Full Version: Rollplaying defended, gender examined
... And?
Dude, you resurrected it.
As much as it pains me to say it, emo has a point. Why'd you bring this monstrosity back from the dead?
So you could FYAD it do death and get banned, too?
I still stand by what I did; it was for the sake of funniness, and I still think my getting banned was hilarious.
I still stand by what I did; it was for the sake of funniness, and I still think my getting banned was hilarious.
| QUOTE (SL James) | ||
Or you can not play something so retarded and avoid even the slightest whiff of being the kind of tool who does play such a worthless piece of shit character. |
Or better yet you can play some punk-ass character that has all kinds of hindurances and gets his brains splattered all over the wall because he spent all his points on "character background". Hey but at least your character had depth and that's what's important when some nameless, formless NPC sec guard kills him in a corporate office for performing an underpaid, over-exposed run with a bunch incompentent PIBs.
Or sometimes you actually need someone there who knows how to fire a gun and hit a target.
...it's not my fault, it's not my fault...you gotta believe me...! 
I don't have a shovel...I don't even like archival graveyards...
I don't have a shovel...I don't even like archival graveyards...
| QUOTE (Lazarus) | ||||
Or better yet you can play some punk-ass character that has all kinds of hindurances and gets his brains splattered all over the wall because he spent all his points on "character background". Hey but at least your character had depth and that's what's important when some nameless, formless NPC sec guard kills him in a corporate office for performing an underpaid, over-exposed run with a bunch incompentent PIBs. Or sometimes you actually need someone there who knows how to fire a gun and hit a target. |
Lazarus has caught t3h corr3ct.
Why is it that emo-ness and precious-little-snowflake-ness can exist in any given society in the first place? Because there are people who are good at using violence to protect the society in question. To quote Han from "Enter The Dragon", "Who knows what fragile wonders have passed from this world for want of strength?"
A team full of precious little snowflakes probably won't exist for very long. A tough and competent team, on the other hand, can maintain a couple of emo snowflakes because of the competence of the other members. A sterotypical example would be an emo snowflake decker who posts "Goth poetry" on the Matrix and who is useless in a firefight.
Perhaps it is better to pass from this world than to exist by trampling others.
~J
~J
| QUOTE (Kagetenshi) |
| Perhaps it is better to pass from this world than to exist by trampling others. ~J |
Perhaps, but probably not in a game of Shadowrun. I mean, unless you want your game to emphasize character creation rather than actual in-game events.
Character creation is the best part. Sometimes I use the Sacrificing rules to deal D Naval damage to myself just so I can create another character.
And so I can imagine the looks on the rest of the team's faces as my character presses a knife to his stomach and then explodes into unrecognizable charred pieces.
~J
And so I can imagine the looks on the rest of the team's faces as my character presses a knife to his stomach and then explodes into unrecognizable charred pieces.
~J
So a character who's roleplaying is limited to "RRRRRAAHHHHH!!!!" and letting off machinegun bursts is optimal? A character who wants nothing to do with the others because "He works alone" is good? I can't speak for SL James, and he can't speak for himself, but I agree with him the reclusive, badass loner and the the maniac combat monster are retarded concepts.
Looking at his qoute he didn't say anything about gimping a characters combat effectiveness. I believe he was showing his dislike of two character ideas that don't work well as part of a team. If he was I agree with him completely. Combat is part of the game, a fairly large part sometimes, and part that I enjoy, however it is not the entire game.
I am not pulling a Creepwood here.
Looking at his qoute he didn't say anything about gimping a characters combat effectiveness. I believe he was showing his dislike of two character ideas that don't work well as part of a team. If he was I agree with him completely. Combat is part of the game, a fairly large part sometimes, and part that I enjoy, however it is not the entire game.
I am not pulling a Creepwood here.
Nah I'm not saying that. I'm arguing against the notion that just because you create a character with "depth" doesn't mean he's worth a damn. It cuts both ways.
I think it comes down to professionalism as a being the baseline or standard if you will for creating a character. Who’s to say what sort of flavor is better when it comes to a character? It’s the same criteria as to whether or not you think a particular movie is bad or good. It's all in your tastes and opinions.
Having said that I find it odd that so many people think the solution to the problem of Stat character combat machines, which are a problem, is to make an equally crappy character on skill and stats but have a lot of background fluff.
Most of my SR games are professional ones. That means characters are usually basically the same. They are have similar backgrounds with little differences in personality and how they handle things on the surface. Sure we've played two or three gang campaigns where 99% of us weren't pros, but that was just to take a break from the main ones.
But just because you play a combat-oriented character doesn't mean you can't have depth. Hell Rambo had depth in First Blood. Conan had depth. But if those types of characters aren't your flavor then I would say look at the Neil character from HEAT; arguably the prime example of a gun guy with depth. He has a house on the beach in Malibu with hardly anything in it. When Eady approaches him for the first time in the bookstore he responds to her small talk with "Lady why is it you're so interested in who I am and what I do?" However he does several things that show his character: his vengeful nature which ultimately leads to his downfall, his loyalty to his friends at odds with his drive and pragmatism to see a job through, and his angst over his life and how he really wants to do something else. On the outside typical he’s gun-guy, badass, loner-type with a few friends but underneath substance.
I guess my point in a nutshell is just because you have a Neil type character doesn't mean he/she can't have substance, and just because you have a goth PIB Hope is Emo type character doesn't mean that there is substance other than fluff.
Of course if you have a player whose character walks around in Full Heavy Military Grade Armor armed with a Panther Assault Cannon and a Duke Nuke'em complex when you're doing a stealth datasteal then I think it's a problem of stupidity on your team's part for the same reason as if they let a little 12 year old shaman girl in pajamas who has her teddy "Mr. Boscoe" on the run too.
I think it comes down to professionalism as a being the baseline or standard if you will for creating a character. Who’s to say what sort of flavor is better when it comes to a character? It’s the same criteria as to whether or not you think a particular movie is bad or good. It's all in your tastes and opinions.
Having said that I find it odd that so many people think the solution to the problem of Stat character combat machines, which are a problem, is to make an equally crappy character on skill and stats but have a lot of background fluff.
Most of my SR games are professional ones. That means characters are usually basically the same. They are have similar backgrounds with little differences in personality and how they handle things on the surface. Sure we've played two or three gang campaigns where 99% of us weren't pros, but that was just to take a break from the main ones.
But just because you play a combat-oriented character doesn't mean you can't have depth. Hell Rambo had depth in First Blood. Conan had depth. But if those types of characters aren't your flavor then I would say look at the Neil character from HEAT; arguably the prime example of a gun guy with depth. He has a house on the beach in Malibu with hardly anything in it. When Eady approaches him for the first time in the bookstore he responds to her small talk with "Lady why is it you're so interested in who I am and what I do?" However he does several things that show his character: his vengeful nature which ultimately leads to his downfall, his loyalty to his friends at odds with his drive and pragmatism to see a job through, and his angst over his life and how he really wants to do something else. On the outside typical he’s gun-guy, badass, loner-type with a few friends but underneath substance.
I guess my point in a nutshell is just because you have a Neil type character doesn't mean he/she can't have substance, and just because you have a goth PIB Hope is Emo type character doesn't mean that there is substance other than fluff.
Of course if you have a player whose character walks around in Full Heavy Military Grade Armor armed with a Panther Assault Cannon and a Duke Nuke'em complex when you're doing a stealth datasteal then I think it's a problem of stupidity on your team's part for the same reason as if they let a little 12 year old shaman girl in pajamas who has her teddy "Mr. Boscoe" on the run too.
| QUOTE (Lazarus) |
| Most of my SR games are professional ones. That means characters are usually basically the same. They are have similar backgrounds with little differences in personality and how they handle things on the surface. Sure we've played two or three gang campaigns where 99% of us weren't pros, but that was just to take a break from the main ones. |
In my personal experience some people have trouble grasping this. Someone once asked me why so many of my characters all had some ex-military aspect to their backgrounds and suggested that I should instead focus on trying to bring something more unique to the table. I responded that ex-military is eminiently sensible and logical given that we're playing Shadowrun. How else can I explain Assualt Rifles 6?
| QUOTE (Wounded Ronin) |
| In my personal experience some people have trouble grasping this. Someone once asked me why so many of my characters all had some ex-military aspect to their backgrounds and suggested that I should instead focus on trying to bring something more unique to the table. I responded that ex-military is eminiently sensible and logical given that we're playing Shadowrun. How else can I explain Assualt Rifles 6? |
Dude exactly!
| QUOTE (Lazarus) |
| Or better yet you can play some punk-ass character that has all kinds of hindurances and gets his brains splattered all over the wall because he spent all his points on "character background". Hey but at least your character had depth and that's what's important when some nameless, formless NPC sec guard kills him in a corporate office for performing an underpaid, over-exposed run with a bunch incompentent PIBs. Or sometimes you actually need someone there who knows how to fire a gun and hit a target. |
Why this polarised either-or? Do characters with depth inherently not know how to fire guns and hit targets? Are characters without ex-military backgrounds somehow incapable of becoming competent shadowrunners?
| QUOTE (Lazarus) |
| Of course if you have a player whose character walks around in Full Heavy Military Grade Armor armed with a Panther Assault Cannon and a Duke Nuke'em complex when you're doing a stealth datasteal then I think it's a problem of stupidity on your team's part for the same reason as if they let a little 12 year old shaman girl in pajamas who has her teddy "Mr. Boscoe" on the run too. |
Even if "Mr Boscoe" is a homunculus inhabited by her bad-ass masked Force 12 ally and she doubles as your "little lost girl" infiltrator?
I think a large part of it is that sometimes people have a hard time creating a character background that isn't just an itemised laundry list of what/how/why their characters got their skills/attributes/resources. Blame it on creative burnout and the chargen app mentality; when you create a guy that's already got a 6 in Longarms (and therefore has probably crept past Tom Knapp and is currently sneaking into Carlos Hathcock territory), you also start struggling at figuring out when, exactly, he also had time to become an accomplished covert ops man (Stealth 4) and a highly tuned All-American level collegiate athlete (Athletics 4) without formal and intensive training. And that's not even getting into the "why is the character a shadowrunner?" conundrum, which only gets worse when you start looking at 50 resource characters and the Awakened in general.
Also, it's often hard to avoid getting pigeonholed when you're using an optimized character. After all, if you're good in a fight and have a ton of combat 'ware, people are gonna call you a sammy and that's that. As far as your fellow players are concerned, you've may have already ceded any potential mystique the second you finalized that sheet.
Also, it's often hard to avoid getting pigeonholed when you're using an optimized character. After all, if you're good in a fight and have a ton of combat 'ware, people are gonna call you a sammy and that's that. As far as your fellow players are concerned, you've may have already ceded any potential mystique the second you finalized that sheet.
QUOTE (Talia Invierno @ Jul 23 2007, 01:55 AM)
Why this polarised either-or? Do characters with depth inherently not know how to fire guns and hit targets?
Yes! Every build point you spend on your character's background is one less you have available to spend on skills. It's like this:
30BP: well-written novel
15BP: detailed background
5BP: brief background
0BP: laundry list of skill acquisition
-5BP: commonly-used, undistinguished background
-10BP: clichéd background
And who wouldn't want that extra ten build points?
~J
Well, you really don't have to spend BP on background, do you? Usually, background gives BP because it usually comes in the form of Flaws. The rest of it is creative writing to justify Assault Rifles 6 or whatever other practical skills the character may have.
There is no rule requiring that a player spend BP to write a background.
There is no rule requiring that a player spend BP to write a background.
No, actually, you do. Edges and flaws to support it are separate. See the chart I just quoted.
In the Priority system, it's A, B, C, D, E, and F Background, respectively.
~J
In the Priority system, it's A, B, C, D, E, and F Background, respectively.
~J
| QUOTE (Talia Invierno) | ||||
Why this polarised either-or? Do characters with depth inherently not know how to fire guns and hit targets? Are characters without ex-military backgrounds somehow incapable of becoming competent shadowrunners?
Even if "Mr Boscoe" is a homunculus inhabited by her bad-ass masked Force 12 ally and she doubles as your "little lost girl" infiltrator? |
Nah I wasn't saying it has to be either or. I think a combination of both is okay. My point is why is one type, the gun, looked down on, and the other, the PIB, liked upon as some how "creative", they both conform to a stereotype. At least the gun is useful where it counts. that's better then nothing.
And yes with a Force 12 Ally she can be anything she wants.
| QUOTE (Lazarus) |
| ... a little 12 year old shaman girl in pajamas who has her teddy "Mr. Boscoe"... |
Oh, man, I so need to make that character.
I have this image in my head of this little girl surrounded by goons holding her at gunpoint, just staring at them, saying in her little-girl voice, "Mr. Boscoe says you need to put your guns down now. Mr. Boscoe says if you don't, we'll have to hurt you. I don't want to have to hurt you."
| QUOTE (John Campbell) | ||
Oh, man, I so need to make that character. I have this image in my head of this little girl surrounded by goons holding her at gunpoint, just staring at them, saying in her little-girl voice, "Mr. Boscoe says you need to put your guns down now. Mr. Boscoe says if you don't, we'll have to hurt you. I don't want to have to hurt you." |
...sends chills of VEGM delight up my spine.
| QUOTE (Lazarus) |
| Of course if you have a player whose character walks around in Full Heavy Military Grade Armor armed with a Panther Assault Cannon and a Duke Nuke'em complex when you're doing a stealth datasteal then I think it's a problem of stupidity on your team's part for the same reason as if they let a little 12 year old shaman girl in pajamas who has her teddy "Mr. Boscoe" on the run too. |
i actually know that guy.
| QUOTE (Lazarus) |
| Nah I wasn't saying it has to be either or. I think a combination of both is okay. My point is why is one type, the gun, looked down on, and the other, the PIB, liked upon as some how "creative", they both conform to a stereotype. At least the gun is useful where it counts. that's better then nothing. |
I'm not saying the gun isn't usefull or is looked down on. Hell, roughly 90% of the time I am the gun. If I had the choice to be a hyper badass mage or a hyperbadass gunbunny I'd pick the gunbunny hands down.
What I was saying is their are some concepts that are less useful in a "team game" like Shadowrun. The lonewolf who always breaks from the party to do his own thing "because it's what his character would do", is one of them. The shortfused, vindictive, combat monster is another trouble concept. It doesn't matter if these characters have what could be turned into a novel trilogy of background written about them, they are still not going to do well in the Shadowrun I play and sometimes gm in.
I hear what you're saying Angelone.
And for the record. The 12 year old girl in question was actually a 7 year old badass Otaku NPC in one of my games. Her name was Cindy and Mr. Boscoe was a little AI that she befriended in the Matrix. She called him Teddy. He called himself Mr. Boscoe.
And for the record. The 12 year old girl in question was actually a 7 year old badass Otaku NPC in one of my games. Her name was Cindy and Mr. Boscoe was a little AI that she befriended in the Matrix. She called him Teddy. He called himself Mr. Boscoe.
So, today I read something that made me remember this thread, and think some more about gender.
I was reading a Piers Anthony novel today, and came across the following paragraph about what men want from women. However, I didn't really feel that what he said applied to me. I didn't think that I felt the way he said I should. What do you think about his statement?
When I say that I don't think that applies to me, that's not a simple "nuh-uh" denial. I don't think I feel that way, but on the other hand, I'm also not really sure I can articulate or know what I want in a woman. I know I'm sexually attracted to them from internet pr0n but it's hard for me to say much more. I don't think I feel comfortable with anyone being dependent on me because it seems like it would be an emotional drain and a lot of trouble to deal with that person all the time.
Do men and women generally want specific things from each other, assuming that they're heterosexual? Is stuff like that somehow genetically hardcoded?
I was reading a Piers Anthony novel today, and came across the following paragraph about what men want from women. However, I didn't really feel that what he said applied to me. I didn't think that I felt the way he said I should. What do you think about his statement?
QUOTE
...a man--desires a dependent woman. Whatever he might say to the contrary. A man wanted his woman all to himself. It wasn't nice, it wasn't generous, but that was what he most truly desired--when his illusions were stripped away. A lovely, talented, and completely dependent woman.
When I say that I don't think that applies to me, that's not a simple "nuh-uh" denial. I don't think I feel that way, but on the other hand, I'm also not really sure I can articulate or know what I want in a woman. I know I'm sexually attracted to them from internet pr0n but it's hard for me to say much more. I don't think I feel comfortable with anyone being dependent on me because it seems like it would be an emotional drain and a lot of trouble to deal with that person all the time.
Do men and women generally want specific things from each other, assuming that they're heterosexual? Is stuff like that somehow genetically hardcoded?
I think it's a gross oversimplification but it makes sense within the context of a story even if it would be inadequate in an essay; it's true insofar that people respond well to behaviors that let them maintain face. People want to feel respected and desired, and not just by their sexual partners. It's a matter of ego and survival. Gender is certainly of consequence when looking at why people do things, but I think we'd find that flattery cuts across gender lines and that people who feel unappreciated or useless become insecure regardless of the genders involved. That's one of the reasons why codependent relationships of all stripes can last so long-- when you tell someone "I won't make it without you," that's a powerful thing. Submitting to someone makes them feel powerful, and it often happens in relationships that are not overtly sexual. Sometimes I think people underestimate just how much of interaction between men can essentially be described as power plays. Openly telling a guy "You will respect me or else," went out of style long ago, but if you read between the lines that's still what happens every day. Face is a scary thing.
QUOTE (Wounded Ronin @ May 23 2010, 07:44 PM) 
So, today I read something that made me remember this thread, and think some more about gender.
I was reading a Piers Anthony novel today, and came across the following paragraph about what men want from women. However, I didn't really feel that what he said applied to me. I didn't think that I felt the way he said I should. What do you think about his statement?
When I say that I don't think that applies to me, that's not a simple "nuh-uh" denial. I don't think I feel that way, but on the other hand, I'm also not really sure I can articulate or know what I want in a woman. I know I'm sexually attracted to them from internet pr0n but it's hard for me to say much more. I don't think I feel comfortable with anyone being dependent on me because it seems like it would be an emotional drain and a lot of trouble to deal with that person all the time.
Do men and women generally want specific things from each other, assuming that they're heterosexual? Is stuff like that somehow genetically hardcoded?
I was reading a Piers Anthony novel today, and came across the following paragraph about what men want from women. However, I didn't really feel that what he said applied to me. I didn't think that I felt the way he said I should. What do you think about his statement?
When I say that I don't think that applies to me, that's not a simple "nuh-uh" denial. I don't think I feel that way, but on the other hand, I'm also not really sure I can articulate or know what I want in a woman. I know I'm sexually attracted to them from internet pr0n but it's hard for me to say much more. I don't think I feel comfortable with anyone being dependent on me because it seems like it would be an emotional drain and a lot of trouble to deal with that person all the time.
Do men and women generally want specific things from each other, assuming that they're heterosexual? Is stuff like that somehow genetically hardcoded?
Dude, it's PIERS ANTHONY. Writing about women. Taking that as a reliable and informed source is like reading Mein Kampf to learn how to understand the rich and noble culture of Der Juden.
And your point is? Piers Anthony does write some stuff that reads like a sexist fantasy at times, but what does that tell us? It tells me that he makes money this way. People buy his books. And a lot of people embrace and identify with some of those characterizations without even one iota of irony even as Anthony hangs a lampshade on some of his own bullshit from time to time. Hell, in a way, the Hitler comparison is apt-- say what you want about Adolf, but he knew how to tell people that they wanted to hear.* There's a market for writing that casts women as sweet, dependable and ultimately willing to put aside their own interests for the sake of the family-- Why else is the long suffering housewife who props up her man-child husband and won't leave him no matter how pigheaded/stupid he is a sitcom staple? Even when we cast women as the smart ones a lot of the time they use that intelligence to keep their man afloat and little else-- many people have pointed out that we seem totally OK with the woman being talented as long as she uses it to our advantage. Western society has burqa jokes and miniskirts now, but that doesn't mean we're always aware of our own biases.
*What they wanted to hear, btw, was that they could be important again. If I have a bias on history, it's that I always tend to suspect that that everything comes down to pride in the end. Even people who are incredibly insecure are often that way because the overestimate how much of the world actually notices when they fuck things up. Pride, pride, pride.
*What they wanted to hear, btw, was that they could be important again. If I have a bias on history, it's that I always tend to suspect that that everything comes down to pride in the end. Even people who are incredibly insecure are often that way because the overestimate how much of the world actually notices when they fuck things up. Pride, pride, pride.
I think Whipstitch makes a strong point. Yes, having someone say "I need you in order to survive" certainly makes someone feel powerful and important. Even a janitor will feel like a man when confronted with that. Who wants a wife who says "I enjoy your company, but will do just as well without you".
I think there's also an evolutionary point to it. We all know the setup - the woman wants to secure the best seed and secure an ongoing source of resources for the raising of a child. The man wants to protect his chosen mate from being implanted by anyone else, and also wants to implant as many other women as possible.
Given the man's basic criteria, the most effective way to keep a chosen mate tied to you is to make her dependent on you. A dependent woman doesn't have choices, and that reinforces the odds of successfully passing on your gene-line.
Not saying it's that way for all people or all cases. Certainly not for the 'love her and leave her' relationship. But there's certainly an impetus for it, and we can see it reinforced throughout Western history.
I think there's also an evolutionary point to it. We all know the setup - the woman wants to secure the best seed and secure an ongoing source of resources for the raising of a child. The man wants to protect his chosen mate from being implanted by anyone else, and also wants to implant as many other women as possible.
Given the man's basic criteria, the most effective way to keep a chosen mate tied to you is to make her dependent on you. A dependent woman doesn't have choices, and that reinforces the odds of successfully passing on your gene-line.
Not saying it's that way for all people or all cases. Certainly not for the 'love her and leave her' relationship. But there's certainly an impetus for it, and we can see it reinforced throughout Western history.
QUOTE (Wounded Ronin @ Feb 18 2006, 01:28 AM)
*Of the small group of people that get into RPG gaming, an even smaller group within that group is female. Female role players seem to be quite rare in my experience.
You should have been in the Camerilla in the 90s... way more girls than guys. Its the games not the roleplay.
QUOTE (SL James @ Feb 20 2006, 10:44 AM)
I've been playing RPGs for more than half my life. It's not a notion that gaming is dorky. Gaming is dorky. I cringe every time I'm within a quarter-mile of the FLGS. I make one trip a year to remind myself why I despise it, and then I return to my electronic ivory tower where I don't actually have to be within the physical presence of other gamers. If someone was to drop me into the middle of Gencon, I'd probably have a stroke.
/nod
I made the mistake of going to a FLGS on a friday night and the stench made me decide to go buy it on Amazon rather than walk in. They aren't all that bad but geez, the guys who spend all day hanging out at the FLGS and don't work there are stinky!
Funny enough, with the Knights of the Dinner Table reference way earlier, I've been compared to Sarah by several people; generally, this was a compliment, as I was often the only on in the group that wasn't trashing the game or played my character as something more than a set of statistics. I tend to prefer character development, thematics and other abstracts myself; while I like crunch just fine, for me the game system is the vehicle for roleplay. Meanwhile, many roll play with only a veneer of character over the stats. While I've gamed with quite a few roleplayers and rollplayers of both genders, from what I've seen women gamers seem somewhat less likely to play RPGs like video games and to enjoy roleplaying. Of course, I play in that vein too.
QUOTE (Wounded Ronin)
What do you think about his statement?
Loving yes, dependant no.
QUOTE (Wounded Ronin)
Do men and women generally want specific things from each other, assuming that they're heterosexual? Is stuff like that somehow genetically hardcoded?
Assuming they're heterosexual, they both want sex and that's hardcoded.
They also want affection, which might or might not be linked to sex. There's definitely something such as love that is different from lust (according to several studies). It's also very probably hardcoded.
Other than that, I'm not sure if there's anything eles that's hardcoded.
I think Piers Anthony here is confusing what men as a whole want with what male /a/ and /r9k/ users want.
Seriously, though, I think there may be a grain of truth to it, but I wonder if it may have as much to do with masculine/feminine identity as with biological sex. Personally, to respond to Nezumi, I'm far more comfortable with "I want you but I don't need you" in a woman than with total dependence, but I'm pretty far away from my expected masculine social role; I spend my non-gaming time reading shoujo/josei manga and internet fanfiction of variable quality, while I eat ice cream and cuddle with my cats. I'm not under any illusion of being "masculine" in a traditional sense, so maybe it doesn't feel like it applies to me because of that? I'd like to think he's just wrong, because it's a fuckin' creepy notion. I suspect Blade's right, ultimately; aside from sexual desire and the need for affection, I don't think anything's hardcoded as an invariant sex/gender feature. I don't think it'd be a loss if all the gender role stuff just magically disappeared from our culture.
My gaming group is pretty atypical in this regard, too. We have five women out of six players and a GM, me. Out of the female players, the overworked English major who loves to cook is also the one who shows up mostly to unwind and destroy things with her gyro-stabilized MMG. She has a very "I didn't come here to think, I came here to kill!" attitude towards planning, which I think stems from how overworked she is in the rest of her life. She's currently playing a lesbian Ojibwe dwarf mercenary named Jukebox, who has kind of a "natural outlaw" relationship with the world around her, very much the loner-Rambo type described earlier in the thread. Sounds like a crappy concept, but the player's a straight woman so it's not all fanservice or anything, and she's 1/4 Ojibwe herself and from the North Woods so she knows the culture pretty well. Still, it's a very action-movie take.
The other male, on the other hand, a CompSci major, is also a budding slam poet and has a strong creative impulse (he's wasted on computers, if you ask me), and he always has a fleshed out backstory; he's competent with the mechanics and building strong characters, but his character ideas are usually concepts well before they become stats. He's currently playing an anti-magic/meta/technomancer Black Muslim gunslinger chick who's in denial about her adept abilities. It's a remarkably introspective backstory for someone who's a combat character.
And everybody else is somewhere in between, to some extent bucking and to some extent reinforcing the stereotypes. I'm pretty sure being 5/7 female is a bit different from most Shadowrun groups, but it feels like we've got a lot of different perspectives.
Seriously, though, I think there may be a grain of truth to it, but I wonder if it may have as much to do with masculine/feminine identity as with biological sex. Personally, to respond to Nezumi, I'm far more comfortable with "I want you but I don't need you" in a woman than with total dependence, but I'm pretty far away from my expected masculine social role; I spend my non-gaming time reading shoujo/josei manga and internet fanfiction of variable quality, while I eat ice cream and cuddle with my cats. I'm not under any illusion of being "masculine" in a traditional sense, so maybe it doesn't feel like it applies to me because of that? I'd like to think he's just wrong, because it's a fuckin' creepy notion. I suspect Blade's right, ultimately; aside from sexual desire and the need for affection, I don't think anything's hardcoded as an invariant sex/gender feature. I don't think it'd be a loss if all the gender role stuff just magically disappeared from our culture.
My gaming group is pretty atypical in this regard, too. We have five women out of six players and a GM, me. Out of the female players, the overworked English major who loves to cook is also the one who shows up mostly to unwind and destroy things with her gyro-stabilized MMG. She has a very "I didn't come here to think, I came here to kill!" attitude towards planning, which I think stems from how overworked she is in the rest of her life. She's currently playing a lesbian Ojibwe dwarf mercenary named Jukebox, who has kind of a "natural outlaw" relationship with the world around her, very much the loner-Rambo type described earlier in the thread. Sounds like a crappy concept, but the player's a straight woman so it's not all fanservice or anything, and she's 1/4 Ojibwe herself and from the North Woods so she knows the culture pretty well. Still, it's a very action-movie take.
The other male, on the other hand, a CompSci major, is also a budding slam poet and has a strong creative impulse (he's wasted on computers, if you ask me), and he always has a fleshed out backstory; he's competent with the mechanics and building strong characters, but his character ideas are usually concepts well before they become stats. He's currently playing an anti-magic/meta/technomancer Black Muslim gunslinger chick who's in denial about her adept abilities. It's a remarkably introspective backstory for someone who's a combat character.
And everybody else is somewhere in between, to some extent bucking and to some extent reinforcing the stereotypes. I'm pretty sure being 5/7 female is a bit different from most Shadowrun groups, but it feels like we've got a lot of different perspectives.
QUOTE (Whipstitch @ May 24 2010, 04:17 AM)
Sometimes I think people underestimate just how much of interaction between men can essentially be described as power plays.
Everything that goes on between people are power plays. When it doesn't seem like it, either you've misunderstood the players' preferences, or at least one of the players is inept at the game.
QUOTE (Whipstitch @ May 23 2010, 10:17 PM)
Sometimes I think people underestimate just how much of interaction between men can essentially be described as power plays.[...] Face is a scary thing.
I think Smokescreen's got a point, Whip. It plays out a little different in male and female circles, but power dynamics is pretty universal in human relationships.
QUOTE (Megu @ May 25 2010, 07:12 AM)
I think Smokescreen's got a point, Whip. It plays out a little different in male and female circles, but power dynamics is pretty universal in human relationships.
This. While women may be less confrontational or direct about their power plays, that doesn't mean they aren't there.
QUOTE (Smokeskin @ May 25 2010, 01:53 AM)
Everything that goes on between people are power plays. When it doesn't seem like it, either you've misunderstood the players' preferences, or at least one of the players is inept at the game.
That was sort of my point; My intention was to point out that feminist readings of society often tend to leave out the fact that much of this stuff isn't limited to specific gender pairings.* For example, I know of many women who have complained that men who make less money than they do are often put off slightly by that fact. And while part of it probably is indeed sexism, I've noticed that generally speaking, you don't see the guys at the country club being all buddy-buddy and hanging out with the guys tend the grounds either.
*Whether that's just a matter of points of emphasis or whether it's a legitimate blind spot is another argument entirely.
I'm sure you've all seen the following -- it gets passed around every so often in viral/chain emails...
QUOTE
"Today we will experiment with a new form called the tandem story. The process is simple. Each person will pair off with the person sitting to his or her immediate right. One of you will then write the first paragraph of a short story. The partner will read the first paragraph and then add another paragraph to the story. The first person will then add a third paragraph, and so on back and forth. Remember to re-read what has been written each time in order to keep the story coherent. There is to be absolutely NO talking and anything you wish to say must be written on the paper. The story is over when both agree a conclusion has been reached."
The following was actually turned in by two of my English students: Michelle and Gary.
-------------------------------------------------------
THE STORY:
(first paragraph by Michelle)
At first, Laurie couldn't decide which kind of tea she wanted. The chamomile, which used to be her favorite for lazy evenings at home, now reminded her too much of Carl, who once said, in happier times, that he liked chamomile. But she felt she must now, at all costs, keep her mind off Carl. His possessiveness was suffocating, and if she thought about him too much her asthma started acting up again. So chamomile was out of the question.
-------------------------------------------------------
(second paragraph by Gary )
Meanwhile, Advance Sergeant Carl Harris, leader of the attack squadron now in orbit over Skylon 4, had more important things to think about than the neuroses of an air-headed asthmatic bimbo named Laurie with whom he had spent one sweaty night over a year ago. "A.S. Harris to Geostation 17,???*?? He said into his transgalactic communicator. "Polar orbit established. No sign of resistance so far..." But before he could sign off a bluish particle beam flashed out of nowhere and blasted a hole through his ship's cargo bay. The jolt from the direct hit sent him flying out of his seat and across the cockpit.
-------------------------------------------------------
(Michelle)
He bumped his head and died almost immediately but not before he felt one last pang of regret for psychically brutalizing the one woman who had ever had feelings for him. Soon afterwards, Earth stopped its pointless hostilities towards the peaceful farmers of Skylon 4. "Congress Passes Law Permanently Abolishing War and Space Travel," Laurie read in her newspaper one morning. The news simultaneously excited her and bored her. She stared out the window, dreaming of her youth, when the days had passed unhurriedly and carefree, with no newspapers to read, no television to distract her from her sense of innocent wonder at all the beautiful things round her. "Why must one lose one's innocence to become a woman?" she pondered wistfully.
------------------------------------------------------
( Gary )
Little did she know, but she had less than 10 seconds to live. Thousands of miles above the city, the Anu'udrian mothership launched the first of its Lithium fusion missiles. The dim-witted wimpy peaceniks who pushed the Unilateral Aerospace Disarmament Treaty through the congress had left Earth a defenseless target for the hostile alien empires who were determined to destroy the human race. Within two hours after the passage of the treaty the Anu'udrian ships were on course for Earth, carrying enough firepower to pulverize the entire planet. With no one to stop them, they swiftly initiated their diabolical plan. The lithium fusion missile entered the atmosphere unimpeded. The President, in his top-secret Mobile submarine headquarters on the ocean floor off the coast of Guam, felt the inconceivably massive explosion, which vaporized poor, stupid, Laurie and 85 million other Americans. The President slammed his fist on the conference table. "We can't allow this! I'm going to veto that treaty! Let's blow 'em out of the sky!"
-------------------------------------------------------
(Michelle)
This is absurd. I refuse to continue this mockery of literature. My writing partner is a violent, chauvinistic semi-literate adolescent.
-------------------------------------------------------
( Gary )
Yeah? Well, you're a self-centered tedious neurotic whose attempts at writing are the literary equivalent of Valium. "Oh shall I have chamomile tea? Or shall I have some other sort of FUCKING TEA??? Oh no, I'm such an air headed bimbo who reads too many Danielle Steele novels."
-------------------------------------------------------
(Michelle)
Asshole.
-------------------------------------------------------
( Gary )
Bitch.
-------------------------------------------------------
(Michelle)
DICK!
-------------------------------------------------------
( Gary )
Slut.
-------------------------------------------------------
(Michelle)
Get fucked.
-------------------------------------------------------
( Gary )
Eat shit.
-------------------------------------------------------
(Michelle)
FUCK YOU - YOU NEANDERTHAL!!!
-------------------------------------------------------
( Gary )
Go drink some tea - whore.
**********************************************
(TEACHER)
A+ - I really liked this one.
The following was actually turned in by two of my English students: Michelle and Gary.
-------------------------------------------------------
THE STORY:
(first paragraph by Michelle)
At first, Laurie couldn't decide which kind of tea she wanted. The chamomile, which used to be her favorite for lazy evenings at home, now reminded her too much of Carl, who once said, in happier times, that he liked chamomile. But she felt she must now, at all costs, keep her mind off Carl. His possessiveness was suffocating, and if she thought about him too much her asthma started acting up again. So chamomile was out of the question.
-------------------------------------------------------
(second paragraph by Gary )
Meanwhile, Advance Sergeant Carl Harris, leader of the attack squadron now in orbit over Skylon 4, had more important things to think about than the neuroses of an air-headed asthmatic bimbo named Laurie with whom he had spent one sweaty night over a year ago. "A.S. Harris to Geostation 17,???*?? He said into his transgalactic communicator. "Polar orbit established. No sign of resistance so far..." But before he could sign off a bluish particle beam flashed out of nowhere and blasted a hole through his ship's cargo bay. The jolt from the direct hit sent him flying out of his seat and across the cockpit.
-------------------------------------------------------
(Michelle)
He bumped his head and died almost immediately but not before he felt one last pang of regret for psychically brutalizing the one woman who had ever had feelings for him. Soon afterwards, Earth stopped its pointless hostilities towards the peaceful farmers of Skylon 4. "Congress Passes Law Permanently Abolishing War and Space Travel," Laurie read in her newspaper one morning. The news simultaneously excited her and bored her. She stared out the window, dreaming of her youth, when the days had passed unhurriedly and carefree, with no newspapers to read, no television to distract her from her sense of innocent wonder at all the beautiful things round her. "Why must one lose one's innocence to become a woman?" she pondered wistfully.
------------------------------------------------------
( Gary )
Little did she know, but she had less than 10 seconds to live. Thousands of miles above the city, the Anu'udrian mothership launched the first of its Lithium fusion missiles. The dim-witted wimpy peaceniks who pushed the Unilateral Aerospace Disarmament Treaty through the congress had left Earth a defenseless target for the hostile alien empires who were determined to destroy the human race. Within two hours after the passage of the treaty the Anu'udrian ships were on course for Earth, carrying enough firepower to pulverize the entire planet. With no one to stop them, they swiftly initiated their diabolical plan. The lithium fusion missile entered the atmosphere unimpeded. The President, in his top-secret Mobile submarine headquarters on the ocean floor off the coast of Guam, felt the inconceivably massive explosion, which vaporized poor, stupid, Laurie and 85 million other Americans. The President slammed his fist on the conference table. "We can't allow this! I'm going to veto that treaty! Let's blow 'em out of the sky!"
-------------------------------------------------------
(Michelle)
This is absurd. I refuse to continue this mockery of literature. My writing partner is a violent, chauvinistic semi-literate adolescent.
-------------------------------------------------------
( Gary )
Yeah? Well, you're a self-centered tedious neurotic whose attempts at writing are the literary equivalent of Valium. "Oh shall I have chamomile tea? Or shall I have some other sort of FUCKING TEA??? Oh no, I'm such an air headed bimbo who reads too many Danielle Steele novels."
-------------------------------------------------------
(Michelle)
Asshole.
-------------------------------------------------------
( Gary )
Bitch.
-------------------------------------------------------
(Michelle)
DICK!
-------------------------------------------------------
( Gary )
Slut.
-------------------------------------------------------
(Michelle)
Get fucked.
-------------------------------------------------------
( Gary )
Eat shit.
-------------------------------------------------------
(Michelle)
FUCK YOU - YOU NEANDERTHAL!!!
-------------------------------------------------------
( Gary )
Go drink some tea - whore.
**********************************************
(TEACHER)
A+ - I really liked this one.
And point in case, to the above story, by the second sentence of 'Michelle's' writing, I started skipping her automatically, and started reading Gary's more because it was just funny and more interesting.
I think I found the theme music for that writing: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBtCixzY-7w
Holy thread necromancy, Batman!
-k
-k
Everyone sing along!
"This is the thread that never ends, it goes on and on my friends, some people started posting not knowing what it was...."
In all seriousness, after reading through the whole thread for the first time (yes, I'm that bored at work), the question comes up about those who ARE in that blurring of sex/gender boundaries, such as transexuals, bigender, etc. They do exist as gamers, so how would you stereotype them in the whole roleplay/rollplay manner? Would you?
"This is the thread that never ends, it goes on and on my friends, some people started posting not knowing what it was...."
In all seriousness, after reading through the whole thread for the first time (yes, I'm that bored at work), the question comes up about those who ARE in that blurring of sex/gender boundaries, such as transexuals, bigender, etc. They do exist as gamers, so how would you stereotype them in the whole roleplay/rollplay manner? Would you?
This was an amusing...article?
/me likes.
/me likes.
QUOTE (SleepIncarnate @ Oct 18 2010, 09:06 PM)
Everyone sing along!
"This is the thread that never ends, it goes on and on my friends, some people started posting not knowing what it was...."
In all seriousness, after reading through the whole thread for the first time (yes, I'm that bored at work), the question comes up about those who ARE in that blurring of sex/gender boundaries, such as transexuals, bigender, etc. They do exist as gamers, so how would you stereotype them in the whole roleplay/rollplay manner? Would you?
"This is the thread that never ends, it goes on and on my friends, some people started posting not knowing what it was...."
In all seriousness, after reading through the whole thread for the first time (yes, I'm that bored at work), the question comes up about those who ARE in that blurring of sex/gender boundaries, such as transexuals, bigender, etc. They do exist as gamers, so how would you stereotype them in the whole roleplay/rollplay manner? Would you?
Some intersexed people take gender WAY seriously and will go out of their way to fit into every stereotype of their preferred gender (like tertiary sex characteristics are a thing to cling to in order to keep their identity afloat,) but I don't think the population is uniform enough for real generalization..
If they are transexual, presumably that means they match the mentally held gender. If they are bigender, it would be a toss up (or perhaps they're a bit of each). However, I've only met two transgendered people on role-play forums, I've never played with either, and both struck me as far so intensely focused on the fact that they are transgendered, I don't know that I'd enjoy playing with them - with the corrollary that if the person is not so intensely focused on being transgendered, I probably would never know it, so I can't exactly count them for any statistical purposes.
QUOTE (Saint Sithney @ Oct 19 2010, 12:57 PM)
Some intersexed people take gender WAY seriously and will go out of their way to fit into every stereotype of their preferred gender (like tertiary sex characteristics are a thing to cling to in order to keep their identity afloat,) but I don't think the population is uniform enough for real generalization..
It's a real tough thing to gauge. After all, in a lot of cases those people really only talk about it as much as anyone would given the fact that privilege doesn't really insulate them from the subject like it does straights. I've never really talked much about being attracted to women before, but as a straight male it's not like I have people asking me what's up with liking boobs to begin with.
QUOTE (Whipstitch @ Oct 19 2010, 06:15 PM)
It's a real tough thing to gauge. After all, in a lot of cases those people really only talk about it as much as anyone would given the fact that privilege doesn't really insulate them from the subject like it does straights. I've never really talked much about being attracted to women before, but as a straight male it's not like I have people asking me what's up with liking boobs to begin with.
Heh, it's women who are more likely to have detailed discussions about boob attractiveness.
This is the thread that never ends?
let the hueys and napalm flow! just rmemeber, Charlie don't surf!
let the hueys and napalm flow! just rmemeber, Charlie don't surf!
QUOTE (nezumi @ Oct 19 2010, 02:54 PM)
If they are transexual, presumably that means they match the mentally held gender. If they are bigender, it would be a toss up (or perhaps they're a bit of each). However, I've only met two transgendered people on role-play forums, I've never played with either, and both struck me as far so intensely focused on the fact that they are transgendered, I don't know that I'd enjoy playing with them - with the corrollary that if the person is not so intensely focused on being transgendered, I probably would never know it, so I can't exactly count them for any statistical purposes.
Ah, but as was pointed out early on, there's also the importance of gender roles, and lots of people who are along the spectrum of both gender identity and sex. Transexuals are not all Kim Petras, most are raised and live a while in the gender role of the sex they're born before transitioning somewhere in the 20-50 age range. That's a lot of time spent in the opposite gender role, even if it's the wrong gender identity. I think it's simpler really to not do these kinds of stereotypes and acknowledge that there's an entire spectrum, not just male and female players, but everything in between, and how they play and react to things also covers the entire spectrum from horrible player trying to get their fantasies fulfilled through complete newbie who sucks but can learn to the dedicated players, from rollplaying to roleplaying.
And you've probably met with more transgendered folks than you know, most just don't make a big deal about it, they want to live their lives as who they really are (called living in stealth). To quote pretty much everywhere in literature, movies, etc: "We walk among you."
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.