gender, race, orientation/identity, economic status, age, etc), I would think "feminist" would be a misleading term to use. What do you think?
Most (modern) feminists do actually espouse equality, and combat oppression across multiple axis. There are some radical feminists who don't believe in gender and orientation/identity equality, but they are becoming scarcer.
The most surprising experience I've had was when a gamer brought his aged Chinese parents to the gaming table, between them we're talking about 140-160 years of age. For them their first experience was in playing the Second We Be Goblins! module. I've yet to see two people jump into it more like fish into water.
That is made of awesome! I've gamed with many, many different people, but never with anybody more than a few years older than me.
I've played with people up to 20 years older and 10 years younger than myself. Of both (or more accurately most) sexes.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Most (modern) feminists do actually espouse equality, and combat oppression across multiple axis. There are some radical feminists who don't believe in gender and orientation/identity equality, but they are becoming scarcer.
I would think "feminist" would be better suited as a term for folks who, despite being in favor of equality on all fronts, are focusing their own efforts specifically on the gender issue. For a person/group that tries to spread its efforts equally among multiple aspects of equality (gender, race, orientation/identity, economic status, age, etc), I would think "feminist" would be a misleading term to use. What do you think?
I wasn't talking about belief, but of the main thrust of one's actions. For example, take three people: all three believe in equality of all sorts. One of them devotes their time to engaging gender inequality issues, another spends time focusing on racial equality, while the third tries to help even things out across economic lines. They're all supportive of each others' work and ideals, but each only has time to regularly take action on a single front, and they've each chosen a different field to devote their limited time to. Referring to all three of them as "feminists" seems misleading to me. That's all I was saying.
They could just post that they are a safe gaming space for everybody, harassment is prohibited, but expect a little trash talking when your carefully laid plans are foiled by your opponent's lucky roll.
I wasn't talking about belief, but of the main thrust of one's actions. For example, take three people: all three believe in equality of all sorts. One of them devotes their time to engaging gender inequality issues, another spends time focusing on racial equality, while the third tries to help even things out across economic lines. They're all supportive of each others' work and ideals, but each only has time to regularly take action on a single front, and they've each chosen a different field to devote their limited time to. Referring to all three of them as "feminists" seems misleading to me. That's all I was saying.Most (modern) feminists do actually espouse equality, and combat oppression across multiple axis. There are some radical feminists who don't believe in gender and orientation/identity equality, but they are becoming scarcer.
I would think "feminist" would be better suited as a term for folks who, despite being in favor of equality on all fronts, are focusing their own efforts specifically on the gender issue. For a person/group that tries to spread its efforts equally among multiple aspects of equality (gender, race, orientation/identity, economic status, age, etc), I would think "feminist" would be a misleading term to use. What do you think?
I don't think it's that cut and dried. In the feminist circle I've been a part of, no more than 50% of time and effort has been spent on actual gender equality issues. The rest has been spent on intersectionality with racism, classism, etc. I actually entered feminist circles through LGBT activism, and that is still my "main thrust". If do not think that calling myself a feminist would be misleading.
It's good to see that so many groups have a diverse player-base, following the numbers on this thread it seems that a lot of groups are 20-50% women. Of the groups I've GMed, mostly via Roll20, I've had one woman and one girl out of about 25 people total over the course of running 1 permanent/ongoing campaign, and 4 short/now-defunct campaigns; this comes to a bit under 10% women:men.
I wonder if this has generally been people's experience in online games, and if not, what suggestions people have for making a more girl/woman-friendly gaming environment.
Belated reply here, but as a roll20 GM I've experienced the same thing, most groups I've seen are either all men or have a single female player, and when I've tried to run games there I've gotten mostly male players responding. I tried for my groups to pick out at least one female player, just because I feel most comfortable if I'm not the only girl at the (virtual) table. I've never had anyone be disrespectful of me or anything like that, though.
I think it's just an overall geek-culture phenomenon, not something specific to online RPGing. Roll20 is a social network that runs on community-created content, so I don't think there's really anything that could be done to make roll20 or sites like that more "female friendly".
|
Man that's scary. Someone's old parents make natural goblins? Uhhh I dont think I want to know what happens in the house...
For all you know they might have lightsabers in the closet.
Baticeer, sorry to burst your bubble, but I think most people who play are roll 20 regulars are guys. I used to GM down there some too, ye know?
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would think "feminist" would be better suited as a term for folks who, despite being in favor of equality on all fronts, are focusing their own efforts specifically on the gender issue. For a person/group that tries to spread its efforts equally among multiple aspects of equality (gender, race, orientation/identity, economic status, age, etc), I would think "feminist" would be a misleading term to use. What do you think?
I remember someone who reacted badly to the group name "Black Lives Matter" with the retort "All Lives Matter" The reply was given that if that statement were actually true, there would be no need for the group at all.
It's called a feminist movement, because whether we want to admit it or not, on the bulk of this planet women are still in a secondary status to men. In the US it comes in the form of things such as glass ceilings or criminialisng aspects of life which are uniquely female.. such as a woman whom today was sentenced to concurrent terms of 30 years (10 suspended) for endangering a dependent) and 10 years for feticide because of a miscarriage. In other countries, women are killed by their families for staining their honor by being raped.
Yes, patriarchy does do damage to men, but on the whole, it's women who are being kept on the wrong side of the boot,so that's why it's a feminist movement. And yes, men can be feminists too... all of the best ones are.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I remember someone who reacted badly to the group name "Black Lives Matter" with the retort "All Lives Matter" The reply was given that if that statement were actually true, there would be no need for the group at all.It's called a feminist movement, because whether we want to admit it or not, on the bulk of this planet women are still in a secondary status to men. In the US it comes in the form of things such as glass ceilings or criminialisng aspects of life which are uniquely female.. such as a woman whom today was sentenced to concurrent terms of 30 years (10 suspended) for endangering a dependent) and 10 years for feticide because of a miscarriage. In other countries, women are killed by their families for staining their honor by being raped.
Yes, patriarchy does do damage to men, but on the whole, it's women who are being kept on the wrong side of the boot,so that's why it's a feminist movement. And yes, men can be feminists too... all of the best ones are.
Indiana, right? Already famous for their poorly-thought-out bathroom bill?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The shy guy Gark refers to is me, the shyest guy of all.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We have no problem charging ahead and getting into antics if the table isn't going to judge us harshly for it.
Most of the groups I've played in had a near equal gender ratio. Usually one more of either gender. So I and most people I play with don't really pay any attention to player genders.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
We have no problem charging ahead and getting into antics if the table isn't going to judge us harshly for it.
Indeed. But many of us have been, over a lifetime, harshly judged or derided for any type of behavior that could be considered 'forward'. So if we aren't sure how the group will react, or if the group has already shown that it will react with negativity, then it's often easier to just stop offering ideas. Fighting uphill battles during what is supposed to be a leisure activity isn't exactly fun inducing.
It's called a feminist movement, because whether we want to admit it or not, on the bulk of this planet women are still in a secondary status to men. In the US it comes in the form of things such as glass ceilings or criminialisng aspects of life which are uniquely female.. such as a woman whom today was sentenced to concurrent terms of 30 years (10 suspended) for endangering a dependent) and 10 years for feticide because of a miscarriage. In other countries, women are killed by their families for staining their honor by being raped.
Yes, patriarchy does do damage to men, but on the whole, it's women who are being kept on the wrong side of the boot,so that's why it's a feminist movement. And yes, men can be feminists too... all of the best ones are.
And what are you willing to sacrifice to gain that equality?
It's always interesting to see people get lessons on the difference between equality and civility, and why the two are very much not the same thing. Many people ask for equality when they mean civility. And I've seen many gamers learn which one they should have asked for the hard way.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's called a feminist movement, because whether we want to admit it or not, on the bulk of this planet women are still in a secondary status to men. In the US it comes in the form of things such as glass ceilings or criminialisng aspects of life which are uniquely female.. such as a woman whom today was sentenced to concurrent terms of 30 years (10 suspended) for endangering a dependent) and 10 years for feticide because of a miscarriage. In other countries, women are killed by their families for staining their honor by being raped.
Yes, patriarchy does do damage to men, but on the whole, it's women who are being kept on the wrong side of the boot,so that's why it's a feminist movement. And yes, men can be feminists too... all of the best ones are.
And what are you willing to sacrifice to gain that equality?
It's always interesting to see people get lessons on the difference between equality and civility, and why the two are very much not the same thing. Many people ask for equality when they mean civility. And I've seen many gamers learn which one they should have asked for the hard way.
Both. The idea that equal treatment means it's suddenly okay to hit women, etc. is a pretty transparent antifeminist attempt to punish women for seeking equality.
It's not okay to hit anyone, except in self-defense or, perhaps, in defense of someone who can't defend themselves. The whole, "well, if women are equal than I can beat up women who don't respect (read: obey) me" is sociopathic.
We're not in need of your "lessons." You have nothing legitimate to teach us.
It's called a feminist movement, because whether we want to admit it or not, on the bulk of this planet women are still in a secondary status to men. In the US it comes in the form of things such as glass ceilings or criminialisng aspects of life which are uniquely female.. such as a woman whom today was sentenced to concurrent terms of 30 years (10 suspended) for endangering a dependent) and 10 years for feticide because of a miscarriage. In other countries, women are killed by their families for staining their honor by being raped.
Yes, patriarchy does do damage to men, but on the whole, it's women who are being kept on the wrong side of the boot,so that's why it's a feminist movement. And yes, men can be feminists too... all of the best ones are.
And what are you willing to sacrifice to gain that equality?
It's always interesting to see people get lessons on the difference between equality and civility, and why the two are very much not the same thing. Many people ask for equality when they mean civility. And I've seen many gamers learn which one they should have asked for the hard way.
Both. The idea that equal treatment means it's suddenly okay to hit women, etc. is a pretty transparent antifeminist attempt to punish women for seeking equality.
It's not okay to hit anyone, except in self-defense or, perhaps, in defense of someone who can't defend themselves. The whole, "well, if women are equal than I can beat up women who don't respect (read: obey) me" is sociopathic.
We're not in need of your "lessons." You have nothing legitimate to teach us.
I didn't ask my question to provide a lesson. I asked it to see what answer would be given.
My comment on civility versus equality was not for lesson purposes. There are people who say they seek equality, but really do not. It was to help illustrate part of the problem and help provoke further thought for the answer.
So perhaps you could actually explain what you mean, rather than hint at it.
I've got some ideas for what equality and civility mean in this context, but I don't see why one needs to be prioritized over the other.
Women long had a veneer of civility instead of equality. As I suggested that's led to some very toxic forms of machismo. Toxic for both men and women.Or for that matter what are you hinting at with "sacrifice to gain that equality" or "learn which one they should have asked for the hard way"? That last at least sounds like you could give specific examples, which might make this all much clearer.
Some people prioritize their perceptions of reality over reality itself. It does not matter to them that they are being treated horribly as long as they don't see it. And when someone points out the truth, they adamantly focus on ignoring that truth in favor of the illusion they have come to live.
For those people, civility is more important because it provides them with an illusion they are comfortable with. The only reason it is prioritized higher in those instances is because it is what is actually important to them. Just as there are those who prioritize equality over civility, because only equality is important to them.
The question I asked was as clear as intended. It is intentionally left so open-ended as to not constrain the possible answers. Perhaps it would illuminate more if I provided my own answer?
When I was asked the question the first time, my answer after some thought was the concept of inequality. The very idea itself. If doing way with that and dooming my choice and the existence of an entire movement to be forgotten could achieve equality, I would find it an acceptable trade. Knowing my children would grow up never facing discrimination is worth it to me.
The examples are hard to narrow down exactly.
We are quite rough on each other. Playful insults, heavy-handed teasing, injokes that go back years and are quite embarrassing. Some members of the group have been around since first edition DnD. They have stories going back forever. And the jokes about family are some of the worst.
Every once in awhile, a new person joins the group. And we tone it down and rely on injokes more. And invariably, the new player notices that they're being left out of things and we're being a bit easy on them compared to each other. They ask, we outright admit we're not treating them equally. They ask for equal treatment, and more than one has cited something about themselves as why we're treating them like an outsider.
Keep in mind they're asking to be equal to people who joke about how recursive each others' family trees are. We're not exactly a group of people to aspire towards.
So, invariably, the jokes start. And the teasing. And by the end, the poor person has usually asked us to go back to treating them like an outsider.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Some people prioritize their perceptions of reality over reality itself.
No. People can't tell the difference between their perceptions of reality and reality itself. They think their perceptions of reality ARE reality itself. That's what "perception" means. As far as any given person is aware, their perceptions of reality and reality itself are one and the same.
Prioritizing X over Y requires knowledge that X and Y are two different things. But if someone knew that their perceptions of reality didn't match actual reality, then the former would no longer be their perceptions of reality.
Some people prioritize their perceptions of reality over reality itself.No. People can't tell the difference between their perceptions of reality and reality itself. They think their perceptions of reality ARE reality itself. That's what "perception" means. As far as any given person is aware, their perceptions of reality and reality itself are one and the same.
Prioritizing X over Y requires knowledge that X and Y are two different things. But if someone knew that their perceptions of reality didn't match actual reality, then the former would no longer be their perceptions of reality.
I think you've got a point, but you're also missing plenty of variation. You're implying it's impossible to understand there are other versions of reality based on other people's perceptions formed by their own perspectives, filters, histories, etc. I can assure you there are plenty of people who have a pretty advanced concept of that - though still favoring their own perception of reality.
Even beyond "then I can beat up women who don't respect me", the basic idea that it's not okay to hit women, but hitting men is fine is itself an example of toxic masculinity - pushing men into the "you're valued on how good you are at violence" trap.
It's just the most extreme example of the differences between how you're expected to act as an/or towards the genders, and people have a tendency to take any point to an extreme to try to make a point. There are much more subtle/better/on topic/ less button pushy examples. Everything from body language to eye contact to subject matter is different, and every way of dealing with it is wrong at least two ways.
More on topic, take for example when a bunch of people are trying to talk at once (like, every gaming session). When a bunch of guys are trying to talk you lower your pitch, increase the volume, and talk over. That's what guys naturally to do be heard. Something that's been brought up on the forums more than once is that tends to exclude women from the conversation, so I know not to do that in mixed company and try something else.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yes, but my point was that the whole idea of it being okay to beat up guys is a problem in itself. That the gender divide there is a bad thing because hitting people is a problem whatever gender they are. Normalizing that should lead to less hitting men, not more hitting women.
But how much less? I don't think it's reasonable to expect it to ever reach seeing it the exact same way. A large chunk of why that prohibition exists is because of very real physical differences that aren't going anywhere.
You're right there are a lot of subtler differences as well. Differences in talking over men vs women, differences in how we perceive the same behavior from men vs women, etc. And much of this on a level much lower than conscious intention - which makes it really hard to deal with.
Even if recognized it's still hard to deal with. People tend to see the way that they interact as the right way. Trying to tell people that their established practices are wrong is always a tricky trade off between accommodation and getting to be yourself.
To chime in on the original topic: The only games I've run that hasn't had a female in it is a very short-lived Shattered Star campaign and my current campaign (though one player's girlfriend might join in). It's never been an issue one way or the other. I will say, I do tend to run groups that have radically different views on things (never run a game with an anarchist and a communist), but there's an agreement at my tables that once a discussion turns from discussion (even if heated) to a full blown argument that it's best, for the sake of the game (the reason we're all here) to drop the subject.
Also I think I used too many parenthesis there.
| 11 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's called a feminist movement, because whether we want to admit it or not, on the bulk of this planet women are still in a secondary status to men. In the US it comes in the form of things such as glass ceilings or criminialisng aspects of life which are uniquely female.. such as a woman whom today was sentenced to concurrent terms of 30 years (10 suspended) for endangering a dependent) and 10 years for feticide because of a miscarriage. In other countries, women are killed by their families for staining their honor by being raped.
Yes, patriarchy does do damage to men, but on the whole, it's women who are being kept on the wrong side of the boot,so that's why it's a feminist movement. And yes, men can be feminists too... all of the best ones are.
And what are you willing to sacrifice to gain that equality?
It's always interesting to see people get lessons on the difference between equality and civility, and why the two are very much not the same thing. Many people ask for equality when they mean civility. And I've seen many gamers learn which one they should have asked for the hard way.
I hold doors for both men and women. And I don't mind either holding doors for me. The idea that equality takes away civility only holds water for people looking for excuses to be rude.
I hold doors for both men and women. And I don't mind either holding doors for me. The idea that equality takes away civility only holds water for people looking for excuses to be rude.It's called a feminist movement, because whether we want to admit it or not, on the bulk of this planet women are still in a secondary status to men. In the US it comes in the form of things such as glass ceilings or criminialisng aspects of life which are uniquely female.. such as a woman whom today was sentenced to concurrent terms of 30 years (10 suspended) for endangering a dependent) and 10 years for feticide because of a miscarriage. In other countries, women are killed by their families for staining their honor by being raped.
Yes, patriarchy does do damage to men, but on the whole, it's women who are being kept on the wrong side of the boot,so that's why it's a feminist movement. And yes, men can be feminists too... all of the best ones are.
And what are you willing to sacrifice to gain that equality?
It's always interesting to see people get lessons on the difference between equality and civility, and why the two are very much not the same thing. Many people ask for equality when they mean civility. And I've seen many gamers learn which one they should have asked for the hard way.
While I do agree with the sentiment, you didn't answer the question. You did give an excellent comment on what is wrong with the viewpoint I pointed out some people as having.
I am willing to drop it here. This discussion would derail the thread too much.
Quick survey... who here has a girl in their group... and is she treated with the respect she unquestionably deserves!! ;))
I'm a woman that is in a Pathfinder group. I'm also a transgender woman, so there is a possibility of misogyny and transphobia. I haven't experienced either of them within my RPG group. The have always used the correct gender pronouns when referring to me. Nothing about me being an inferior gamer, just because I am a woman.
In fact, the game shop that I go to regularly is very welcoming of female gamers. There are framed oversized Magic The Gathering cards that people can buy with all of the funds going to breast cancer research (can't recall which organization they give to). It isn't uncommon to see at least one other female gamer at the shop. Sure, it is still very male dominant, but it is welcoming for us. My only wish is that the bathroom was a little cleaner. :)
It might be because most people who post haven't led with, "Well, I'm one, and..." :P
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Welp, this thread sure is a lot of dudes talking about us, and congratulating themselves for being enlightened enough to have women in their groups, rather than to us. Or better yet, asking questions and listening.Maybe I'm missing something, but I was a bit confused over something when I read this post back in April, and am again still confused over the same point:
how did you come to the conclusion that it was mostly men posting in the thread? I mean, I suspect a lot of people on this website assume I am male, based on my username, but most people here don't have particularly masculine- or feminine-sounding names. As difficult as it is to accurately discern someone's gender identity in person (aside from asking them, of course), it is far more difficult to do so over the internet.So...what made you think that the people posting on this thread are/were mostly men?
Because they identified as such.
One of the things I've enjoyed but been surprised about, is how its not an issue being a girl in a RPG gaming group. Most times I'm the only girl in the group but no-one has batted an eyelid.
I know RPG playing is very much seen as a geeky guy thing but I think more women are giving it a go.
Quick survey... who here has a girl in their group... and is she treated with the respect she unquestionably deserves!! ;))
We have had members of the Distaff in my games since 1974*. Yes, not as common as males, but it's by no means at all rare or uncommon to see females in table-top roleplaying games.
* Just look at my Manual of Aurania, which in 1977 recognized the contributions of two of our female players.
In my Wednesday game, we have one- in my Saturday game the females outnumber the males.
We have always treated them with the same respect the males members get- joshing, a little teasing, camaraderie, friendship.
and a cantankerous old fart... (that would be me)
Get off my lawn!
When I started in the late 70s there were two and sometimes three women in the group (one only played infrequently). They were the ones that kept the main stories going while some of the gentlemen went off the tracks sometimes.
In virtually all my games over the years there has been at least one women, and often they have encompassed the entire party.
In all cases everyone was treated well. I don't recall any instances of anyone being talked down to over their gender.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Welp, this thread sure is a lot of dudes talking about us, and congratulating themselves for being enlightened enough to have women in their groups, rather than to us. Or better yet, asking questions and listening.
Any discussion of how to make gaming tables welcoming to women should be led by women. You shouldn't be trying to speak for us. So I'm not sure what purpose discussions talking about us as if we're some sort of exotic animals serves.
Because that's the OP, Jessica: "Quick survey... who here has a girl in their group... and is she treated with the respect she unquestionably deserves!! ;))"
So, if I answer the OP by saying yes, as I did- am I "congratulating themselves for being enlightened enough to have women in their groups" or just answering the OP's question?
The OP is not a "discussion of how to make gaming tables welcoming to women" it is a question- by a female note- as to who "has a girl in their group". She asked a reasonable polling question, and many of us are simply answering it.
This doesnt make us sexist or presumptuous or speaking for the other sex. It means simply we respect the Op and are answering her query.