administrators group

Tez

@hellfrog No!!! I could watch the Cher show outfit reveals for hours.

Tez

@Third-Eye said:

@Tez said:
There’s something to be said about the fact that we are more comfy with killing someone. This might not be the best venue for that, but there is something to be said.

I think there’s a mischaracterization here of how at least some games, including ones I’ve been a part of, draft rules around this and Social Contract type language. It’s not like rape RP is always put in its own box as the only thing anyone cares about. Sometimes it is but it’s often not. These have also included broad language on what kind of violence is and isn’t going to be involved in plots, how physical and psychological torture is handled, etc. I’ve seen red/yellow/green lights players list on their character pages becoming more common and like…some of it’s sex, some of it’s torture, some of it’s spiders.

I think the social contracts are a great way to frame out what is okay and what isn’t: PC vs NPC, on-cam vs off-cam, backgrounds or worlds or stories. I love them. I think they are a great tool. And you’re right! Games definitely break down violence in the same way.

But I was specifically addressing the point made in the post rather than social contracts and the way games break down violence and how they engage with it. I didn’t mean to characterize or speak to any game with a social contract addressing that. I was just narrowly addressing the post. Just to be clear.

Tez

@Nelly said:

I’m just sort of confused, what’s the end game here in a game that enables this? Your character becomes a pariah and known as the person who rapes people and is now on the short-list for an early retirement/character death?

A couple of quick points: your reply presumes that allowing the subject means that the only way you would encounter it is with PCs as perpetuators. From what I have seen, though, even PCs as victims – on-cam or off – is not allowed. Games no longer tell these stories at all.

Just looking to media, the category of redeemed rapist is really not a well explored space because no one is interested in them being redeemed. Redeemed murderer? Accidentally killed someone and now you’re the town pariah? Murdered your arch enemy in cold blood and now are trying to cover the tracks? This is a lot more interesting for all characters involved.

There’s something to be said about the fact that we are more comfy with killing someone. This might not be the best venue for that, but there is something to be said. I will grant that we probably can’t actually speak to any victims of murder. We aren’t RPing with those people every day, while every day we are RPing with victims of SA. That does make a difference. I won’t pretend it doesn’t.

But. There’s a tension there.

Tez

@Kestrel I would suggest not tagging people into this thread given the subject matter.

Tez

@Jennkryst said:

@Pavel said:

Code should never override a player’s agency in such a way; it is anathema to how I believe MU stories should be told.

Hyperbolic example that is hyperbolic on purpose because I think there are some things that should actually be enforced, roleplay vs rollplay (everyone take a drink!):

I dodge the attack, even though you rolled eleventy-billion successes and it cannot be dodged, getting hit affects my agency.

nah

Tez

@Pavel said:

Player(s) do not consent; game code forces/enables the assault anyway.

#3 is out, period. Code should never override a player’s agency in such a way; it is anathema to how I believe MU stories should be told.

This was the thing that I found most immediately jarring about Jumpscare’s story. That shit was wild.

There’s also a list of, like, three people I’d trust to run a place that has SA-RP not specifically banned and part of why I trust them to do so is precisely because they wouldn’t want to.

YEAH. Like – Third Eye made a point that SA content probably exists plenty on games I’m not playing. Hearing people talk about it over the course of the day has increasingly convinced me that it is … difficult to imagine a world where random Joes can be trusted to run with such difficult themes.

Like, IDK, maybe the internet isn’t great at nuance.

I was talking to a buddy today and I think one of the reasons I am uncomfortable with what can feel like the sanitization of themes is because there is so much external pressure in the real world that threatens to sanitize whatever the current culture finds uncomfy.

Trans kids. Queer artists. Sexual content in general, when you look at payment processors.

It’s tough.

junipersky

@Yam

Live and learn young one.

Tez

@Kestrel said:

@Pyrephox said:
But if we’re talking about consenting adults typing words then there are no children involved. If they play necrophilia, there are no corpses involved. Bestiality? No animals involved. Noncon of any type or flavor? No nonconsenting people involved.

I wouldn’t let anyone near my dog if I had reason to suspect they jerk off to the thought of fucking dogs.

People may pretend they believe that what people get off to says absolutely nothing of import about their personality structure, and that saying otherwise is tantamount to bigotry; but the range of sneering disgust to morbid fascination in this very thread proves that on some instinctive subconscious level, everyone knows this is false.

Yikes.

Pyrephox

@DrQuinn If an actual, real child is being actually assaulted via the mechanisms of the game, absolutely. (Note, I recognize that this is possible and happens and should absolutely be stopped, whether it’s passing CSAM or grooming underaged players, etc.)

But if we’re talking about consenting adults typing words then there are no children involved. If they play necrophilia, there are no corpses involved. Bestiality? No animals involved. Noncon of any type or flavor? No nonconsenting people involved.

In which case, what penalties do you wish the gaming community to inflict on the consenting adults typing the fictional words at each other? Or an entire game that allows such words to be typed at consenting adults?

Pyrephox

I think there’s a difference between allowing IC sexual assault (or other taboo) content, and providing code that allows one player to expose another to that content without their OOC consent.

I have no problem with a game allowing players to decide to play out SA content together, so long as a) either they take the responsibility to ensure that content does not ‘leak’ into the play of anyone who didn’t consent to be involved or b) the game has very explicitly made it OOC clear that this content exists on the game and you may be exposed to it without opting in.

However, I do think that code that allows one player to subject another player’s character to sexual assault without their OOC content crosses a line that I am not comfortable with, and that would be a deal-breaker for play for me.

administrators

Posts

Member List