The Role Playing Public Radio Forums
General Category => RPGs => : Cthuluzord July 09, 2013, 08:11:13 PM
-
I'm going to explain the specifics about how I came to the question I'm going to ask. There will be SPOILERS for some Hebanon Games releases. If neither sound appealing, you can just skip to the bolded question at the bottom. I'd appreciate hearing some other peoples' thoughts on this.
So I've been thinking about this awhile, but it kind of came to a head today. Tim wrote a very nice summary of his running Lover in the Ice for his group. They called it "disturbing" (yay! it worked!), but then made a joke about him being a freak for backing it on Kickstarter (not so yay). I've also gotten reviews of the scenario like this one: http://diehardgamefan.com/2012/11/22/tabletop-review-lover-in-the-ice-no-security/
And while I think the review above is overall positive, I have to admit I was a little disappointed that DieHard GameFAN didn't care for the scenario as much as the others in the No Security pack merely because of the sex angle. I'm not angry, and I get that the topic is hard to touch on even briefly for some gamers, but
Add all this with my writing today. I'm working on the monster for The Wives of March. The description sort of ran away from me and reached the level of short story, but I just rolled with it. Anyway, I was plugging along for awhile before I realized I was kind of squicking myself out. I took a break, Sara snuck in an read it, and now she's giving me a look that says I-just-realized-our-7-year-relationship-is-an-elaborate-ruse-to-torture-and-kill-me.
Part of me feels like this is a good thing: if it can't scare me, what chance does it have with an audience? But I'm also doubting myself. I think its probably a good thing that a MONSTER is scary and disturbing, but I don't want to make people too uncomfortable at the table. I mean, when I came up with the Amante, it literally never occurred to me that people would be made so squicky by it. I actually worried it would be boring because the whole conflation-of-sex-and-death theme would be too trite to be scary. But I've heard suggestions that it actually makes people too uncomfortable to play. I don't want that at all.
But on the flip side, I also want to call bullshit. I think I write games that are clearly R rated, and that you shouldn't teach your kids how to play RPG's with Cthulhu-esque horror games. That is to say, people know what they are getting into with Hebanon Games.
I also think that sex, reproduction, and many other factors in life beyond violence are scary as hell, and I don't know what horror gains by avoiding those topics -- so long as negative actions within those contexts are treated as realistically terrifying rather than exploitative. So long as it serves the narrative at the same time, horror is supposed to transgress and make people uncomfortable, isn't it? If monsters can't have babies, but it's totally cool if they eat your face or suck your soul into a non-Euclidian hell dimension, isn't that just to serving the weird American disconnect between violence vs. EVERYTHING ELSE the culture finds offensive?
To use an example, Skip Mill's house gets mentioned a lot in playthroughs I've been told about. Players get grossed out by the porn covered walls. Good -- that's the point -- but hardly anyone mentions his mother's chewed remains in the bedroom or the blind, taloned monkey-thing crawling around the attic. Why not?
How is the Amante lifecycle any more disturbing than man-sized puppets that bait you into being prey for an alien god (Bryson Springs), obese carrion eaters festering beneath your feet (Red Tower), or inescapable hell-grubs that can manifest from another dimension at any time and without explanation (Fall Without End)? Is it creepy because some people that aren't infected with hell parasites decorate that way in the real world? Is the sex angle somehow intrinsically too exploitive or sexist? But if so, how specifically? My monsters are equal opportunity harbingers of destruction, and I don't think I for one second fetishized how fun an Amante attack was (or at least I hope no one read it that way...that's genuinely scary to think about).
Despite the urges used to drive them towards new victims, Seeders are NOT trying to rape anyone; they are trying to murder them, though I will admit that the primal fear of violation is something I was trying consciously to tap into. The Amante is NOT doing anything that could be called sex; the fact that's it has an animal definition of its action that doesn't intersect with the human perception is where the scary comes from. I mean, I was consciously going for an Alien vibe, but the scariness is what people remember about that brilliant film, whereas I worry I'm falling short and just landing in "pervy." Obviously, this wasn't my intention, and it's something I'd like to prevent in the future whether its due to the subject matter or just my inability to pull it off.
So yeah, here's the question that all this brings up: How far is TOO far in a Horror Game? What can't be done in a story at the table, and is it the same list for Horror films or books? I think I know when something transforms from terrifying to tasteless, but my definition differs from others. Clearly, that difference of opinion is always going to exist, but what really worries me is that I don't have any kind of vocabulary for addressing that limit, nor do I know what I should do when that border comes into view. Should I attack it? Steer clear? What makes for a better story and game in the horror genre?
You folks are cool, and the extra cool ones are familar with my work :D. Plus, many on the forums are more widely read in the genre than I. I'd like to hear what everyone has to say.
-
Honestly, from my experience with Horror film and whatnot, really it seems all bets are off. I mean there are multi-million dollar film franchises about a man teaching morality lessons to people by sticking them in horrible death trap ridden locations and situations, and then there is always "Human Centipede" and even the "Hellraiser" series. As long as the horrific content suits the narrative, there's not a whole lot that cant be used to horrify or disturb people. people still go to these films and pay full price. As for the horror in gaming, the same rules apply in my opinion, as long as the audience/players know what there walking into, horror should NOT have a lot of limitations. (Really if they are horrified/disgusted when playing Call of Cthulhu or other such horror games, and complain, why are they playing that game? What did they expect?)
When I first listened to "Lover in the Ice" I knew I was listening to a horror game and so the scenes at Skip Mill's house among others, while creepy, weren't offensively so. It just helped to give the visceral horror feel. And in that respect it succeeds to contribute to the whole. Unfortunately in the case of horror, some folks are always going to call people out on there work because they don't like something about it, or they think it's gone to far.
If you are actually stepping back and thinking "Wow, that's CREEPY." in context to making something horror, your doing a good job. It means you r scaring/creeping yourself out and isn't that the goal?
Simply put, no, I don't think you've gone too far. (own personal opinion)
-
As someone who's been into horror since before his teenage years, I honestly don't think there's a line to cross in horror where it becomes too much.
Modern horror (mainly films) forgets this a lot, but the reason I (and I hope many others) sit down to watch a horror flick is because I want to be scared and/or very unsettled. I want to squirm around where I'm sitting and shoot my hands up to my face, covering part of it in some self-comforting way. I don't want to see gallons of blood or jump scares without any effort.
The first statement also goes for horror games, imo. If I sit down to play a horror session, I invite any feelings of discomfort and horror. I think the feeling of something being too much stems from when someone is trying to creep you out just for the sake of creeping you out. Like a madman stomping on a foetus just to show how crazy he is. You just have to keep the horror befitting of the narrative.
I personally loved the porno-revelation in Skip's house, because to me as a listener (as it would as a player) it alerted me that shit is fucked up, whether due to this guy being crazy or having been driven crazy. It contributed greatly to the scenario's creepy vibe.
If you're creating something horrifying, just go all in. I'm glad to say that I've greatly enjoyed all of No Security thus far and will certainly continue to do so. Can't wait to see the madness you cook up for "The Wives of March". Keep up the good work.
-
I'm not sure there are limits when it comes to horror because it's going beyond the bounds of safety, whether that be psychological, emotional or physical, that makes horror scary. That's my personal belief but RPGs have to cater to the lowest common denominator in the groups that are playing them. If I declare 'I've got no limits, free reign, baby, gimmie your best shot!' and another player says 'I don't like anything over PG-13' then we're playing something PG-13 or we're not playing. That isn't a bad thing, it's just part of the social contract that we have with other gamers when we congregate in our filthy nerd-hovels; No one is there to feel uncomfortable. Whether it's sexual content, horrific violence or torture, or even just PVP, it's gotta be respected to have fun.
There is one thing I would like to point out specifically concerning Lover In The Ice. You say this:
Despite the urges used to drive them towards new victims, Seeders are NOT trying to rape anyone; they are trying to murder them, though I will admit that the primal fear of violation is something I was trying consciously to tap into. The Amante is NOT doing anything that could be called sex; the fact that's it has an animal definition of its action that doesn't intersect with the human perception is where the scary comes from. I mean, I was consciously going for an Alien vibe, but the scariness is what people remember about that brilliant film, whereas I worry I'm falling short and just landing in "pervy." Obviously, this wasn't my intention, and it's something I'd like to prevent in the future whether its due to the subject matter or just my inability to pull it off.
This is all well and good but you have to consider what the players are hearing about the Amante before they see it in action. Statues or renderings of some thing that's always described as having a 'giant phallus'. The seeder organ is referred to multiple times (both in the modern scenario and the prequel) as either an actual penis, something akin to a penis, or at least penis-shaped. It has an alien biology, sure, but can you really blame players for only picturing a dick getting rammed down a throat when the thing or one of the infected finally does catch someone?
This is different to Alien in that no one ever references the Facehuggers or their anatomical parts with language that has any sexual connotations. The film certainly does evoke forceful oral rape but it's never described by the characters that way. It's scary because that's where the audiences own imagination goes without having to be explicitly told 'This thing is gonna rape your face'.
I'm not saying that this is necessarily bad at all, I find the scenario to be really cool, but there's a lot of sexual imagery and description used that violates the 'Show, don't tell' rule. I think that's an important thing to keep in mind if you want to continue to write scenarios that touch upon sexual horror while still being largely accessible to a wide audience, even an R-rated one.
-
This is different to Alien in that no one ever references the Facehuggers or their anatomical parts with language that has any sexual connotations. The film certainly does evoke forceful oral rape but it's never described by the characters that way. It's scary because that's where the audiences own imagination goes without having to be explicitly told 'This thing is gonna rape your face'.
That is because it was a movie vs. you know someone describing it. It is regularly referred to as such in some of the books set in the universe. Surrogate Penis is the actual phrase, I believe. Also, I believe they refer to impregnating in the extended release of Aliens. If Lover in the Ice were a movie (I'd kickstart that) you wouldn't have anyone describing it either. It would be a visual experience.
On the question at hand, the line of "what is too far" is personal and it moves. More people have had a traumatic sexual experience vs a cthulu zombie attack or poisonous spiders. It is closer to reality. Sex is just an uncomfortable topic for lots of folks, however that doesn't mean you should shy away from it (maybe not every monster is a sex monster could be a rule of thumb?).
If it isn't a game that a group should run, that is on them. Delivery by the GM and the relationship between the group is not something that you can control.
On the creature itself, I viewed it more of a parasite with a disturbing delivery system vs. a rape sex monsters. I also ate fried chicken right after watching Killer Joe, so my opinion may not be relevant.
-
My current gaming group is actually made up of a majority of female gamers, and based on an early request for boundaries we've instituted a no sexual violence rule, so no matter what Lover in the Ice is not going to be run for my current group. I'm familiar with the scenario and creature so I know what you're getting at, but the mystery means that they could absolutely get the wrong impression or have a traumatic trigger.
It's tough, it's an excellent scenario and scary as hell but different people have problems with different things.
-
I don't have time to write a full thought out response to the question but I ran Lover in the Ice long long ago(based off of your orignial notes), for two seperate groups. Both of which I gave a breif disclaimer about the graphic nature of the scenario.
Both games went well, although they suffered from some serious bouts of player logic(mostly in the first playtest).
Although in the second game one of the players that survived the encounter decided that his character offed himself in the epiloge due to the stress of it all.
He had lost a lot of sanity though.
-
Too far is different for each person. Horror is supposed to be uncomfortable to be effective.
My group, for example, is totally fine with Call of Cthulhu horror games featuring strange illnesses or conventional death, even of their own characters. But when I ran a CthulhuTech game were the players would play characters that were bonded with alien symbiotes I had a player bow out. She stepped out largely due to how bleak the setting was and the level of violence. But she still talks with glee about the time she was stuck on an isolated road in Call of Cthulhu and literally screamed at the table from fear.
I've had my players repeat multiple times that gore is their main limiation. They can deal with dread, crushing monsters, and even conventional death (humans with guns or knives) but over emphasising the spilling of blood or rending of flesh turns them off. They allow me to use it sparingly (to highlight a monster's method of killing or add to a scene) and we have a bond of trust from years of gaming together.
Personally, I was more scared by the jail 'escape' in Bryson Springs than I was in Lover in the Ice.
I say power on through Caleb, attack the horizon with Tommy Gun in hand. What you might do, and I've asked other games to do for their scenarios, is include a sidebox after the scenario description kind of summarizing the goal of the scenario for the storyteller. That way they can judge if the players can take it or not. Putting in a nice, easy to access box makes it easier for storytellers not actively looking for it to find.
-
Somehow just noticed this thread even though Caleb specifically called it out in the other thread. Guess I botched that Enlish roll.
To use an example, Skip Mill's house gets mentioned a lot in playthroughs I've been told about. Players get grossed out by the porn covered walls. Good -- that's the point -- but hardly anyone mentions his mother's chewed remains in the bedroom or the blind, taloned monkey-thing crawling around the attic. Why not?
My own players found that the mother off putting (there was a large discussion about do they even go in the other bedroom or just burn the whole place down) but what really set them off was when they went into skips bedroom and found evidence he had been using parts of the mother in his self abuse. That tripped them out pretty hard core.
How is the Amante lifecycle any more disturbing than man-sized puppets that bait you into being prey for an alien god (Bryson Springs), obese carrion eaters festering beneath your feet (Red Tower), or inescapable hell-grubs that can manifest from another dimension at any time and without explanation (Fall Without End)? Is it creepy because some people that aren't infected with hell parasites decorate that way in the real world? Is the sex angle somehow intrinsically too exploitive or sexist? But if so, how specifically? My monsters are equal opportunity harbingers of destruction, and I don't think I for one second fetishized how fun an Amante attack was (or at least I hope no one read it that way...that's genuinely scary to think about).
As stated in the other thread I think the primary difference is how close the fear strikes to reality of what people fear. It is a conceptual horror vs something that is close to an all to real horror. A puppet that pulls me into space and the hell grubs are far removed from my reality. The nature of the Amanta attacks, while not fetishized at all, is all about personal invasion and dominance in a way that is quite close to peoples real world fears of sexual assault. You are grabbed and a foreign body is forced into you. You don't actually die, at least not yet, but are left damaged both physically and emotionally and are no longer really yourself. It does not get much worse than that.
I do feel that you need to walk a pretty careful line with the sex angle. Yes we are all adults and this is an R rated movie and you should be able to go where you want but as you noted it could easily become exploitative or possibly sexist if not carefully considered.
I actually think Red Tower is going to be pretty disturbing as well.
Despite the urges used to drive them towards new victims, Seeders are NOT trying to rape anyone; they are trying to murder them, though I will admit that the primal fear of violation is something I was trying consciously to tap into. The Amante is NOT doing anything that could be called sex; the fact that's it has an animal definition of its action that doesn't intersect with the human perception is where the scary comes from. I mean, I was consciously going for an Alien vibe, but the scariness is what people remember about that brilliant film, whereas I worry I'm falling short and just landing in "pervy." Obviously, this wasn't my intention, and it's something I'd like to prevent in the future whether its due to the subject matter or just my inability to pull it off.
The seeders when they get to the point of an attack on another person are of course attempting to murder them but the scenario details what happens before that which I feel people are reacting to. Skips cycles of self abuse that eventually reach a point he cannot control so he kills and the players who are suddenly in the middle have to put him down. The girls have a similar cycle as well. They are still basically human yet driven by these terrible desires. That part is horrific. Yes the seeder organ that comes out of their mouth is terrible as well but I find the other parts are what creep me out more.
I don't feel you undershot and landed in the pervy end of the pool although in the hands of the wrong GM and group it really could come off the rails. That is not something you can control in any way but I understand why it might give you some pause or concern.
-
I don't know that I have a good answer for "how far is too far." I only know that I've crossed that line.
My one-time gaming group, a bunch of unrepentant rules lawyers and power gamers once played a few sessions of Vampire the Masquerade. The GM, a regular member of the group, but not a real power gamer wanted to run it. And he gave us the choice: we could play Camarilla vampires or Sabbat.
Well, that was a no brainer. "Sabbat!" we chorused. Because why play a bunch of rule-bound emo-vamps when you could be a bad-ass vampire who thought the masquerade was for pussies? (Disclaimer: this may not accurately mirror how the games were written, but it was how WE interpreted the game world.)
So we created characters. Being who we were, we bend the rules to the breaking point to create the most obscenely powerful vampire characters our GM would allow (which was, frankly, way too powerful). And then the GM made the key mistake of not giving us enough to do. Left to our own devices, we started looking for trouble. Assaulting humans in the open. Holding drag raaces down crowded boulevards, complete with grenades being tossed at our fellow racers. Why? Because we COULD.
And then we started using our powers on people. It should come as no surprise that we had a couple of Tzimisci (or however you spell it) amongst the PCs. And they had flesh and bonecrafting powers. Which we used gleefully, in ever more vicious, horrific ways. It turned into an unspoken competition to see who could come up with the most fiendish, horrific, torturous fate to inflict on some hapless NPC.
It reached the point where we players all looked at one another--and realized just how depraved our characters were acting. And we stopped. Remember, this was a bunch of powergaming rules lawyers who LIVED for the opportunity to think up new and innovative ways to abuse the rules and break the system (any system) and demonstrate our cleverness in doing so. And we stopped, because...we'd managed to horrify OURSELVES. I've never seen that happen before or since. But we'd managed to plumb depths even we couldn't abide.
What took it too far? It wasn't simply a lack of regard for the lives of the NPCs (most hack n slash games involves killing lots of humans or humanoids with little or no concern). I think it was behaving like literal monsters, causing pain and suffering and death for its own sake. But whatever the reason it's an experience I've never forgotten.
-
Hey there, it's been a while since I looked at your work (though I REALLY enjoyed all the games I listened to). I would agree that part of it is that "too far" is different for different groups. My ideal would be to get a bit beyond the comfort level but not so far beyond that they players have no desire. That said, I think that a big part of why people are super uncomfortable with the whole sex angle is a cultural thing. For one thing, at least in the US (which I would imagine a lot of these comments are coming from?), there is much more exposure to graphic violence than sexuality (whether or not it is violent), so players are naturally a bit more desensitized.
My second thought (which I have gone back and forth on whether or not to mention it, but I think it offers some enlightenment), is that it might hit a bit too close to home, especially with the scene of a room covered in pornography. For most gamers, I think they can easily distance themselves from brutal or graphic violence (thinking I would never do that), but when they see something clearly disturbing around a room wallpapered with pornography, it's something intrinsically more private where that line is perhaps a bit more blurred as far as what one would and wouldn't do. So the players see something that is clearly meant to be disturbing (and it is), but what is worse is they aren't necessarily able to distance themselves quite as much (again, perhaps just a thought).
Again, I don't know if that's the case, but at least for this specific case, I think that might be some of what is feeding into it. Whether or not it means it has crossed a line, I don't know, I just suspect that for some people they might have a hard time feeling "distance" between their actions and the horror....
EDIT: I think some of my personal beliefs and modes of thinking might affect my response to this, so if you happen to be really interested or want to chat some more, PM me, and I'll go back through and give a listen/read through some of the stuff you've said again, and compose a much more complete/thought out response. If not though, it's cool and I'll save us both time :P
-
I think an idea of horror going "too far" in tabletop RPGs is difficult to address, specifically because of the biased nature of the experience. Creating horror in a tabletop RPG is an extremely abstracted endeavor: there are no visuals (or if there are, they are limited and static), immersion is easily broken based on the simple fact that the environment can only be described to the players, and it is difficult to establish a sense of threat or fear without quite a bit of leg-work being done to immerse and invest players in their characters.
It's been said before, but horror as a concept falls into and is made up of three areas:terror (the suspense), horror (the shock value/jump scares), and revulsion (torture, gore, etc.). With videogames for example, all three are easy to create. Amnesia creates suspense through bizarre visuals, strange environments, and excellent sound design, creates horror in the interactions with the unbeatable monster, and revulsion through the environment and the player's broadening understanding of the true nature of what is going on -- all of which are rooted in the player seeing and experiencing the game from a first person perspective. Tabletop RPGs simply don't have that.
What they DO have is a massively skewed bias towards working with the horror branch of revulsion. Revulsion of a monster, revulsion towards the idea of a monster, towards something that threatens cultural, religious, or human norms, etc. etc.
The Amante is a perfect example of this. It's a well balanced monster across the three branchs: horrifying in its appearance and actions, terrifying in its ability to create a threat from many different angles (the hidden seeker threat, etc.), and revolting and repulsive in its "sexual" desires and behaviors as compared to human norms. However, because the tabletop setting prevents the audience from completely being scared by its horror qualities, the focus gets shifted towards what the Amante represents: its revulsion qualities.
Skip Mill's home is horrifying (I was probably the one person who always wondered what was up with the body on the bed) and terrifying (the sudden realization that this man who was behaving only slightly oddly was actually hiding such disturbing desires), but the porn and fluid plastered all over his walls is what sticks (forgive the pun.)
A lot of RPG scenarios in general, and Hebanon Games in particular, seem to skew towards this idea of revulsion as the core tenet of horror in tabletop gaming. There's good reason: it's incredibly effective. But the brand of horror that revulsion represents has a much broader experience for the audience, and so opinions and tastes are going to differ.
That said; Lover in the Ice is brilliant. It's well written, it's grounded in all three branches of horror, it is engaging, and it's memorable.
-
Going too far?
When the police arrive at your door...;3
Otherwise, it's another iteration of 'know your audience'
(i've noticed there seem to be 'horror norms' that are different among different cultures -- Americans seem to find violence ok compared to sexual themes, British have an ingrained pessimistic streak and are ok with ambiguity, violating social order is horror in Japan, taking Mohammad's image is horror to some people...)
There is always the possibility of consequences as well; there are people (and internet 'tribes') who have and will go 'after' people if their particular 'horrors' are tripped...children in certain circumstances, rape, holding one group of people above all others, stuff like that...in ye olde times, people got burned at the stake for tweaking someone's horrors...
-
Based on my reading of these comments on this subject, I'm seeing a pattern that it is up to the Keeper/GM to know their "player's" limits. The limits of horror may not be an issue to the writer, but the reader. The discretion of which is their own responsibility.
-
I really don't feel like the critcism of the Amante being "too disturbing" is anything that ought to be taken too much to heart. It's not as if Caleb invented murder/rape monsters in horror RPGs. Call of Cuthulhu's already got a few pretty nasty examples:
- Deep ones - specifically capture and rape humans to breed hybrids.
- Yog Sothoth - Impregnated Old Man Whatley's daughter in Dunwich Horror.
- Eihort - "implants his spawn" in people that eventually eat them from the inside out.
That's just in fussy old-fashioned Cuthulhu too. That's not even getting to the disturbing rape monsters in Fear Itself. Old World of Darkness got away with some pretty creepy fetishy horror stuff with Vampire (especially with Tzimisce fleshcrafting.) Might be White Wolf was just banking on vampires always getting away with that sort of thing. Seems like you can get away with all sort of bizarre stuff if it's vampires. *sigh*
Honestly I think these folks are just nervous about narrating this stuff to a group of their friends, perhaps thinking "what if I offend someone?" That's where this oft repeated refrane "know your players limits" comes in. If all else fails, just run a zombie game. Everyone can agree that describing folks being torn to pieces and eaten alive by the walking corpses of their former friends and family is A-ok.
-
So I've been thinking about how I want to respond for a few days. I guess first of all I want to say that this might come out kind of harsh because it's an emotional topic for me but I want to make it clear that I think Caleb is really cool! He seems like a good guy and I don't think he thinks rape is okay or anything. Second I can't really comment on Lover in the Ice too specifically, since I don't remember the actual play clearly enough for critique (besides THAT PARROT) and was too unemployed to back the kickstarter enough for the PDF. Third I'd like to state that I have been raped before and that obviously is the source of a lot of what I am writing here.
When rape shows up in fiction, especially if it isn't handled sensitively, I am reminded of being raped. It isn't a gigantic panic attack thing but it makes me feel uncomfortable and sad and sick and I am immediately taken out of whatever story for a while. It is worse in games for a couple reasons: Games are improvisational things, so it's harder to have things happen in a tasteful way. You usually identify more with a character you control than a character in a book (players say "I slap the mayor", not "Doris, champion of Pelor slaps the mayor").
The argument against that being important would be something like "That sucks for you, but you can't expect the world to change for you." But I don't think reactions like mine are rare. Most of the other survivors I know have similar feelings, and a lot of people have been raped. One of six U.S. women has experienced an attempted or completed rape. Even if only, say, half of those people are really uncomfortable reading about rape that still feels like a lot of people to shut out. And 90% of the people who are effected are women, so it seems sort of extra bad to me to do something that mostly hurts a minority.
So why is murder less offensive? Well, rape happens a lot more. To be blunt, murder victims aren't around to be offended. Death is something everyone has to deal with eventually, too. The biggest thing is the different ways our culture deals with rape and murder, though. You can die in an awesome way! You can be brave or honorable and be awarded a posthumous medal. You can tell people someone you knew died. Even something as bad as torture has movie scenes where the hero is badass for getting through it. If you're raped, at best you get pity and at worst you are blamed.
So should rape never be a thing in stories? Well, no. But I think using it just to make things more grim or scary is kind of tasteless. I guess to be honest it kind of bothers me that it shows up so often in your writing. Like, the Know Evil episode where the women were being forcibly impregnated was way too hard for me to deal with (and it kind of bothered me that the only thing people wrote about it in the comments was along the lines of "haha, pretty grimdark"), it kind of sucked to not hear Thad as Hunter S. Thompson because I figured out that scenario was related to Lover in the Ice and stopped listening. There was a game Drew ran where your character was threatening to rape someone's wife, and it kind of sucks hearing someone you like say those kind of things. It's like hearing your sweet old grandma be really racist or something. I guess one thing about the Amante in particular is that "men rape because they just get so frustrated and can't help themselves" is a myth that people actually use to justify rape.
I guess what I want is: If you're going to include rape, have a really good understanding of what it is and how it might effect readers, and label it so people who need to can avoid it. Also you've done some good things with handling the subject! You portray it as a horrible scary thing, never make it "sexy", and it was really great how you didn't make SAIROC almost getting date raped a joke or anything. Also you're a lot better about it than a lot of RPG writers I've seen. (fucking Cthulhutech, oh my god)
Extra things: The deep ones didn't rape people, they bribed them with gold basically. The horror in the Lovecraft story was basically a metaphor for white people having sex with other races because he was pretty racist.
Also I've heard "It's a horror game, you should feel as uncomfortable as possible" and that's silly. It's a game you're playing for fun with your friends, not a tribal manhood ritual. You're not a worse gamer because you have limits.
Sorry this was ranty and kind of disconnected!
-
Thank you for your insight!I really appreciate hearing a new perspective on this issue.
-
I have been thinking about throwing my two cents in and now having read Bidoofs experience I feel like I'm coming to the party to late. How does one follow an intimate expression like that. :) But I'm going to. What is the internet for if not shouting out your opinions into the crowd.
The thing about horror is that different things are horrible to different people. And some things are to horrible for some people to consider them fun. I think the current English word for it is 'a trigger'. Lover in the ice and Lover before the ice have some strong sex/rape triggers. Caleb, you might want to put in a little boxed text in the beginning of those two saying something like "This scenario has some strong sexual elements to it. Without giving away the surprise you might want to discuss with your player what type of horror they DON'T want to deal with".
Personally I think that this conversation should happen before any group sits down to play for the first time. Even a simple DnD scenario can become very uncomfortable for someone with a trigger reaction that no one expects. Say someone with a strong phobia of spiders ending up playing s scenario full of drow. I know for me the trigger is violence against children. I put down game of thrones after reading for about an hour because a kid got thrown out a window. Haven't picked it up again. And it's not even because of personal experience with violence. It's just because I have kids.
-
I guess first of all I want to say that this might come out kind of harsh because it's an emotional topic for me but I want to make it clear that I think Caleb is really cool! He seems like a good guy and I don't think he thinks rape is okay or anything.
Thank you for starting with this. Your response makes me feel like a pretty big tool, but it certainly helps to know that you aren't hating me from afar.
When rape shows up in fiction, especially if it isn't handled sensitively, I am reminded of being raped. It isn't a gigantic panic attack thing but it makes me feel uncomfortable and sad and sick and I am immediately taken out of whatever story for a while.
I cannot express how sorry I am for this. That was never, ever my intention. I apologize.
It is worse in games for a couple reasons: Games are improvisational things, so it's harder to have things happen in a tasteful way. You usually identify more with a character you control than a character in a book (players say "I slap the mayor", not "Doris, champion of Pelor slaps the mayor").
This seems to be one of the general themes of this discussion, and it might be my take away from the experience. I'm unwilling to say these subjects can't be dealt with in fiction at all, but maybe the collaborative and improvisational experience of an RPG can't exert enough control over the story to handle the topic well.
The argument against that being important would be something like "That sucks for you, but you can't expect the world to change for you." But I don't think reactions like mine are rare.
I would never, ever say something like that.
So why is murder less offensive? Well, rape happens a lot more. To be blunt, murder victims aren't around to be offended.
I don't think it's less offensive at all. I agree that it's less common. But the victims of a violent crime aren't just the deceased: they're the parents and children and brothers and sisters and friends. I agree with you that the frequency (which is just depressing as shit to think about) makes rape a more sensitive topic statistically, but if something triggers someone personally I don't think the degree would be lessened any by violence.
If you're raped, at best you get pity and at worst you are blamed.
Rape culture sucks. I agree that it is an issue that American culture has not yet symbolically "redeemed" one for suffering such a crime, false as such redemption may be. For instance, I don't think there is such of a thing as "a blaze of glory," and no on holds out under torture. But this is about the perception, and you're absolutely right on that front.
I guess to be honest it kind of bothers me that it shows up so often in your writing.
Again, I'm sorry. I don't write to bother people, especially to this degree.
Like, the Know Evil episode where the women were being forcibly impregnated was way too hard for me to deal with (and it kind of bothered me that the only thing people wrote about it in the comments was along the lines of "haha, pretty grimdark"), it kind of sucked to not hear Thad as Hunter S. Thompson because I figured out that scenario was related to Lover in the Ice and stopped listening.
Okay, I guess here is where I try to "defend" myself, though I no point am I saying bidoof is in anyway wrong to have these feelings.
In my mind, I don't separate rape from violence. It is sexual in nature because of it's location on the body and the cultural shame brought with it; the act itself is pure, unjustifiable violence. When I included the rape in the pirate stronghold, I did so because a) I'd read about it as a tactic of Somalian Pirate communities and wanted to ground the adventure in something real and b) according the setting, I couldn't figure out how a bunch of flats still existed in EP. Or for that matter, people that steal physical goods. I couldn't figure out how any of those villains could exist in a universe of exo-wombs, and I thought the inclusion of that detail would place horror in a scenario from an unexpected direction (the horror of what humans can do to each other rather than the horror of TITANS).
In the case of Lover Before the Ice, much like Lover in the Ice, no one is actually raped. . The humans merely use sex as a lure, then they kill people, every time. Unless you count the Amanta as a human (it's not), the act is symbolic. I'll admit the symbolism was an intentional attempt to invoke that body horror, but its also a very good reason to kill something with fire. Furthermore, the brothel in the prequel actually existed, just as Altamira and the TransAmazonica actually existed. There just weren't alien parasites to blame for the violence that no doubt occurred there.
All of that very well may have been in bad taste, and I'm sorry it made people feel uncomfortable. I just wanted to unpack my thinking and make sure everyone knows it didn't come from an intentionally harmful place. I was trying to add realism and create worthy antagonists, but I should have thought longer about how do to it in a less offensive way.
There was a game Drew ran where your character was threatening to rape someone's wife, and it kind of sucks hearing someone you like say those kind of things. It's like hearing your sweet old grandma be really racist or something.
I don't even remember saying this. I don't even remember Drew ever running a game. I'm not saying you're lying; what would possibly be the motivation for that? I'm just deeply ashamed that I would do something like this and horrified to think I could do so without realizing it. I'm so, so very sorry.
I guess what I want is: If you're going to include rape, have a really good understanding of what it is and how it might effect readers, and label it so people who need to can avoid it.
I will make more of an effort to label such things in the future. As far as understanding though, I don't think it's possible. If I'm being honest, I knew that any mention of rape at all, in any context, could trigger negative emotions in some people that underwent such an experience. I knew that when I wrote the scenarios, but underestimated the scope and scale of the interaction. I understand that rape is an awful, terrible thing. I understand it is an act of violence, and perhaps the single most common act of violence in our world. I understand it needs to stop, as well as the culture that's shaming its victims, and as such I put it in a place where murderhobos could shoot at it.
But that's as far as my understanding is ever going to extend as a person lucky enough to have avoided such an experience. And I'm not sure that's every going to be enough. Does that mean we can't ever talk about it in fiction? Like issues of race and religion and all that other touchy stuff? For me, dealing with those topics in games and stories is more productive than talking about the bald, offensive facts...but that's coming from my limited understanding.
What I'm saying is that I feel irresponsible just ignoring the possibility of sexual violence as conflict at all. Turning all characters in every setting into neutered Ken dolls that murder neutered Kobolts feels offensive to me in its silence and denial. But the level of understanding required to deal with the situation tastefully is (thankfully) forever beyond me, so I feel like it's my only choice.
Also I've heard "It's a horror game, you should feel as uncomfortable as possible" and that's silly. It's a game you're playing for fun with your friends, not a tribal manhood ritual. You're not a worse gamer because you have limits.
I wouldn't make this argument. "Too far" is implied as a possibility in the title.
Thank you for your thoughtful and brave response bidoof. You've given me a lot to think about. Again, I'm sorry for any pain my writing or playing may have caused, and I'll endeavor to do better in the future.
-
Aaaugh I really didn't want anyone to feel bad! I guess to clarify a lot of what I said was more preemptive arguments against things I've seen in other places on the internet. The Drew game I was talking about was the one with the moonrocks: http://actualplay.roleplayingpublicradio.com/2013/03/systems/call-of-cthulhu/call-of-cthulhu-delta-green-tiamat/
-
You're fine. It just brought some things to my awareness. That's what the thread was for.
-
bidoof -
Some really interesting points.
Not asking this in a rude way, but what traumatic events are okay to cover? Not saying it is on par with rape, but infidelity affects drastically more people than rape (again not equating, however there can be life altering shifts in personality, choices, etc). It also occurs as a regular theme in entertainment, so folks affected are exposed constantly.
Is that okay to include in fiction / entertainment?
Caleb's previous mention of mental illness is similar.
Is it only okay to include a traumatic event if it didn't affect the reader or it only affects a certain % of the population? Why is one pain okay and another not?
Is it up to the consumer to avoid sensitive material for their triggers vs the author to censor? Should the author have to pre-disclose content of a sensitive nature i.e. movie ratings?
Again, curious vs. confrontational.
-
That's really up to the individual gamers in a group, geekyogrt, and it's easier to come up with a list of what's not cool. For example, a game I run for my group has a hard 'No violence against children' rule and it's because I don't wanna see that shit. Even with that in mind, I'd never tell someone that scenarios shouldn't be written if they include things that I may find distasteful or distressing. Writers simply need to remember that some players will reject scenarios out of hand if they do include those sort of things.
That's not something an author should feel a need to necessarily apologize for but it's the reality of the marketplace. I know some of Cormac McCarthy's material features children in horrible, violent situations so I won't be buying his books but I don't need an apology from him. It also doesn't necessarily mean that I automatically judge stories that include such distasteful things to be bad or poorly written. There are parts of the video game The Last Of Us that include violence against children but I thought it had a well-written narrative. It made me overly emotional and put me off replaying it but I'm still glad I experienced the story.
-
Firstly, polite apologies for possibly resurrecting a topic that was considered closed. Also, for if this gets too introspective and rambly. It's 4am for me on a rainy night, perfect for thinking the deep thoughts we reject in the daylight hours.
I want to start by stating I am a rape survivor, not for pity, empathy and only a little for understanding. You see, I don't get to say that in my flesh and blood life. It is painful for my loved ones to hear and I spend the majority of my social time with my fellow geeks. I love our subculture dearly. It's clever, creative, fantastic and can be marvellous fun. However, I often feel like it doesn't love me very much. I slowly slipped out of my role playing group because, despite being normally fairly empathic individuals (which included my boss, a coworker and the man who would become my partner), there was something about the gaming environment that brought out the rape jokes. The night that was set aside for me to relax and enjoy a game with my friends quickly turned into lessons of control. Could I stop my hands from shaking? Could I pass off the dread settled in my gut as a reaction to too much pizza? It was easier to give up something I enjoy than explain to my friends that they were hurting me.
So, given the above, I believe there is a need for all members of the group, be they player or GM, to foster an environment where any one person can feel confident in saying, this is my line.
I don't believe that rape can never be used. The thing I hear most survivors asking for is consideration. For some, that's including a trigger warning. For others, it's not seeing the same old tropes. I know I personally am extraordinarily tired of seeing the 'women gain strength through rape' trope. I fall into both of the above categories from time to time, but most important to me is seeing the thought process.
Caleb, you are doing everything I personally ask from someone dealing with this content. You are thinking about what you are writing (perhaps a little retrospectively in this case) and you are open to comments. Lover in the Ice is one of my favourites of the Actual Plays. I drew the rape analogy fairly quickly but for me, it was almost cathartic to hear my horror reflected by other voices in a safe space. I will note that the pirates left me cold, I was glad I had spoiled myself by reading the comments on that one.
I guess that is what makes it hard. The experiences of one survivor don't always match the experiences of another. All we can really do is ask ourselves 'does this serve a purpose or am I merely throwing it in for 'grimdark' purposes. There is a little more sensitivity going around at the moment, due to our struggle dealing with the gaming use of the word. (One day, I'll snap at the fourteen year old who compares character death to the complete erasure of my personal autonomy. I'll be fired but it would be worth it).
Hopefully, somewhere in the above I've answered your question. I'd like to finish by thanking all the RPPR crew. You are my vicarious entry into a world I love and you do it in a way that is safe for me. I know that triggering topics may be touched on but you all appear to approach it from a respectful position and I can trust that I'll be able to get to the other side of it.
-
Thanks for giving us your insight into the topic. It's good to hear we're on the right track. I almost never edit our APs but I do occasionally worry if we ever go too far in some of them. They're meant to be entertaining. The last thing I want is to cause real stress or anxiety in any of our listeners.
Firstly, polite apologies for possibly resurrecting a topic that was considered closed. Also, for if this gets too introspective and rambly. It's 4am for me on a rainy night, perfect for thinking the deep thoughts we reject in the daylight hours.
I want to start by stating I am a rape survivor, not for pity, empathy and only a little for understanding. You see, I don't get to say that in my flesh and blood life. It is painful for my loved ones to hear and I spend the majority of my social time with my fellow geeks. I love our subculture dearly. It's clever, creative, fantastic and can be marvellous fun. However, I often feel like it doesn't love me very much. I slowly slipped out of my role playing group because, despite being normally fairly empathic individuals (which included my boss, a coworker and the man who would become my partner), there was something about the gaming environment that brought out the rape jokes. The night that was set aside for me to relax and enjoy a game with my friends quickly turned into lessons of control. Could I stop my hands from shaking? Could I pass off the dread settled in my gut as a reaction to too much pizza? It was easier to give up something I enjoy than explain to my friends that they were hurting me.
So, given the above, I believe there is a need for all members of the group, be they player or GM, to foster an environment where any one person can feel confident in saying, this is my line.
I don't believe that rape can never be used. The thing I hear most survivors asking for is consideration. For some, that's including a trigger warning. For others, it's not seeing the same old tropes. I know I personally am extraordinarily tired of seeing the 'women gain strength through rape' trope. I fall into both of the above categories from time to time, but most important to me is seeing the thought process.
Caleb, you are doing everything I personally ask from someone dealing with this content. You are thinking about what you are writing (perhaps a little retrospectively in this case) and you are open to comments. Lover in the Ice is one of my favourites of the Actual Plays. I drew the rape analogy fairly quickly but for me, it was almost cathartic to hear my horror reflected by other voices in a safe space. I will note that the pirates left me cold, I was glad I had spoiled myself by reading the comments on that one.
I guess that is what makes it hard. The experiences of one survivor don't always match the experiences of another. All we can really do is ask ourselves 'does this serve a purpose or am I merely throwing it in for 'grimdark' purposes. There is a little more sensitivity going around at the moment, due to our struggle dealing with the gaming use of the word. (One day, I'll snap at the fourteen year old who compares character death to the complete erasure of my personal autonomy. I'll be fired but it would be worth it).
Hopefully, somewhere in the above I've answered your question. I'd like to finish by thanking all the RPPR crew. You are my vicarious entry into a world I love and you do it in a way that is safe for me. I know that triggering topics may be touched on but you all appear to approach it from a respectful position and I can trust that I'll be able to get to the other side of it.
-
Thanks for the response. Sharing is always a little nerve wracking so it's nice to know it helped. I try to discuss and create dialogue when I have the energy for it to break the culture of silence and shame that exists around it. I believe dealing in these topics in game spaces can help shift ideas and create discussion, though preferably it's approached in a thoughtful way.
Triggers are so individual and personal that it's impossible not to trip someones somewhere along the line. It doesn't help that western culture has shaped the narrative of rape into stranger danger and victim blaming, despite the vast majority of cases being perpetrated by a close contact. If I can fall into student social scientist mode, I think most listeners are aware that you are operating under your own social contract/group norms so the actions and reactions will be shaped by that. Ultimately, we listeners are almost like eavesdroppers into your great games.
I guess mostly it's just refreshing not to see people follow Crystal Dynamics path of disaster in how to address worries.
I just wanted to reiterate that my experience and opinions may not be reflective of other survivors. I'm ten years into healing and still have some journey to go so change is always inevitable. I certainly would have reacted differently at the start of this.
There are some wonderful discussions along these topics coming out of the video gaming world as it hits its growing pains for further reading if time permits.
-
Jadzia and bidoof,
First, I also want to thank you both for having the courage to share your thoughts and personal experiences with the rest of us. It must definitely not have been easy, but it's added depth to an already important conversation, one that I feel we should keep having. Violence in gaming is something I think a lot about. While I rabidly enjoy gaming and horror, I do feel that Caleb asks a very important question in "How far is too far?"
Around the gaming table, I think it's as you point out Jadzia: each group of players operates with their own social contract. I agree with Gorkamorka, that topic should be discussed among all player before the game begins, so that the lines of what can and can't be crossed are well established.
With publishing adventures, games, etc. it must become trickier though, since the material can potentially be read by anyone, and there's not really a time when the author is discussing with that individual person which of those lines are okay to cross for him or her. True, you can have a rating for the material, or a warning on the cover, something along those lines. And also, if it's a horror scenario, one purchases and reads it knowing it's probably not going to be pretty. People go into a R rated horror movie knowing that they're going to be made uncomfortable. They go into a R rated action movie knowing they're going to see violence. If they don't want to, they just don't buy the ticket.
But, if they do buy the ticket, or purchase the scenario, they can be relatively okay with a lot of the content that's presented, but something might be too much. Something might take them by surprise, and they can be severely offended, or it can call up very painful memories if they had themselves been through a similar circumstance.
How to handle content like that in a game becomes a delicate issue, then. And a difficult one. Horror is horror because it makes us uncomfortable to one degree or another. I'd guess we're fans of the genre because of this, to an extent. And part of what makes us uncomfortable in our culture is sex and violence. Really, how often does Lovecraft refer to "blasphemous" and "unnameable" rites, etc? Clearly, it's impossible to not offend anyone all the time with such content, but especially when dealing with more touchy subjects, such as sexual violence, I think the difficulty increases exponentially.
What's the solution? I don't think there really is a specific one. The easiest would be not to broach these subjects at all. I hesitate to say that, since I don't want to advocate any form of censorship. If the goal is to avoid offending anyone, however, that is simply the route to go.
Another way is to address these subjects, but to do so in a careful way that is respectful, but also addresses the seriousness of the subject, and hopefully causes the gaming group, or audience, to think about it and relate it with their own and others humanity. That takes a high degree of maturity from both the audience, and also the author. I do believe that Caleb in his scenarios, addresses these issues well, and I think the fact that he is questioning himself in the first place is very reflective of that.
Ultimately, I don't know that there is an answer. I guess that's not very helpful, but really it comes down to what the author is willing to risk, and what the audience is able to tolerate.
For my own part, I've played a lot, a whole lot, of violent video games. I've also watched a whole lot of violent movies, and read a whole lot of horror. In my rl job, I've seen the results of violence relatively often. There is a world of separation between rl violence and fictional violence usually. So I like to think I high have a high tolerance for the portrayal of violence in media. Even so, I know on a few occasions where it was a little too much even for me. As a recent example, let me point out a line that I can't cross.
I really like heist movies. They're cool. There is something about them that, as a gamer, translates very well to rpgs and video games. You have a group of specialists after a certain goal. Each has their own skill set. They are trying to break into a bank, corporate building, whatever(essentially modern day "dungeons"). There are cool gadgets and weaponry. So on. I could go on.
Recently, Payday 2 was released. Part of me really wants to play this game. It's a heist game. It's a cooperative game, my favorite kind of shooter. But I can't get myself to get it. Why? Well, the fact that it involves shooting down waves upon waves of police officers.
Not zombies. Not robots. Not aliens. Not even sociopathic criminals, or even oppressive guards of some dystopian fascist state. They're just cops. For whatever reason, playing a game where I'm killing them indiscriminately makes me very uncomfortable. I can't do it.
It's just a game. I don't believe for a second anyone(or at least the vast majority) playing it has anything against law enforcement, or wants to rob a bank, and so on. I'm sure it's a very fun game. But I just can't cross that line. I can in other games, but not that one. Not sure what that says about me, but there's an example of my own particular limit.
Anyway, I went off into a ramble there. I do tend to do that sometimes. Again, very interesting, and important discussion.
-
Thank you for your thoughtful response and your own self-disclosure, Metalwhisper. I also spend a lot of time with video games, as I'm working in video game retail while I study my degree. Apologies if I get rambly, I've been buried in academic writing of personality theory for the last two days.
With respect to avoiding triggers in published works, I actually think that is easier as a consumer. There are rating systems, reviews, trailers and word of mouth to draw on. I see the few surprise triggers as inevitable in life. You can't avoid all of them and sometimes something that is a trigger one day won't be on another. That's where the personal responsibility of healing and coping mechanisms comes into it. For example, when I'm low on energy, be it a stressful day or just lack of sleep, loud, primarily male, voices can trigger a flashback for me. That usually means a freeze reaction and then a rush of anger that my body has determined as the best response to remove me from the perceived danger. I've developed the coping response of then grounding myself by getting to a friendly voice, often a phone call to my mother or partner, which lets me ride through the last of the effects.
It frustrates me a little that so often this discussion turns to talk of censorship in the places it occurs. The majority of the discussion I see are requests for respect in the handling of these topics, not the complete erasure. I want to acknowledge that I don't think that is what you are doing here, it's just a general trend I see. It shifts the power away from survivors again, treating us as oppressors, silencing us by accusing us of trying to stifle others voices.
Like I said before, I don't think it's possible to never offend anyone. We're all different, it's part of the joy of living (people and their stories are kind of my passion). I don't know that it's necessarily even desirable. After all, we learn by challenging ourselves and our beliefs. For me, desired intent would be the intent to be respectful, to use problematic content for more than gratuitous shock and have the class to apologise and listen to criticism of this use.
It's feels strange to talk about a rape scene done right but there are so many ones done wrong that I like to give a example that reflects my idea of one. I can't remember the exact episode but I think it was in season one of The Closer, the lead character successfully fights off a rape attempt. The aspect that makes it work for me is not that she succeeded in stopping her assailant but there was none of the framing of her body in a way that dehumanised. She was always a person in those moments, no emphasis drawn to her breasts or loving tracing of her face. In contrast, I've never been able to watch Game of Thrones, with the way the wedding night was shot, casting the woman as an object to be consumed.
There absolutely is a difference between fictional violence and real life violence but I do think it can desensitise us, not to actual in the moment violence because I'm a humanist at heart, but within our ability to engage with empathy in our discussions of violence. I also think there is not a lot of personal responsibility to interactions with this medium. I live in Australia so we're just starting to deal with the R rated games but just look at the behaviour that occurred with regards to the Saints Row 4 saga. It was refused classification due to the direct reward link with drugs giving you super powers, something that is expressly stated in the classification guidelines as something that can not be classified under an R rating. I had work colleagues throwing temper tantrums about being denied their game without researching why, just written off as the old fuddie duddies and pearl clutching mothers. I can't count the number of parents who have bought GTA 4 for their 7 yr old kids because 'they just play them at their friends house anyway' or how many are fine with drugs, violence and swearing but balk at prostitutes.
Apologies, went on a slight work rant there. The example I wandered from was that during the R rating petition process there were people leaving death threats on the door of the major Attorney-General blocking it's path. Traditionally, we learnt our morals and codes through story telling and I don't believe we've evolved to the point where our subconscious knows when something isn't a lesson. The casual treatment of violence creates a disconnect with the reality of that violence.
I play and enjoy most games, though I tend to avoid GTA (no real interest in playing a gang member) or the COD/Battlefields (all respect to Americans but I find them a little too much military propaganda and toxic community for my tastes). This doesn't mean I don't think these games should exist but it'd be nice to see a bit more diversity in choices.
I'm really grateful that everyone here has been very respectful and welcoming. I spend a lot if my time reading gaming discussions, particularly around gender (as I still have people asking to speak to a man when the come into the store or automatically assume I'm not senior staff) and it can be a terrifyingly toxic space. I enjoy discussing ideas as I like to constantly challenge my own (self-reflection and integrity of self are kind of a big deal in my chosen career path, plus I figure I have to live with myself at the end of the day) and I appreciate the opportunity to learn from you all as well. No one has all the answers after all.
-
What's interesting in these discussions of controversial media sources is the split between "I don't want the media I like to be censored or restricted" versus "those people/kids shouldn't have access to that media" - everyone draws the line somewhere but the thing is, if you say that certain media should not be consumed/viewed by certain people then you admit it can influence people. But, of course, you're reasonable and no violent movie or video game is going to corrupt you, right?
-
Yeah, I hit that a lot in these discussions, that somehow we are completely rational beings that can chose every facet that influences us. It's really boggling for me, considering how very little we still know about how the brain functions and personality is determined. My favourite example was when I was discussing Mad Men with a coworker. He uttered "Yeah, it has the sexism of the times. You feel really sorry for the poor bitches" and it took me looking at him with a raised eyebrow before even realised what he said. This from a guy that has confronted the manager about his sexist behaviour when he wouldn't listen to the women working for him. So I think it's a little ridiculous to think these things exist in a vacuum or that somehow we choose or are above it's influence.
With my example with the GTA parents, for me, it's less that they are buying it for their kid and more that they are waiving their responsibility towards knowing what their child is consuming. When I hit a few parents that jokingly say "you must think I'm awful buying this for my kid", my response is always "You know your child better than I ever could. I'm just here to give you the information to make up your own mind."
It's why I like classifications. Not everyone has the time to research a product so having a snapshot of the expected content within that allows you to decide whether that is appropriate or not is awesome.. Chances are with the above GTA parents, there won't be discussions about the context the game exists in. I'm not sure I agree with the stance that video games are inherently more influential by being interactive media as, being completely unscientific, my brother and I were equally likely to rough-house after our favourite Jackie Chan flick than after playing Marvel vs Capcom. There isn't a lot of unbiased research into the subject yet which is a shame.
It's a discussion that gets complicated very quickly, as well as reactive because it's one that hits a lot of people's hidden buttons by it's very nature. My solution is always going to be provide more information and respect someones ability to chose for themselves.
Edit: because apparently my fingers decided that walking and working totally is the same word.