# When a man plays a woman



## Hawk Diesel (Nov 4, 2016)

So I'm a cis-norm male, and I realized that all the D&D characters I've ever played were also cis-norm male. And in roleplaying games, you have this unique opportunity to play a person completely different from you in so many ways, but in this way I've been unable to step outside this one characteristic. I've never personally been interested in playing a female character. Not because I didn't think it would be interesting or fun, but because I didn't think I could really pull it off. And this also got me thinking about other people I've gamed with. In my experience when men play as women, they play up the seductress part (perhaps part of the male fantasy of how women should be?), or have some sexual trauma in their character's history that defines them as man hating violence mongers. In a sense, the aspect of playing female becomes an incredibly central aspect of the character who is more cartoon than a flesh-out character. Perhaps this is my own bias coming out, but this is one of the reasons that I never wanted to run a female character, because I didn't really feel I could avoid this pitfall. 

On the other hand, I can totally understand a person (regardless of gender or gender identity) playing a male character, since it allows them to explore issues of power, status, and all sorts of other things that don't inherently connect with being male, but is one of the privileges of being male. Additionally, being a therapist and working with adolescents, I can see people playing cross gender as a way to explore their own gender identity.

These were just some thoughts I was having in response to one of my players proposing the character they were thinking of running. Has anyone here had an experience of playing someone of a different gender identity? What was it like and how did you play that character?


----------



## ccs (Nov 4, 2016)

I'm the DM.  I have to play all types of characters....

That said, I currently play two female characters as PCs:

1) A 12 year old 1/2ling warlock girl - mostly I just try & remember what my buddies daughter was like at that age & do that.  Just backed up by some magic and a psuedo-dragon.....
The hardest part is talking in rapid run on sentences that include excess details. 
She's a warlock because I just really wanted to see how this class played in 5e.  The personality/aproach to playing her really came when I promoted her from plot device NPC in my own game to PC in the shops Strahd adventure.

2) (in PF) A manipulative  female tiefling divination wizard.  This one's even easier to play.  She's just a (more) evil version of an Ex....  
At least in the game her horns and tail are obvious & there's spells that'll reveal her true alignment.
She was created specifically to mess with another players Paladin.  Mission acomplished.


----------



## Roseweave (Nov 4, 2016)

Did anyone else internally read the thread title to the tune of this? 

[video=youtube;Y8raabzZNqw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8raabzZNqw[/video]


----------



## Hawk Diesel (Nov 4, 2016)

ccs said:


> I'm the DM.  I have to play all types of characters....




This is a good point. But I feel there is a difference between an NPC played by the DM and the PCs. NPCs are tools for the purpose of moving the story along. Many won't get the same kind of screen time or development as the characters do. NPCs don't really have to be fleshed out or have depth. And even when they do, the spotlight really isn't on them.



Roseweave said:


> Did anyone else internally read the thread title to the tune of this?




I'm glad someone picked that up! ^_^ Completely intentional.


----------



## Remathilis (Nov 4, 2016)

I've not played many female PCs to any great length, but recently in my last few games, I've had:

* A male play a female not as a sex-object, but as a fine, capable woman. Aside from occasional references to liking certain clothes or jewelry, he played her pretty evenly and rarely made issue of her gender.
* a female play a male character who was a himbo (8 int and wis) and was narcessistic, smug, and a complete dufus. She played him up like he was a "player" but clearly had no game. 

Neither seemed out of place nor awkward. As a DM, I've had dozens of female NPCs (some party members, some villains) and nobody questions that either. 

I've also had straight players play gay/bisexual PCs (male and female) and gay players play straight, fwiw.


----------



## Teflon Billy (Nov 4, 2016)

Generally as a DM I don't allow it, largely from experiences early on in my time in the hobby. When I started really delving into RPG's (in my early 20's) any time a guy played a woman, it was a countdown til he started attempting to trade sexual favors (which, admittedly came at no cost and unlimited supply) for setting benefits. Paired with the other (less common) "guy is attempting to work out his sexual issues" instance; I mostly just denied any request for cross gender rp (well, m to f anyway)

There have been exceptions, but this is my general rule and I've never really regretted it.


----------



## Roseweave (Nov 4, 2016)

Hawk Diesel said:


> So I'm a cis-norm male, and I realized that all the D&D characters I've ever played were also cis-norm male. And in roleplaying games, you have this unique opportunity to play a person completely different from you in so many ways, but in this way I've been unable to step outside this one characteristic. I've never personally been interested in playing a female character. Not because I didn't think it would be interesting or fun, but because I didn't think I could really pull it off. And this also got me thinking about other people I've gamed with. In my experience when men play as women, they play up the seductress part (perhaps part of the male fantasy of how women should be?), or have some sexual trauma in their character's history that defines them as man hating violence mongers. In a sense, the aspect of playing female becomes an incredibly central aspect of the character who is more cartoon than a flesh-out character. Perhaps this is my own bias coming out, but this is one of the reasons that I never wanted to run a female character, because I didn't really feel I could avoid this pitfall.
> 
> On the other hand, I can totally understand a person (regardless of gender or gender identity) playing a male character, since it allows them to explore issues of power, status, and all sorts of other things that don't inherently connect with being male, but is one of the privileges of being male. Additionally, being a therapist and working with adolescents, I can see people playing cross gender as a way to explore their own gender identity.
> 
> These were just some thoughts I was having in response to one of my players proposing the character they were thinking of running. Has anyone here had an experience of playing someone of a different gender identity? What was it like and how did you play that character?




Trans woman player here.

Character I currently play is female. Last character in last campaign was a dude(while I still identified as trans, but not as openly so - mostly I just had an idea for a character I wanted to run with). My next character will be female too, though maybe trans(which will largely be incidental, other than having an excuse for why she can drop her voice as part of disguises, lol) and a little more genderqueer than myself. 

What's interesting is the character I currently play is sort of a mix of exaggerated feminine tropes - she's a Courtesan, Diva-ish type but also Disney Princess-ish. Basically she's more of a drag queen than I ever could be, lol. It'd be pretty hard and potentially insulting for a (cis het) guy to play a character like that. Some of the lewd jokes(while I try to keep it to a minimum most of the time, as it's not that sort of game) would be particularly jarring for someone who's not a woman(and has no experience of sex work/sex worker culture - as a brief stint as a camgirl and having experienced some pretty nasty slutshaming as a result, along with engaging in a lot of SW activism, I am in a place where certain words are a bit more mine to reclaim). I suppose you could get into the territory of "Is drag offensive?"(personally I don't regard it as such, depending, a lot of young white trans people don't know their history that well & there isn't always a clear separation) but I think that they're two very different forms of performance, that sort of stage entertainment relies heavily on a over the top persona whereas PCs while often comically exaggerated in some ways tend to be more intimate and complex as they need to function in a variety of different situations with different people. 

Ellie was never really a seductress type as such, though since she's supposed to be a Leanan Sídhe(mechanically Eladrin with a lot of charm & enabling magic) a degree of that is inherent to the character. I play the Courtesan thing as an extension of that rather than the other way around though, she's sort of the quirky fairy that whisks you away to another world, has that inherent kind of excitable charisma and works outward from that, as opposed to being traditionally seductive(though I do imagine a lot of her outfits being pretty cleavage-heavy) so just relies on people finding her fascinating or attractive and cute as she is. She has slept with a number of NPCs, but got incredibly nervous around a character she was actually interested in(it worked out in the end, thanks GM!). 

I think stuff like that can help diffuse a stereotype. Make a character that isn't straightforward, and even if they embody a trope or some tropes find a way to have them play off each other, or throw in some endearing(or not so endearing) character flaws.

As for the exploring one's identity thing - interestingly enough my current character saw me all the way through transition more or less(from first actually helpful therapist apt. to being 3 years on HRT) so that was an interesting experience, but I was already pretty sure of who I was. What was sucky is that back in my old college there used to be a ban on dudes playing lesbians. Their reasoning was that, basically when dudes do that they just play them like dudes(they probably added something offensively cisnormative like "with "). I can on one level sort of understand this issue, but it's strange they never considered the pitfalls mentioned by the OP. It also sucked for me as someone who identified as - guess what a - a woman largely attracted to other women.


----------



## Venley (Nov 4, 2016)

Female here. About a quarter of my characters over nearly 40 years have been male. They range from stereotypes to well-remembered personalities that feature in our group's stories decades later. I find it easier to portray intellectual or artistic men than really macho guys (the latter tend to come out very stereotyped).

As for my players (we rotate GMs), all are male. One rarely plays women but does a great job of leader-types when he does. One was a young student when I met him and he refused to play women but after chatting with him over several months, he has rarely played other than women since ... ok but not well. The other two of my main players split genders about 50/50 and both represent either gender very realistically. Others who play more rarely with us tend to play fewer women. The only others who stand out as not playing women at all over the years were gay or Muslim.

In games where we are playing so many different species, it always surprises me that some people get hung up on the issue of a different gender.


----------



## Venley (Nov 4, 2016)

Teflon Billy said:


> Generally as a DM I don't allow it, largely from experiences early on in my time in the hobby. When I started really delving into RPG's (in my early 20's) any time a guy played a woman, it was a countdown til he started attempting to trade sexual favors (which, admittedly came at no cost and unlimited supply) for setting benefits. Paired with the other (less common) "guy is attempting to work out his sexual issues" instance; I mostly just denied any request for cross gender rp (well, m to f anyway)
> 
> There have been exceptions, but this is my general rule and I've never really regretted it.





This surprises me. 
Plus, to me it is the player's choice to make, not the GMs. Perhaps I just have nice mature friends to game with.


----------



## Roseweave (Nov 4, 2016)

Teflon Billy said:


> Generally as a DM I don't allow it, largely from experiences early on in my time in the hobby. When I started really delving into RPG's (in my early 20's) any time a guy played a woman, it was a countdown til he started attempting to trade sexual favors (which, admittedly came at no cost and unlimited supply) for setting benefits. Paired with the other (less common) "guy is attempting to work out his sexual issues" instance; I mostly just denied any request for cross gender rp (well, m to f anyway)
> 
> There have been exceptions, but this is my general rule and I've never really regretted it.




With my character I used her Courtesan-ing(and general Bard-ing I guess) as an explanation for where random items came from, which sometimes just so happened to be plot relevant. She had a "Warddrobe of Holding"(bag of holding that could initially only hold) even at first level that suddenly made more sense when that aspect of her was revealed. 

I actually never created the character as a Courtesan outright, just with some influence from the sort of imagery associated, but there was a point where the GM mentioned gifts she was receiving from "patrons" and it sort of clicked, lol. You kind of have to be careful with me I guess because I'll take things and make something out of the possibly unintended implications. A lot of stuff about the character made suddenly sense to me though so I'm glad the GM let me went down that route even if he wasn't necessarily 100% comfortable with it at the time. It filled some holes(pardon the pun) in her somewhat convoluted backstory and made her an interesting mirror for her philandering father(who's nature we discovered soon after).

There's a recurring NPC in the game who's more of a stereotypically "slutty" sort, and having my character in the game sort of helps balance out any negative implications of that character(and yeah, they did end up doing stuff), not that she's the best role model either necessarily but still.



Remathilis said:


> I've not played many female PCs to any great length, but recently in my last few games, I've had:
> 
> * A male play a female not as a sex-object, but as a fine, capable woman. Aside from occasional references to liking certain clothes or jewelry, he played her pretty evenly and rarely made issue of her gender.
> * a female play a male character who was a himbo (8 int and wis) and was narcessistic, smug, and a complete dufus. She played him up like he was a "player" but clearly had no game.
> ...




We have a guy in our group who habitually plays female characters and though a lot of his influence coming from anime & manga which can veer into dodgy territory we generally trust him to do it well and he does. He plays the more gruffer strong female character as opposed to my archetypically feminine one. He wanted to play a bi/lesbian character in the next game(I think he was actually initially influenced by Asami from the Legend of Korra) and honestly I'm pretty cool with it. He's not the biggest social justice head or anything but he's pretty un-edgy and avoids crap stereotypes.

Last leader character in the last campaign(where i played a male Tiefling Paladin) was also played a guy who often plays female characters, and did it well. Though again erred a little bit on the side of doing a more archetypically "masculine" female character for want of a much better word. Which I don't really have a problem with so much, unlike those GMs. I'm not the goddamn gender police, lol.


----------



## Teflon Billy (Nov 4, 2016)

Venley said:


> This surprises me.
> Plus, to me it is the player's choice to make, not the GMs.




I've long been of the mind that given the disparity of work/prep time between DM's and players, that the game *is* the DM's.

The Players get to choose whether they play or walk. I seek no input into my setting decision and (generally) accept none that doesn't appeal to me. 



> Perhaps I just have nice mature friends to game with.




Passive-aggressiveness is not a nice look this fall.


----------



## Roseweave (Nov 4, 2016)

IMO Rpgs are collaborative storytelling. While by definition the GM has the most power you can't really have a game without the players.

ALSO I've been listening to motown all the way through this thread and i can't stop now lol.


----------



## Teflon Billy (Nov 4, 2016)

Roseweave said:


> IMO Rpgs are collaborative storytelling. While by definition the GM has the most power you can't really have a game without the players.




While that is certainly one kind of RPG, there are lots of others.

Mine simulationist world-building.  PC's (once they are in the setting) are the free radicals. Weekly, following the game, I ask myself "How did their actions alter the setting?"...then adjust it accordingly. None of that requires any pre-game input from the players about setting norms or game requirements.

And I wouldn't say it's about who has the most "power", it's about who has to invest the most effort and time into the game. 

As for "not being able to have a game without players"...players grow on trees. Good DM's are rare.



> ALSO I've been listening to motown all the way through this thread and i can't stop now lol.




Ditto.


----------



## AaronOfBarbaria (Nov 4, 2016)

As a DM, and as a player, I support anyone interested in role-playing a character of differing gender. As long as it isn't being used as a means to be offensive (such as role-playing one negative gender stereotype as if it were a fully-realized personality), or in a way that goes beyond what the rest of the table is comfortable with (such as trying to describe out your own sexual fantasies while the rest of the table didn't want this campaign to involve that material in an "on-screen" fashion).

I have experienced only a few (literally 3, oddly enough) people out of the hundreds I've shared the table with that had problems related to such role-playing: A player that always wanted to play busty lesbian elven prostitute ninjas (a mix of the offensive and out of bounds play), a player that wanted to go into detail describing bathing and hygiene habits in a way that made the rest of the table uncomfortable, and a player that took issue with the DM portraying a female character with romantic interest in my male character (homophobia, expressed by him saying that it was "gay" that I wasn't "skeeved" by the male DM's portrayal of flirtation). And in all cases, the solution was not to restrict everyone else that was role-playing in good faith, but to excise the player that was not doing so.


----------



## pdzoch (Nov 4, 2016)

This should be an interesting thread.

I've have seen many players play opposite genders in my game and not once have I seen a player use the gender to deliberately play the gender poorly, but neither have I seen them play the gender with any genuine depth.  I did have one player MANY years ago when we were adolescents play a female that was an over the top promiscuous woman, but he also played a male character that way, too; so as creepy as it was, it wasn't a gender slam, and the group self-corrected. [even the player struggled to portray the sexuality well as, at his young age, he did not have enough of a frame of reference to execute the role play decisions. so it was a short lived experience]  I have never seen a player play the same gender and race consistently, unless it was as themselves. So I do not think there has been an issue.

That all said, the depth of background to form genuine role play motivations is a problem for any player, regardless of gender.  All player project a portion of themselves (to make the character relevant to them) as well as their own understanding of a characteristic they wish to use to shape the character.  But unless the player have genuine experience (real personal experience) that matches the background of the character, it is contrived.  Does a player who never had to practice anything really understand the work ethic required to become proficient as a fighter (or do they think it is achieved by natural genetics, Rocky montage, or trained-once movie Conan?)  Can a player really role-play the brooding and silent suffering of a character who lost a family member without having to have really lost a family member? Almost all role-play is going to incorporate superficial understanding of the role, and seldom with enough depth to put it in context.  At best, players can learn more about a characteristic by role-playing them, but it will only be in the context of the role-played game and their own personal experience.  

In my experience, the younger players tend to gravitate toward stereotypes most; and older players tended to have more depth, but that may not necessarily due to more knowledge of others as much as a larger life experience that informs them.


----------



## Celebrim (Nov 4, 2016)

pdzoch said:


> I've have seen many players play opposite genders in my game and not once have I seen a player use the gender to deliberately play the gender poorly, but neither have I seen them play the gender with any genuine depth.




Considering how rarely one ever sees any characterization with genuine depth, this should hardly be surprising.

I don't care what you play, just as long as you keep it PG.  Anything that isn't PG, happens off screen and without elaboration. 

I don't mind the occasional romance plot regardless of the player/PC mashup, but if I start to feel that in some fashion the player's sexual fantasies were becoming a large portion of his decision making as a player, I'd probably take them aside privately and tell them to tone it down.  That would be true regardless of how the player chose to engage with those fantasies, what those fantasies were, or what gender that they choose to play.  I'm not there as a DM to help you explore or express sexual experience, fantasies, or desires at the gaming table.  That's a whole other spectrum of role-playing, that isn't part of what I do or what I think other players should be subjected to.

Beyond the obvious whose parts fits into whom differences that I'd rather not make a part of social play, I don't particularly find men and women all that different and certainly believe the range of experiences and abilities for genders is wide enough to encompass just about any PC concept.  So I tend to not worry too much about whether a player is playing a gender right.   Every characterization a player makes is going to be contrived and stereotyped.  Heck, if it's badly acted, then it will probably be an above average characterization in that at least it will be acted out and consciously considered.   

So far, abiding by those guidelines, I've never had anyone feel threatened.  Nor have I ever observed big differences in what male or female players wanted to explore in terms of romantic or sexual game experiences (some play promiscuous PC, others chaste, some want no attachments, others prefer a romantic object of their affections), or in terms of exploring opposite gendered characters, or in terms of their interest and tolerance adult themes (pregnancy, marriage, family, etc.).  Because of that, my bias would be to see anyone that wanted to break or stretch my guidelines, or anyone getting uncomfortable within PG framework, as probably not well suited to the table.


----------



## Teflon Billy (Nov 4, 2016)

Celebrim said:


> Considering how rarely one ever sees any characterization with genuine depth, this should hardly be surprising.
> 
> I don't care what you play, just as long as you keep it PG.  Anything that isn't PG, happens off screen and without elaboration.
> 
> I don't mind the occasional romance plot regardless of the player/PC mashup, but if I start to feel that in some fashion the player's sexual fantasies were becoming a large portion of his decision making as a player, I'd probably take them aside privately and tell them to tone it down.  That would be true regardless of how the player chose to engage with those fantasies, what those fantasies were, or what gender that they choose to play.  I'm not there as a DM to help you explore or express sexual experience, fantasies, or desires at the gaming table.  That's a whole other spectrum of role-playing, that isn't part of what I do or what I think other players should be subjected to.




Yeah, as my good friend *Fusangite* once said "If a player goes home after my game and masturbates to the memory of it, my game as clearly jumped the rails".

If someone says "Rothgar wants to spend the night with the barmaid" my response is "Done. The next morning you all find yourselves...."


----------



## Celebrim (Nov 4, 2016)

Teflon Billy said:


> Yeah, as my good friend *Fusangite* once said "If a player goes home after my game and masturbates to the memory of it, my game as clearly jumped the rails".
> 
> If someone says "Rothgar wants to spend the night with the barmaid" my response is "Done. The next morning you all find yourselves...."




I am very flattered when a player expresses a romantic interest in an NPC, because it means I've been doing my job as a DM characterizing that NPC well.   I've had plenty of players both male and female get "crushes" on NPCs, and as long as it stays at that level I'm ok with it.  I don't get wierded out being the girl or the boy in a mildly flirtatious relationship, although I confess it surprised me and threw me off my game the first time it happened with a gay player.... for all of 15 seconds or so, just because I wasn't anticipating it.

But that is where it stops, and anything beyond that is like the wedding bed scene in _Les Miserables_ - let us now draw a curtain over the scene, upon which we will not intrude.  The details are not important to my game.

If I had to guess, many players have a romantic attachment of a sort to their opposite gendered PC, in that many will choose PC which has traits that they find desirable or attractive in a member of the opposite gender.  This is not that different than how I suspect and have observed many readers engage with characters from fiction.   For example, when I have discussed Tolkien with female fans, I was initially surprised to discover how many of them developed a romantic attachment to the male characters - not only Aragorn or Faramir (obviously), but even Frodo, Sam, Merry, or Pippin,  Again, I'm ok with that sort of (inevitable?) exploration, so long as it is romantic rather than erotic in nature.  A PC as an idealized romantic partner, is generally treated with much more respect than a PC as mere sexual object.  I haven't had a player create a PC as sexual object, but if one did, I imagine it would almost immediately be obvious and immediately break the 'keep it PG' rule.


----------



## Roseweave (Nov 4, 2016)

AaronOfBarbaria said:


> As a DM, and as a player, I support anyone interested in role-playing a character of differing gender. As long as it isn't being used as a means to be offensive (such as role-playing one negative gender stereotype as if it were a fully-realized personality), or in a way that goes beyond what the rest of the table is comfortable with (such as trying to describe out your own sexual fantasies while the rest of the table didn't want this campaign to involve that material in an "on-screen" fashion).
> 
> I have experienced only a few (literally 3, oddly enough) people out of the hundreds I've shared the table with that had problems related to such role-playing: A player that always wanted to play busty lesbian elven prostitute ninjas (a mix of the offensive and out of bounds play), a player that wanted to go into detail describing bathing and hygiene habits in a way that made the rest of the table uncomfortable, and a player that took issue with the DM portraying a female character with romantic interest in my male character (homophobia, expressed by him saying that it was "gay" that I wasn't "skeeved" by the male DM's portrayal of flirtation). And in all cases, the solution was not to restrict everyone else that was role-playing in good faith, but to excise the player that was not doing so.




As someone who played a busty eleven sex worker fairy/bard/mage it does sound like he was trying to be edgy/clever, lol. My character sort of evolved as a concept before she became that. 

tbh I'd be very wary of letting a cis male player playing a sex worker of any sort. I actually know lesbian sex workers, and it's an interesting sort of headscape to be in that makes you think about the nature of attraction and emotional labour, etc.

That homophobic player sounded a like a total asshat. I'm lucky I haven't been in a game with someone like that.


----------



## Celebrim (Nov 4, 2016)

Hawk Diesel said:


> In my experience when men play as women, they play up the seductress part (perhaps part of the male fantasy of how women should be?)




Now that I've made my position clear, I can say in 30+ years at dozens of tables, I have honestly never seen this stereotype actually happen.  I know that it can happen, and have already outlined some theory as to why it happens (which I think accords pretty well with your theory), but I don't think this is as common as you think.



> or have some sexual trauma in their character's history that defines them as man hating violence mongers.




In the rare cases even seen character backgrounds with sexual violence, it had nothing to do with stereotypical man-hating or playing the character that way.  So far as I could guess playing amateur psychologist and not doing much inquiry into a players private affairs, it was largely an excuse for the player to play an essentially asexual character.   They were more or less taking that off the table, which is fine. 

I have also seen male characters who had been victims of sexual violence in their background.   Again, no real interest in playing amateur psychologist on why that would be, and as long as they keep it 'PG', I don't care.

Personally, I find your stereotyping mildly offensive, as it seems to expect the worst of people and RPers in particular.  That hasn't been my experience with people, though perhaps I've just been lucky.


----------



## Roseweave (Nov 4, 2016)

pdzoch said:


> This should be an interesting thread.
> 
> I've have seen many players play opposite genders in my game and not once have I seen a player use the gender to deliberately play the gender poorly, but neither have I seen them play the gender with any genuine depth.  I did have one player MANY years ago when we were adolescents play a female that was an over the top promiscuous woman, but he also played a male character that way, too; so as creepy as it was, it wasn't a gender slam, and the group self-corrected. [even the player struggled to portray the sexuality well as, at his young age, he did not have enough of a frame of reference to execute the role play decisions. so it was a short lived experience]  I have never seen a player play the same gender and race consistently, unless it was as themselves. So I do not think there has been an issue.
> 
> ...




I think about this a lot, actually. At least if you're something like a sorcerer, that can be purely "unreal". But generally you want to play something at least a little unlike yourself, that's somewhat the point. It's escapism. But at the same time even in fantasy there are going to "real" elements one cannot personally attest to, and whether or not it's a question of appropriation, it can make you feel like a poser. Like if I was playing a ninja character around my friend Naziyah, who is btw an actual Ninja I'd probably feel kind of goofy. Other players with actual skills your character claims to possess sort of have to be in on it and encouraging for it to feel "right" I think, or else the illusion falls apart. I think one of the answers is: if you can't go in depth emotionally with a certain aspect of your character: don't. It's a thing, it's there, you might mention it from time to time, but try not to make too big a deal of it or the seems will begin to show. And if possible, make sure to read up a bit to make it more believable. When I decided my character had been a Courtesan on the sly, I had read quite a bit about Courtesans and talked to sex workers, even though it wasn't ever going to be an aspect of the character I really talked about in detail, since again not that kind of game. But it helped me get into the _headspace_ of a character like that, which is important. Reading up about similar characters, and writing short stories about your PC can help with that too.


----------



## Roseweave (Nov 4, 2016)

Teflon Billy said:


> Yeah, as my good friend *Fusangite* once said "If a player goes home after my game and masturbates to the memory of it, my game as clearly jumped the rails".
> 
> If someone says "Rothgar wants to spend the night with the barmaid" my response is "Done. The next morning you all find yourselves...."




Yeah, this is how it's done in our game pretty much. Nobody needs a graphic description of what my character's lewd Dad gets up to with the Tiefling girls he has hanging off him lol. Though I think elaborating on "done" with some little tidbit can help improve immersion a bit without making people uncomfortable - some little piece of information Rothgar discovers about the Barmaid(her favourite drink, colour) a quick line of dialogue, or a fairly safe quip. That way there's some actual feedback from the game/world to acknowledge something happened. You'll see video games often use this with the "fade to black" moments, the brothel in Dragon Age II being one example(some of those puns were truly dreadful, lol). 

Even as someone who's talked smutty for money previously I don't really feel comfortable with overly explicit stuff in games. I like the FACT that my character is a Courtesan, and that it comes up sometimes, but it doesn't need to be gotten into everything that entails(only one part of which is sex, anyway).


----------



## Hawk Diesel (Nov 4, 2016)

Celebrim said:


> Now that I've made my position clear, I can say in 30+ years at dozens of tables, I have honestly never seen this stereotype actually happen.  I know that it can happen, and have already outlined some theory as to why it happens (which I think accords pretty well with your theory), but I don't think this is as common as you think.




I don't know how common it is and I don't think I mentioned any assumptions that it happens with any particular frequency. But this HAS been my experience, which I think I made clear. Of course there have been exceptions, but generally when I've played in games with males playing female characters, this was the way they were played.



Celebrim said:


> In the rare cases even seen character backgrounds with sexual violence, it had nothing to do with stereotypical man-hating or playing the character that way.  So far as I could guess playing amateur psychologist and not doing much inquiry into a players private affairs, it was largely an excuse for the player to play an essentially asexual character.   They were more or less taking that off the table, which is fine.
> 
> I have also seen male characters who had been victims of sexual violence in their background.   Again, no real interest in playing amateur psychologist on why that would be, and as long as they keep it 'PG', I don't care.
> 
> Personally, I find your stereotyping mildly offensive, as it seems to expect the worst of people and RPers in particular.  That hasn't been my experience with people, though perhaps I've just been lucky.




The entire reason I started this thread was specifically because a player that wanted to join one of my games presented a female character with a background of being used as a child sex slave and hating/distrusting men and wanting to make them pay. The player was a male. I make no assumptions about how people play characters, and the entire reason I started this thread was because it sparked some curiosity and I was hopeful that perhaps my experience hasn't been the norm. I'm neither stereotyping nor expecting the worst in people. I'm attempting to create a conversation, and I think I have worked fairly hard to be upfront with my perspective, experience, and biases specifically so that I might challenge them through discourse with others.


----------



## Nagol (Nov 4, 2016)

I mostly DM.  Looking at my last dozen of so PCs (scattered over at least as many years), I see about 50% male, 40% female and 10% non-gendered/other/not applicable.

For games with random generation, I'll typically roll gender as well.  For design games like Champions, sometimes one gender or the other feels right for character I envision.

My first PC began play at ~200 years old and expected to live for a few more millennia having not a soul, but a reincarnating spirit (1e elf).  My second character was an anthromorphic violent plant-creature (Runequest elf).  What are gender perspectives compared to that?

As a DM, people can play anything legal at the table..  I've found those players for whom gender play degenerates into unpleasant situations typically exhibit other unpleasant play patterns that get them weeded out from my table.


----------



## Roseweave (Nov 4, 2016)

Celebrim said:


> Now that I've made my position clear, I can say in 30+ years at dozens of tables, I have honestly never seen this stereotype actually happen. I know that it can happen, and have already outlined some theory as to why it happens (which I think accords pretty well with your theory), but I don't think this is as common as you think.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




tbh sexual violence is so common and treated with such a blasé attitude that I'd be very wary of including it as an element in a game.

I remember one time after a joke went sideways my Cyberpunk 2020 character(that I played around 2004 or so) ended up being a "pimp" and had 5 girls he tried to take care of. The GM then proceeded to turn it into a murder mystery, with each of the escorts being murdered in increasingly brutal/grotesque ways. Like, stuff out of the Hannibal TV show or some nasty horror film. As someone who was coming to terms with being trans, this messed with my head. Reflecting on it, having dipped my toes into a form of sex work, it's even more traumatic. I'm lucky to have never experienced really serious sexual violence personally, but I have experienced transphobic violence and various somewhat casual instances of molestation(when your trans especially your boobs and butt sort of cease to become fully just yours). 



Celebrim said:


> I am very flattered when a player expresses a romantic interest in an NPC, because it means I've been doing my job as a DM characterizing that NPC well.   I've had plenty of players both male and female get "crushes" on NPCs, and as long as it stays at that level I'm ok with it.  I don't get wierded out being the girl or the boy in a mildly flirtatious relationship, although I confess it surprised me and threw me off my game the first time it happened with a gay player.... for all of 15 seconds or so, just because I wasn't anticipating it.
> 
> But that is where it stops, and anything beyond that is like the wedding bed scene in _Les Miserables_ - let us now draw a curtain over the scene, upon which we will not intrude.  The details are not important to my game.




My character fell in love with a giant spider we picked up as a guide on the Rock of Bral. She was an Aranea who lost her memory and couldn't shapeshift(it turned out she was actually a super Plastic Man/Kamala Khan-esque shapeshifter later on, from a family of royal mutant aranea). The GM thought it was sort of a cute/sad story, with the poor girl stuck as a monster getting rocks thrown at her, but of course my character fell utterly in love with her because it was such a perfect fairy tale. It was also sort of a trans girl metaphor(or more specifically maybe genderqueer since she goes over and back now) so I identified with it on that level. (Here's some arts of them! http://roseweave.deviantart.com/art...-to-Walk-476106391?q=Roseweave/17246133&qo=18 http://roseweave.deviantart.com/art...nuggling-624713894?q=Roseweave/17246133&qo=11 and my fav with them dressed up in pirates from that one priate episode - http://roseweave.deviantart.com/art/Grappling-Hook-627213488?q=Roseweave/17246133&qo=0)

I adopted her and some other NPCs to write stories about them(which you can read here! http://crystallineprincess.tumblr.com/tagged/short-stories) I often wonder if it's flattering or just weird to do that.


----------



## Roseweave (Nov 4, 2016)

Hawk Diesel said:


> I don't know how common it is and I don't think I mentioned any assumptions that it happens with any particular frequency. But this HAS been my experience, which I think I made clear. Of course there have been exceptions, but generally when I've played in games with males playing female characters, this was the way they were played.
> 
> 
> 
> The entire reason I started this thread was specifically because a player that wanted to join one of my games presented a female character with a background of being used as a child sex slave and hating/distrusting men and wanting to make them pay. The player was a male. I make no assumptions about how people play characters, and the entire reason I started this thread was because it sparked some curiosity and I was hopeful that perhaps my experience hasn't been the norm. I'm neither stereotyping nor expecting the worst in people. I'm attempting to create a conversation, and I think I have worked fairly hard to be upfront with my perspective, experience, and biases specifically so that I might challenge them through discourse with others.




It's weird, because most of us would watch a movie or read a comic featuring a character like that, written by a dude. Stuff like the Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, X-23 from X-men stuff, Mad Max: Fury Road. When it comes to roleplaying it's a bit more suspect because it's an isolated character that doesn't have a guaranteed narrative like in a regular story. Like that would raise red flags for me tbh. I'd recommend he maybe go with a similar concept but tone it down somehow. Find another slightly more PG form of abuse and make the character less Zealous and more emotionally complex I guess.


----------



## Teflon Billy (Nov 4, 2016)

> The entire reason I started this thread was specifically because a player that wanted to join one of my games presented a female character with a background of being used as a child sex slave and hating/distrusting men and wanting to make them pay. The player was a male. I make no assumptions about how people play characters, and the entire reason I started this thread was because it sparked some curiosity and I was hopeful that perhaps my experience hasn't been the norm. I'm neither stereotyping nor expecting the worst in people. I'm attempting to create a conversation, and I think I have worked fairly hard to be upfront with my perspective, experience, and biases specifically so that I might challenge them through discourse with others.




if it sets your mind at ease, I saw nothing in your original post that I'd call stereotyping or offensive.


----------



## Roseweave (Nov 4, 2016)

Who else i still listening to motown lmao. I'm on Kool & The Gang's Ladies night now.


----------



## Celebrim (Nov 4, 2016)

Hawk Diesel said:


> But this HAS been my experience...but generally when I've played in games with males playing female characters, this was the way they were played....The entire reason I started this thread was specifically because a player that wanted to join one of my games presented a female character with a background of being used as a child sex slave and hating/distrusting men and wanting to make them pay. The player was a male.




*sigh*

Well, either I've been very lucky, or you are being very unlucky.  It sucks to hear that this is something that has been repeatedly forced on you be experience.

I don't think I would approve a female PC with a background as a child sex slave, especially in the hands of a male player.  I can't see anything good coming out of that.

I prefer to think well of people, but then people always do make that hard...


----------



## Hawk Diesel (Nov 4, 2016)

Roseweave said:


> It's weird, because most of us would watch a movie or read a comic featuring a character like that, written by a dude. Stuff like the Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, X-23 from X-men stuff, Mad Max: Fury Road. When it comes to roleplaying it's a bit more suspect because it's an isolated character that doesn't have a guaranteed narrative like in a regular story. Like that would raise red flags for me tbh. I'd recommend he maybe go with a similar concept but tone it down somehow. Find another slightly more PG form of abuse and make the character less Zealous and more emotionally complex I guess.




Yea, my response to him was that I didn't want such themes or that kind of tone for the game I want to run, and asked him to tone it down. It's also a game, and I don't much want to bring things into a game that I have to deal with at work that could trigger me from my own vicarious trauma.

Btw,  [MENTION=6806914]Roseweave[/MENTION], I really appreciate your perspective and honesty in this conversation. It's really interesting to read how you've used RPGs to explore and cope, and on the flip side how playing in certain kinds of games or things within those games has triggered you. 

 [MENTION=264]Teflon Billy[/MENTION] - Thanks, I appreciate that. I try to be very aware of how I come across and to check my own baggage, so I'm glad that it didn't come across that way to everyone.



Celebrim said:


> *sigh*
> 
> Well, either I've been very lucky, or you are being very unlucky.  It sucks to hear that this is something that has been repeatedly forced on you be experience.
> 
> ...




Well, I used to primarily play on PbP boards as a teen because I didn't have anyone in my area that would play, and the one group I did play with wasn't exactly made of the most mature or savory individuals. It wasn't until college that I got to play with decent human beings.


----------



## Teflon Billy (Nov 4, 2016)

Roseweave said:


> Who else i still listening to motown lmao. I'm on Kool & The Gang's Ladies night now.




"ain't No mountain High Enough" here


----------



## Roseweave (Nov 4, 2016)

Yeah thanks. I'm thankful for my current GM(who I know reads these threads and I hope i haven't offended somehow) who's largely respectful of sensitivities even if we have a slightly different idea of where to draw the line sometimes, so don't run the risk of running into that sort of stuff again. A little nervous about prospective new players in the next campaign in a couple of weeks though, and I'm probably going to start going back to gaming cons next year too. I haven't had a bad experience at a con in recent years as such, though i know one person who was GMing(not my GM, but table across from me, friend of a friend) I ended up befriending who was pretty insensitive about mental illness & trans issues. Geeks aren't always the best at this stuff unfortunately, even the very social ones(sometimes especially those ones).


----------



## Teflon Billy (Nov 4, 2016)

The best example I have is for a game of *Champions *I was running. I explained that the campaign would be about the remnant of Earth's superhero community following an alien war (using Earth as a battleground). The big hitters of the world had been killed, and the PC's were the lowbie/mid rankers who missed the climactic battle for whatever reason. I turned two PC's away from the game and one player. The PC's would be involved in the resistance, and throughout the campaign would hopefully slowly drive back the invaders, and discover a bunch of revelatory things that would help them determine who was *really* on their side.

PC number one was a guy playing a lesbian ninja character who hated men, but used her pheromonal superpower to seduce them, then kill them. This is a catastrophe I've seen before. Nope.

PC number two was a girl whose character was of constantly (and uncontrollably) shifting gender, and she wanted to use it to explore what it meant to be a man or woman if that wasn't something carved in stone. No superpowers listed, claimed that her character would not wear a superhero costume as "She wasn't about that" and no reference to how she would be involved in the described campaign. Nope.

Excluded Player: A guy who wanted to be the "Bad guy on the side of good" and expert in torture, not afraid to kill anyone (man, woman or child) not afraid to "break some eggs to make an omelette" ...told me about a lot of books he had read on virtually every reprehensible subject he kept bringing up. Gave me the creeps. Gone.

Like I say, people get different things out of the games, and when I'm running a game you might not get what you want. You'll only get what I am offering. Which, in the case of the game described above, was costumed superheroic action in a sci-fi environment.

Anyone looking to work out personal issues regarding basically anything outside of silver-age alien smashing needed to look elsewhere. My table is not therapy for you, neither is it an opportunity to live out abhorrent power fantasies.

Though, I guess at it's core D&D is about armed robbery, so I guess my rules aren't exactly ironclad


----------



## Roseweave (Nov 4, 2016)

PC #2 sounds like it could have been interesting in the right context tbh but if she didn't have any useful super powers a bit arty pretentious. Some people just get an idea for a character that has this sort of dramatic thing about them but are otherwise sort of useless.


----------



## TheCosmicKid (Nov 4, 2016)

Roseweave said:


> tbh sexual violence is so common and treated with such a blasé attitude that I'd be very wary of including it as an element in a game.



This. Just... find another table, folks. Don't need to deal with that stuff in a crazy-fun fantasy adventure.



Roseweave said:


> It's weird, because most of us would watch a movie or read a comic featuring a character like that, written by a dude. Stuff like the Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, X-23 from X-men stuff, Mad Max: Fury Road.



I think that range of fiction illustrates how the topic can be handled well or... not so well. I hesitate to apply the term "realistic" to anything _Mad Max_, but Furiosa's character and actions really do make perfect sense in response to the situations she encounters. Whereas independent badass Lisbeth Salander inexplicably jumps in the sack with a transparent author avatar who's twice her age and shares no common interests outside of work. I'm not saying men can't write (or, to bring us back to the point, roleplay) female characters who are sexually active. I'm a man, and I'd certainly like that creative freedom for myself. But sometimes it gets a little, y'know, white-knighty. You gotta be conscious whether your ideas are coming from your forebrain or your hindbrain.


----------



## pdzoch (Nov 4, 2016)

Hawk Diesel said:


> The entire reason I started this thread was specifically because a player that wanted to join one of my games presented a female character with a background of being used as a child sex slave and hating/distrusting men and wanting to make them pay.




Getting back to the specific instance at hand, I would probably handle the situation like I handle all my character backgrounds.  

First, does the background make sense in your campaign world?  This is a pretty gritty background, and despite the prevalence of evil in my game, child sex slaves are not a characteristic of my campaign. So, I would not be open to this background, but it may be appropriate depending on the game and campaign world you are running.

Second, how does the player want this background to inform the game?  I generally try to tie elements of every characters background into the campaign so that they characters become relevant to the world  and the world becomes relevant to the players.  Long lost fathers show up, old friends call in favors, patrons have tasks to be completed, etc.  How would the child sex slave situation come up in the game play that would make for a rewarding game experience for everyone? Perhaps a lead on the ringleader of the trader comes into play which begins an adventure?  Would everyone else like such a game?  Again, this is too gritty for my game. Ultimately, if this is just an excuse to act a certain way (character is  a man-hater), there are other backstories or palatable reasons to  frames a characters reason to act a certain way.  Perhaps a compromise  could be reached between player and gamemaster.

Third, my game emphasizes that the characters are heroes.  How does this background inform the heroics of the character?  If the background is only going to get in the way of the heroic story telling, then this character may not be suited for the game.  A similar example are the rogue classes in my game, especially the assassins.  These characters are playing redeemed villains, now using their once immoral skills for good. The same goes for those Drow characters.  

And lastly, this is a game for the entire group.  How do you feel about letting this character in the game?  Do you trust the ability for the player to role play the character tastefully?  How do the other players feel about the character?  This is a group decision.

In the end, I have one reservation about the background.  What is the character's goal or measure of happiness?  Given the "man-hatin'" mantra, how does the character come to peace?  Does the player intend for this destructive emotion and attitude to exist all her life? There is always something rewarding when past histories, conflicts, emptiness in the characters background becomes resolved as part of the campaign game.  [Something I try to do as I build the campaign world with the characters in mind, and thus make the world relevant to the character and vice versa].  How does the former child sex slave resolve her past in the game?  That is a beastly problem I would rather not have to wrestle with.


----------



## Teflon Billy (Nov 4, 2016)

Roseweave said:


> PC #2 sounds like it could have been interesting in the right context tbh but if she didn't have any useful super powers a bit arty pretentious. Some people just get an idea for a character that has this sort of dramatic thing about them but are otherwise sort of useless.




Yeah, that's been my point through the whole thread: not every game is for every PC. 

...or the "needs" of every player.


----------



## Roseweave (Nov 5, 2016)

tbh I forget whether or not I've told the GM or players whether or not I want my next character to be trans. It's sort of a reverse of this problem, where it's an experience that's so intensely mine that others might not know how to react to it. There's a long history of "Gender bending" in D&D so even if there aren't really any properly "trans" characters outside of maybe a couple of Gods(Corellon comes to mind) that I don't think it would stand out much. I think I decided back with the Mizhena controversy that my next character would be trans, because there was no reason _not_ have a trans character, and the fact I've never .  What exactly that will mean though I'm not sure. I only had one trans character in my character's backstory(she worked for an evil wizard in calimshan helping with alchemy, then made a run for it with his alchemy stuff, figuring out how to create hormone-manipulating potions and ultimately making birth control for courtesans & my character's doctor, which i thought was a cool way to throw everything together). 

(Real reason: my character is going to be a spy-ish sort and I want to be able to drop my voice for disguises, lol).

That adds another dimension to this though. How would I feel if _someone else_ played a trans character? If it's a character that's non-binary example - it's kind of normal for Fey/Elves to have nonspecific genders for example - it probably wouldn't be a big deal. But a character that had been through a specific analogue of transition might be difficult(my next character will probably have ties an alchemist, lol). 

Has anyone had this around a table? The 5E PHB encourages it, technically.


----------



## Dioltach (Nov 5, 2016)

I'm male and I play male characters. I find it challenging enough to pretend to be competent and likeable without making things even more complicated.


----------



## aramis erak (Nov 5, 2016)

I've seen males play females done poorly far more often than well.

The ones who do so poorly seldom get a second chance.


----------



## fjw70 (Nov 6, 2016)

I am male and have never played a female character. I am not opposed to the idea but I have never had a reason to. I will play dwarves or elves for their mechanics or for story reasons.  Mechanics don't give me a reason to go female and I have never considered a story option that wouldn't work either way so I have stayed male.


----------



## steenan (Nov 6, 2016)

I am male and while I typically play male characters, about one in five is female. Roleplaying females is quite normal for me, as I GM a lot and half of the NPCs are female.

From my point of view female characters are similar to characters that differ from me in race, religion, social class etc. It's fun to explore characters that are not me in various ways. I don't see why playing a woman would be seen as strange when we play elves, half-gods and AIs.


----------



## Dualazi (Nov 7, 2016)

Hawk Diesel said:


> On the other hand, I can totally understand a person (regardless of gender or gender identity) playing a male character, since it allows them to explore issues of power, status, and all sorts of other things that don't inherently connect with being male, but is one of the privileges of being male.




You mean the privileges that by-and-large don’t exist in D&D? Ever since 3rd edition at least there have been no stat differences or class restrictions based around gender, and certainly in the more popular campaign settings (Forgotten Realms in particular) women are shown to hold great positions of personal and political power. If you choose to run a historic, real-world scenario where women were second class citizens then that’s certainly an option to explore issues like that, but D&D itself is a poor vehicle as such because the assumption is egalitarianism from the get-go.

To answer the question in the OP, I’m the DM usually, and I typically let my players choose as they wish, since it’s usually a total non-issue anyway. Outside of magical realm BS (which I haven’t had to deal with in a long time, but have zero tolerance for) it’s a totally unimportant. The lich plotting world domination or the red dragon razing the countryside don’t care one whit what the players identify as, because if they have their way it’ll be “dead”. 

Haven’t had anyone do the overt seductress/man hater at my table though, so if you’ve had to put up with that you have my condolences.


----------



## Hawk Diesel (Nov 7, 2016)

Dualazi said:


> You mean the privileges that by-and-large don’t exist in D&D? Ever since 3rd edition at least there have been no stat differences or class restrictions based around gender, and certainly in the more popular campaign settings (Forgotten Realms in particular) women are shown to hold great positions of personal and political power. If you choose to run a historic, real-world scenario where women were second class citizens then that’s certainly an option to explore issues like that, but D&D itself is a poor vehicle as such because the assumption is egalitarianism from the get-go.




I disagree. First of all, most D&D settings are human centric, and it can be argued that non-human races can be representative/analogs to non-white, non-western peoples and cultures. Also, while the setting may be built in with examples of females holding power in the produced settings (and even then I would say there are vastly more examples of white males represted), and while it may be a fantasy game, you cannot escape the inherent and implicit biases that color choices, interactions, and reactions by the player or DM. These things will come out, and to deny that they exist is to deny you have any biases of your own.

It's also not even necessarily bad to include those things in the game world, because it provides a vehicle to challenge these very same issues in a safe place that does not carry the same real world consequences. This is why D&D and all other roleplaying games hold so much therapeutic potential. Socially awkward people can learn social skills and cooperation through a structured game. Individuals with trauma can face analogs of their trauma, but in a situation in which they have the power to overcome it. And people can take on roles they might be denied in real life due to their gender, gender identity, lifestyle, sexual orientation, skin color, or whatever.


----------



## Celebrim (Nov 7, 2016)

Hawk Diesel said:


> I disagree. First of all, most D&D settings are human centric, and it can be argued that non-human races can be representative/analogs to non-white, non-western peoples and cultures.




Wait... what?  I mean, sure it can be argued that that is true (its possible to _argue_ anything however nonsensical), and I suppose some DM wholly lacking in both creativity and good sense might actually draw clumsy analogies in that fashion, but I would argue that actual analogies of that sort are pretty darn rare and thus that argument is just unbelievably bogus and unreflective.  

For example, consider the PC races in my campaign, and the characteristics that mark them:

1) Fey (Pixies, Changelings, Sidhe): Immortal, magical, often spontaneously generated rather than birthed, unaging eternally youth, denizens of two worlds.  
2) Goblins (Goblins, Hobgoblins): Product of extensive selective breeding and perhaps magical manipulation that has transformed them from something quite different than their original form, resulting in division of the population into physical castes according to role.  Obligate carnivores.  Nocturnal. 
3) Elves: Age at roughly 1/9th the rate of humanity.  Pregnancy lasts 7 years.  Infancy two decades.  Adulthood is generally perceived as occurring sometime after the first century.  Have innate connection to nature, allowing them to commune with animals.  Usually vegetarians.  Very little or no sexual dimorphism.  Xenophobic and isolationist, arguably by necessity.  Literally dies, as if starving, if unable to experience beauty.
4) Orine: Avian.  Feathered.  Two eyelids.  Carnal, emotion and sensual race, loving dance and music, and notable for lacking emotional control.  Have a tendency to go into a trance when experiencing profound beauty, and to fly into a rage when they feel slighted.  Consequently, their own culture is steeped in layers and layers of customs and manners designed to avoid giving offence.  Dislike cities for the filth that they produce, and prefer nomadic existence.
5) Dwarves: Male births outnumber female births by more than two to one, resulting in a culture which is both patriarchal and yet women have great effective power at the same time because female lives are actually worth more than male lives.  Chivalric warrior ideas and theoretically chaste romantic love dominate the culture.  Merchantile and cosmopolitan, they freely mix with other races but cannot breed with them.
6) Idreth: Individuals reincarnate and share in a group mind, resulting in infants being born aware and with memories.  Called the 'born old', because even youths appear careworn, stooped, and fragile to members of the other races.  Scholarly and monastic in their culture, they are admired for their wisdom and reviled as meddlers and conspirators.

Which non-white race is that?  Match them up.  Or maybe just accept that they are each in essence humans where I've changed some of the aspects we find universally in humanity, and asked people to consider what a people would be like if they lacked some essential human characteristic so basic we seldom think of it (mortality, families, sexual dimorphism, equal numbers of males and females, short life span, omnivorous, etc. etc. etc.).

It would simply miss the entire point to treat any of these species as a stand in for some human race.  The whole point is to have something not human to compare and contrast with humanity, so that we might see ourselves better as if in a mirror.  It would likewise even miss the point to treat any of the human races in my fantasy world as direct stand ins for any real world race, although some analogies are inevitable simply because I don't have unlimited imagination.  But the whole point of having non-human races is for them to be alien and non-human.  I don't need to invent alien non-human things in order to have something analogous to a real world ethnic group.  I can just have them stand for themselves.  

Besides which, while human racism still occurs, it would be really odd if racism in a fantasy world was as marked and conventional as racism in the real world, given that unlike the real world humanity must also deal with sharing a world with a large number of other sentient and non-human species.  Speciesism is therefore far more prevalent and dramatic on my world than racism, but even that isn't meant to be a conventional analogy for real world racism.  I really want to explore the idea of how peoples of different species might possibly relate.  If I just wanted to explore only racism, I probably wouldn't construct a fantasy world.



> Also, while the setting may be built in with examples of females holding power in the produced settings (and even then I would say there are vastly more examples of white males represted), and while it may be a fantasy game, you cannot escape the inherent and implicit biases that color choices, interactions, and reactions by the player or DM.




Well I would hope you can.  Anyone that judged what I was doing by some real world racial or gender biases would be missing the point.  I might as well not write or create anything if you are going to always bring the bias that I'm writing about real world races.


----------



## Sunseeker (Nov 7, 2016)

I usually end up splitting things up pretty 50/50.

I've only played a seductress once, she was born poor and hated the rich so she seduced wealthy men and then killed them, then claimed to be their late wife to take all their wealth and lands.  

I played a female elf monk who was abandoned as a child and thus hated other elves.  She had no real sexual bent towards men or women and sex didn't come up in that campaign much so it was never an issue.

I am currently playing a female weretiger rogue who left her people to pursue wealth and power (which her tribe didn't value).  Sex hasn't come up in this game because we've got some youngins, so I mostly play her up as a female Sher Khan.  

I've made a couple stereotypical men before but I find stereotypes pretty boring so I try to avoid them.  I usually write fairly long character backstories and the character's sex is developed out of that.  Sometimes men fit an idea more than women, sometimes the other way around.  Sometimes tropey characters work in a beer & pretzels game, they usually don't at a more serious table.  IMO: if your intention is to play a well-rounded character, the sex really doesn't matter.


----------



## Hawk Diesel (Nov 7, 2016)

[MENTION=4937]Celebrim[/MENTION] Homebrew is different than standard D&D. Issues of race and sex may be secondary  (though I would argue those are hard if not impossible to erase outright). However, when you look at the source material and Tolkien in particular, race is indeed an issue and it is much easier to view the difference between the white (humans, elves, dwarves, hobbits) versus black (orcs, goblins, ect). Even consider half-orcs as a playable race. They are only accepted if half their parentage is of the "white" races and even then are typically portrayed as brutish and low intellect. D&D products also have a tradition of cultural appropriation, as is apparent in products such as Oriental Adventures. As for the representation of females, when you think of iconic D&D, who do you consider? Elminster, Volo, Drizzt, all those wizards that have spells named after them. Especially Drizzt! He is one of the evil dark races and is only a hero after he turns away from his own people!

Are there counter examples? Sure. And of course, how you run games may be different. But that doesn't deny that the foundation set by D&D doesn't contain those elements, and it is then up to the individual players to ignore them or incorporate them.


----------



## Celebrim (Nov 7, 2016)

Hawk Diesel said:


> [MENTION=4937]Celebrim[/MENTION] Homebrew is different than standard D&D.




I've been playing D&D 30 some odd years.  I have no idea what 'standard D&D is'.  I've seen dozens of tables.  They are all different.  What is the "standard Batman"?  Which era?  Which writer?   D&D is even worse.  Canon changes.  Canon is ignored.  Canon changes between published settings.  

And in all of that I never recalled anything from TSR/WotC pushing hard any sort of analogy between typical PC races and real world cultures or ethnic groups.



> However, when you look at the source material...




Which source material?  We've got at least all of appendix N to review.



> ... and Tolkien in particular, race is indeed an issue and it is much easier to view the difference between the white (humans, elves, dwarves, hobbits) versus black (orcs, goblins, ect).




Oh good grief no.  Just no.  That's ridiculous.  That's your bias, not his.  The textual history of orcs is far more complex than that, and they are certainly not intended as neat analogies between real world races.  If you read Tolkien that way, you are just missing the point.



> D&D products also have a tradition of cultural appropriation, as is apparent in products such as Oriental Adventures.




Oh good grief, let's not get that started again.  "Cultural appropriation" isn't a thing.  



> As for the representation of females, when you think of iconic D&D, who do you consider? Elminster, Volo, Drizzt, all those wizards that have spells named after them.




Tasha?  The Simbul?  The Seven Sisters.  You can find whatever you want.  When I think of iconic D&D, I think of Dragonlance... that is Margaret Weis, and the husband and wife team of Tracy and Laura Hickman. 



> But that doesn't deny that the foundation set by D&D doesn't contain those elements, and it is then up to the individual players to ignore them or incorporate them.




Well, first, yes I deny it, and secondly we can tell what choice you've made.


----------



## Hawk Diesel (Nov 7, 2016)

[MENTION=4937]Celebrim[/MENTION] When I say standard D&D, I mean D&D based on the official products released. I'm not even discussing canon versus non-canon, but what has been released in the various books. I also don't think one can argue that D&D didn't start out with cultural or sex biases, as the first few editions outlined very specific mechanical penalties for playing a female. 

As for the examples I pointed out, I'm sure there are more complicated issues and context, and it is almost certainly an oversimplification on my part given that I don't want to be writing an entire thesis on this board, but one can find many themes or racial injustice and even academic writings that have explored this issue within both Tolkien and D&D. 

As for cultural appropriation, it most certainly is a thing. This is something I won't even try to argue. If you deny it, then there just isn't enough common ground between us to even have a discussion. I can accept that you may disagree that Oriental Adventures isn't an example of cultural appropriation, or that it is difficult to say that D&D qualifies due to the fantasy landscape, but to deny the idea of cultural appropriation even exists is, from my perspective, akin to saying the world is flat.

As for my own biases, I do my best to recognize them and challenge them. And yes, I see these themes in D&D, as I'm sure many others do. Nothing is created in a vacuum. We always bring our world view into our creations and stories. And this can be a good thing, because if we can be upfront about it, we can recognize them, challenge them, and grow as individuals.

You can deny these things if you want. It doesn't mean they aren't present.


----------



## Celebrim (Nov 7, 2016)

Hawk Diesel said:


> [MENTION=4937]Celebrim[/MENTION] When I say standard D&D, I mean D&D based on the official products released. I'm not even discussing canon versus non-canon, but what has been released in the various books. I also don't think one can argue that D&D didn't start out with cultural or sex biases, as the first few editions outlined very specific mechanical penalties for playing a female.




Seriously?  I thought we were arguing whether or not in general non-human races are standins for specific 'non-white' racial cultural groups.  Whether or not D&D did or did not start out with cultural or sexual biases is irrelevant to answering that question.  It could be that it did have cultural or sexual biases, but those biases weren't expressed by (for example) making Gnolls analogy for Laotian peoples or making Elves a stand in for Berbers or whatever you think.  Whatever we want to make of specific mechanical differences between genders in 1e AD&D, it has no bearing on whether kobolds, gnomes, and norkers are actually stand ins for real world ethnic groups.  It would seem that your mode of argumentation is to eschew logic, and bring up every single controversial political position you can drag into the thread whether it has a bearing on the subject at hand or not.



> As for the examples I pointed out, I'm sure there are more complicated issues and context, and it is almost certainly an oversimplification on my part given that I don't want to be writing an entire thesis on this board, but one can find many themes or racial injustice and even academic writings that have explored this issue within both Tolkien and D&D.




Yes, and if I wanted to insult my eyes, I could go out and find lots of Neo-Nazi writings on various topics as well.  The existence of someone out there with a theory in no way validates that theory.  There are tons of people who are wrong about things.  Citing "expertise" or "authority" in vague ways isn't an argument.



> As for cultural appropriation, it most certainly is a thing. This is something I won't even try to argue.




Once again, I've no intention of arguing this either.  Take it up here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGgj9S8XO7k 



> If you deny it, then there just isn't enough common ground between us to even have a discussion.




There probably isn't.  My idea of evidence supporting your argument is you show examples of how hobgoblins were explicitly meant to have a Slavic culture or to be a stand in for Aztecs or something.  Then you show that there is a one for one and onto relationship between the culture and cultural tropes associated with hobgoblins and the intended real world culture they represent.  And if you can do that, I might find it convincing.  What I don't find convincing is this unrelated word salad of political speech.



> I can accept that you may disagree that Oriental Adventures isn't an example of cultural appropriation, or that it is difficult to say that D&D qualifies due to the fantasy landscape, but to deny the idea of cultural appropriation even exists is, from my perspective, akin to saying the world is flat.




I feel much the same way about people that claim cultural appropriation exists, and your axiomatic assertions aren't completely convincing.  But, if you are curious I was involved in a much longer (and largely) respectful discussion of whether it exists or not about a year ago on EnWorld.  Go read that thread if you like.  I have no intention of repeating myself at that length.  



> As for my own biases, I do my best to recognize them and challenge them.




Including the belief that cultural appropriation exists?

However, most of all it is irrelevant.  I wasn't challenging the whole of your carefully constructed political world view, and frankly I don't find you outlining your politics in a conventional manner particularly convincing.  I was challenging a very specific statement.


----------



## innerdude (Nov 7, 2016)

As a GM, obviously I've played NPCs of both genders. As a man, I do try to make a conscious effort to incorporate strong, competent female NPCs into my games. Whether this translated well in my games or not, I don't know, but even with the minute sample size of the dozen or so players I've run for, I've never had complaints about gender stereotyping. 

One of my favorite NPCs I think I've ever created was a female leader of the shadow agency for the Andoran Eagle Knights. She was a former Red Mantis assassin turned "good," with a fairly extensive backstory. But I don't know if my affinity for her had as much to do with her gender as it did with her story, though truthfully in some ways you can't really separate the two.  

Interestingly, though, as a player I had never had any desire to play female characters. As others have mentioned, there are enough human issues to explore through characterization without having to play the opposite gender. But then for some reason, as a player in our current campaign I thought maybe I'd try playing a woman as a PC for the first time in the 30+ years I've been playing RPGs.

And truthfully, I don't know that I've played her all that much differently then I've played any other PC over the years. I try to imbue my characters with real motivations, with backstories that fit the world. She's an escaped slave, held captive by a rich noble for her magical abilities, but without any troubling sexual backstory. In fact, I don't know that I really gave much thought to her "sexual history" at all, simply because the campaigns we play in don't really have a focus on that kind of subject matter.

I've tried to avoid stereotypical "female" qualities, with two exceptions. First, she does have an elevated attention to appearance. Whether that's right or wrong I don't know, but I can say that it actually has had some significance in terms of roleplaying. When interacting with nobility, I see her as being much more attuned to standards of dress, propriety, etc., things others in the party might not catch. Second, there's an interesting sense with this character that I haven't had with other characters, in that she feels a need to prove competence. And that's interesting to me, because that's certainly something I don't think would have come up playing a male character.  

The other players in the group were a little bit . . . jarred by it at first, I think, but over time have come to see her as a real character, with "woman" being just one of many aspects that define her. 

Now, would I make the claim that this character is anywhere close to being an accurate depiction of a woman? Certainly not. Experiences we have as gendered individuals in our society will always be unique and varied. I'm not saying I'm doing anything particularly right, or that I'm in any way representative of all gamers, but it truthfully has been an interesting and dare I say _fun _experience at attempting to see certain things about reality through a different lens, even if my attempts are ultimately less than perfect.

And this idea of "less than perfect" dovetails directly into the next point, RE: Cultural Appropriation. 

If by "cultural appropriation" you mean, "Any time white / Western culture borrows anything from another culture, it's inherently wrong and disrespectful, and any member of the 'appropriated' culture has a right to be offended and tell other people what to do about it," then I completely agree with @_*Celebrim*_. This version of "cultural appropriation" only exists in the minds of some individuals, not in reality.

If by "cultural appropriation" you mean, "cultures coming into contact with each other will inevitably borrow / synthesize things from those cultures into their own," then absolutely! Every culture does it; it's not limited to Western Europe / America. Are there cases where certain dominant cultures have used aspects of another culture to create injustices and wrongs? Certainly. But why can't we simply call those things what they are---injustice and tyranny---instead of trying to wrap it up into some kind of weird, social shaming phenomenon and call it "cultural appropriation"?

To me, the main arguments for "cultural appropriation" adherents are two-fold: The first is that anyone who wants to borrow from another culture will "do it wrong." The "borrower" will not fully capture the spirit/essence of the culture, and as a result the attempt will inherently be offensive, and the person shouldn't do it. I comprehensively disagree with this. Can someone from the synthesized/borrowed culture be offended by some attempts at cultural synthesis? Of course. But no one individual _owns that culture, even if offended by some portrayals of it. _Even if someone borrows from a culture and "does it wrong," by definition the person doing the borrowing has just created a new, separate version of the culture---a culture of one. You may not like it, but isn't that their right?

The second argument for those who want to enforce their view of "cultural appropriation" is that there are some aspects of history, related to culture and race, that are inherently offensive, due to past oppressions, injustices, and tyrannies. This I think may have some merit. There are elements of American history that are brutal, cruel, and shameful regarding cultural and racial interactions. But even if I thought that someone dressing up in Native American dress, standing on a street corner, holding a sign that says "The Trail of Tears" is abhorrent (and I absolutely think such a thing is vile and abhorrent), I certainly don't think I would have a right to walk up to them and forcibly destroy their sign, then tear off the offending clothing. Either freedom of speech is a thing, or it's not.


----------



## Argyle King (Nov 7, 2016)

Physically, I'm male.  Socially, I also identify as male. (I don't at all identify with the term "CIS".)  Culturally, I identify as American... occasionally "European American" if I find myself in a conversation where someone insists upon using labels, but my family tree has enough Native influence that I'd say that's not really accurate either.

I have played female characters, but not often.  For some of those characters, sex was important.  For some, it wasn't.

I'd say that my history of characters as a whole would be predominantly male.  For some of them, sex was important.  For others, it wasn't important at all.  In a few cases, other players at the same table alluded to sexual things and my character.

The main reason I don't play female characters more often?  I don't feel that I can perform a convincing female voice.  That being said, I recently did fairly well as my character Vespa... a D&D 5th Edition Druid with the Noble background.

In recent years, I've noticed that I tend to play robots, droids, and various other sexless characters a lot.  

My only active character at the moment is a Half-Ogre Wizard in a GURPS Dungeon Fantasy game.  I really have no idea how that relates to real life issues or cultures.  The character's skin tone doesn't look like a normal skin tone at all, and his pupils are shaped similarly to something like an orange & purple Star of David.


----------



## Hawk Diesel (Nov 7, 2016)

[MENTION=4937]Celebrim[/MENTION] You may be right in that some of what I said was not as carefully constructed an argument as I normally might provide, given that I'm writing much of this between projects at work. I will say this though. I do not recall claiming one-to-one stand-ins to represent various people or cultures, but rather that themes of injustice (whether based on race, sex, or what have you) have been and continue to be a part of D&D, of for no other reason than it is a part of our society, and our creations tend to often carry our own implicit ways of viewing and interacting with the world. Even in pretend worlds, we tend to view them through the lens that we see our own world.

And you're right. Theories and writing on topics do not explicitly make them exist or valid. This was poor form on my part.

As for the issue of respect you mentioned, if you felt attacked or disrespected, that was not my intention. These are topics I am quite passionate about. I am a therapist and worked with the most vulnerable populations, and so issues of social justice resonate strongly with me and I may lose sight of logic while my heart takes over the argument. I will work to improve that in future responses. I have more to say, but as I mentioned I'm on a phone and have work to attend to. So I will continue my response later.


----------



## Celebrim (Nov 7, 2016)

Hawk Diesel said:


> [MENTION=4937]Celebrim[/MENTION]I do not recall claiming one-to-one stand-ins to represent various people or cultures...




You wrote: "it can be argued that non-human races can be representative/analogs to non-white, non-western peoples and cultures."  If in fact they are representative or analogs to non-white, non-western peoples and cultures, then in fact they must also be one to one stands ins for various peoples or cultures.  That's what words like "representative" and "analog" means.  If your words in that statement mean something wholly different, as you now assert, how is the reader to know?



> ...but rather that themes of injustice (whether based on race, sex, or what have you) have been and continue to be a part of D&D, of for no other reason than it is a part of our society, and our creations tend to often carry our own implicit ways of viewing and interacting with the world.




How in the world would I be expected to understand "it can be argued that non-human races can be representative/analogs to non-white, non-western peoples and cultures." to mean all that (whatever that means).  That's not clarification.  That's some completely different tangent.

What really gets me here is that you seem to think you are in making the above statement you are in some way backing off and making a lesser claim.  But in fact you are making a greater claim.  You now not only have to show that non-human races are stand-ins for real world ethnic groups or cultures, but that this portrayal was unjust.   Leaving aside that until the first statement is proved the second remains a counter-factual, while the second part of that may be easier to show than the first and I might be more willing to concede it (hinted at in my first response), it is by no means a given that it is so.  For example, see a work like "The Record of the Lodoss War".  Themes of injustice?

Beyond that, I have a pretty good idea what is meant by the word "justice".   It means something like, "A person gets what they deserve."  But I see no sign that "themes of injustice" were being consciously or unconsciously explored by Gygax and others when they created D&D, much less when I read an entry in the Monster Manual.  You certainly can have a game in which there is a story about justice or injustice, but I see no reason why you inherently have to do so because D&D has "themes of injustice" deeply rooted in its conception, construction, or engagement at the table.  I'd personally love for games to be so deep and thoughtful, but in point of fact I don't think they usually are. 

Besides which, when you say "justice" or "injustice", I suspect there is a bunch of other baggage you are hauling around, and that you are implicitly expecting me to unpack a lot of things you didn't say.  I think what you really mean to say is that we can look at the worlds and creations we create in ways that are just or unjust, or create them in ways that are just or unjust, based on the biases that we bring with us to the table.  And in that I might agree, but the exact application of that and what constitutes a just or unjust way of looking at things is going to be something there will be no universal consensus on.  



> As for the issue of respect you mentioned, if you felt attacked or disrespected, that was not my intention.




You don't know me very well, but you should know I care little if someone attacks or disrespects me in the conventional sense you mean it.*  I generally don't get upset about that sort of thing.  The sort of things likely to provoke me to aggressive commentary have more to with what I see as intellectual laziness and unconsidered words.  If you'll allow me a bit of my usual hubris, I like to think of myself as being a bit like Gandalf, who has to ask, "What do you mean by 'Good morning'.", when someone says, "Good morning", and its not clear even they know what they mean by it.   Likewise, I get a little perturbed when people use "Good Morning", in a way that makes me marvel how many things that they use "Good morning" for, but I don't actually get offended by it.   There are things that do offend me, but they aren't the sort of things that other people seem to worry about.  



> I am a therapist and worked with the most vulnerable populations, and so issues of social justice resonate strongly with me and I may lose sight of logic while my heart takes over the argument.




I'm rather a fan of living justly myself, and tending for the vulnerable - what has been at times called (without meaning it as a put down) "the least of these".   But I'm not very much of a fan of the phrase "social justice", as I find that it's one of those modifiers that gets added to a word to make it mean rather the opposite of what it means.  Quite often this is done with the best of intentions, but I'd rather it was not done at all.

*PS: I went back and tried to figure out why in the world you thought I was troubled by you disrespecting me, and I couldn't.  The only time I employed the word "respect" was in reference to a different conversation, and the reason I employed it was not to contrast with this one or to imply you were being disrespectful (which if you were, I couldn't care less over), but that the conversation - because it was largely respectful despite the strong disagreement - might be worth your time.


----------



## Flexor the Mighty! (Nov 7, 2016)

At my table players can play what they want, nobody has ever played a female PC but if they did fine. If it was a stereotypical characterization fine, if you offend someone they will let you know as we are all long term friends and acquaintances.  Nobody at my table is interested in examining the human condition or fighting for social justice via D&D.  We are just down for some adventure gaming.  If someone had a friend they wanted to join the game and they were looking for that I'd advise them to pass on the game. Hell nobody even comes up with a PC background so we aren't a good fit for that type of game focus.


----------



## Lwaxy (Nov 7, 2016)

I have a man playing only females because he says anytime he plays a man the char slowly turns into him and he wants to be something different. Many of my players play all genders, and all types, and the only time we had a stereotype issue was when someone played a gay char. It was a version of Detlev-the-hairdresser stereotype - German speaking folks will know that one, not sure if it is the same elsewhere - and it became unbearable quickly. We asked him to switch to something else. 

Most men playing women complain about the difficulty to find char pictures not half naked or in annoying suggestive poses. 

I'd give more examples, some quite interesting but still sick so too tired  But we didn't really have any issues with cross gender play yet.


----------



## Roseweave (Nov 8, 2016)

Lwaxy said:


> I have a man playing only females because he says anytime he plays a man the char slowly turns into him and he wants to be something different.




I always worry about this with characters, but at the same time for long term campaigns I find it less stressful to play a character that's similar to myself but highlights different aspects. It's definitely a good strategy to avoid pitfalls though assuming you can do it right, and gender is an easy way to sort of view certain things in a different light.



> Many of my players play all genders, and all types, and the only time we had a stereotype issue was when someone played a gay char. It was a version of Detlev-the-hairdresser stereotype - German speaking folks will know that one, not sure if it is the same elsewhere - and it became unbearable quickly. We asked him to switch to something else.




Not German as we've established but I know the stereotype. I would heavily side-eye anyone trying to do that. It's also an issue with people playing obvious proxies of real world ethnicities. I'd be cautious of anyone playing for example a Calishite/Zakharan character and playing up that element of it. I think it's all about respect(and skill) though.



> Most men playing women complain about the difficulty to find char pictures not half naked or in annoying suggestive poses.




http://www.heromachine.com/

I usually send people here. I'm okay-ish at doodling my own designs too. I have pictures of my character and some NPCs along with all the Heromachine stuff here - http://roseweave.deviantart.com/


----------



## Dualazi (Nov 8, 2016)

Hawk Diesel said:


> I disagree. First of all, most D&D settings are human centric, and it can be argued that non-human races can be representative/analogs to non-white, non-western peoples and cultures. Also, while the setting may be built in with examples of females holding power in the produced settings (and even then I would say there are vastly more examples of white males represented), and while it may be a fantasy game, you cannot escape the inherent and implicit biases that color choices, interactions, and reactions by the player or DM. These things will come out, and to deny that they exist is to deny you have any biases of your own.




First off, I would love to hear exactly which races are analogues for real world ethnicities, because I deeply suspect that any examples you might give will be quite the stretch. 

Secondly, with all the races and creatures present in D&D, I think you would be hard pressed to make the argument that straight white men are over-represented as opposed to other categories, especially one as broad as ‘female’. Even if you were to do so, it _still_ would not matter, because perfect parity in representation is a joke of a goal. What 
matters is that in most published settings (FR definitely so) women are explicitly stated to be as competent as any man and have (and continue to hold) the highest offices in the land.

Third, you can 100% escape the implicit biases, choices, and interactions in a made up fantasy game. That’s the whole point! You can imagine cultures and histories untouched by our own assumptions and experiences. If you’re afraid of making your villain homosexual or your savage races dark-skinned out of some need to avoid even tenuous real-world implications, then in my opinion you’ve already lost from a creative standpoint.



Hawk Diesel said:


> It's also not even necessarily bad to include those things in the game world, because it provides a vehicle to challenge these very same issues in a safe place that does not carry the same real world consequences. This is why D&D and all other roleplaying games hold so much therapeutic potential. Socially awkward people can learn social skills and cooperation through a structured game. Individuals with trauma can face analogs of their trauma, but in a situation in which they have the power to overcome it. And people can take on roles they might be denied in real life due to their gender, gender identity, lifestyle, sexual orientation, skin color, or whatever.




It’s not inherently bad, but it also adds little of value. D&D should never be a ‘safe space’, at least by default, because the very concept is intellectual poison. And ‘challenging’ these issues sounds like a masturbatory fantasy of bringing down strawmen to pat yourself on the back for how progressive you are. That’s not intended as a personal attack, I just remain remarkably unconvinced that D&D is the proper venue for this.

Although it does remind me of a humorous play report I read about a group who found out gay marriage didn’t exist in the fantasy (not)Europe they were playing in, and got so sidetracked trying to overthrow the government to implement it that a lich completed his evil plan and overran everything.


----------



## Roseweave (Nov 8, 2016)

It's really disheartening that even after a locked thread people still want to talk about Cultural Appropriation, and by talk I mean absolutely insist it isn't real and anyone who believes in it is an idiot. I just want to be clear about this - the reason why people, especially largely white, western sorts who don't experience much in the way of appropriation hurting them, make arguments that appropriation isn't real, racial/sexist bias doesn't exist etc. is because they want to keep on doing that stuff without checking themselves or opening themselves up to the experiences of others. People are acting like they have an intellectual slant on it but it's really false. 

At the end of the day, the difference between appropriation and exchange, as with the subject of "A man plays a woman" is _respect._ And unfortunately most of us have been raised in or spend a lot of time in environments where we're told we're the heroes of our stories and the subaltern are little more than accessories - your sassy gay black best friend, the spicy Latina girlfriend, the east asian martial artist dude. As such people aren't used to the idea of really respecting subaltern groups, but see any bone thrown as doing so since it's a step up from the baseline.

These things aren't just "theories" and there's certainly a lot more written for the idea of Cultural Appropriation than against. You can talk to the lived experiences of groups heavily affected by appropriation - particularly Native Americans, Romani people. It hurts people - and I don't think that people not from those groups have a right to tell them that what they see and experience or feel somehow isn't real. That is, frankly, amazingly imperialist, and we need to be real that what we call "Cultural Appropriation"  is really the modern iteration of Orientalism, which goes hand in hand with Colonialism.

I'm in a unique position - I'm white, though I am Irish so until somewhat recently we were affected by such things. I was adopted by a Romani family, so I can see the harm "gypsy" stereotypes cause(even if the Roma themselves aren't always aware of them). I'm a convert to Islam, and I can see how the use of Islamic & Middle Eastern imagery and concepts can be harmful. Most of the people I talk to are non white(Despite living in Ireland, not even sure how that happened!), and a large number are activists educated on their cause. One of their biggest complaints goes thusly: Roma people will get discriminated against for being visibly Roma(wearing the long skirts+diklo), black people get discriminated against for dreadlocks etc. but when a white person puts on a Sari without any pretext they're often celebrated for it. Granted a lot of people will find it distasteful, but an actual South Asian person would increase their chances of being told "go back to India" - with a white person it won't. Somehow something that's a beloved part of someone's culture has become a safer part of someone else's. Of course, if they were going to a Diwali festival with some South Asian friends, it would be a different example. That would be being _invited in_ to a cultural event. Similarly if my Roma friends dress me up as Roma, that's being invited in. Dressing up in an abaya/niqab for Hallowen? Not so much.

The idea that "all cultures borrowed from each other throughout history" actually hides a very brutal history that white westerners want others to forget - a history of imperialism, colonialism, mass starvation and killing. This is why the concept of "invited in" is so important because generally white, western people didn't bother with that and just took what they wanted. Entire peoples practically disappeared because some westerners wanted some spices. Britain's relationship with India is a great example of this. The relationships between white majority western countries and essentially the rest of the world wasn't quite the same as throughout history because it was so starkly biased. Of course - if you go back far enough you'll find other examples of empires and the like causing a mesh of cultures, but it's been long enough since most of that Occured that it's history(though contrary to popular belief, history seldom fully goes away as an effect). Millions of people are still alive that remember the creation of Partition in India/Pakistan, for example, or France's brutal and comically evil occupation of Libya that a lot of people don't realise was a large factor in France's issues with "Muslim" immigrants. 

People who say cultural appropriation doesn't exist honestly just don't care about things like this, or haven't spent enough time at intersections to see it. Which sounds like a hefty and hurtful accusation, but so is saying "Cultural Appropriation doesn't exist". Do you know what happens when people say stuff like this? Most of the time, instead of arguing the case, PoC especially those from heavily exoticised cultures, back off. They don't come here. They don't reveal their ethnicity. They may even feel like not being involved in the hobby. While not everyone making the argument is white, "Cultural Appropriation Doesn't Exist" serves to help mark roleplaying games as the territory of white or at least heavily westernised people.  

As for Orcs, Elves, etc. as analogies for human racists - it's a terrible idea to view these as _direct_ racial analogues because most of these creatures from folklore and are often metaphors for other things, other aspects of human existence, other sorts of "groups"(like for pirates, bandits, corrupt rich people, whichever). Unfortunately, it's also hard to deny that the way these races are written in D&D and similar systems make them less alien, fairy tale creatures, and _can be_ somewhat more analogue to real world ethnicities. It's really curious to me that people are saying that racism against real world ethnicities doesn't exist in D&D(which is untrue, in the Realms at least you have the Gurs, and it's mentioned that people do "exoticise" Zakharan and Calishites, just like in real life), because of the existence of other_ species, _though the species also don't count as any sort of analogue for ethnicity. But hold on - this is like pulling yourself up form your feet! The issue of racism just somehow disappeared. This is a magicians trick. For the idea of real world racism to be obfuscated, there needs to be _some _conceptual overlap. Unless the mere presence of "alien" races opens everyone minds so much that racism stops existing, which I really really don't think is the case. It's interesting to me too that privileged groups often tell marginalised groups to be happy with "allegorical" representation(like the X-men etc.) but then deny that it happens when it becomes problematic.

Saying absolutes like, _Drow or Orcs can never be seen a real world minority_ or _Cultural Appropriation doesn't Exist _are very decisive statements that need an awful lot of defence given the number of examples you could imagine where these things are the case and are harmful. Obviously there is a need for nuance here and discussing to what degree these things are true, when, and how we can minimise disrespect for others. The people who make aggressive blanket statements and then act like they're being persecuted for being called out on it are standing in the way of any sort of rational discussion. I can't be in a thread where people are trying to set the absolute premise that something I have seen in action - even from my own perspective, being Trans, and seeing how people co-opt trans culture & achievements for yet another Oscar bait movie - is not real, and I'm dumb for believing it. And if I feel that way, I can only imagine how most non-white people will feel, and not just that one black guy on youtube who holds views that are convenient for people that don't much care about what most subaltern peoples have to say.


----------



## Maxperson (Nov 8, 2016)

I'm a straight male.  I've been playing D&D since 1983 and I have never had the desire to play a female character.  If I did play one, I'd do it badly since I'm not a woman.

I have, though, seen somewhere between 12 and 20 players play female PCs in games that I run or have played in.  Invariably one of three things happens.

1) They play it as a joke acting outlandishly "female".

2) They try to seriously play the PC as female, but do it badly, because they aren't women.

3) They just ignore sex altogether and play the female PC like they would play any other PC.


----------



## Roseweave (Nov 8, 2016)

I think 3) isn't mostly all that bad though, since there's no one way to be "female". But there is definitely a better way to write/play female characters.


----------



## fuindordm (Nov 8, 2016)

Roseweave said:


> At the end of the day, the difference between appropriation and exchange, as with the subject of "A man plays a woman" is _respect._




Thanks for the thoughtful, interesting, and well-written post. 

Any creative work is a melting pot, but respect shows itself if you try to create something of value to a wide audience. That means you're not just playing to your own cultural group and its stereotypes, you're trying to make something that people from the cultures who inspired your work would also enjoy.

So if you're a man who wants to play a woman, you should first and foremost try to create a PC with personality, motivations, and quirks that are interesting in their own right, and that male and female players at the table can enjoy along with you.

Ben


----------



## innerdude (Nov 8, 2016)

Roseweave said:


> These things aren't just "theories" and there's certainly a lot more written for the idea of Cultural Appropriation than against. You can talk to the lived experiences of groups heavily affected by appropriation - particularly Native Americans, Romani people. It hurts people - and I don't think that people not from those groups have a right to tell them that what they see and experience or feel somehow isn't real.




My disagreement with the concept of "cultural appropriation" isn't about denying that injustices have occurred through cultural and racial interactions throughout history. This is fact; I completely accept that. 

What I completely disagree with is that someone being emotionally hurt by a representation of their culture is a valid, legally necessary reason to censor that speech.

There's a parallel here between this idea and the playing of opposite genders in an RPG. There are some in our hobby who would advocate that men shouldn't play women PCs (or vice-versa) because there's a potential to offend someone of the opposite gender. And in my mind, the risk of offending someone isn't generally a valid rationale for censorship, at least as it applies in public discourse. 

RPG groups, on the other hand, are generally private exercises (unless the game is being played in a public space). It's entirely up to the group to set standards for the content they want in their game. If a group's okay with a "bro" playing a lesbian ninja stripper, that's their prerogative. 

Would I greatly wish for people to approach cultural/gender representations with care, respect, and an eye to positive engagement and enlightenment? Absolutely. Just because I support someone's right to say or artistically represent something abhorrent on a cultural topic doesn't mean I particularly respect or want to spend time with people who participate in those kinds of speech.


----------



## Mallus (Nov 8, 2016)

Roseweave said:


> People who say cultural appropriation doesn't exist honestly just don't care about things like this, or haven't spent enough time at intersections to see it.




You should really avoid sweeping generalizations like this. I'm a multiracial American who presents as Asian. Show a little respect, eh? I've lived my life and reflected on it and I don't appreciate someone telling me what I do or don't care about (even if they mean well, which for now I'll assume you do). 

I think cultural appropriation is... largely unhelpful as a critical framework, and most online arguments (ie, non-academic) made in favor that I've encumbered are, well, dumb. Like the poster who cited Oriental Adventures as an example of D&D's cultural appropriation. That's idiotic (the idea, not the poster). For a host of reasons, not the least of which is Asian-Americans aren't a subaltern group in the United States. And it's not like a lot of us practice _ninjitsu_ or follow Bushidō in our everyday lives, or any of the other stuff covered in OA, ie what's actually being appropriated, kemosabe?.  

edit: drat, distracted by cultural appropriate tangent - next post will be about playing adventuresses as a guy.


----------



## Roseweave (Nov 8, 2016)

innerdude said:


> My disagreement with the concept of "cultural appropriation" isn't about denying that injustices have occurred through cultural and racial interactions throughout history. This is fact; I completely accept that.
> 
> What I completely disagree with is that someone being emotionally hurt by a representation of their culture is a valid, legally necessary reason to censor that speech.
> 
> ...




I don't see anyone calling for censorship here. This always comes up with anti-social justice arguments. Cultural practices can be outlawed or made "undesirable" by way of employment discrimination etc., Muslim women can be afraid to wear Abayas & Hijab, trans people can be afraid to walk down the street without being arrested for intent to prostitute, but yet people who claim to care about censorship and freedom of expression (or see how appropriation ties into these issues) never really comments on these. Of course they'll get offended at that notion saying "Of course I care about them!"  but the fact is I see 100x amount the focus from self described Free Speech advocates focusing on the right to be hateful/insensitive. And ironically, it's sort of taboo to criticise this attitude because "Free Speech". (In SJ circles we often refer to it as "Freeze Speech" to distinct it from actual freedom of expression, or legal Freedom of Speech). 

When people criticise a piece of media or being insensitive or hurtful and it gets changed, the gamergate sorts of the world are very quickly to scream censorship. What this is saying is that - while these people claim not to hate minorities, women, trans people etc.(and may even be from those groups), they don't actually want bigoted or insensitive attitudes to be challenged, or for things to get measurably better in terms of representation of other peoples and cultures. It's an aggressive defence of status quo(though particularly the status quo of the 80s or so). In this thread one person has outright said cultural appropriation does not exist and does not open themselves to be challenged on it, and this is creating a problem.


----------



## Flexor the Mighty! (Nov 8, 2016)

fuindordm said:


> Thanks for the thoughtful, interesting, and well-written post.
> 
> Any creative work is a melting pot, but respect shows itself if you try to create something of value to a wide audience. That means you're not just playing to your own cultural group and its stereotypes, you're trying to make something that people from the cultures who inspired your work would also enjoy.
> 
> ...




Or you can just put F in the sex field on the sheet and play the PC like the rest of your dungeon bashing characters.


----------



## Flexor the Mighty! (Nov 8, 2016)

Oh nevermind.  Where is the delete post option?


----------



## Roseweave (Nov 8, 2016)

Flexor the Mighty! said:


> Or you can just put F in the sex field on the sheet and play the PC like the rest of your dungeon bashing characters.



 Well, yeah, a bit like how you can put "Half-Elf" in the race field but play it like a Human or Elf aside from minor mechanical differences.


----------



## Flexor the Mighty! (Nov 8, 2016)

Roseweave said:


> Well, yeah, a bit like how you can put "Half-Elf" in the race field but play it like a Human or Elf aside from minor mechanical differences.




Sure.  The people I've always played with took a different race for the mechanical differences and how they impact gameplay instead of playing a half elf because they have a story that can only be told with a half elf.


----------



## Roseweave (Nov 8, 2016)

I prefer to do stuff with stuff I guess. Though I do worry as many in the thread as to what stuff some people consider.


----------



## Mallus (Nov 8, 2016)

I'm a guy and I primarily identify as "DM". As a player, I'm probably around 70/30 split male PCs to female PCs. That said, 3 out of my last 4 PCs have been female: Kelis the Brunch-Loving Archer, Amber Alert, and currently, Black Swann LaVey. As DM 3 of my all-time favorite NPCs have been female (2 cis, 1 trans): Mercy of the Guild of Revelry, The Lady Eve, and Shalazar, Director of the New School for Gate Research. 

I'm not aware of treating/conceiving of female PCs any differently from male. My goal's the same: create an amusing fictional character. All of my PCs tend toward the exaggerated and absurd, frequently broad comic types (but hopefully not stereotypes) that eventually get more grounded and humanized (in theory, at least). I don't go into the process with the deliberate intent of exploring different identities -- in the cultural criticism sense. It is, however, my experience that role-playing in a game has a knack for for revealing attitudes about things like gender that a person not consciously realize they hold. So there's that.

I try to give all my PCs the same general kit: they're good at something, they want something, and they're a mix of good, neutral, and awful like most real people I know. I also give them some sort of ridiculous shtick, behavioral, conceptual, or both, whose purpose is to keep me entertained during play while I try to 'find out' who the PC; to locate the character inside the caricature.


----------



## Celebrim (Nov 8, 2016)

Roseweave said:


> Well, yeah, a bit like how you can put "Half-Elf" in the race field but play it like a Human or Elf aside from minor mechanical differences.




I think that this actually gets to the heart of it, both on the main topic of the thread and the side discussions that we've been having.   Yes, we can.  And that's not only 'Ok', but inevitable.

There is no one in the world that can play an authentic Half-Elf.  There is no one in the world that can play an authentic Elf.   This is obvious and I would hope uncontroversial.  These things are self-evidently true because elves and half-elves aren't real, so no one can speak to the authenticity of being an elf.   I can give my players a 10 page document describing in a very high level overview elven culture as it pertains to my wholly invented imaginary world, in hopes of sparking some amount of creativity in them, but I certainly can't claim my take on elves is authentic.  There is no standard to judge authenticity by.

Nonetheless, as the DM, I have a responsibility within the game to be every other single being in my creation who isn't a PC.  I have to be all the men and all the women.  I have to be all the fair skinned people, and all the dark skinned people and all the peoples whose ethnicities and even species have no parallels in the real world.   I have to be all the saints of my world and all the most dastardly villains.  I have to be all the gods of my world, and all the lowest peasants.  I have to be the abusers and the oppressors and the abused and the oppressed.  I have to be the pretty people, and the low charisma people lightly regarded within the world.  I have to be the proud and the humble, high and low, the meek and terrifying dragon fuming arrogantly in his lair.   I am every single extra in the story, and I am the villain that chews up the scenery that everyone loves to hate.  I'm the mentors and the henchmen and literally every character in the story but the protagonists.  The PC's get to decide who those are.

I don't feel like I have any particular obligation to anyone but my players regarding the world I create and the stories I tell, but it is my pleasure as the creator to fill the world up with as diverse a cast as I can manage.  I shall be very put out if someone comes and tells me that I can't do so because I'm not authentic enough to pretend for a little while to be a woman, or a child, or an old man, or a Tumesi, or Elven, or Mokoheen, or Averen, or a Har peasant patriot with a foul mouth, a swaggering Orine bravo, or a Sea Folk Wise Woman puffing on pipe,  or a goblin prospector seeking out wealth, or a barbarous merfolk girl hunting gulls, or a 4000 year old incarnation of the spirit of a bitter well, or any other darn thing that I think of that I think makes my world a richer place for their presence.   And I shall be even more put out, if I'm told that I'm not authentic enough to do these things, but that I didn't do these things that the absence of "diversity" in my world reflected somehow on what I thought of people in the real world.  There would be no way to pass this test, and I'm arrogant enough to think that the real world would be slightly less rich and interesting of a place for it, if I had to shut up or whitewash my world, or otherwise alter it from what I've wanted it to be.

Of course I can't be perfectly authentic, but the truth of the matter is that I can't be perfectly authentic pretending to be anything other than myself.  It's just not women I can't play with perfect authenticity.  It's everything and everyone other than who I am.  Am I any less authentic pretending to be a woman than I am pretending to be a jester with a ready wit and good humor?  Am I less authentic pretending to be a dark skinned merchant buying cedar for the palace of a far off land, than I would be pretending to be an olive skinned slave boy working on the docks of that cosmopolitan market?  It's all made up, yet I've never lived there or really experienced these lives.  And there is no one that I can go to tell me what would be authentic, or what it is really like to live them.  This is my world, it's all out of my head, and I am the only authority about what is authentic in it.

And the truth is, even to the extent that my world borrows liberally from ideas in the real world - as it must since my imagination is not limitless - there is still no one that can come to me and tell me what is authentic.  Some woman can't come to me and tell me some character of mine isn't authentic, because just as I can't authentically be anyone but myself, they can't authentically say what is right and real for some other woman.  And invariably an argument over who was or could be authentic would just degenerate down to averages, aggregates, and stereotypes of people - which wouldn't be authentic either.  Now they might could say that my representation of women in the game was consistently disrespectful in some way, and though that has never happened, if it did happen I'd probably give it hard thought about whether I'm presenting a true diversity of female characters and or whether my female characters are the sort of characters that are respected or admirable in some way, or at least as admirable as the male characters.   And maybe, depending on how strong of an argument they presented, I'd consider changing whatever element that person saw that had escaped my attention.   I don't think that there is anything like that going on, and certainly my female players never brought anything like that to my attention, and granted when I had a sizable number of female players it was sort of like playing with the cast of "Big Bang Theory" so it wasn't a "representative sample of women" (whatever the heck that would mean).   But sure, hypothetically speaking, there could be a deficit of respect in my play that needed addressing.

But this is not the same thing as saying I can't play a women because I can't play one real enough.  I'm fairly sure that it is possible to pretend to be a woman well enough that you can't tell the difference over the internet, because I used to MUSH and it really was never possible to know anyone's gender and I've been mildly surprised both directions (guessing that a female character didn't have a female player, and being wrong, and guessing that a female character did have a female player, only to discover to my mild amusement that they were actually a male fire fighter in Alaska).  If I can't guess, then the portrayal is convincing by at least one standard.  But ultimately, that doesn't matter, since I can only really and fully be myself.

Since all of this has to be true of me as the DM, it would be hypocritical of me to hold the players to any different standards.  I can't tell a player what to play, or that they aren't authentic enough to play that.  So long as they seem to be respectful to the group, and taking their role seriously - which in my opinion includes avoiding jokey characters of all sorts, whether the jokes are offensive and not appropriate, or just would get old in a hurry, or would diminish the literary value of my game (or all three).

Like I said before, most RP is not to a high standard anyway.  It's not like most tables are groups of method actors or aspiring thespians who bring consistent quality drama and characterization to the table.  Most tables are trying to have fun without getting to deep into acting.   Some players may be extremely shy and uncomfortable interacting socially period, much less getting into character.  Some players may not enjoy dramatics.  Many players just don't have the knack and really, regardless of what is on the sheet, are only playing themselves.  And all that is fine, and in my opinion in good fun.

I mean fundamentally, if men can't play women in role-playing games, where are we stuck at?  I mean forget that we lose something comparatively trivial, like the ability to play a RPG.  If fundamentally we can't walk that far in another person's mocassins even as a leisure activity, how are we ever to exercise empathy and compassion for each other when its challenging?


----------



## Gentlegamer (Nov 8, 2016)

Hawk Diesel said:


> Has anyone here had an experience of playing someone of a different gender identity?




You're referring to a character's sex. Gender is a grammatical concept. And gender identity is a nonsensical concept.

I've played characters of the opposite sex many times, as Dungeon Master. I also often portray characters who aren't even human.


----------



## Lanefan (Nov 8, 2016)

Straight male here.

As player, I'd say about half the characters I roll up are female.  In the currently-active parties I'm playing 2 males and a female; retired I've got another 2 males and 4 females.  At our tables anything goes for gender, sexual preference(s), alignment, etc.

As DM I somewhat obviously have to play all kinds of things, but for major NPCs or party-member NPCs e.g. henches it's again reasonably even between male and female.

Lan-"named after one of the characters noted above"-efan


----------



## Flexor the Mighty! (Nov 8, 2016)

Roseweave said:


> I prefer to do stuff with stuff I guess. Though I do worry as many in the thread as to what stuff some people consider.





I'm not even sure what you mean by any of that.


----------



## Roseweave (Nov 9, 2016)

Gentlegamer said:


> You're referring to a character's sex. Gender is a grammatical concept. And gender identity is a nonsensical concept.
> 
> I've played characters of the opposite sex many times, as Dungeon Master. I also often portray characters who aren't even human.




Hey cool thanks I'm trans would be nice if we could keep your "opinions" out of the thread. 

(OOI I'm not big on the concept of "gender identity" as defined, because it can lead to people circumventing with biological essentialism, but that's another story, this poster is basically saying trans people don't exist)


----------



## happyhermit (Nov 9, 2016)

Roseweave said:


> It's really disheartening that even after a locked thread people still want to talk about Cultural Appropriation, and by talk I mean absolutely insist it isn't real and anyone who believes in it is an idiot. *I just want to be clear about this - the reason why people, especially largely white, western sorts who don't experience much in the way of appropriation hurting them, make arguments that appropriation isn't real, racial/sexist bias doesn't exist etc. is because they want to keep on doing that stuff without checking themselves or opening themselves up to the experiences of others. People are acting like they have an intellectual slant on it but it's really false. *
> ...




Wow, that makes my skin crawl, to say the least, as does much of the rest of your post. Generalizations such as this wherein a person not only attributes the same motivations to everyone who holds a particular opinion on a subject, but links that to race and ethnicity . 

I don't think the people you are speaking about actually _wanted_ to talk about "cultural appropriation", from what they have written, but were actually responding to it.


As to the actual OT, this seems to come up a lot in online discussion, IRL it has never been a big deal for me so it's interesting to read. Sure, a lot of bad stereotypes get played, some people don't allow it but it isn't a big deal for the most part. A lot of the people who are problematic when playing another gender are problematic at other times too. I have seen quite a few instances of females depicting males that were not very good... at all... but, meh.

I think part of the problem comes from wish-fulfillment and the aforementioned "wanting to use gender to make a different character from oneself". 

A large chunk of the "bad" RP by females playing males IME has been of the "If I were a man I would sleep with everyone and not care about their emotions or feel bad about it" and males playing essentially the same thing with a bit of the "sleep with everyone, toy with their emotions, and get free stuff in exchange". To some extent I have seen those same things by people playing their own gender, so not great but whatever.

The second part about using gender as a crutch to differentiate from oneself has it's own issues. If I think of myself as "myself but the opposite sex" for example, that does essentially nothing to differentiate the characters. There are people of the opposite gender who have the same job as me, the same political views, the same sense of humour, the same everything. There aren't a lot of them, but there aren't a lot of the same gender either. Gender does not differentiate the personality on the individual level. So, what happens is we tend to think in terms of the actual generalities that exist and apply those to the individual character. Instead of being "me with a different gender" the character becomes "me with some stereotypical traits of a different gender".


----------



## Roseweave (Nov 9, 2016)

happyhermit said:


> Wow, that makes my skin crawl, to say the least, as does much of the rest of your post. Generalizations such as this wherein a person not only attributes the same motivations to everyone who holds a particular opinion on a subject, but links that to race and ethnicity .




There's honestly very little I find worse in the world that people trying to take an argument designed to protect the dignity and the marginalised and trying to turn it around saying "NO U R THE REAL RACISTS LOL". I'm really not sure you understand all that much about "race and ethnicity" but I'm too exhausted to get into it.


----------



## happyhermit (Nov 9, 2016)

Roseweave said:


> There's honestly very little I find worse in the world that people trying to take an argument designed to protect the dignity and the marginalised and trying to turn it around saying "NO U R THE REAL RACISTS LOL". I'm really not sure you understand all that much about "race and ethnicity" but I'm too exhausted to get into it.




Uhm, I never said anything about you being racist, I find your post and line of reasoning to be insulting, disrespectful, factually wrong, etc. The fact that you are denying my personal emotional response to it because of what you think you know about me is rather telling. I happen to know a whole lot about race and ethnicity, which would be pretty obvious if you knew my background. I am not too exhausted to get into it, but this really isn't the place, is it?


----------



## the Jester (Nov 9, 2016)

Hawk Diesel said:


> Has anyone here had an experience of playing someone of a different gender identity? What was it like and how did you play that character?




Sure! I've played lots of pcs of both sexes, as well as a few (elves) who didn't really have a gender identity. My most recent Mage character was a trans man; my current 5e pc is a gnome with a cantrip that allows him to change sex, so he spends about half his time as female.


----------



## Mallus (Nov 9, 2016)

Roseweave said:


> I'm really not sure you understand all that much about "race and ethnicity" but I'm too exhausted to get into it.



I understand something about race and ethnicity. Because I'm a non-white US citizen whose been alive for 47 years. At the very least, I understand the truth of my lived experiences.

I don't think cultural appropriation is a useful idea. Not when used informally, anyway, in places like this. It's a pejorative label for cultural exchange, which is inevitable and not in itself a bad thing. I think this _because I'm the product of cultural assimilation_. For the record, I have 4 distinct ethnic heritages, plus the cultural heritage that reflects the region I was raised in (and that heritage is a mix of immigrant minorities). I'm also in an interracial marriage. I kinda think about 'race and ethnicity' a lot. 

So if you'd like to talk about cultural assimilation with a minority gamer who holds a different opinion of it, I'm game. Unless the topic is verboten here, in which case I'll drop it. I'm perfectly happy to keep it civil - but mind, while I welcome other people's opinions and experiences, I don't like being spoke _for_.


----------



## Mallus (Nov 9, 2016)

Now, back to men playing women characters...

One thing I notices in these discussions is the common refrain of "wanting to do it right" and "wanting to do a female character justice". Outside of not wanting to play a bundle of sexist cliches, I'm not too concerned about the accuracy of the portrayal, or if they're believable. That's not a standard I hold my male PCs to. They're just sketches of people operating in a sketch of a world for the amusement of the people playing a game. I'm not trying to hit upon some great truth. I'm not trying for an Oscar. While I'm constantly surprised and delighted by the flashes of shockingly good characterization and quality insight that occur even in the silliest of my campaigns, we don't find ourselves fretting about 'right'. The game is a space for experimentation and often directionless play inside each other's heads. 

I don't always manage 'respect' - frankly a lot of my characters, PC and NPC, aren't respectable people - but do try to create & play them without judgment. Or maybe with a single judgment: they're just people, for good or ill.


----------



## Celebrim (Nov 9, 2016)

Mallus said:


> I don't think cultural appropriation is a useful idea. Not when used informally, anyway, in places like this. It's a pejorative label for cultural exchange, which is inevitable and not in itself a bad thing. I think this _because I'm the product of cultural assimilation_.




When I say that "cultural appropriation is not a thing", what I don't mean is that some of the problems that get stuffed under the umbrella tag of "cultural appropriation" aren't problems.   I mean that "cultural appropriation" as a tag is inherently not useful, inherently poorly communicates about those problems, inherently creates misconceptions, unfortunately lumps together things which would be better with their own tags, and has fundamental philosophical roots in some really dark places.   It's not by accident that I choose to attack the notion of "authenticity", and I think people that traced back where that came from would be really surprised.  I say it's not a thing, not to dismiss anyone's real problems and experiences, but to dismiss it as a useful description and mental framework for what those problems actually are.  In other words, I dislike it in large part because I think it is sloppy thinking, and I link to the video that I link to because its someone who isn't white (and therefore, for better or worse has the privilege of speaking with moral authority on this topic) that eloquently attacks the sloppy thinking involved in "cultural appropriation", and the racist ideology at the heart of it, while not dismissing the often real problems that get labeled as "cultural appropriation".  

One of the things I always look for in an ideology, is if that condemns something as wrong, it gives a functional description of how a person in the wrong can amend their behavior.  And I really think one of the big problems with "cultural appropriation" as a description, is it isn't coherently proscriptive.  Any attempt to describe what someone guilty of the crime should do, or how one should avoid the crime, invariably runs into wishy-washy thinking, self-contradiction, and most of all appointment of a preferred priesthood who can speak "authentically" on the particular subject.  As I've just tried to show, defining "authenticity" in these matters is probably impossible, and is usually a tautology.  But even worse "authenticity" in a racial context proves to be racist, as it turns out that whether you are authentic or not ends up being determined mostly by whether you agree and submit, and if you have some opinion about race or whatever that doesn't conform with the program, then you - as you've just experienced - get dismissed.   I've seen too many cases of things like people who supposedly have good intentions, promoting "cultural appropriation" as "social justice", claim that the only "authentic" black experience is being a criminal, and dismissing as inauthentic (in far more racist language than that) someone whose skin is dark who has any other experience.  When you do that to people who I count as friends, or count as people I admire and respect, I get a bit defensive about it, which may unfortunately spill out into aggressive rhetorical counter-punching.

Anyway, I think there seems to be consensus that men can play women (and women can play men).  It might be interesting if there was any particular insight beyond the obvious on how to do that well, especially if you feel it isn't usually done well.


----------



## innerdude (Nov 9, 2016)

Roseweave said:


> but the fact is I see 100x amount the focus from self described Free Speech advocates focusing on the right to be hateful/insensitive.




It's only tangentially related to the OP, but I couldn't let this slide by without commenting . . . . 

The very notion of free speech must, by definition, include provisions to protect hateful/insensitive expressions or it is no longer valid.

Taken to its barest level, "cultural appropriation" is based on the idea that "We simply cannot allow people to do Action X or say Speech Y because it's offensive! It's too dangerous and harmful to those who might experience it!"

And in some highly narrow, circumscribed cases, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled this is true. Some forms of speech are, in fact, too dangerous and harmful to be protected under the First Amendment. But the core conception of "cultural appropriation" falls solidly outside the use cases defined by SCOTUS legal precedent. Telling someone, "You can't do or say that because it's hurtful and insensitive to some people's feelings, and I'm going to make you stop!" is by definition an espousal of censorship. Period. 

Don't get me wrong---I am not saying that the pain suffered by those subject to hateful and insensitive speech is not genuine or real. But legally, the U.S. Supreme Court has evaluated the balance of free speech against the pain of those who might suffer at the hands of hateful and insensitive speech, and weighed in favor of free speech. If people get up in arms about "cultural appropriation" infringing on their _right _to be hateful and insensitive, that's because it does. While we might wish that infinitely fewer people availed themselves of their right to engage in hateful and insensitive speech, it doesn't change the fact that it's their right.

Bringing it back to the OP: we might equally wish that men playing female PCs would not avail themselves of their right to roleplay lesbian stripper ninja characters. Doesn't change the fact that it's still their right to do so* (assuming their group consents).





*For the record, I generally have no desire to be hateful or insensitive, nor play lesbian ninja stripper PCs.


----------



## Sunseeker (Nov 10, 2016)

Mallus said:


> Now, back to men playing women characters...
> 
> One thing I notices in these discussions is the common refrain of "wanting to do it right" and "wanting to do a female character justice". Outside of not wanting to play a bundle of sexist cliches, I'm not too concerned about the accuracy of the portrayal, or if they're believable. That's not a standard I hold my male PCs to. They're just sketches of people operating in a sketch of a world for the amusement of the people playing a game. I'm not trying to hit upon some great truth. I'm not trying for an Oscar. While I'm constantly surprised and delighted by the flashes of shockingly good characterization and quality insight that occur even in the silliest of my campaigns, we don't find ourselves fretting about 'right'. The game is a space for experimentation and often directionless play inside each other's heads.
> 
> I don't always manage 'respect' - frankly a lot of my characters, PC and NPC, aren't respectable people - but do try to create & play them without judgment. Or maybe with a single judgment: they're just people, for good or ill.




Well, noone really asks about how men go about playing men (or women women).  We just assume that since you _are_ a man you must know how to be _any_ man.  That doesn't seem right.  Being a human male IRL may or may not give me insight into how to play a male, human or otherwise, in the game world.  It assumes a lot about cultural norms in the game and to be honest, if you did ask me, you'd get the same answer, because my goal is always the same.  Male, female, elf, dwarf, naked mole rat: to do the character I want to play justice.  

But as you say, your games often have directionless play.  I don't enjoy those games.  I like a game where I can achieve good characterization and good direction.


----------



## zymurgy65 (Nov 10, 2016)

Oddly enough, I nearly always play female characters. I think it goes back to my time with a Sega Mega-Drive - the female characters were more about speed, agility and stealth rather than brute strength (e.g. Blaze in Streets of Rage, and Shadow in Eternal Champions), which suited my playing style. That (and years of watching Xena: Warrior Princess!) means I favour female over male characters.

Also, playing another gender is more of a challenge. In our Firefly campaign, I play Kaylee. As a 50-something guy with depression and OCD, I find playing a perky, optimistic 20-year-old quite therapeutic, as well as being great fun!

Likewise, in a Descent: Journeys in the Dark campaign in 2014, I played the wildlander Jain Fairwood. I had so much fun in that role that when 5th Ed. D&D came out, I re-created her as a ranger. Interestingly, all four members of our recently reformed party are now female, although I'm the only male player.


----------



## Gentlegamer (Nov 11, 2016)

By the way, when you play a woman, be sure to roll the random check to see if your character is menstruating.


----------



## Roseweave (Nov 11, 2016)

shidaku said:


> Well, noone really asks about how men go about playing men (or women women).  We just assume that since you _are_ a man you must know how to be _any_ man.  That doesn't seem right.  Being a human male IRL may or may not give me insight into how to play a male, human or otherwise, in the game world.  It assumes a lot about cultural norms in the game and to be honest, if you did ask me, you'd get the same answer, because my goal is always the same.  Male, female, elf, dwarf, naked mole rat: to do the character I want to play justice.
> 
> But as you say, your games often have directionless play.  I don't enjoy those games.  I like a game where I can achieve good characterization and good direction.




It's hard to explain but I know that being trans at least there's certain things only trans people will ever really get. That's not to say that great trans characters can't be and haven't been written by cis people, but there'll always be a layer of abstraction there so when you're dealing with something like a PC that's a bit more intimate than a character in a book it can be difficult. OOI the character I'm playing is "non-white" and something of a refugee and will be treated like a foreigner in the next campaign, which isn't something I've exactly experienced(I am of "mixed heritage" technically, being of Catholic & Protestant origin though, which was a bit more of a thing in the 90s).


----------



## Sunseeker (Nov 11, 2016)

Roseweave said:


> It's hard to explain but I know that being trans at least there's certain things only trans people will ever really get. That's not to say that great trans characters can't be and haven't been written by cis people, but there'll always be a layer of abstraction there so when you're dealing with something like a PC that's a bit more intimate than a character in a book it can be difficult. OOI the character I'm playing is "non-white" and something of a refugee and will be treated like a foreigner in the next campaign, which isn't something I've exactly experienced(I am of "mixed heritage" technically, being of Catholic & Protestant origin though, which was a bit more of a thing in the 90s).




Sure, and personally I probably wouldn't play a trans person, I don't know very many (I know like, 3), and I'm not real well-learned on it, I would also question if it was something that would _add_ to the game for me.  I don't usually play people of color (being quite possibly the whitest person I know) for largely the same reason: I don't know it well enough to make it a meaningful addition to the game.

Oh, and to add: everyone fits _some_ stereotypes, so while I try to avoid _completely_ stereotypical behaviour I try to throw in a couple tics here and there.  Take one of your table players: she's a painter/exterior repair person, she owns her own painting/siding biz, often shows up in paint-stained t-shirts and jeans but sometimes she shows up in a corset and heels.  Why?  Because she likes to.


----------



## MechaPilot (Nov 12, 2016)

Gentlegamer said:


> By the way, when you play a woman, be sure to roll the random check to see if your character is menstruating.




Do you roll periodically to see if your character is flatulent or needs to defecate or urinate?  Rolling for simple bodily functions sounds like a level of minutia tracking that I wouldn't care for either as a DM or a player (I already don't track my players' characters' ammunition usage).  If you don't roll for calls of nature, then why would you roll for menstruation?

Also, rolling for menstruation makes no sense.  If one were going to track it, then just going with an "X number of days between cycles" is far more realistic with no real rise in complexity over using a die roll (it would literally be just as easy as checking off boxes when tracking ammunition).


----------



## Roseweave (Nov 12, 2016)

shidaku said:


> Sure, and personally I probably wouldn't play a trans person, I don't know very many (I know like, 3), and I'm not real well-learned on it, I would also question if it was something that would _add_ to the game for me.  I don't usually play people of color (being quite possibly the whitest person I know) for largely the same reason: I don't know it well enough to make it a meaningful addition to the game.
> 
> Oh, and to add: everyone fits _some_ stereotypes, so while I try to avoid _completely_ stereotypical behaviour I try to throw in a couple tics here and there.  Take one of your table players: she's a painter/exterior repair person, she owns her own painting/siding biz, often shows up in paint-stained t-shirts and jeans but sometimes she shows up in a corset and heels.  Why?  Because she likes to.



 like i said playing a trans character with a high bluff score lets me have them drop their voice for disguises  I'm playing an "outsider" character too so it's just another thing that goes with the theme.


----------



## Sunseeker (Nov 12, 2016)

MechaPilot said:


> Do you roll periodically to see if your character is flatulent or needs to defecate or urinate?  Rolling for simple bodily functions sounds like a level of minutia tracking that I wouldn't care for either as a DM or a player (I already don't track my players' characters' ammunition usage).  If you don't roll for calls of nature, then why would you roll for menstruation?
> 
> Also, rolling for menstruation makes no sense.  If one were going to track it, then just going with an "X number of days between cycles" is far more realistic with no real rise in complexity over using a die roll (it would literally be just as easy as checking off boxes when tracking ammunition).




Agreed, having players roll for menstruation is really nothing more than a "HAHA GOTCHA!" for female characters so that men can make inappropriate jokes about a natural body function.  Not to mention, reproduction has different timescales for different races.  Attempting to track and analyze that sort of stuff is better suited for a sexually-themed game where there _intent_​ of the game is to deal with sexual stuff.


----------



## Roseweave (Nov 12, 2016)

combining the last 2 posts, trans women don't menstruate, lol.

though we still go through fluctuations, OOI - our body is wired to compensate even with a steady supply of estrogen.


----------



## mythago (Nov 12, 2016)

Gentlegamer said:


> By the way, when you play a woman, be sure to roll the random check to see if your character is menstruating.




Why?


----------



## Celebrim (Nov 12, 2016)

mythago said:


> Why?




I'm pretty sure he's making an obscure joke.


----------



## MechaPilot (Nov 12, 2016)

Celebrim said:


> I'm pretty sure he's making an obscure joke.




You appear to have more faith in people than I do.


----------



## Gentlegamer (Nov 15, 2016)

Celebrim said:


> I'm pretty sure he's making an obscure joke.




https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bP3GYdrW450&feature=youtu.be&t=8m53s


----------



## Celebrim (Nov 15, 2016)

MechaPilot said:


> You appear to have more faith in people than I do.




I have zero faith in people.  What I have is a +8 bonus on Sense Motive checks.


----------



## Lylandra (Nov 15, 2016)

shidaku said:


> Agreed, having players roll for menstruation is really nothing more than a "HAHA GOTCHA!" for female characters so that men can make inappropriate jokes about a natural body function.  Not to mention, reproduction has different timescales for different races.  Attempting to track and analyze that sort of stuff is better suited for a sexually-themed game where there _intent_​ of the game is to deal with sexual stuff.




HAHA, i've never ever seen anyone do that. I've played a character who was really afraid of pregnancy (her mother and grandmother died in childbirth) and she did mention feeling uncomfortable when it was "that time of the month", but I agree that imparting such bodily functions should be up to the player, not the GM. Also, my first step as a GM in a more mature campaign would be to ask whether sexually active PCs have thought about using "protection herbs" in order to prevent alimony charges or pregnancy 
(and yes, my players tend to be very careful, especially those who like to romance a lot)

More on topic, I've rarely seen players playing a different gender, although I don't have any problem with it as long as the player is not doing it "for the lulz" or in order to gain favours (some GMs are prone to letting female PCs seduce NPC far more easily than male ones). Not considering my NPCs, I've played two male PCs so far (a stereotypical knight and a sorcerer/monk) and I had a much harder time connecting with them, even if I really enjoyed playing them. NPC are far easier for me.


----------



## Gentlegamer (Nov 15, 2016)

shidaku said:


> Attempting to track and analyze that sort of stuff is better suited for a sexually-themed game where there _intent_​ of the game is to deal with sexual stuff.




The same goes for all this nonsensical 'gender identity' stuff.


----------



## Sunseeker (Nov 15, 2016)

Lylandra said:


> HAHA, i've never ever seen anyone do that. I've played a character who was really afraid of pregnancy (her mother and grandmother died in childbirth) and she did mention feeling uncomfortable when it was "that time of the month", but I agree that imparting such bodily functions should be up to the player, not the GM. Also, my first step as a GM in a more mature campaign would be to ask whether sexually active PCs have thought about using "protection herbs" in order to prevent alimony charges or pregnancy
> (and yes, my players tend to be very careful, especially those who like to romance a lot)



The group I'm in one younger player made a bunch of really obnoxious pussy jokes earlier on since I played a female weretiger.  I told him my character considered these comments to be in character and was tired of it, and if she heard them again she'd gut him.  I don't hear pussy jokes anymore.


----------



## Sunseeker (Nov 15, 2016)

Gentlegamer said:


> The same goes for all this nonsensical 'gender identity' stuff.




I don't have a response that won't violate the forum rules.  So I cannot respond to you further.


----------



## kalil (Nov 15, 2016)

If female PCs roll for menstruation cycles male PCs roll for man flue.


----------



## MechaPilot (Nov 15, 2016)

Gentlegamer said:


> The same goes for all this nonsensical 'gender identity' stuff.




Tell a character whose gender just got shifted by a magic item that gender identity is nonsense.


----------



## Gentlegamer (Nov 15, 2016)

MechaPilot said:


> Tell a character whose gender just got shifted by a magic item that gender identity is nonsense.




As long as you acknowledge that it's make believe.


----------



## Roseweave (Nov 15, 2016)

Why on earth is this not against the rules, but any retort to it is? 

No, sorry, it's transphobic. I'm transgender and if this is protected speech it's deeply alienating to anyone like me. You're not putting up an argument here. You just know you can that be a dick to trans people and get away with it. It's just flat out bullying.


----------



## the Jester (Nov 15, 2016)

Gentlegamer said:


> The same goes for all this nonsensical 'gender identity' stuff.




I'm not quite sure what this means- whether you're casting doubt on the existence of nonbinary gender identities, whether you don't think they should be allowed as part of a character, or whether you think it just doesn't matter to the game. To which I'll point out that it might matter a great deal to the pc in question and offer lots of roleplaying opportunities.


----------



## Roseweave (Nov 16, 2016)

it's also canon in 5E lol


----------



## MechaPilot (Nov 16, 2016)

Gentlegamer said:


> As long as you acknowledge that it's make believe.




Magic items are make believe.  However, science is actually uncovering the likely biological basis for gender identity.  And, even if you don't accept that gender identity is a real biological thing, you at the very least must recognize that it is a real psychological thing, regardless of whether you think it's a mental illness (as some incorrectly do).


----------



## Roseweave (Nov 16, 2016)

If we're honest about it Gender in general is pretty "make believe". The idea that babies should be dressed in blue or pink, or be ascribed certain stereotypes. That is definitely make believe. The idea that people will identify with certain archetypes over another, when we insist those archetypes exist, is not. It's a thing. You can't say that only trans identities are invalid when the whole concept of Gender isn't exactly a tangible thing.


----------



## Istbor (Nov 16, 2016)

I am actually trying my hand at my first Female character (Having done a lot of this sort of RP for NPCs already).

Not because I wanted to get outside my bubble or anything, but because I thought it fit best with some of the random personality traits and background particulars.  Plus I fell in love with the exotic look of the far traveler from Sossal in the SCAG. 

Vega is her name. A half-elf Bladesinger.  Playing with some alternate and houseruled stuff, so she has a character flaw of abrasive.  She is inquisitive however and while pretty blunt she is still somewhat friendly, especially to the party members that she trusts.  Outsiders is where this abrasive attitude comes mostly into play.  She is also a devout follower of Mystra, and brushes off the subject of other Gods as playthings or servants of her Mistress. That does put her at odds often with the Dwarven Cleric in the party. 

So far she has been a lot of fun.  I am just trying to think of ways to expand and make her grow.  I would be open to any thoughts on this as well. 

Sadly, I am not good at a more effeminate voice, so she is currently stuck with my dumb one.


----------



## Roseweave (Nov 17, 2016)

Don't worry about the voice too much tbh. People are used to it from GMs doing opposite gender voices.

Of course I can switch gendered voices pretty easy


----------



## Lylandra (Nov 17, 2016)

Roseweave said:


> Don't worry about the voice too much tbh. People are used to it from GMs doing opposite gender voices.
> 
> Of course I can switch gendered voices pretty easy




Depends on the GM, but I like to switch voices and accents a lot. Especially when my players are talking to more than one NPC at a time. 

For the rest, as I said, it depends on the maturity level of your group. I'm lucky to play with my husband and a friend of 10+ years, so we can and do tackle difficult themes in our campaigns. Playing an opposite gender is by far an easier feat compared to playing, for example, fanatic twin oracles of Asmodeus in a believeable way. Or discussing systems of government where one character is a aristocratist (and noble) while the other is a theocracist and the third one favours a meritocratic monarchy. Or having a character deal with pregnancy. 

In my opinion, roleplaying something that isn't you (or is even contrary to your beliefs) can help you understand and elaborate different points of view and interest. If you are open enough to "embrace" that point of view and start arguing from it. For example, my current (albeit new) character is an Eladrin woman hailing from a matriarchic, reclusive enclave that hasn't had a lot of contact with the outside world for 500 years. And while she is kind of a "progressive youth" who thinks the current matriarchy is neither good for men nor women, she still sees the "new" world around her in a biased way. She's more accepting when it comes to female authority, doesn't question arranged relationships, is estranged by jealousy and monogamy and still has to adapt to the idea that a "father" should have any say on his child's education (the concept of fatherhood doesn't exist in her home culture). So yes, she is slightly sexist without wanting to be so.


----------



## Celebrim (Nov 17, 2016)

shintashi said:


> It's not all roses and sunshine either. Sometimes it leads to intentionally awkward scenarios. Sometimes the scenarios aren't intentionally awkward for the player or DM, but cause problems with other players. You get pedophiles. You get homosexual erotic fantasies being played out. You get two players of the same sex, or opposite sex, voicing out scenes inappropriate for children. You get scenarios where people feel like they are being punished (girdles of fem/masc) or exploited. You are producing a conflict of power distance and sexism, of scenarios involving rape and abortion. Basically, you are asking for problems.




I agree, but would like to once again emphasize that pretty much all of that can be avoided if you stick to a strictly PG table rule (or maybe PG-13 if everyone knows each other well and are comfortable with it).  I tend to be of the opinion that most of what we consider "inappropriate for children" are probably inappropriate as a voyeuristic activity period, and what ought to be considered "adult themes" are things like marriage, pregnancy, parenthood and things that are the common, challenging part of being an "grown up".   That is to say, in modern parlance, a game with adult themes has PC's that are #adulting, where as what passes for "adult themes" is really usually middle school aged voyeurism and fantasy about the newly discovered horizons rather than anything like a mature treatment.   We typically recognize that only when its as blatant as something like F.A.T.A.L. (don't look that up if you don't already know), but I think it's actually pretty universally true regardless of the presentation.

If your group can't handle adult themes like adults, or doesn't want to handle adult themes because they want to keep their leisure activities light hearted fantasies not burdened by too much intellectuality, then this only stronger suggests keeping the game PG and avoiding shining a mirror on anything that might be occult, involve body horror, involve torture, and so forth.   All of that can be assumed to go on in the background, just don't shine your light too brightly on it.  Suggestion often is more powerful than graphic description anyway.

And if your group can handle adult themes like adults, I think they'll demonstrate that by respecting boundaries and treating subject matter that is difficult with dignity.


----------



## Silver Moon (Nov 18, 2016)

While most of my playing characters are male, I have played two female characters.  One started as an NPC in a long module that I DM'ed and became romantically involved with the party's leader.  She was such a good character that I decided to continue her as a PC when I wasn't the DM.   Later on we started a spin-off game with lower level characters, so I took the previously mentioned female PC's NPC teenage daughter and turned her into a PC as well.


----------



## GrahamWills (Nov 21, 2016)

shintashi said:


> playing opposite sex characters is inherently problematic  ...
> 
> It's not all roses and sunshine either. Sometimes it leads to intentionally awkward scenarios. Sometimes the scenarios aren't intentionally awkward for the player or DM, but cause problems with other players. You get pedophiles. You get homosexual erotic fantasies being played out. You get two players of the same sex, or opposite sex, voicing out scenes inappropriate for children. You get scenarios where people feel like they are being punished (girdles of fem/masc) or exploited. You are producing a conflict of power distance and sexism, of scenarios involving rape and abortion. Basically, you are asking for problems.




This has nothing to do with the topic at hand -- the discussion is about men playing women, not about inappropriate sex gaming. Frankly, my Venn diagram of overlap between the two is empty. In my experience (home groups and a LOT of con D&D gaming), inappropriate sex-related behavior has been pretty much always guys playing guys. 

Not saying it doesn't happen, but your post suggests that "men playing women" leads to "scenarios involving rape and abortion". I really, really don't find that to be the case.


----------



## Sunseeker (Nov 22, 2016)

shintashi said:


> playing opposite sex characters is inherently problematic. Not because the player can't do it, or because the DM can't do it, but because there will be times where either can't. There will be times where other players can't handle it. There will be times where the player can handle it, and the DM the character is created under is OK with it, but then new DMs at new Tables, or new players at either table will not enjoy it.



So what?  Those sort of things happen in all sorts of games, for all sorts of reasons.  Sometimes players can't take the violence of a game, sometimes players can't take the political elements.  If someone is having difficulty handing some event at a table, _whatever_ that event may be then there should be an open dialogue and the table should reassess if whatever the triggering event was was inappropriate, or if the _reaction_ to the triggering event was inappropriate.  It's a two way street.  While we all agree to cooperatively game with each other, we cannot all constantly be walking on eggshells around other players, not knowing what unknown future event might cause another person to react badly.



> It's not all roses and sunshine either. Sometimes it leads to intentionally awkward scenarios. Sometimes the scenarios aren't intentionally awkward for the player or DM, but cause problems with other players. You get pedophiles. You get homosexual erotic fantasies being played out. You get two players of the same sex, or opposite sex, voicing out scenes inappropriate for children. You get scenarios where people feel like they are being punished (girdles of fem/masc) or exploited. You are producing a conflict of power distance and sexism, of scenarios involving rape and abortion. Basically, you are asking for problems.



I don't care if my next statement is against the forum rules: this is some of the most sexist, homophobic garbage I've read in this forum in a _long_ time, probably since I argued with that one guy about how using magic to make a woman more susceptible to your charms is _rape_ and he disagreed.  The connections made in this paragraph, going straight from "it's not all roses and sunshine" to *pedophilla* and then into *homoerotic fantasy* is the exact sort of neo-con garbage that is pushed by religious conservatives in the USA to paint homosexuals as horrible, sinful, pedophiles just waiting to sexually exploit others.  



> I suppose you could say similar things about some classes. Like an exorcist, or a witch, or a warlock. Or a half demon, werewolf, or vampire. Like, are you supposed to espouse cannibalism now? Are you expected to dress gothy and drink blood? Shuold you start wearing pentagrams and try not to get kicked out of your parents house or worry about crosses being burned on your front lawn?



This followup paragraph only further demonstrates my point.  Here is your train of thought, literally here's a breakdown:
Man playing woman>pedophilia>homoerotic fantasy> sexual exploitation>witchcraft>drinking human blood>cross burning.

I mean seriously WHAT THE HECK?



> Now, if you live in the 21st century, where anything goes, most of this won't even come up. The sexism issue will be right up there with belching rhymes and fart jokes. But there are places you can take it that are not cool. I highly recommend against it if you see potential for problems. Intersexed and Transgender people should avoid this scenario if the audience isn't completely comfortable with it, as it can lead to outing, ostracism, and bullying. In some cases those negatives can lead to physical violence. It's only funny and melodramatic until someone punches you in the face and slanders you. Then the police get involved. Then it's not funny or cool anymore.



And here's the capstone.  Intersex, Transgender and all non-cis people need to sit down, shut up, be quiet, get back in the closet and not make "other people uncomfortable".  Because _you_ assaulting someone who makes you uncomfortable is totally _their fault_.


----------



## ccs (Nov 22, 2016)

shintashi said:


> playing opposite sex characters is inherently problematic. Not because the player can't do it, or because the DM can't do it, but because there will be times where either can't. There will be times where other players can't handle it. There will be times where the player can handle it, and the DM the character is created under is OK with it, but then new DMs at new Tables, or new players at either table will not enjoy it.




Yeah, once upon a time we were 10-12 also & thought it was weird to play a _girl._...
And then we realized that it was part of the game.  Afterall, one of us had to be the DM - and sometimes that meant playing the part of the barmaid, princess, queen, the evil witch, Lolth, the really dangerous Drow, the Fates, Hera, etc. 
We also learned that it men playing the role of women wasn't at all uncommon in theatre in ages past.
And once we shrugged off this childish reaction _because someone had to DM_?  We realized we could do the same as players.




shintashi said:


> It's not all roses and sunshine either. Sometimes it leads to intentionally awkward scenarios. Sometimes the scenarios aren't intentionally awkward for the player or DM, but cause problems with other players. You get pedophiles. You get homosexual erotic fantasies being played out. You get two players of the same sex, or opposite sex, voicing out scenes inappropriate for children. You get scenarios where people feel like they are being punished (girdles of fem/masc) or exploited. You are producing a conflict of power distance and sexism, of scenarios involving rape and abortion. Basically, you are asking for problems.




I don't think we're playing the same game.




shintashi said:


> I suppose you could say similar things about some classes. Like an exorcist, or a witch, or a warlock. Or a half demon, werewolf, or vampire. Like, are you supposed to espouse cannibalism now? Are you expected to dress gothy and drink blood? Shuold you start wearing pentagrams and try not to get kicked out of your parents house or worry about crosses being burned on your front lawn?




You miss the early 80s don't you?




shintashi said:


> Now, *if *you live in the 21st century, where anything goes, most of this won't even come up. The sexism issue will be right up there with belching rhymes and fart jokes.




*IF *I live in the 21st century?  I get a choice?




shintashi said:


> But there are places you can take it that are not cool. I highly recommend against it if you see potential for problems. Intersexed and Transgender people should avoid this scenario if the audience isn't completely comfortable with it, as it can lead to outing, ostracism, and bullying. In some cases those negatives can lead to physical violence. It's only funny and melodramatic until someone punches you in the face and slanders you. Then the police get involved. Then it's not funny or cool anymore.




I have a question.  What do you propose those Intersexed, Transgenders, etc play as?
{apologies if neccecary, I don't know how to phrase this}
THEY don't see themselves as whatever they started as....
Others don't see them as what they think they are....
So tell us wise one, what gender of character should they be making?


----------



## Roseweave (Nov 22, 2016)

Trans people should only play agender Shardminds

My gender:


----------



## Mad_Jack (Nov 24, 2016)

The trick to voicing a character of opposite sex or of some wildly different nationality or species is not to try to change the physical characteristics of your voice, but your speech patterns and grammar. It's about mimicking the way the character would speak, and not what they sound like. While you might adjust the volume of your voice, or the force behind it, the real difference comes in the words and phrases the character uses, how often they pause for breath, whether they speak fast or slow, the way they change their manner of speaking depending on who they're addressing, etc...
That's largely based on sociology and psychology rather than physiology, and thus those characteristics make much more difference than whether it's said in a baritone, a soprano or a falsetto...

 On the original topic, I generally choose the sex/gender/race/whatever of the character based on whatever makes the concept and/or backstory of the character more _interesting_ or fun to play - whether that may be visually, psychologically or narratively.
 It's much less about my personal preferences than what best serves the character. However, I also tend not to be interested in playing minor variations on a recurring theme, so, because how important that detail may be to the character concept varies wildly from instance to instance. it somewhat diminishes the statistical relevance of how often I play either sex.


----------



## TalenOfTheKeep (Nov 27, 2016)

I've been playing for over 30 years, and the only thing I refuse to play is a human male (I play one everyday IRL).  I've played many female characters over the years, and it's like any other role play.  Give them a personality, and a rational behind the personality.

Two of my more memorable characters are both human female.  One was raised on the streets, (a rough and tumble rogue) who spoke like someone who grew up in taverns, surrounded by sailors, and had the added problem of attracting unwanted male attention.  Her sister was raised in a cloister, rarely saw the outside world, and learned everything she knew from books.

How does this translate into role play?  Simple.  
Sister 1 would frequently hint to a guard of a good time if they just followed her, only to end up getting ambushed.  Sister 1 did not like paying for meals or nights at an inn.  Her solution was to find a patron, get a free dinner and drinks, and follow him up to his room for the night.  Other than disease checks on occasion (started by our GM once he got on to her not paying for anything), we left what happened in the room off table unless it was part of the plot (she got kidnapped once, and the party had to go rescue her).  

Sister 2 is more of the quiet fountain of knowledge.  She is shy and has poor inter-personal skills (think of Sheldon from the Big Bang Theory).  She was female, but other than men hitting on her, it never really became relevant.

Like any other characters, make your players come up with a reason for the personality.  Male or Female makes about as much difference between Dwarf and Elf.  The character has a story to tell, just like everyone else.


----------



## Man in the Funny Hat (Nov 28, 2016)

"I think of a man, then take away reason and accountability." - Melvin Udall, _As Good As It Gets_

Actually, I've played a great number of female characters - PC's and obviously NPC's.  I would assume that back when I was a teenager my female characters were two-dimensional and prone to adolescent male fantasy stereotype.  I would HOPE that these days they have more than such superficial, even offensive depiction, but personalities of genuine interest and depth.

I seem to recall Michael Caine once talking in an interview about various roles he'd taken where he had no idea what the character's job was really like or what life was really like for them.  He noted that Method actors, for example, would research parts and as much as possible try to actually LIVE the life of a character they were playing, whereas he felt that as an actor the tool for him to use was his own imagination - he didn't need to LIVE a role to understand it, his job was more like pretending he knew.  I take that kind of attitude when it comes to portraying female characters.  I have an imagination and I can FAKE IT, so to speak.

  If I'm putting forth a reasonable effort to portray a character with enough dimension and believability to fit that characters place in the game that's good enough.  I don't have to be a woman to properly play a female character without surrendering my Man Card or offending women - at least no more than any woman would have playing a male character.


----------



## ad_hoc (Nov 28, 2016)

The inherent problem here is that people are seeing gender as a character trait.

A problem in storytelling, particularly Hollywood, is that anything that makes a character not a cis-het white man is seen as a character trait.

This is because the assumed default is cis-het white man. Any divergence is seen as a deliberate choice by the author. Then they need to answer why, and the why is that it is part of the story.

The following is my favourite way to explain privilege.

A white man is asked to briefly describe what he is: He says, "I'm a person."
A white woman is asked to briefly describe what she is: She says, "I'm a woman."
A black woman is asked to briefly describe what she is: She says, "I'm a black woman."
Their sexuality was not described at all, so the assumption placed on all of them is that they are cis-het.

I play in a mixed gender group, though I don't ask the players what their genders are. It's not important to the game (though I do know their pronouns). Characters in the game are a variety of genders. Gender has never taken the spotlight or been an issue.


----------



## Lylandra (Nov 29, 2016)

Yep, I agree that there are far too few female/other race/X roles out there in Hollywood movies, especially in more action-oriented flicks (that doesn't necessarily mean action movies, but also thrillers, some dramas, superhero movies etc.). TV series are improving in this regard and I for one can see the impact that this increased diversity has on the stories that are being told. Problem is that every writer starts with him- or herself as a starting point and if you happen to be a white man, you will include more "people like you" in your script. I've witnessed it myself when I was writing my first adventures or novel ideas... almost all NPC were white (or alien) women. Ouch. 

So because I am aware of this rule, I sometimes switch genders of NPC quite liberally. Unless there is an ingame reason why this or that group should be all-male or all-female, i try out shuffling them around until I have a roughly 40-60 to 60-40 representation. For example, if all "key NPC" a PC group could interact with in a major hub are male without reason, I include some women. I also try to include other races if everyone you can speak to for major plot points is human, but your town is, say, 30% elves/70% humans, unless there is an intended power imbalance between races. 
(For those familiar with WotBS which I am currently DMing, I did switch Headmaster Simeon to a fierce, dark-skinned Simeonne because the who's who in Seaquen felt so strangely male after the previous adventures. I also made some nobles change race and gender in Dassen to match its past and present people. My players tend to stick to my female NPC anyway for reasons I don't fully understand yet and they especially love Simeonne, so I guess I did do it right for them^^) 

In many cases, gender is irrelevant except for getting a general feel of who a PC/NPC is. But in my experience, it totally depends on your group. I've played female PCs who were more or less wary around people of the opposite gender (or a certain race/gender combo). I've had PCs who were romanciers (but hetero) and who tried to flirt with every other female NPC. I've had pregnant NPC and single mothers/fathers with small children and young girls who had a total crush on the "sooooo handsome" elven PC. In some cases, your setting even says that gender is not irrelevant. Most famous example are the Drow, but any society with an imbalance of power or different societal roles for different genders will impact your choice.

Not every group does include this kind of social interaction or does design societies like that and, as I said previously, whether or not you could or should include romance and mature themes like having a personal responsibility or having a traumatic past or whether your affairs can have consequences is totally up to your group.


----------



## pemerton (Nov 30, 2016)

Hawk Diesel said:


> Has anyone here had an experience of playing someone of a different gender identity? What was it like and how did you play that character?



I don't play that often, and mostly play male PCs. The last time I remember playing a woman PC was a long time ago now at a convention, in a CoC freeform. The basic framing for the three-session game was that my character's son had been taken to hell by his father (my (ex-)partner). The other PCs were my daughter, her boyfriend, and my son's friends.

The issue of family drama/trauma was pretty central to the game. As it happened, at the time I had a couple of very close former school friends (sisters) whose father had recently abandoned the family. I was close to their mother also, and I used my knowledge of her experiences and responses as a basic template/guideline for playing my character. It seemed to work fine (I got the tournament prize for that particular PC).

In my regular games I've had a few male players over the years play female PCs. It's never been a big deal. Sex tends not to be a very big part of our games, so being a woman rather than a man is mostly just an issue of flavour/characterisation.

In the BW game that I'm currently running, one of the PCs is a woman played by a man. On a couple of occasions, there have been situations where women NPCs are threatened by male NPCs (not necessarily sexually, but BW if a fairly gritty game with a somewhat S&S tone, and so the undertones of gendered violence have been present). On those occasions the player has played his PC - who is a sort-of necromancer/assassin - as feeling particularly protective of the women NPCs. In the context of our RPGing, this is quite a heavy foregrounding of PC gender.


----------



## Anon Adderlan (Dec 28, 2016)

Any character concept which violates the boundaries of any player at the table should be changed. Full stop. Our experiences are irrelevant to your discomfort or concerns.

That said, in my experience men playing women and visa versa has never been a problem, but I've yet to encounter anyone playing a sexual abuse survivor who hates all men, so can't help you there. I have however encountered plenty of actual sexual abuse survivors, and while they all deal with it differently, most of the time some level of (hyper/hypo)sexualization is a part of it, which I'm almost certain would be difficult to express without coming off as creepy. Think Annie Reilly from Copper.

Regardless there'll always be some level of stereotyping to account for in an RPG, and people naturally tend to overemphasize the biggest differences from themselves when playing a character.



Roseweave said:


> What's interesting is the character I currently play is sort of a mix of exaggerated feminine tropes - she's a Courtesan, Diva-ish type but also Disney Princess-ish. Basically she's more of a drag queen than I ever could be, lol. It'd be pretty hard and potentially insulting for a (cis het) guy to play a character like that. Some of the lewd jokes(while I try to keep it to a minimum most of the time, as it's not that sort of game) would be particularly jarring for someone who's not a woman




For some this would be offensive regardless the source. I mean Ru Paul can't even get away with it anymore. And how would you know if a person playing such a character was a cis het guy anyway?



Roseweave said:


> as a brief stint as a camgirl and having experienced some pretty nasty slutshaming as a result, along with engaging in a lot of SW activism, I am in a place where certain words are a bit more mine to reclaim.




I was in special-ed, consistently bullied, and called 'retard' up until College. Guess I've got the same legitimacy to take back that word as you do yours.

Wonder how well that'll work out.



Roseweave said:


> I suppose you could get into the territory of "Is drag offensive?"(personally I don't regard it as such, depending, a lot of young white trans people don't know their history that well & there isn't always a clear separation)




#Drag seeks to violate cultural norms while #Trans seek to become them. They're diametrically opposed despite the superficial similaritiy. So #Drag is 'offensive' by its very nature.



Roseweave said:


> I actually know lesbian sex workers,




So you have black friends lesbian acquaintances. Guess that means you're qualified to speak on their behalf.



Roseweave said:


> I'm white, though I am Irish so until somewhat recently we were affected by such things[/B]. I was adopted by a Romani family, so I can see the harm "gypsy" stereotypes cause(even if the Roma themselves aren't always aware of them). I'm a convert to Islam, and I can see how the use of Islamic & Middle Eastern imagery and concepts can be harmful. Most of the people I talk to are non white(Despite living in Ireland, not even sure how that happened!), and a large number are activists educated on their cause.




I guess that means you're qualified to speak for all those groups too, especially the #Roma who are apparently too dumb to see when certain representations are harmful without their great Irish savior.

Here's a thought: Perhaps it's not that they don't see them, but that they simply don't _agree_.



Roseweave said:


> As someone who played a busty eleven sex worker fairy/bard/mage it does sound like he was trying to be edgy/clever, lol.




And this entitlement even extends to fictional minorities, lol.



Roseweave said:


> How would I feel if _someone else_ played a trans character? If it's a character that's non-binary example - it's kind of normal for Fey/Elves to have nonspecific genders for example - it probably wouldn't be a big deal. But a character that had been through a specific analogue of transition might be difficult




Then you should feel free to share your concerns and ask that player not to do it.



Roseweave said:


> Has anyone had this around a table? The 5E PHB encourages it, technically.




No it doesn't. #Monsterhearts encourages it, D&D 5e just suggests that if you wanted to play such a character there's nothing stopping you.



Roseweave said:


> Somehow something that's a beloved part of someone's culture has become a safer part of someone else's.




At least you got this right, and why only the 'dominant' culture can engage in it. There's even parallels when it comes to shaming transwomen for wearing dresses while celebrating cis het guys for doing so. Thing is the dominant culture isn't always white, and the problem isn't white people wearing bindis and dreads, but minorities being punished for it. So the solution isn't to start persecuting white people, but to _stop persecuting minorities_.



Roseweave said:


> The idea that "all cultures borrowed from each other throughout history" actually hides a very brutal history that white westerners want others to forget - a history of imperialism, colonialism, mass starvation and killing.




If you're involved in imperialism, colonialism, mass starvation, or genocide, then by definition you're trying to wipe out 'inferior' cultures, not borrow from them. German Nazi's did not adopt Jewish culture. White colonials did not adopt Native American culture. British imperialists did not adopt Indian culture. Spanish Conquistadors did not adopt Aztec culture.

On the other hand Modern America and The English Language adopt culture almost indiscriminately and have been insanely successful because of it.



Roseweave said:


> Do you know what happens when people say stuff like this? Most of the time, instead of arguing the case, PoC especially those from heavily exoticised cultures, back off. They don't come here. They don't reveal their ethnicity. They may even feel like not being involved in the hobby.




Are you a PoC? No? Then let them speak for themselves and don't dismiss them when they do...



Roseweave said:


> and not just that one black guy on youtube who holds views that are convenient for people that don't much care about what most subaltern peoples have to say.




...like here. And you did so by dismissing him _as a person_ based solely on his race and how 'convenient' he was for other people (and wasn't for you). Now if he came to this site and read what you wrote about him do you think he'd feel welcomed?

I on the other hand like to raise minority voices up, so here's what Some Black Guy, nappy headed black girl, SomethingSomething Love, Aba & Preach,  Ross Mckelvy and a couple of Brilliant Idiots have to say about dreads and cultural appropriation.



Roseweave said:


> the difference between appropriation and exchange, as with the subject of "A man plays a woman" is _respect._




So who determines what is respectful? Because obviously it isn't 'that one black guy'.



Roseweave said:


> I don't see anyone calling for censorship here. This always comes up with anti-social justice arguments. Cultural practices can be outlawed or made "undesirable" by way of employment discrimination etc.




You don't need to call for it because it's being 'outlawed' in exactly the same manner. Just ask a teacher, cop, actor, artist, or anyone else SJWs have sought to get _fired_ or made _unemployable_ for what they said.



Roseweave said:


> There's honestly very little I find worse in the world that people trying to take an argument designed to protect the dignity and the marginalised and trying to turn it around saying "NO U R THE REAL RACISTS LOL". I'm really not sure you understand all that much about "race and ethnicity" but I'm too exhausted to get into it.




There's honestly very little I find worse in the world than hypocrites who use their 'oppressed' status to judge and speak for others, except for maybe those who also disengage when their conclusions and legitimacy are challenged.



Hawk Diesel said:


> I don't much want to bring things into a game that I have to deal with at work that could trigger me from my own vicarious trauma.




Fair enough, but are you also saying you can claim someone _else's_ trauma as your own vicariously? Because if true then boy howdy do I have a lot of baggage.



Hawk Diesel said:


> Socially awkward people can learn social skills and cooperation through a structured game.




But how often does that honestly translate to social ability _outside_ the game? Because I've seen people with _good_ social skills get _worse_ after playing an RPG more often than the contrary.



Hawk Diesel said:


> I also don't think one can argue that D&D didn't start out with cultural or sex biases, as *the first few editions* outlined very specific mechanical penalties for playing a female.




Chainmail didn't. D&D didn't. AD&D limited female characters to 18/50 STR max. 3rd Ed didn't. 4th Ed didn't. 5th Ed certainly doesn't.

Perhaps you meant _one_.



Hawk Diesel said:


> As for cultural appropriation, it most certainly is a thing. This is something I won't even try to argue. If you deny it, then there just isn't enough common ground between us to even have a discussion.




When conclusions are challenged, disengage! And whatever you do, don't try and find out if the problem is simply different definitions for 'cultural appropriation'.



Hawk Diesel said:


> As for the issue of respect you mentioned, if you felt attacked or disrespected, that was not my intention.






Celebrim said:


> I went back and tried to figure out why in the world you thought I was troubled by you disrespecting me, and I couldn't.






Celebrim said:


> I care little if someone attacks or disrespects me in the conventional sense you mean it.*  I generally don't get upset about that sort of thing.  The sort of things likely to provoke me to aggressive commentary have more to with what I see as intellectual laziness and unconsidered words.




This is exactly the kind of misunderstanding you get when dealing with someone who priortizes feelings over facts, which may be no less legitimate, but the difference is still a leading cause of conflict on the internet. Me? I'm a facts guy. Because taking the internet too seriously is a leading cause of conflict in the real world.



Celebrim said:


> One of the things I always look for in an ideology, is if that condemns something as wrong, it gives a functional description of how a person in the wrong can amend their behavior.  And I really think one of the big problems with "cultural appropriation" as a description, is it isn't coherently proscriptive.  Any attempt to describe what someone guilty of the crime should do, or how one should avoid the crime, invariably runs into wishy-washy thinking, self-contradiction, and most of all appointment of a preferred priesthood who can speak "authentically" on the particular subject.




That's because the point is to make an example out of someone, not correct their behavior. It's an ideology of fear and intimidation, where nothing short of lifetime ostracization, unemployment, and public shaming is enough.



Celebrim said:


> "authenticity" in a racial context proves to be racist,




Indeed, I'd love to see someone make claims about what makes someone an authentic PoC or woman without it being intensely marginalizing.



Teflon Billy said:


> Anyone looking to work out personal issues regarding basically anything outside of silver-age alien smashing needed to look elsewhere. My table is not therapy for you, neither is it an opportunity to live out abhorrent power fantasies.




The minute you treat an RPG session as therapy is the minute you make the GM _accountable_ for being a therapist, your fellow players patients there for the same reasons you are, and any character choices as evidence of 'issues'.

On the other hand, being able to call myself a therapist would lend an air of legitimacy to my statements 



aramis erak said:


> I've seen males play females done poorly far more often than well.
> 
> The ones who do so poorly seldom get a second chance.




And how many of them ended up coming out as transwomen? Because I've seen this happen before, and the 'quality' of roleplay was never a significant indicator.



Dualazi said:


> D&D should never be a ‘safe space’, at least by default, because the very concept is intellectual poison.




Contrary to popular belief a safe space is not a padded cell full of hypoallergenic kittens, only an environment where you are free from the demands and judgements of others.

#SpotTheIrony



pdzoch said:


> I've have seen many players play opposite genders in my game and not once have I seen a player use the gender to deliberately play the gender poorly, but neither have I seen them play the gender with any *genuine depth*.




How would you know?



pdzoch said:


> That all said, the depth of background to form *genuine role play* motivations is a problem for any player, regardless of gender.  All player project a portion of themselves (to make the character relevant to them) as well as their own understanding of a characteristic they wish to use to shape the character.  But unless the player have *genuine experience* (real personal experience) that matches the background of the character, it is contrived.




You sure use the word 'genuine' alot. Makes me think you don't actually have a coherent argument backing your conclusions. Does this mean a transwoman is not a 'genuine' woman?



shidaku said:


> If someone is having difficulty handing some event at a table, _whatever_ that event may be then there should be an open dialogue and the table should reassess if whatever the triggering event was was inappropriate, *or if the reaction to the triggering event was inappropriate*.




This comes dangerously close to demanding someone justify their feelings and experience based on someone else's, or worse dismissing them entirely. So what exactly do you consider 'inappropriate' reactions?



Gentlegamer said:


> By the way, when you play a woman, be sure to roll the random check to see if your character is menstruating.




And finally Gentlegamer, aptly demonstrating why this is still even an issue.


----------



## pdzoch (Dec 28, 2016)

Edited -- response not needed


----------



## Roseweave (Dec 28, 2016)

Wow that was the biggest load of crap.

Sorry, I've been too exhausted from arguing with actual Nazis lately to care about the people "SJWs" get fired. Or deal with your attempts to turn the argument around on me being a white saviour while dismissing minority concerns yourself, as if you actually care about tropes like that. Nope nope nope. In a more ideal environment I wouldn't need to speak up on behalf of others. But this isn't it. And I'm pretty tired of people who don't experience the same level of daily subjugation presenting themselves as "facts" not emotions - it's pretty easy to feel that way when you're not affected by it first hand. But that means your "facts" aren't being observed from a place of experience either. 

Your assessment of Drag vs. Trans is also wrong. Trans people merely by existing are subversive. And there isn't always a clear distinction. Just to be clear, while you're so concerned about transphobes, racists, aggressive misogynists and fascists getting fired, people like me struggle to find or hold down jobs. The intersection of employment rates for being trans, autistic, and wearing a headscarf is stupid low. So again, don't feel bad for bullies on this one. If anything it makes it all the more fitting a punishment. 

Let's be clear - "ostracization, unemployment, and public shaming" is exactly what people like me experience for EXISTING. The vast majority of bullies get away with their . Heck you can be a fascist bully and be elected to positions of power. Trying to make me feel bad for the people that either hate me or try to undermine attempts at progress towards a world that doesn't hate me isn't going to work. It seems like your "fact" book is missing a lot of statistics on how crap things can be for trans people. 



> There's honestly very little I find worse in the world than hypocrites who use their 'oppressed' status to judge and speak for others, except for maybe those who also disengage when their conclusions and legitimacy are challenged.




As opposed to people who talk down to minorities and tell them their own issues? Or try and garner sympathies for their oppressors? Yeah no thanks.

Re: the Roma, I'm not saying I know better than them and you're pulling a disingenous trick then. Because I know people like you love to use examples of minorities that "disagree" to fuel your arguments ven when the majority might not be on their side. The fact is that the Roma are very focused on survival and quite cut off from the mainstream. For that reason, they're often not fully aware of certain aspects of the "gypsy" stereotypes, but almost all of them suffer from some form of it and recognise it to some degree. Those who are more integrated - the ones I learn my politics/activism from - will recognise these tropes as negative and call them out. My problem is that there will always be members of groups that DON'T - as you say "disagree" and you will hold these up as somehow more "valid" because they are more convenient to you(which is exactly what you goddamn do posting those youtube videos), without unpacking why someone might answer that to begin with. 

You call me a white saviour but your whole argument seems to be about centering you and your experiences and perspectives. The worst thing is - I do agree that Cultural Appropriation discussions do requires more nuance. But what you're proposing isn't nuance, it's just finding people who already agree with you and holding them up as examples of model minorities. Meanwhile, all the others who say otherwise are ignored. But who cares about Black/Trans feelings right? When we have normative cis white men & friends with their "facts" to sort us all out and set us straight because aside from a precious few enlightened that agree with the mainline cis white guy position, we obviously need guidance. Thank goodness we're not listening to some "white saviour" instead! Oh, wait...


----------



## Sunseeker (Dec 28, 2016)

Anon Adderlan said:


> This comes dangerously close to demanding someone justify their feelings and experience based on someone else's, or worse dismissing them entirely. So what exactly do you consider 'inappropriate' reactions?




Like punching someone.  Spitting in their face.  Screaming and yelling.  The group is under no obligation to accept and tolerate someone being offended, especially if that someone is demanding that others change for them and is unable or unwilling to provide any reason for their offended-ness.


----------



## Morrus (Dec 28, 2016)

When terms like "SJW" are being thrown around, this thread is clearly no longer about gaming. As always, keep politics out of it, please, along with general discussion of social ills or your perceptions thereof. There are plenty of places on the web (i.e.: everywhere else) you can discuss those those things.


----------



## Zhaleskra (Dec 28, 2016)

I'm physically male, and growing up, most friends my age were female. This made my brain a lot more female than male, though not so far as being transgender. Stereotypical men have been put off when I'm not into male stereotype hobbies.

I've played female characters for cliche reasons, and also sometimes because certain roles just seem like they'd appeal more to a woman in a fantasy setting.

Also, I've had players play female characters, and yes, some of them did play off the stereotypes. The "lesbian stripper ninja" has never crossed any table I've been at, but I've heard the rumors.


----------



## darkrose50 (Dec 28, 2016)

These conversations always irk me.

We play as all sorts of things that we are not.

I am not a dwarf, I am not an elf, I am not a wizard, and I am not someone who fights ing dragons.

Women should not be considered stranger than a ing dwarf or elf fighting a flying fire breathing dinosaur while armed with fairy tale magical powers and a pointed metal stick!

Q: is a woman a person?
A: Yes.
Q: Then what is your ing problem?

-----

Edit: Looking at more of the thread it is not playing another sex that is the problem for some of you, it is other bat-guano-crazy-pants stuff that is the problem.  

This is like saying that Chrismass trees should be banned because people put candles ON FIRE on them.  Just ban the flaming candles on the Chrismass trees, not the god forsaken trees themselves!


----------



## Morrus (Dec 28, 2016)

darkrose50 said:


> These conversations always irk me.
> 
> We play as all sorts of things that we are not.
> 
> ...




Watch the profanity, please.


----------



## darkrose50 (Dec 28, 2016)

Do the smiley faces not show up with an optional setting?


----------



## darkrose50 (Dec 28, 2016)

Roseweave said:


> If we're honest about it Gender in general is pretty "make believe". The idea that babies should be dressed in blue or pink, or be ascribed certain stereotypes. That is definitely make believe. The idea that people will identify with certain archetypes over another, when we insist those archetypes exist, is not. It's a thing. You can't say that only trans identities are invalid when the whole concept of Gender isn't exactly a tangible thing.





Flower names used to be male names.


----------



## darkrose50 (Dec 28, 2016)

This should sum up the whole answer to this silly question.

"I've always considered women to be people." 
-George R.R. Martin

http://www.upworthy.com/why-it-shouldnt-be-difficult-to-write-believable-female-characters


----------



## Eltab (Dec 28, 2016)

darkrose50 said:


> Flower names used to be male names.



I feel sorry for the boys who had to learn to spell 'Chrysanthemum' or "Rhododendron' and put that at the top of every page of homework they wrote / turned in.

Come to think of it, I feel sorry for any girl whose parents did that to them, too.


----------



## Sunseeker (Dec 28, 2016)

Eltab said:


> I feel sorry for the boys who had to learn to spell 'Chrysanthemum' or "Rhododendron' and put that at the top of every page of homework they wrote / turned in.
> 
> Come to think of it, I feel sorry for any girl whose parents did that to them, too.




I feel sorry for anyone just having to learn it in biology!  But I think they meant _common_ flower names as opposed to scientific ones.  Like "Rose" and such.


----------



## Celebrim (Dec 28, 2016)

darkrose50 said:


> This should sum up the whole answer to this silly question.
> 
> "I've always considered women to be people."
> -George R.R. Martin
> ...




I wish it was that simple.  I basically agree with GRR Martin here, in that I create female characters in exactly the same way I create male characters.  I have a thread nearby where I'm creating NPCs for a Jann/Arabian setting, and for every purpose but physical description I could switch the gender of any character and feel I had basically the same character with the same utility to the setting.

But I have a female friend who would not be satisfied by that, and who I know would reject that as good characterization on those very grounds.  She believes that if a character's gender could be altered without altering the character, that it's poor characterization.  She would consider virtually all of my characters inherently masculine.  It wouldn't offend her per se, that my female characters aren't to her believably feminine, but it would mean that she considers them rather poor characters.

For example, I felt that Jyn from Rogue One was a vastly better character than Rey from The Force Awakens in every manner.  She was more believable; she was more complex; she had an actual narrative and emotional arc; she was competent but not ludicrously so; she was allowed to fail at times, and she had believable and sympathetic motivations.  She was also IMO much wiser than Rey and had much better and more quotable lines. 

However, my female friend felt that Jyn was a poor character because in no fashion did she feel feminine to her.  If Jyn were male, basically nothing Jyn did would be different.  On the other hand, characters like Ripley, are generally universally received as both admirable and memorable 'kick butt' heroines, because you can't change Ripley's gender without changing the character and the meaning of the story.  

This sets two standards, and meeting both is very hard.  Some people demand characters have qualities that make them uniquely gendered or have a uniquely gendered perspective.  Others will feel that if you do this, it's sexist precisely because of that.  While, at the same time, the first group will feel its demeaning or sexist if you don't.

Note that these two standards can be seriously at odds even if the author is of the same gender as the critic.  My friend would probably find Isabella Swan a gendered and thus respectful character.  While others would feel that her gender issues are too overt and stereotypical.

I try to set the bar much lower in terms of what is 'good enough'.


----------



## aramis erak (Dec 28, 2016)

darkrose50 said:


> These conversations always irk me.
> 
> We play as all sorts of things that we are not.
> 
> ...




The differences between elves and dwarves and men and halflings in most settings is less than the difference between male and female in any given group of them. Gender isn't just about presence/absence of enlarged breasts, a vagina, a uterus, or a phallus... if it were, (1) there wouldn't be the social unrest over LGBTQ issues (on both sides), and (2) there wouldn't be the clear gender roles that are both fairly uniform and near universal amongst primitive human societies. Oh, (3) and there wouldn't be the clear gender roles in other primates, either.

The difference between male elf, male dwarf, and male human is size and shape, and preferred foods, at least in tolkien, and the elves tend to be a bit effeminate. Just a bit. Oh, and lifespan.

The difference between female elf, female dwarf, and female human is again, size and shape, and (for elves) lifespan. 

In Tolkien, Brooks, Weiss, Hickman, and even in many other authors works, the differences in behavior by gender are bigger than the differences by subspecies.

Me, I'm uncomfortable playing across the gender line - not because I can't do it, but because I can readily envisage what it means to be a male dwarf, who's prospects for love are likely to be "Give up on female dwarves, because there aren't enough to go around"... but I can't readily envisage what it means to be female. It's less of a role change.

Likewise, I know what it feels like to hunt and to fight - I can extrapolte from there easier to dragons than I can to "seductress"...


----------



## dropbear8mybaby (Dec 28, 2016)

This is an actual topic of concern for people? Really?

This is insane. In fact, I'm going to make a female character and play it solely due to this thread in the hope that I piss someone off who doesn't like switched genders in gaming.

Then I'm going to play a transgender character.

And then I'm going to play an intersex character.

And then one who doesn't have any genitals at all because it's a fantasy game and people being concerned about gender in a fantasy game are being ridiculous.


----------



## darkrose50 (Dec 28, 2016)

aramis erak said:


> The differences between elves and dwarves and men and halflings in most settings is less than the difference between male and female in any given group of them. Gender isn't just about presence/absence of enlarged breasts, a vagina, a uterus, or a phallus... if it were, (1) there wouldn't be the social unrest over LGBTQ issues (on both sides), and (2) there wouldn't be the clear gender roles that are both fairly uniform and near universal amongst primitive human societies. Oh, (3) and there wouldn't be the clear gender roles in other primates, either.
> 
> The difference between male elf, male dwarf, and male human is size and shape, and preferred foods, at least in tolkien, and the elves tend to be a bit effeminate. Just a bit. Oh, and lifespan.
> 
> ...




Choosing not to play a type of character is your choice.

Telling someone that they cannot play a girl character when they are a guy is stupid as hell.

I am a man, married to a woman, and I am as far into liking women as one can get.  I can play a woman without any problems, and I think nothing of it.


----------



## darkrose50 (Dec 28, 2016)

Celebrim said:


> I wish it was that simple.  I basically agree with GRR Martin here, in that I create female characters in exactly the same way I create male characters.  I have a thread nearby where I'm creating NPCs for a Jann/Arabian setting, and for every purpose but physical description I could switch the gender of any character and feel I had basically the same character with the same utility to the setting.
> 
> But I have a female friend who would not be satisfied by that, and who I know would reject that as good characterization on those very grounds.  She believes that if a character's gender could be altered without altering the character, that it's poor characterization.  She would consider virtually all of my characters inherently masculine.  It wouldn't offend her per se, that my female characters aren't to her believably feminine, but it would mean that she considers them rather poor characters.
> 
> ...




Men can understand women and women can understand men.  I am surrounded by women.  Not all men are masculine, and not all women are feminine.  There are women with Myers Briggs Personality types of INTJ (the extreme logical thinker scientist and engineer stereotype), and there are men on the opposite stereotypical woman feeling stereotype (teachers and nurses).  

Women TEND seek to communicate problems with others while troubleshooting a problem.  The primary goal is to retain a stable social role within the group.  Good for long term problem-solving (like identifying that we need to keep people happy in case we need them later).

Men TEND to seek to fix the problem.  The primary goal is to fix the problem, and retaining a stable social role is not part of this problem solving.  Good for short term problem solving (like who needs to be punched, consequences be damned).

Both methods of problem solving are valid, useful, evolutionary advantageous, and/or god given.

Yet one can be a female with the  INTJ personality type (stereotypical male scientist or engineer).

In fact among those with Asperger's Syndrome (~1/200 men, and ~1/900 women) this is common to have the INTJ (likely 50/100 folks with Asperger's Syndrome are INTJ, and in the general population ~1/100 INTJs are women, ~2/100 INTJs are men) engineer and mad scientist personality type.  Women with the mad scientist INTJ personality type, are quite often non-feminine, and are quite definitely women (many of them I consider to be quite attractive, as in holy cow, how can you be this seriously attractive . . . if I were single, then I would totally want to date these genius scientist girls as they have brains and beauty).


----------



## Celebrim (Dec 29, 2016)

darkrose50 said:


> Men can understand women and women can understand men.  I am surrounded by women.  Not all men are masculine, and not all women are feminine.  There are women with Myers Briggs Personality types of INTJ (the extreme logical thinker scientist and engineer stereotype), and there are men on the opposite stereotypical woman feeling stereotype (teachers and nurses).
> 
> Women TEND seek to communicate problems with others while troubleshooting a problem.  The primary goal is to retain a stable social role within the group.  Good for long term problem-solving (like identifying that we need to keep people happy in case we need them later).
> 
> ...




Ahh..... good.  You understand after all.

But, you must admit, that's not _simple_, and most people want it to be simple.


----------



## Sunseeker (Dec 29, 2016)

Celebrim said:


> This sets two standards, and meeting both is very hard.  Some people demand characters have qualities that make them uniquely gendered or have a uniquely gendered perspective.  Others will feel that if you do this, it's sexist precisely because of that.  While, at the same time, the first group will feel its demeaning or sexist if you don't.
> 
> Note that these two standards can be seriously at odds even if the author is of the same gender as the critic.  My friend would probably find Isabella Swan a gendered and thus respectful character.  While others would feel that her gender issues are too overt and stereotypical.
> 
> I try to set the bar much lower in terms of what is 'good enough'.




Yes, as the old axiom goes: you can't make everyone happy all the time.  The best bet is always to make _your_ character to _your_ liking and take other people's input with a grain of salt.


----------



## Lanefan (Dec 30, 2016)

dropbear8mybaby said:


> This is an actual topic of concern for people? Really?



Unfortunately, yes.  I think this might be the third or fourth thread on this exact topic I've seen over the years in here, and the subject has come up in numerous other threads dealing with broader questions around what DMs will or will not allow at their tables.

In fairness, however, I'd say by and large this is the best such thread I've seen in terms of people actually explaining their viewpoints without being (too) snarky.



> This is insane.



Ayup. 

Lanefan


----------



## Dualazi (Dec 30, 2016)

[MENTION=6806914]Roseweave[/MENTION] Glad to see you're open about your hypocrisy, at least. "An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind." The "bullies" being harassed are often innocent of any of their supposed crimes (such as the latest controversy around tweets remembering Carrie Fisher), and even if they were bigots, attempting to bring your own brand of vigilante justice to them through social media and the like only proves that you don't want equality, just your turn as the oppressor so you can meet out your preferred brand of 'justice'.

Incidentally, without getting into the accuracy of what he posted, Anon Adderlan is correct in that facts always supersede feelings in importance. Your lived experiences mean nothing. Neither do mine. Not unless they're being presented as a comprehensive (and preferably peer-reviewed) study. This is why you erase the experiences of the people he has linked to supporting his position, and vice-versa, because you're just slinging anecdotes at each other fruitlessly.

I would lastly like to agree with dropbear that this is insane. Not because of the question itself per se, but because it so aptly highlights the poisonous depths that identity politics has dominated discussions in recent years. Play what you want, you don't need a doctorate in sociology to vindicate your decisions.


----------



## Roseweave (Dec 30, 2016)

Dualazi said:


> @_*Roseweave*_ Glad to see you're open about your hypocrisy, at least. "An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind." The "bullies" being harassed are often innocent of any of their supposed crimes (such as the latest controversy around tweets remembering Carrie Fisher), and even if they were bigots, attempting to bring your own brand of vigilante justice to them through social media and the like only proves that you don't want equality, just your turn as the oppressor so you can meet out your preferred brand of 'justice'.
> 
> Incidentally, without getting into the accuracy of what he posted, Anon Adderlan is correct in that facts always supersede feelings in importance. Your lived experiences mean nothing. Neither do mine. Not unless they're being presented as a comprehensive (and preferably peer-reviewed) study. This is why you erase the experiences of the people he has linked to supporting his position, and vice-versa, because you're just slinging anecdotes at each other fruitlessly.
> 
> I would lastly like to agree with dropbear that this is insane. Not because of the question itself per se, but because it so aptly highlights the poisonous depths that identity politics has dominated discussions in recent years. Play what you want, you don't need a doctorate in sociology to vindicate your decisions.




It never ceases to amaze and worry me how completely divorced some people are from the power dynamics that exist in this world and seem to think everything goes every which way(at least in so far as it is convenient for them), and also the sheer lengths people will go to to uphold this willful ignorance. The concept of "an eye for an eye" like this exists because people don't value our lives, and/or are so insulated from our experiences that they consider minor infractions on the same scale as real world violence. When you have actual "vigilantes" threatening to shoot transgender women who dare to go to the bathroom, for example, it's not a concern, but if someone dares tell someone to check their privilege then it's some sort of atrocity.

This is part of a wider effort to muscle minorities away from spaces like this so you don't have to listen to their concerns. Only people who's narratives fit with yours are acceptable, because god forbid you care about the lives and experiences of those different to you. Trust me when you say you can't imagine what someone like me would have to do to truly extract "an eye for an eye" in recompense with the atrocities committed against people like me. You now have a situation where people have consciously pushed for the rights and protections for people like me to be removed, so more of us can be thrown onto the streets, subjugated, and killed. For there to be "an eye for an eye", we'd have to gain access to that level of institutional power and legitimately restrict the freedoms of cisgender white men and make them live in fear of rejection, unemployment, poverty and violence in a way few of them would have previously. 

And yet, we're the ones that have to live with constant accusations of being "oversensitive", often from deeply sheltered and self-focused individuals that are utterly indifferent to the suffering of others that don't look like them.

Please don't accuse me of silencing people's experiences when your whole position revolves around coercing the voices of people like me into silence, of making people like me uncomfortable speaking up in places like this. I'm not going to pussyfoot around this - people who continue to obsess over the dangers of "identity politics" when people are living in fear of the rise of fascism across the western world are not good people, and we need to call that out. You know little about our struggles, you don't care about us, our lives are worth almost nothing to you and that needs to change.

You speak from a position of relative aggression and moral offence. But this doesn't affect your day to day life. It does mine. There is definitely an effort to obscure this fact among the "Anti-SJW"/anti-feminist masses and it needs to stop.


----------



## Mallus (Dec 30, 2016)

To nudge this back towards the topic...

So my current PC, Black Swann LaVey is in bad straights. Which probably shouldn't surprise me since I rolled up an actress to explore an extra-planar mega-dungeon. Therefore, I'm going to throw together another female PC to replace her, just in case.

Why another female character? Because I came up with a great name! "Dolores/Dolorous Haze" (and by "came up with" I mean "stole from Nabokov"). I want to try out one of the new paladin oaths, so she'll be a half-drow slave sold to the Church of Lolth and trained as a holy warrior, courtesy of her natural aptitudes & authorial fiat.

Thanks to her mild arachnophobia and rebellious streak, she runs away, takes of the Oath of Treachery, spends some time as a street-thief (multiclass), then coincidentally finds herself in the same mega-dungeon as my current PC. 

I have no idea who she is yet, outside of this rough sketch -- wait, her weapon of choice is a stolen rapier she names "L'il Stabby -- but I hope to find out more, soon (if Swann slips off her mortal coil tonight).


----------



## Roseweave (Dec 30, 2016)

funny since my current character is a Spider Hengeyokai/mini-Aranea lol

Also a Rogueish steeet rat runaway sort, and one of the character influences was Darlene from Mr. Robot who uses the screenname D0loresH4ze.


----------



## Morrus (Dec 30, 2016)

@Roseweave, you were asked to stick to gaming and refrain from real world politics and - specifically, the term "SJW" was identified as an obvious clue. You chose to do none of those three things.  Please do not post in this thread  again. We are serious when we say that politics have no place on this website.


----------



## Lanefan (Dec 30, 2016)

Dualazi said:


> Incidentally, without getting into the accuracy of what he posted, Anon Adderlan is correct in that facts always supersede feelings in importance. Your lived experiences mean nothing. Neither do mine.



Well, yes they do, as those experiences are - in fact - facts.  It's a fact, for example, that I played in a D&D game last night; and while meaningless to you as you weren't involved in any way, my lived experience of playing in that game is still an actual fact and doesn't really need a peer-reviewed study to prove it. 

Now how I *feel* about how that game went or what happened within it is a different question, but likely easy enough to extrapolate from the following fact: my number one character died.  Again.

Which is more important to you?  In fairness probably neither hold any importance to you at all, which I'd fully understand; but relatively speaking I'd guess the facts of the gameplay and the PC death.
Which is more important to me?  The feelings generated by those events.  And, were I to for some reason post that game's story on here, those feelings would doubtless show through.

What I'm getting at (badly, I suspect) is that lived experiences *are* facts, and in many-but-by-no-means-all cases it's not that hard to extrapolate what feelings might result.  As RP-ers we probably do this all the time when using our character backgrounds to justify or explain why our character's personality is what it is.

Lan-"pushing up the daisies"-efan


----------



## Morrus (Dec 30, 2016)

Dualazi said:


> [MENTION=6806914]Roseweave[/MENTION] Glad to see you're open about your hypocrisy, at least. "An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind." The "bullies" being harassed are often innocent of any of their supposed crimes (such as the latest controversy around tweets remembering Carrie Fisher), and even if they were bigots, attempting to bring your own brand of vigilante justice to them through social media and the like only proves that you don't want equality, just your turn as the oppressor so you can meet out your preferred brand of 'justice'.
> 
> Incidentally, without getting into the accuracy of what he posted, Anon Adderlan is correct in that facts always supersede feelings in importance. Your lived experiences mean nothing. Neither do mine. Not unless they're being presented as a comprehensive (and preferably peer-reviewed) study. This is why you erase the experiences of the people he has linked to supporting his position, and vice-versa, because you're just slinging anecdotes at each other fruitlessly.
> 
> I would lastly like to agree with dropbear that this is insane. Not because of the question itself per se, but because it so aptly highlights the poisonous depths that identity politics has dominated discussions in recent years. Play what you want, you don't need a doctorate in sociology to vindicate your decisions.




Also please do not post in this thread again. The term "identity politics" is a big flag that you're talking about politics instead of gaming.


Sent from my iPhone using EN World mobile app


----------



## Ogre Mage (Jan 1, 2017)

shidaku said:


> The group I'm in one younger player made a bunch of really obnoxious pussy jokes earlier on since I played a female weretiger.  I told him my character considered these comments to be in character and was tired of it, and if she heard them again she'd gut him.  I don't hear pussy jokes anymore.




I play a hot-tempered, vengeful female gunslinger in a weird west setting.  We had captured a pair of murdering train robbers and were trying to intimidate them into telling us where the rest of the money was hidden.  I said tell us where the money is or I would blow their balls off.  One of them suggested I should get down on my knees then.  Yeah, that was the wrong thing to say. I pointed my revolver at his groin and fired and my PC is a crack shot.  He falls on the ground screaming.  The rest of my posse (all male PCs) stare at me in horror, one is so horrified his PC runs away because he can't watch anymore (lol).  The partner of the castrated train robber immediately starts blubbering please don't do that to me and tells us where the money is hidden.  Problem solved!

The GM running this scenario and portraying the murdering train robbers was female.  And I was a man playing a female gunslinger.


----------



## ArchfiendBobbie (Jan 1, 2017)

I make a simple character profile and then ask myself, "what's the first mental image that crops up with this?" And that's how I describe my character.

Well, except for the times it's a character race totally unplayable in the game. Then I have to go for the second image. A cyborg ferret is unlikely to be accepted in DnD.

Other than that, I play them as people according to their personality make-up. Occasionally toss in a major quirk that gets mentioned a lot if it fits them. Otherwise... people are people.


----------

