(no subject)

[benlehman]

In other news: Point out and criticizing the stupid things that men do to try to get sex is sexist against women.

I'm trying to wrap my head around this.

I've been in many games where the girl who the GM wants to get in bed, or already has in bed, gets special attention, "cool plot," etc. It's stupid boy behavior (never seen a girl GM do it) and one of the downsides to having one person with %100 of the social and material power in a gaming group. It's stupid and it happens constantly.

How is pointing it out an attack against the women involved? The only situation I can think of is one where a girl likes this behavior, and is afraid that acknowledging her privilege will take it away.

Comments

[relevance.livejournal.com]

I think this sentence sums up her viewpoint neatly:

It's sexist because it is a charge most often levelled at women (or girl) gamers, and is predicated on the idea that women (or girls) are unable to play at a level equal to men and thus must resort to 'cheating' to succeed.

• It's sexist to blame the girl if the GM gives her special treatment. I would agree with this - it's both unfair and sexist to blame the girl for what is most often a stupid boy behavior.
• The girl is blamed out of jealousy because the other gamers think she would not be able to achieve as much without the special treatment. Assuming the group has generally gamist motivations (and thus the word "achieve" makes any sense), the other gamers would have to be pretty lame to jump to the conclusion that the girl is intentionally romantically/sexually manipulating the GM in order to "achieve".

[benlehman.livejournal.com]

What's missing here is the target's perspective. Do they like the game being subverted as a tool to hit on them? (note: I'm all for flirtiness in games, but it's a rather different story if it screws up the game in practice.) If so, they seem to be part of the problem and ought to take part of the blame. If not, then talking about the problem openly is not an attack on them, all they have to do is say: "damn, I noticed that, too, and it's hella creepy, let's put a stop to it."

My experience about it being a charge levelled at men is counter to hers, though. Remember DaveC's 1d6?

yrs--
--Ben

[relevance.livejournal.com]

What if you're operating in the real world and don't know whether the target likes the game being subverted to hit on them? If you're another gamer in the group who's trying to improve the game by correcting the situation, it's sexist to assume that they like it, or are actively seeking it, because they are male/female. I think this is what she's complaining about.

As marcus_sez_vote points out, men and women can receive favoritism, and as I point out, it's never good for the game. But this is only tangentially related to the sexist assumptions that the original blogger is complaining about.

[benlehman.livejournal.com]

I guess. I just haven't largely seen it levelled at women exclusively, and usually seen it levelled at the initiator rather than the target.

Regardless, though, if there's social dysfunction going on, I'm loathe to tell people "you shouldn't point that out." For whatever reason.

yrs--
--Ben

[relevance.livejournal.com]

Oh, I absolutely agree that it should be pointed out. One just needs to be careful about one's phrasing and assumptions when one does so.

[marcus-sez-vote.livejournal.com]

Well actually in terms of response I would wager that various plotlines that a male or female GM would think are "cool", or put out effort to make happen, are often different. Similarly the plots that appeal to male gamers and female gamers are likely also often different. Now as to female GMs skewing plot as a ploy to get it on with a male gamer, I imagine that has also happened. I think a similar phenomenon would be favoritism for friends. This could range from gamers who a given GM thinks can "handle" a given role(in a NPC case) or perhaps a favorable upgrade situation for a given character(in a PC case). This favoritism can be a good thing of course since you WANT your PCs to enjoy the game and you as a GM should cater, to some degree, to player needs.

Somewhat rambly, but there's my thoughts.

Be well.

[relevance.livejournal.com]

I would argue that favoritism (for whatever reason) is different from catering to player needs. Actually, I'd define favoritism in gaming as catering to player needs unequally - catering to some players' needs more than others'.

[benlehman.livejournal.com]

What Adam said. Being a good GM (giving your players what they want) is different from making one player super-special and good because you want in their pants / their respect / whatever.

yrs--
--Ben