The SA In Games Thread (Good Luck)

[Pavel]

I’ll actually even answer that one. The dice code isn’t deciding anything, it’s telling you the result of dice. Players can chat about the result and decide to do something else if they so choose. Generally the result is obeyed, but there’s agency there to negotiate exactly what a dice result means.

As it was described, the assault code forced the assault. You weren’t forced to RP it, but you were forced to have had assault happen to your character. No discussion, no negotiation, no wiggling. Your character was assaulted. No choice, no decision, no nothin.

ETA: Code should guide roleplay; it should not absolutely decide anything.

[Kestrel]

@Tez said:

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 […] Sexual content in general, when you look at payment processors.

There is generally a cultural pushback whenever things head too far in a certain direction. I personally think the sexual liberation movement peaked with Gen X & Millennials.

I don’t trust anyone who believes in any kind of extremes. All of life is nuanced and shades of grey. You can have too much of a good thing. All or nothing radical thinking is something I consign to my 20s. You can have too many cats. You can add too much garlic. You can have too much sexual liberation.

My generation grew up with Sex and the City, American Pie, and widely available internet porn which, I recall on first inquisitive viewing, being genuinely baffled to even try and comprehend how the depicted acts were physically possible. And in all candour, I don’t think my life has been terribly enriched by gaining this knowledge.

We grew up with Cool Girl before it had the name Cool Girl; this idea that a person (but especially a woman) is invalid unless they perform extreme sexuality without limits.

Within this framework, a person is not a person, they are parts. They do not have wants and needs, they have status to earn and prove. I do not see that as “sex positive”, I see that as a broken and fragmented understanding of sexual identity as a kind of fashion accessory, much like stiletto heels, displayed even if it hurts, and existing separate from the actual person.

I am strongly of the opinion that these dynamics play out in online games and communities as well. I’ve seen them play out on Haven, IRE games (the latter of which I played mostly while underage, and were not marketed as “sex games”), and even the chillest and most expertly run MUSHes I’ve played.

I think it is blind to ignore the ways in which these experiences can cause real harm to players, both through other players and their own choosing. A couple examples:

1. A player writes a fantasy in which his adult character engages in incest with an underage character. This is repeatedly training his mind to associate sexual desire and arousal with the fantasy of an underage family member. It’s not his fault if these fantasies already lay dormant, but it is his fault and his choice to reinforce and further explore them. I cannot be convinced that this is unlikely to cause future harm to his ability to maintain an appropriate view and relationship with his own underage family members.
2. A game has a skewed gender ratio, more female than male. Because of this, male characters are in high demand by partner-seeking heterosexual female characters. This gives the players of male characters an advantage to pit female characters against each other in competition. It encourages the players of female characters to seek to prove themselves sexually above other female characters, to settle for unequal nonmonogamous arrangements, to ignore mistreatment by the players of male characters, to alter their characters and storytelling for male approval, and to blur IC/OOC boundaries in order to retain their attention. I cannot be convinced that a male-led harem on this game can truly be assumed to be fully consensual, on the part of potentially lonely players using this game as a source of self-esteem and validation, or that it fosters healthy dynamics. I don’t think it’s good for men to ride this kind of ego trip, and I don’t think it’s good for women to vicariously experience this erosion of self through a sexual fantasy that isn’t even really her own.

None of this is to say that sexual RP should be disallowed or even discouraged. I engage, have engaged, and will continue to engage in graphic sexual RP.

But I personally try to be incredibly mindful of the ways that sexual RP can cause harm both to myself and others. I try to notice unhealthy dynamics, some of which spark concern, others anger and moral disgust, because I’ve been on the receiving end and know firsthand the profound degree of psychic damage they can cause. It would absolutely kill me, were I staffing any kind of game, to imagine that my action or inaction had caused that kind of harm to someone else.

I’m not just worried about children. The players of online roleplaying games tend to originate from a baseline crop that, IME, is on average more neurodivergent, less mentally and emotionally stable, less romantically/sexually successful in real life, etc., and that creates a fertile ground for exploitation and abuse. I’m not at all comfortable with anyone who washes their hands of having to ever think about that by simply saying, “they’re adults”. I’m especially concerned when game staff say stuff like this, because it makes me wonder how they handle parasocial attachment from their players, when in a position of power.

And again, this is not to say that SA RP specifically should be allowed or disallowed, etc. But it is to say that I very strongly reject any kind of blasé attitude that it is always acceptable so long as it occurs between adults and is technically consensual. Nothing is, IMO.

Consent is a lot more complex than many people here are giving credit. Consent is not a moral blank cheque or a get out of jail free card. If you harmed someone, you harmed them. You can also harm yourself. It’s not magically fine regardless of surrounding context just because they nodded and said, “harder daddy” while clearly bleeding.

[hellfrog]

@Kestrel I am confused on what the difference is here between, say, someone who rps sexual assault and someone who writes fiction that includes sexual assault. If someone writes a seven book series that includes multiple instances of non consent or otherwise problematic behavior, does that mean there’s a reasonable suspicion that person engages in or wants to engage in that behavior in their real life?

If not, is the difference the involvement of another person? Does it become something that needs addressing if an author includes another author in brainstorming or writing?

What’s with the assumption that anyone who participates in graphic rp is doing it for their direct gratification and building pathology?? Because that’s just not reliably the case. I see you said your issue is the ‘blase attitude’ that it’s ok if there’s consent, but what’s the alternative? I don’t understand the consequence that’s desired.

[Jennkryst]

@Kestrel said:

A game has a skewed gender ratio, more female than male. Because of this, male characters are in high demand by partner-seeking heterosexual female characters.

Bold of you to assume this is a ‘women will fight over men’ as opposed to ‘women who are into women and hurray for more options’.

[Juniper]

@hellfrog said:
What’s with the assumption that anyone who participates in graphic rp is doing it for their direct gratification and building pathology?? Because that’s just not reliably the case. I see you said your issue is the ‘blase attitude’ that it’s ok if there’s consent, but what’s the alternative? I don’t understand the consequence that’s desired.

My reading of Kestrel’s whole spiel is that it’s important to look at the big picture of what you’re doing and examine if what you’re doing is harmful to yourself or others on a case by case basis. Not that, like, all sexual RP is self-harm.

[Jumpscare]

@Kestrel said:

Maybe the safest and most sensible way to enjoy story-rich CNC RP is to just do it on a game that forbids it, but behind a closed door, in a private room that can’t be spied on, and contrive a reason to never tell anybody IC or OOC.

I know you mean that as a joke, but please never do that. The amount of times I’ve had to review logs to fix bugs only to stumble upon policy violations is already more than I wish it was.

[hellfrog]

@Juniper said:

My reading of Kestrel’s whole spiel is that it’s important to look at the big picture of what you’re doing and examine if what you’re doing is harmful to yourself or others on a case by case basis. Not that, like, all sexual RP is self-harm.

So the issue is other peoples’ cavalier attitudes towards their own self-examination of their motives and behavior? Internally?? Because previously she stated she wanted it in the setting, but not - involving pcs, I guess? Which begs a lot of questions, and assumptions, and questions about the assumptions.

And maybe a little alarm at the assumption one can diagnose a stranger by a behavior that may be an indicator of a possible problem or may be completely harmless.

ETA Obviously everyone can and should make informed choices about what they are comfortable dealing with. I pretty famously completely outlawed SA as a story beat on the last game I staffed for that very reason.

[Juniper]

@hellfrog said:
So the issue is other peoples’ cavalier attitudes towards their own self-examination of their motives and behavior? Internally?? Because previously she stated she wanted it in the setting, but not - involving pcs, I guess? Which begs a lot of questions, and assumptions, and questions about the assumptions.

And maybe a little alarm at the assumption one can diagnose a stranger by a behavior that may be an indicator of a possible problem or may be completely harmless.

no?

[Pavel]

If they’re consenting adults, the harm is entirely their responsibility. If I am one of those consenting adults, then the harm is my responsibility; otherwise, it is not. If I am staff (heaven forfend) and it is revealed that consent is not genuine (for any of the usual sexual-crime related reasons) then it becomes my problem.

But I must start from the position that continuous, enthusiastic, and explicit consent is honest, and any ensuing harm is regrettable but not punishable. There’s an assumption of risk that one takes when one engages in roleplay; adding violence, kink, horror, etc. adds to that risk. It is your personal responsibility to ensure that you don’t take on more risk than you’re capable of—harm may still happen, and it is unfortunate. To my mind, your being harmed does not always mean someone is liable or responsible. Sometimes harm just happens.

ETA: This isn’t an absolute statement, there are nuances and everything’s subjective, but I’m mostly pushing back on the vibe that we have to be responsible for everyone else at all times.

[Nelly]

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?

I’m just not really sure what’s gained here RP wise, what is the interesting story? This isn’t an episode of Law and Order SVU where the rapist is thrown in jail and forgotten about and a new episode airs next Sunday, it’s a character played by someone.

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.

[Pavel]

@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?

Actual consequences are how we know it’s fiction.

[Kestrel]

@hellfrog said:

So the issue is other peoples’ cavalier attitudes towards their own self-examination of their motives and behavior? Internally?? Because previously she stated she wanted it in the setting, but not - involving pcs, I guess? Which begs a lot of questions, and assumptions, and questions about the assumptions.

And maybe a little alarm at the assumption one can diagnose a stranger by a behavior that may be an indicator of a possible problem or may be completely harmless.

What questions and assumptions does it beg, exactly? I think I could not have been more specific in the point I made and example I gave, so I can’t infer the gish gallop response was in good faith.

If a person derives enjoyment from writing about children engaged in graphic sexual acts, I would assume that person is a paedophile, which is not harmless.

If a person enjoys collecting members of the opposite sex, pitting them against each other in competition for their affection, and exercising control over them, I would assume that person is an abuser who does not see members of the opposite sex as complete human beings. And by the way, “it’s just my kink bro, plus they all literally consented, it was an empowering women’s movement, they asked to be my slaves!” is exactly the excuse NXIVM cult-leader Keith Raniere gave for this behaviour.

There is an obvious difference between an example I made of implied NPC abuse that takes place off-screen, and is presented for PCs to engage in the moral consequences of, versus a repeated/back-and-forth on-screen graphic sexual scene engaged in for personal gratification, with a real person’s sexual participation as a prop. Not knowing for a fact that it’s being done for immediate sexual gratification is irrelevant; firstly, because this is frequently enough the case to make a safe assumption about, and secondly because in cases of sexual abuse, it actually isn’t about climactic gratification, but about power.

I realise that a lot of posters, and especially Gen X, are traumatised from this history of slut-shaming in the hobby/IRL, but to act like the opposite extreme of unbridled sexual permissiveness doesn’t also do immense harm is blind at best, and an attitude that enables abusers at worst. Which is why a lot of puriteen Gen Z these days who grew up on Andrew Tate, Bonnie Blue, and readily available BDSM porn everywhere they look, reject that attitude so strongly. I’m somewhere in the middle both ideologically and generationally. My stance is that overcorrecting towards either extreme does harm. There should be limits, and one that was put forward earlier in this cross-thread debate (tag removed) is definitely a good start. The consequence I’m advocating for is that game staff should not ignore the potential for harm, nor treat “consent” as a magic word that automatically absolves anyone of harm inflicted.

[Tez]

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

[Pavel]

@Kestrel said:

There should be limits, and one that was put forward earlier in this cross-thread debate (tag removed) is definitely a good start.

I’ll start, as I always apparently need to when this conversation comes up, by reminding all that child rape is bad and I think any game with child rape in it should be fired directly into the sun along with anyone who plays on them.

That said. There is no authority that can stop people from making games of such nature, nor any body that can stop people from playing them. So while I personally may want to put such people in very small boxes buried deep underground, I can’t. So instead, I wash my hands and say “keep them over there, away from me.” Because there’s nothing else I can do.

That is my understanding of anyone here who says the same or similar. We’re not advocates—though I would argue that if any game were advertised here with such concepts then we would be contributors—but there’s very little benefit to gnashing teeth and hand-wringing over it, so we let it go. It’s not being blase or expressing ‘unbridled sexual permissiveness’; it’s impotence.

[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.

[Pavel]

@Tez said:

There’s something to be said about the fact that we are more comfy with killing someone.

I don’t have the time to do an in-depth literature review on the subject, but it wouldn’t surprise me if there is something of an evolutionary bias (eta: either social evolution or genetic) that influenced our sociological development. I can, for instance, easily imagine a scenario in which my killing someone is the correct moral, ethical, and legal choice.

[Kestrel]

@Pavel said:

@Tez said:

There’s something to be said about the fact that we are more comfy with killing someone.

I don’t have the time to do an in-depth literature review on the subject, but it wouldn’t surprise me if there is something of an evolutionary bias (eta: either social evolution or genetic) that influenced our sociological development. I can, for instance, easily imagine a scenario in which my killing someone is the correct moral, ethical, and legal choice.

Sorry, you’ve just tripped one of my special interests.

The Evolution of Desire, by David M. Buss, Chapter 6: Staying Together

Free to listen to as an audiobook with Spotify Premium

[Third Eye]

@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’m not unsympathetic to the view that violence in media gets a pass and sex in media doesn’t, at least in American media. I agree with this broadly speaking.

But.

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.

This thread’s about sexual assault, though, so people are talking specifically about rules around SA content.

[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.

[Third Eye]

@Tez
That’s fair. This thread is, shall we say, far-reaching in what people are talking about in any given post. I’m doing my best not to engage with the broad sociological stuff, honestly, I just don’t think this is a venue where I’m going to have a conversation about it in ways that I’m going to find worthwhile, even if I might be able to do that with individual posters one-to-one. I’ve tried to keep my own thoughts on this subject to what own experiences and why I approach this content like I do in spaces I have some power over. I do think that’s important even if I don’t agree with how every game or player handles it.