Male Dominance in RPGs

[Ben O'Neal]

to be condescending requires intention. whilst i have no doubt that the actions/PM's of these men can be interpreted as condescending, i do doubt that it was their intention. instead, what you see as being condescending i would interpret as a function of their attempts to hit on you. "praising your every move" seems more like some loser trying to get his end wet than someone thinking you are a lost puppy who needs constant reinforcement.

i can't say i've ever experienced being hit on by multitudes of guys, but i know what it's like to be hit on by a bunch of girls. i used to change schools alot, even right up to when i finished high school, and without fail, every time i was a "new" student i would be inundated with girls asking me if i would "go out" with their friends, who of course, i had no idea who they were. but i must say i never felt uncomfortable. maybe i was just used to it, but i think it was more the fact that the whole situation was more humourous than anything. whilst i never did so, i know many a girl who takes advantage of the multitudes of guys who fall at their feet by using them as convenient source of transport and free meals.

as for your comment AnyaTheBlue on being different to the Straight White Normal Male, you're right about it not being at all limited to women. objectively, people different to this norm are treated differently by both genders equally. just as guys might avoid or ostrasize 'weird' men and women, so too do girls avoid or ostrasize 'weird' men and women. in fact, the only ones who won't treat 'weird' people differently are other 'weird' people who are similar. i know this because many people would call me a "goth", though i myself abhore that label for the connotations it carries of pathetic depressed social retards who cut themselves. but i do wear only black, i have black hair, and i listen to and play heavy music. i wouldn't harm a fly (ok i would, i hate flies with a vengeance), and when people get to know me, they often exclaim how different i am to their initial preconceptions. and yet, just today, i was walking down the street and an old man who was walking the other way walked into the middle of the road when i got near him and then back onto the path when i had passed. i was just walking along with the mornings paper, and i managed to inadvertently scare some old guy. why? because i was different to him. i'm white, i'm male, and i'm straight. but i'm not "normal" and so i get treated differently everywhere i go. but i don't mind. even though it's harder for me to get a place to live, harder to get a job, harder to make friends, i'm not going to change because i'm happy with who i am. my image is a perfect filter for sifting through the people who aren't worth my time. so i don't bitch about discrimination, i make the best of it.

if i could suggest one thing, i would suggest not just looking for the ways women are discriminated against, but also looking at the ways men are descriminated against, and any other group of people you can think of. because not one of them recieves more discrimination than another, it only seems that way because we only have one perspective. if you don't believe me, just look in your local "accomodation vacant" section of your paper. who do people want as roommates? females, or male/female. never just male. and there are more F's than the are M/Fs as requirements, regardless of the gender of the current housemates. also think of insurance, and the courts, and sitcoms (is the wife ever a blithering clumsy idiot? is the man ever a competant father juggling work and family?), and advertisements (similar reasons to sitcoms), or try reading a Cleo or a Cosmo and tell me men aren't just as objectified as women (i've lived with many girls, and read many girls magazines) and of course the list goes on and on. so basically my suggestion is to think objectively and rationally and measure the subjective against that.

[RaconteurX]

As one of the "voices of roleplaying antiquity" here on the Forge (I began playing in the summer of 1978), I have witnessed many of the antisocial behaviors that folks have described in this thread. At the same time, the incidents have been for the most part limited to individuals or groups who were poorly socialized rather than "mere geeks". Most were marginalized persons in general, victims of abuse of one or more varieties, who lashed out at people of either gender with equal alacrity and vehemence. Most also were contrite after the inappropriateness of their behavior was made plain to them in a quiet and polite manner, and strove to make amends.

I attended an all-male Catholic college preparatory school, and that made quite a difference in the general attitudes of my earliest gaming cronies. I also played with people at the friendly local game store, and even the all-male group there showed very gentlemanly and respectful attitudes toward women. Most other groups had players of both genders, and I can recall only one instance where behavior of a disrespecful or inappropriate nature occurred. The college crowd was somewhat less perfect, including a gamemaster who routinely subjected players in her (yes, her) campaigns to detailed descriptions of the raping (often homosexual) of their characters.

I am not a Straight White Normal Male myself (I identify as Bisexual and Kinky, which frightens the Straights and the Normals immensely), and so am familiar with discriminatory practices (though not to the extent which women must face on a daily basis). I came to those identifications after I began to roleplay, but fortunately have not had gaming cronies for whom my personal choices have been a problem even when characters of mine (sometimes female, occasionally not) engaged in flirtation with theirs. Of the many people with whom I have played over the years, none has had any difficulty keeping character and player separate in their minds.

I have had similar experience to James' when playing female characters in online campaigns but, given the general state of gender relations these days, I did not consider the revelation particularly surprising. What I also did not consider surprising is that all the men who flirted with me outside the game did so because they found me intelligent, funny and a pleasant conversatonal partner... and not just because they thought I was female. I have been complimented for my portrayal of female characters several times in the past, so it appears I am somewhat in touch with the feminine psyche.

Thank my mother and grandmother (God/dess rest their souls), as it was their capable, competent, educated womanhood that most informed me. :)

[M. J. Young]

Not entirely off topic--

Some time back, among the MUD/MUSH/MUX crowd, there appeared a quiz for "the perfect girlfriend". The idea was that girls would answer the questions and be scored regarding how ideal a girlfriend they would be; it was written, presumably, by someone who played these games, and word of it spread through the young MUDder community.

A lot of young men of my acquaintance took this quiz; they all scored quite highly, as being ideal girlfriends.

This leads me to seriously question whether the reaction of males to a female character played anonymously by a male player is at all relevant. I'd like to think I play credible females; most of the girls who read my novel believe I wrote a credible female. But then, if what I'm doing in play is creating what guys wish girls would be like, it's pretty evident that they're going to like the girls I play.

Back in the early nineties we had a running joke going around here that E. R. Jones and I were going to start a pay-to-chat number and advertise it to make money. I'm Markie, and I know what men like. It is said that women want the authors of their romance novels to be women, because they don't want to believe that men can understand romance as well as women can; maybe there is something to the idea that a woman understands a woman better and a man understands a man better. If so, James' experience of having men be attracted to his in-game character may only mean that in some ways the perception of a woman he conveyed to them was something that clicked with their perceptions of women, and they really wanted to get to know this girl who was so like what they wanted in a girl.

Did that make any sense?

In any case, I'd be more impressed by people whose cross-gender play fools those of the gender they're playing.

--M. J. Young

[james_west]

There's been a great deal of talk of misogyny, or lack thereof, in the threads lately, and I'd like to try to establish this main points folks seem to be making. I've seen the following points made in threads. Note that in none of the following am I attempting to reproduce any specific person's point of view, and I'm including other threads;

(1) In my experience, a lot of groups do have an androcentric focus, sometimes becoming horribly female-unfriendly.
(a) but I didn't mind it
(b) but it was just youthful high spirits
(c) but they were socially inept in any context
(d) but you shouldn't be so sensitive
(e) but they were just reflecting societal values

(2) Our group is thoroughly integrated genderwise.
(a) and I think the horrid geek stereotype is a myth
(b) but we've all known each-other since kindergarten anyway
(c) but I live somewhere with a completely different culture than mainstream US
(d) but we're all over thirty, and thus past the particularly intense phase of sexual competition, anyway
(e) and all my friends got married to other members of the group

(3) Our group is pretty much a bunch of guys, although I don't think we're female-unfriendly
(a) but our games aren't the sort of thing women would be likely to enjoy, anyway
(b) but it's not because we're a bunch of geeks
(c) but it's for essentially historical reasons.
(d) but the presence of women distracts from male bonding
(e) but the presence of women intensifies male competition


Don't have any synthesis to go along with this at the moment; these just seem to be the sorts of points people are making.

I'd be more impressed by people whose cross-gender play fools those of the gender they're playing.

Interesting thought; sort of a Turing Test for cross-gender sensibilities. This is an idea that seems like it's got philosophical legs, but I'm not quite sure where they'd carry you.

- James

[Ben O'Neal]

I'd be more impressed by people whose cross-gender play fools those of the gender they're playing.

I've read at least two posts that identify such a phenomena, one by Doctor Xero where he cited an experimental study which almost perfectly replicates the second post given by M.J. West:

When I was in college, I took a course in creative writing. We were asked to do an internal character sketch--that is, convey information about the personality of a character by writing a piece as seen through the eyes of the character. I decided to do a woman, modeling some of it on my perception of my wife.

The professor read the paper to the class and asked for comments, whether the character seemed believable, whether they could identify with her. The class of fourteen girls and one other guy all said it was very well written. Then the professor added that it was written by a guy, and suddenly several of the girls were saying that they knew there was something wrong about it that they just couldn't put their finger on.

the problem is, as is plain to see, that a gender's perception of the reality of a fictional character is coloured by their perception of who created that character. as has been mentioned before, girls don't like to think that they can be understood by males. it almost comes close to being a quantum mechanic, where the more a male knows about a female, the more she will change herself or deny the truth to "maintain the mystery".

i think that given sufficient social interaction and learning, we all have enough machiavalian intelligence to convincingly portray the other sex, providing that our true gender remains anonymous.

[Ben Lehman]

(2) Our group is thoroughly integrated genderwise.
(a) and I think the horrid geek stereotype is a myth
(b) but we've all known each-other since kindergarten anyway
(c) but I live somewhere with a completely different culture than mainstream US
(d) but we're all over thirty, and thus past the particularly intense phase of sexual competition, anyway
(e) and all my friends got married to other members of the group

BL>
With regard to one of my groups, I can add 2(f)
...and, all being 20-somethings, the sexually driven competition and social machinations have, at times, led to highly dysfunctional play.

yrs--
--Ben

[Minx]

I'd be more impressed by people whose cross-gender play fools those of the gender they're playing.

I've read at least two posts that identify such a phenomena, one by Doctor Xero where he cited an experimental study which almost perfectly replicates the second post given by M.J. West:

When I was in college, I took a course in creative writing. We were asked to do an internal character sketch--that is, convey information about the personality of a character by writing a piece as seen through the eyes of the character. I decided to do a woman, modeling some of it on my perception of my wife.

The professor read the paper to the class and asked for comments, whether the character seemed believable, whether they could identify with her. The class of fourteen girls and one other guy all said it was very well written. Then the professor added that it was written by a guy, and suddenly several of the girls were saying that they knew there was something wrong about it that they just couldn't put their finger on.

the problem is, as is plain to see, that a gender's perception of the reality of a fictional character is coloured by their perception of who created that character. as has been mentioned before, girls don't like to think that they can be understood by males. it almost comes close to being a quantum mechanic, where the more a male knows about a female, the more she will change herself or deny the truth to "maintain the mystery".

i think that given sufficient social interaction and learning, we all have enough machiavalian intelligence to convincingly portray the other sex, providing that our true gender remains anonymous.

I´d call ist a self-fulfilling prophecy, but I agree with you. This was something I missed in both this and the feminist game design thread, although there have been some post which mentioned it. (Especially by Dr. Xero.)

When discussing discrimation and similar issues, we have to remember how our perception is influenced by our opinions and experience.

M

[M. J. Young]

I'd be more impressed by people whose cross-gender play fools those of the gender they're playing.

I've read at least two posts that identify such a phenomena, one by Doctor Xero where he cited an experimental study which almost perfectly replicates the second post given by M.J. West:

When I was in college, I took a course in creative writing. We were asked to do an internal character sketch--that is, convey information about the personality of a character by writing a piece as seen through the eyes of the character. I decided to do a woman, modeling some of it on my perception of my wife.

The professor read the paper to the class and asked for comments, whether the character seemed believable, whether they could identify with her. The class of fourteen girls and one other guy all said it was very well written. Then the professor added that it was written by a guy, and suddenly several of the girls were saying that they knew there was something wrong about it that they just couldn't put their finger on.

Actually, um, those were both me. I think it can be done, and I think I've done it, but since I'm the guy who thinks he credibly plays girls, I really can't say I have the perspective for it.

I think I write a credible major female protagonist in Verse Three, Chapter One, but I don't know. My wife says that she (the character) is not sufficiently bothered by the fact that she's separated from her children, and I'm still thinking about that.

the problem is, as is plain to see, that a gender's perception of the reality of a fictional character is coloured by their perception of who created that character. as has been mentioned before, girls don't like to think that they can be understood by males. it almost comes close to being a quantum mechanic, where the more a male knows about a female, the more she will change herself or deny the truth to "maintain the mystery".

It occurs to me that this isn't limited to this particular situation either.

Some years back someone did a study that is peripherally interesting here. They created a set of fictional patients, wrote imaginary case histories of each, pinned a psych diagnosis to each of the case histories, and then signed them indicating whether the person doing the diagnosis was a psychiatrist or a psychologist. These were then distributed to psychiatrists and psychologists, who were asked to assess whether in their opinion the diagnoses were correct. (The subjects did not know that these were anything other than genuine case histories and diagnoses by real mental health professionals.)

Psychologists noted some as correct and some as not correct, with no observable pattern.

Psychiatrists strongly tended to indicate that diagnoses listed as having been made by a psychiatrist were correct and those made by a psychologist were not correct.

So we do have a tendency to prejudice ourselves against the possibility that someone outside our group has the ability to understand what we understand.

--M. J. Young

[Ben O'Neal]

So we do have a tendency to prejudice ourselves against the possibility that someone outside our group has the ability to understand what we understand.

i've seen that study, and i couldn't have put it better myself.

Actually, um, those were both me. I think it can be done, and I think I've done it, but since I'm the guy who thinks he credibly plays girls, I really can't say I have the perspective for it.

i know both those paragraphs were yours, i grabbed them at the same time. but i couldn't find doctor xeros post so i just said that his was basically the same as yours, and gave yours alone.

[contracycle]

So we do have a tendency to prejudice ourselves against the possibility that someone outside our group has the ability to understand what we understand.

I'd agree, but argue that this is a basic property of prejudice; that is, often the prejudicial behaviour is premised on some form of argument that its in their best interests, on the implicit assumption that they couldnt possibly know their best interests for themselves.