(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

[faerieloch.livejournal.com]

*waves* I think you're adding an interpretation that isn't in the original post. You're assuming that it's about men doing things to get sex. She's talking about a man who's already getting sex and another one is accusing *her* of sleeping with said man and using that influence to get ahead in the game. *Very* different premise. It's possible they get cooler scenes because they're in a relationship and therefore (presumably) know each other better, so know which buttons to push. I'm guessing there. One thing I do know is that whenever I'm in a game that Albert runs, I worry about being accused of this very thing. Why? The fact that we're together all the time, pre- and post-game, may be perceived by others as giving me an advantage because we will (of course) talk about the game and plot things out for my character ahead of time, or plot the downfall of other characters, etc.. Things we don't do. But it could be perceived that way. And *I'm* the one who will get accused, not him. The first reaction won't be to accuse the GM of favouratism, but to accuse me of using my relationship to twist him. No, it doesn't make sense, but that's the way it is. If players said "hey, GM, I think you're favouring player x" and the GM is in a relationship with x, that's a reasonable statement because it could also be said about players a, f, and k. But like I said, it's usually the woman who gets accused (and yes, this could be stupid jealous behaviour). It implies that it's the woman who's doing something wrong, rather than the GM who is the one displaying favouratism. Does any of this make things clearer?

[benlehman.livejournal.com]

Hey, Nancy --

So you're the second person saying "it's usually the woman who gets accussed." This is so totally counter to my experience I can't tell you. Am I missing the accusations or are you missing the men dealing with their issues between each other or both or are we just in different social scenes?

yrs--
--Ben

[apollinax.livejournal.com]

It might be counter to your experience due to the sample sizes; a history is different than a single occurance.

[faerieloch.livejournal.com]

We're coming at this from totally different positions. What I'm saying is that GM and female player are sleeping together. Fellow male player accuses female player of using that influence to get ahead in the game. You're seeing it as two males fighting over a woman. However, why would male player accuse the woman rather than the GM?