In my younger days, what bound us together wasn’t ideology or identity or even agreement. It was something much simpler and, I think, more powerful: a shared love of fantasy, science fiction, horror, and roleplaying games. We didn’t always see eye to eye. We didn’t always get along, but we read the same dog-eared books (gaming and otherwise), argued about alignment and racial level limits, and gathered around the same tables to roll dice. That was enough.
We were a ragtag lot, diverse not so much in the narrow, contemporary demographic sense (though that too, to a degree), but in personality, taste, and temperament. There were the older, bearded guys who got their start with Tactics; the teenagers who smelled like patchouli and wore jackets covered in band patches; the metalheads, the comic book obsessives, the Tolkien scholars-in-training, the stoners, the would-be novelists, and that one guy who knew way too much about the Wehrmacht’s order of battle in 1944 and wouldn’t stop bringing it up. Somehow, we all managed to coexist – or at least we played together and that, I think, is its own kind of getting along.
What I find disheartening now is how often that spirit seems absent. There’s a growing impulse, coming from multiple directions, to draw hard lines about what’s acceptable to play, read, like, or even talk about without a disclaimer. I’m not talking about politics, at least not primarily. I mean the way taste itself is increasingly treated as a moral signal. “You still play Empire of the Petal Throne? What’s wrong with you?” Or: “You’re using Mörk Borg? That’s not real old school.” I’ve heard both this year, more than once, along with others, just as silly.
There’s nothing wrong with preferences. No one should be shamed or pressured into liking what they don’t like. That was true in 1982 and it’s true now. Back then, plenty of people I knew scoffed at Arduin or rolled their eyes at RuneQuest. I’m not going to pretend we didn’t argue fiercely about whether, for example, spell slots or spell points were “better.” That kind of good-natured rivalry was part of the fun. Even now, I enjoy lobbing the occasional jab in the direction of certain games or game mechanics. I’m not claiming the moral high ground.
However, I think there’s a difference between ribbing your friend for liking Rolemaster and declaring that certain games, creators, or communities are beyond the pale and that merely engaging with them puts you under suspicion. That’s not rivalry. That’s excommunication. It's coming from all sides. Depending on who's speaking, the OSR is either a toxic boys' club of crypto-fascists or a co-opted safe space for woke poseurs who don’t really “get” old games. Try saying that not every game choice is a political act and that maybe you just like what you like and you’ll find yourself viewed with suspicion by both camps.
It's exhausting and, frankly, it's absurd.
When I was a kid, the fact that someone played Chivalry & Sorcery instead of AD&D might earn a few barbs, but no one was exiled. No one cared whether you thought the best sci-fi RPG was Traveller, Space Opera, or Universe (even though it's obviously Traveller). If you were into Tunnels & Trolls, sure, we might’ve thought you were a little weird, but you were our kind of weird. You were one of us. You knew where the lavatories were on the USS Enterprise. You could quote Monty Python and The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy from memory. You subscribed to Dragon and read every page, even the fiction. You liked pretending to be a wizard or a starship captain or a mutant with a laser rifle. That was enough.
I miss that.
I’m not arguing that we all need to agree. We never did and, honestly, that was part of the joy – the clashes, the rivalries, the heated debates about initiative systems and critical hits. There’s a difference in my opinion between spirited disagreement and gatekeeping disguised as virtue. The hobby is big, messy, and contradictory. It always has been; that’s part of what makes it beautiful.
We could all stand to be a little more charitable, a little less quick to sort people into boxes, a little more willing to extend the benefit of the doubt. Curiosity, not conformity, is what brought most of us here in the first place.
I started in 1982 and agree with everything you said, including traveller being better.
ReplyDeleteWhat bothers me most is self-censoring. I notice myself doing it now all the time. I am so fearful of backlash, that I stopped offering my opinions and ideas. I am not talking politics, I am talking about games, rules, are orcs bad, all kinds of stuff .
I watch the vitriol and absurdity and I just shut up, because I fear the backlash.
It's partisanship-ization, even though as you say it's not literally about politics but more like rooting for your team and forming ego entanglement with certain products/companies. I think "our hobby" stopped being a hobby many decades ago and has been a competitive consumer market, like music or sport or fashion or food, for far longer than anyone is comfortable thinking about.
DeleteIsn't what people here call "the backlash" normal consumer behavior? It's just business. (I'd say "it's all in the game" but it seems a bit precious/on-the-nose.) Maybe we're more special snowflakes than sports fans are, is all.
I remember that people "...who knew way too much about the Wehrmacht’s order of battle in 1944 and wouldn’t stop bringing it up" dominated the early days of the hobby. They may not be as vocal now, but they are still here. At least in my little corner of the world.
ReplyDeleteThe thing for me is just how not fun modern RPGs have become. Back int he day, every RPG I tried had a level of enjoyment for me, but AD&D was always my fave. I may not have liked T&T, RQ, or C&S, but I got why people liked them and had fun playing them.
When I tried 3.5, 4th, and 5th I just did not see how people thought all of that number crunching, min/max, railroads were fun. I know it was just the sessions I tired, but I am still hard-pressed to see how a different set of players can make it better.
HOWEVER... that is my problem-not theirs or their game. But those people who who know way too much about the Wehrmacht’s order of battle in 1944 and won’t stop bringing it up creep me out now more than ever. I know what they are fantasizing about, and I don't to be a part of it.
Oh look another pearl clutching mind reader.
DeleteWell said.
ReplyDeletePerhaps it's related to gaming becoming more mainstream.
ReplyDeleteWe're basically the same age and started gaming at the same time, but you report much more idyllic early days than I can honestly remember.
ReplyDeleteDo you entertain the possibility that the difference between "then" and "now" is not changing politics, society, or cultural norms, but that "then" was experienced as a child and "now" as an adult?
Whole academic careers could be built on the study of nostalgia in 21st century TTRPG production and consumption. Within the larger field of 'Infantilization of Adult Culture Studies', natch.
I've definitely considered that possibility and that may well be some of it, but I don't think that's the whole story. It's now that people tell me that preferences or willingness to engage with someone/some game they consider "unclean" are a problem, not then. This seems like a new kind of behavior.
DeleteThat's really strange to hear. When I've listened people who were fully adult in the early years of the genre, or read things that they were writing at the time (like Dragon magazine even!) I'm hearing plenty of preferences, blackballing of individuals or looser shunning/exclusion of them, and drawing cordons sanitaires against incorrect games/products. It is, though, different individuals and different issues they talk about than 40-50-odd years later, as one would expect. And we (you and I) were at most teens in those years who, however socially ept and politically conscious as individuals, just aren't going to pick up on much of what was going on at that age. (As much as in retrospect we can convince ourselves to the contrary.)
DeleteYou may be correct. All I can do is report on my recollections, however faulty, and my present experience of the hobby. Whether I'm the one with a faulty perspective or not, I can't say.
DeleteINFILTRATION DETECTED
DeleteAmen to that!
ReplyDeleteMy English is rusty as it never was before, but I want you to know that I appreciated a lot this post and the previous about blogosphere, although I am from a different RPG players generation, because I started playing at the end of 90's.
ReplyDeletePeople have always rejected others whom they don't like, for whatever reasons. These days people tend to be more reactionary about maverick ideas about what is moral or immoral, and this sort of ideological new-fangled fundamentalist impulse creates a culture of paranoia, stifles expression, and trickles down even to gaming.
ReplyDeleteIt may have been just how my corner of the world was, but I do uave memories from the 80s and 90s that are way less pleasant about the divides in the gaming comunity, and without even getting into real-life politics or issues.
ReplyDeleteFandoms (of all types) can be very unwelcoming places.
Well said, James. As weirdos, we were allowed to be weird in our own ways back then that's not always true today. There were the religious-fundie puritans of course, but they were outsiders to the game and so (for me and my group anyway) more easily ignored than today's puritans who are often gamers themselves.
ReplyDeleteI think this is mostly just an online vs real world thing. I see debates all the time at the local D&D happy hours I go to, but they’re always rpg equivalents of “who’s the best quarterback of all time”, clearly intended to open up a conversation rather than shut down a person.
ReplyDeleteI also think Zero Charisma was kind of prophetic. I’m a little bit too young to have any memories of the golden age, but my recollection as a kid was that the games seemed interesting but the hobby was filled with antisocial types. I don’t know what it was, but something happened in the mid 2000s that attracted hipster (or at least hipster-adjacent) millennials to the hobby. Since D&D culture is largely about finding a group, this was devastating for the antisocial members of the community, and a huge improvement for everyone else. I started playing at the tail end of this, right before Stranger Things came out, and sometimes feel guilty for “gentrifying” a refuse for people who struggle at parties/bars/ect. Should I feel this way?
To be clear, I dont think the hobby was ever all, or even mostly people with poor social skills. I've met a ton of Gen X and Boomer players through my interest in the OSR. I just think that essentially pushing the most unlikeable members of the community out of game stores and groups and into online spaces is part of what made the hobby more appealing to the mainstream.
DeleteWhat does the mainstream considers "unlikeable"? Personally, I don't care what the mainstream likes. Gaming for the longest time was considered fringe, and now it gotten more mainstream in some aspects, it's lost it appeal and edginess.
DeleteNo! Ttrpg game time isn’t a finite resource. You playing doesn’t prevent someone else from playing. Your table doesn’t have any impact on another table. Role playing can be all things to all people.
DeleteActually, one of the many things I like about Grognardia is that you've admirably managed to stay above the fray, even when provoked.
ReplyDeleteI'd respectfully encourage you to keep on the high road. I've read enough OSR flame wars elsewhere. They're pointless and boring. Please kindly continue to serve as an example and a bastion of the reasonable coexistence you fondly remember.
Thanks. I try very hard to be evenhanded and pacific. I don't always succeed, of course, but that's my goal.
DeleteI'm glad this isn't social media, but find I wish I could upvote your comment.
DeleteThat was some well formulated words, and a post with a tone I really can appreciate.
ReplyDeleteThen there's that last sentence, and I did *not* see that last word coming! Thanks, that was a good one!
I've encountered the "people who make that game are bad/evil" thing online, but never in person. OTOH, I game with a regular group of friends, unchanged in years. Maybe I would encounter this attitude in person if I gamed with more people.
ReplyDeleteOne of the reasons I find attending cons so pleasurable is that it's an opportunity to remind myself of the truth of the old saw, "the Internet isn't real."
DeleteI don’t think the 80’s and 90’s were a period of rosy gaming across the board. I struggled years to find a group and finally had one in high school with an odd group of friends using a super hero system. They enjoyed the game and weren’t weird with their own personality quirks and gatekeeping of sorts around games or insular group think. I remember going to a game shop to pick up games in the 90’s of miniature and role playing games and having a very uncomfortable time with the groups not being open to new players. And eventually abandoned my attempts. My con experiences weren’t bad. The early 2000’s was all 3.5 D&D and I couldn’t get in that crunchy mess. But it wasn’t until 2010 that I started finding very open communities to play. Meeting them through local game shops and online looking for groups. These groups have a wide age and demographic range. But I feel that the joy of the game was centered over anything else afoot in the space. Now I play in multiple groups that range from 5e to OSR and some CoC. I do look back fondly to my high school gaming group. But I will take the current scene of gamers over the clubhouse vibe of my early years trying to find groups.
ReplyDeleteOur generation is very strong with the nostalgia and we should be wary of it.
I agree that it's wise to be wary of nostalgia, just as it's wise to see the present as an age of unqualified improvement over the past. I can't speak for anyone but myself in saying that I experienced very little negativity in the hobby prior to the early 2000s. Whether that's indicative of a wider trend, I can't say for certainty.
DeleteThe free-floating nostalgia impulse in the 'wider Gen X' (like, 1960-1985 birth dates maybe?) is something I've started believing in and not dismiss as a journalistic/pop-sci talking point. But I think -- having somehow missed my implantation as a member of that generation -- that I really agree with your last statement, and really get the rest of it too.
DeleteOTOH, we might be the last American generation to get to _have_ nostalgia for youth culture once we've left it; the Ys and Zs and Alphas could potentially live in it forever. So maybe we should appreciate it for what it is? ;)
Like I said, my con experiences were very positive. People introduced themselves, rules would be explained, your opinion on a problem if you were shy or new was asked. It was the game shops I kept visiting for their events and I tried quite a few in different cities and always found them tight knit and inclusive and often rude. A far cry from the shops I encountered around 2010. They reminded me of the chess gatherings I went to as a teen. They were very open and community based. Heck, even the time I went with my uncle to a hex war game gathering was a good experience. They were excited to see a new player and happy to walk you through a turn or two of a game to get your feet wet. There is a huge gaming cafe near my house. You go in there and see folks playing board games, TRPG, miniatures, and cards all the time. And it is a focal point of meet ups. I have attended a few for painting tips, pick up games, and meeting new players. Such a different vibe from the old days. Though I know people tell stories about some old shops having that vibe. Wish you I had found one back in the day. I have also noticed that when my kids went through high school over the last decade that the habit of forming very distinct boundaries between groups has loosened up. A lot more of a come as you are mentality. So long as you are respectful.
DeleteThere is a lot of money in our generational nostalgia. I am constantly amazed by the collectors of childhood toys, books, and so forth. I have seen such massive collections online. Not my cup of tea. But they seem quite happy. Most of my nostalgia is for some simplicity in our lives when it comes to constant tech and certainty that seems hard to grasp for long now. Less crowds at some events or vacation places.
I think overall I don’t think it was simple as we think it was. Or that we all had the same experience. I did have a lot of good times when I finally found a group. But it took 20 years to find it again and not for the lack of trying.
up until about 2015, nobody cared what your politics, sexual preferences, or gender were in the gaming community. What matters is if you were a gamer. You like playing games? Cool! Come on in!
ReplyDeleteNow there's a lot of gate keeping on both sides. All because somebody (ore several somebodies) decided that your politics, sexual preferences, or gender are part of what defines you as a gamer.
Why?
Personally, I don't care what your politics, sexual preferences, or gender are. It's irrelevant when it comes to the gaming community. Some people do, and that's shortsighted and stupid. All I care about is if you like gaming. Keep the other stuff out of the equation.
People absolutely cared if you entered the gaming community with a vagina. Likewise if if you were Gaming While Black or While Asian. There was _intense_ gatekeeping, nothing like what I hear about people having conniptions about today. And when you were welcomed in, it was in order to be harassed and joked about.
DeleteI can't believe you say this seriously; even saying it aspirationally is insulting.
I remember playing with a guest player who was friend of a friend back in the late 80’s. And we were playing a superhero game. We were responding to a fire at an apartment building. This friend asked who was in the building. And the GM explained it an older building with lower income families. And that there was a string of arsons targeting the area. Our group already suspected it was a plot to seize the land by arson and financed crime waves like in Robocop. But this guy says aloud, “ if they are black I am not saving them”. We all ended that game session right there and left and asked that guy never to come back. And I know of lots of stories from women who left the hobby for harassment. I also remember some guy making rez jokes at a public game with a Native American player at the store table around 2011 and we asked him to leave on the spot. I haven’t ran into anything blatant or crude in a while. But it does lurk out there and always has …
DeleteBlack stone, you are exactly right. That’s how things were. Free and open. Women were welcome, as long as they didn’t seek to neuter the men or style of gaming. Anyone who could keep up was welcome. In four decades of gaming, I’ve never witnessed racism. I’m sure it’s happened, since a proportion of any group is racist, but in my circles, nobody cared one whit what skin color you had. We judged based on character and behavior.
DeleteBe it where I grew up in Omaha, Ne, or San Diego where I served in the Navy, and Las Vegas where I ended up for a bit. Finally ended up in Ohio. In all of my travels, I have never encountered gatekeeping. Maybe in your neck of the woods, but not mine.
DeleteI have bought not one, but two RPG histories this year that started off by telling me that RPGs are/were racist and we simply are not going to talk about those people.
ReplyDeleteDare I ask which ones?
DeleteI have as well. Wokism is a mental illness.
DeleteI'm assuming one of those two books is Jon Petersons The Making of Original Dungeons and Dragons AKA the book that made Elon Musk threaten to buy Hasbro. I own it, its just under 600 pages of high quality reproduction of notes and other documents related to OD&D with like 2-3 paragraphs in the forward that mention that some of the language is derogatory.
DeleteI do have my own criticism of the book, but its not the culture-war one. For a book thats supposedly about the origin of OD&D, Peterson included no documents of the Braunstein games prior to Arneson's "Medieval Braunstein" (maybe he thought he would be stepping on Griffith Morgans toes?) which feels like a bait and switch. On the other hand, I'm pretty sure it contains every official supliment to OD&D, including Chainmail, blown up to fit the size of a modern D&D book, so if you can find it on sale, its got pretty much everything you need (other than Outdoor Survival) to run an original rules campaign.
Yeah, that book isn't so bad. The biggest thing that was a turn-off is the fact they felt they had to mention that you shouldn't have provided hit-points for Indian (Vedic) deities, and that Gary shouldn't have done a sexist joke in the original description of Tiamat. The former irritates me because other more modern games sometimes stat out Angels in Abrahamic religions.
DeleteI think though I disliked the Internet commentary that followed trying to say that the one joke caused "real harm" (even though it wasn't reprinted in later books), and people trying to psychoanalyze the authors.
I'd be curious to know if that sentiment relates to face-to-face or online interactions... online discourse tends to be a lot nastier and gatekeepy than face-to-face, so I wouldn't be surprised if, when considering all interactions, things are generally a bit worse nowadays, because there wasn't much "online" in the 80s.
ReplyDeleteThat said, there's also possibly a bit of rose-tinted nostalgia in this. I can't help but think that what you remember as "a few barbs" may not be how some other people remember it. Or maybe you grew to be more conscious of how mean people can be. Or you're comparing interactions with a few dozen friends of friends in a very niche hobby to interactions with hundreds of people in a now vastly bigger industry. I can totally buy that "it was nicer when hobby XYZ was smaller", because it often was, at least from the inside. But I have a harder time buying "it was nicer when I was younger", because that very rarely was the case.
Uffda.
ReplyDeleteJames, I think you are suffering from both nostalgia and from trying to universalize your specific experiences in specific locales.
I started in '81 (age 11) with a copy of Holmes Basic and two friends and my brother. This eventually expanded to many friends at school and friends through other avenues, but never an entrenched gaming scene or community hosted in or surrounding any gaming stores. My early gaming supplies were primarily bought at book stores, Ben Franklin, and hobby/craft supply stores. I think my copy of Top Secret came from Sears. It wasn't until my second, boxed copy of V&V that I bought a game from a comic book/gaming store.
I'm a trans woman, and for all of the time I'm talking about, my gaming groups were intensely male, entirely straight (or in the closet) and exclusively white. Over the course of a decade of gaming, spread across 5 states in the US, I believe I gamed with a total of 7 women, most of whom did not feel comfortable enough to keep up with the gaming groups.
The sexism, racism, homophobia, and transphobia present in the gaming groups was rarely front and center, but was sort of constantly bubbling under the surface. It did come into focus whenever someone decided to start an "evil" campaign. Or when someone used V&V to make a campaign where the villain was a real world person who the "heroes" beat to a pulp and killed because the players didn't like him in the real world.
Again, this wasn't what I took away from gaming, nor what I enjoyed, but they were there, and occasionally it bubbled to the surface and it was uncomfortable. If I'd been out to literally any of these groups, I don't think it would have gone particularly well.
One of the biggest problems we have with ttrpgs is actually a deeper problem with unexamined culture. Most ttrpgs are rooted in genres of pulp fiction, and those genres' tropes are themselves often deeply racist and/or sexist and/or heteronormative. If you are in the male, straight, cisgendered slice of the world, many of these elements can be invisible, or even evoke nostalgia, despite the unpleasant poke it causes others.
One of the refreshing things about modern gaming, from my point of view, is that there are more and more players and designers engaging with this history of racism and sexist tropes and subverting and rejecting them.
I can only assume you're catching heat over EPT and MAR Barker, and I think that's pretty understandble, tbh. Not everybody can separate the art from the artist, and his racism did real harm to real people in the world. I've chosen to disconnect from fandom rooted in his works, personally. You obviously have made different choices, but those are real choices, and some people are naturally going to judge you for those choices. That's kind of how choices work.
I think you are right that there is less tolerance for that guy who knows too much about the wermacht, and I don't see that as a negative, personally. I don't want to game with nazis.
“Trans woman”. So, a man.
DeleteYou don't need to be a Nazi to know lots about the Wermacht. I used to have a very thick book (3" thick, 12"x15" or so) about the German army in WWII. My primary interest before D&D was WWII war gaming, board games and miniatures. But I understand that in some circles WWII would not be a suitable subject for gaming.
DeleteI did have a negative reaction from one friend when he came over to my house and saw my WWII setup on my train table.
Hit send too soon...
DeleteThe friend with the negative reaction had a parent or grandparent who served in the war.
“…his racism did real harm to real people” [citation needed]
DeleteI mean, the responses to my comment here really underscore my basic point -- we have one person with a reasoned comment about real world relevant experiences affecting how someone interacts with WWII even in simulation (my maternal grandparents lived under nazi occupation in Norway, for example), one person immediately invalidating my identity (not exactly welcoming of me or people like me) and another attempting to bait me about how a racist who wrote a novel under a pseudonym that white supremacists use for recruiting AND who was on the editorial board of a racist "race science" academic journal might have caused real harm to people through his very clearly racist actions in the real world. These latter two people want there to not be any trans people in gaming, and are perfectly fine with having racists in gaming. In both cases, they are exhibiting a kind of bigotry, and want that bigotry to be expressed in their gaming community. They want to be able to discriminate (or have people who discriminate, which is more or less the same thing) in their gaming communities.
DeleteI think the view that things were more accepting and collegial in the past is often a direct result of people gatekeeping and keeping the community more homogeneous. People like me -- when detected -- were ejected from the community, and the people NOT ejected didn't notice or weren't aware of our absence (or, of course, welcomed our absence).
Now that various kinds of minorities are openly present, there is more conflict between us and the people who don't want us here. At least some of the conflict we are now swimming in is people judging choices, and a lot of people being judged not wanting to be judged. Not everything is this, but some of it definitely is.
(To be clear, my usage of "people who know a lot about the wermacht" (and James' similar usage) was a shorthand for people who actually sympathize with the nazis, not military historians who aren't themselves neo nazis or bigots of one flavor or another)
Are you not able to handle anyone disagreeing with you or pointing out that a man is not a woman? If those things rattle you so much, perhaps the issue for you is in the mirror and not outside yourself.
DeleteAs well, the other poster is obviously correct that being interested in battle tactics of historical powers, does not make one aligned with the interests of those powers. To think otherwise seems absurd on its face.
Inclusivity and acceptance don't mean smiling, nodding, and blindly accepting anything that anyone says. You sound like you are expecting people to pander and defer to you and when they don't, you are calling them nazis or sexists or just plain bigots.
There were four comments total: two from someone talking about how being a military historian (effectively) doesn't make you a nazi. I agree with that.
DeleteThe other two comments are a) calling me a man and b) implying that a person who was not a passive racist, but a very active one, didn't necessarily hurt anybody.
I understand very well that there is a group of people in the world who do not see a trans person as anything but the gender of their birth. You are apparently one of them.
Are you interested in sitting down and gaming with me? I don't get that vibe off your comments. I also don't think it's unreasonable to expect me to be uncomfortable sitting down to game with someone who wants me to detransition, or wants to actively bully me, or maybe wants me dead or in a camp.
I don't necessarily think you want any of those things, but you seem very invested in making sure it is okay for you to say, to my face in public, that you deny my identity, as if this is some kind of scientific fact that I shouldn't be allowed to disagree with. On the contrary, please continue to be wrong in public as much as you want -- science is very much on my side. But I think we both know neither of us is likely to convince the other of our points of view.
This is the fundamental conflict we are faced with -- should I remove myself from gaming, should you, or should something else happen? And how contentious should this disagreement about our points of view be?
DeleteDon't want to be called a bigot? Don't speak or act like one.
People will simply treat you the way they are treated.
I’ll game with anyone. I don’t care if they are deliciously about their sec or not. But if you come to game, game. Don’t make it about your personal identity and politics. Moat same gamers will have a problem with that and might kick you put based on your
Deletebehavior, not your identity.
And no, science is not definitely not on your side. A man cannot become a woman, period.
DeleteEdit: "I’ll game with anyone. I don’t care if they are delusional about their sex or not. But if you come to game, game. Don’t make it about your personal identity and politics. Moat sane gamers will have a problem with that and might kick you put based on your behavior, not your identity."
DeleteJust so we're all on the same page about the conversation we're having: I'm trying to talk about how marginalized people have often felt excluded and have often been gatekept out of various gaming communities, historically, and how that has homogenized the "gaming culture" artificially, and how that has changed significantly over the past 40-some-odd years.
DeleteYou seem intent on spending a lot of time and energy being disrespectful and insulting me, personally, and people like me.
Which largely makes my point for me.
There are plenty of gaming groups with players who all agree with you, just as there are plenty of gaming groups who all agree with me. And there are plenty who have no horse in this race and just want to play and ignore the whole thing.
I don't think you're insane, I think your attitudes make you unpleasant and a transphobe. You do think I'm insane, and delusional, and normal gamers would maybe kick me out based on my behavior (ie, showing up dressed like I dress every day). Can we sit at a table and be civil to one another?
Maybe?
Should we?
Will we? Probably not.
And unfortunately for those people who don't have a horse in this race, it means they have to pick some sides on arguments like this. When the wider gaming community was more homogeneous, the *didn't* have to pick sides. And many of them want to not have to.
Fair enough.
But a lot of us don't have a choice -- our choice is pick a side and defend our right to exist, or stop existing in these spaces.
Stating a fact is not being disrespectful. If you came into my group dressed as a penguin and insisted on everyone referring to you as Mr. Penguin, because you identify as a penguin, and became enraged when anyone fails to do so, calling them pengphobic and hateful bigots, yeah, we'd kick you out. But if you just showed up dressed as a penguin and started gaming, we'd laugh but welcome you.
DeleteI don't hate people who are delusional about their sex and I certainly am not afraid of them. Everyone has mental issues they are dealing with. As long as you put those aside and game, you are welcome to game with me anytime.
Pardon my hypocrisy, but can all you anonyms start consistently numbering yourselves or something? The surrealistic effect of this subthread has its charms, but... come on.
Delete(This is the trans woman responding)
DeleteI'm not here to litigate whether binary sex and gender is a fact or not.
If someone shows up named Edward, but says, "Call me Skippy" and you insist on only calling him Edward, well, you're kind of being a jerk. Same thing for trans men or trans women and their names and (gasp!) pronouns. They have an identity, and they are asking you to respect it.
If you are "happy" to game with them, but want to misgender and/or misname them and/or laugh at them in the process, why would they put up with that?
Again, you are encouraging them to self-select out of your group. And, if it's you and your friends and a stranger, fair enough. If it's a pick up game at a con or a store, well, it may all play out differently. Should it? Or should your (or my) view dominate the larger gaming scene?
This is a conflict that you and I aren't going to actually resolve -- and especially not in this sub-thread. You believe one set of things is true facts. I know a bunch of random science that contradicts your beliefs. Also, my lived experience also contradicts your beliefs. But more importantly, my presence at a gaming table (or in a comment thread) appears to present you with an opportunity to "tell me facts". You know I don't want to be called a man, but you are insistent on doing so anyway, *because it is a "fact"*. What does this accomplish? I know you think I'm a man. You know I don't think I'm a man. What does saying I'm a man gain you?
Here online where we're anonymous, well, there are no real consequences. In person, at a gaming table, it's a recipe for conflict of one sort or another.
Facts are not disrespectful. But choices can be, and telling me I'm a man when you know I don't want to be called that is a disrespectful choice even if it is a true fact, and is also a disrespectful choice if it's not a true fact (as I, clearly, believe it not to be). I'm still a person, even if I'm a delusional person. You seem to think respecting me as a person is *too much for me to ask*.
What are the options for no conflict? We are both there, and nobody says anything about it and everybody stays polite, or we are both there and I get discriminated or disrespected in various ways and I take it without defending myself, or I am not there at all. Most transphobes want to be able to suffer no negative consequences for saying things that disrespect trans people, and to do things which bully or otherwise push them out of public spaces. So they want options 2 or 3 -- and they hope that option 2 will lead to option 3, no trans people around and visible. Most trans people want option #1 -- not to be ridiculed or discriminated against.
But ignore trans people, because we're just one kind of minority in the gaming space, and currently a big political hot button. Everything I'm talking about also applies EXACTLY THE SAME to women and other members of the LGBT+ community and to ethnic and cultural minorities. All the behavior I'm talking about directed at trans people I have seen directed at women, or gay people, or other minorities at one time or another.
I know someone whose sister's character got raped and killed by her brother's gaming group every time she tried to play with them, back when they were teens in the 80s. And they wouldn't let her play a male character, only a female one -- precisely so they could be cruel to her, to dissuade her out of playing at all.
There is less (not none, but less) gatekeeping today. But that means that all these little rough spots are bringing more real world conflict to the gaming community and I think that's a good thing in general, because it contributes to making the gaming community more like the rest of the world. Obviously, not everybody agrees with me. A lot of places where things were smoothed over because nobody who might rock the boat was in the room are now causing conflict, and that conflict is important, I think. Having more different kinds of people in the room results in a better room.
No, I'm not talking about names. I'm talking about being asked to lie. If someone insists I deny biological reality and say that they are a penguin when they are not, and rages and calls names if I don't, that person is gone. You can identify as a woman or a penguin or whatever for all I care. But what you can't do is make anyone else buy into the delusion.
DeleteNone of that means you "don't exist". You are real. A real man who apparently thinks he's a woman. You are a human being and deserve dignity as such. But I will not lie to make you feel more comfortable.
"Not wanting" to be called what you are is a YOU problem, and you have nobody to blame but yourself for any discomfort caused there.
There is PLENTY of gatekeeping going on now, but most of it is the progressive neo-Puritan variety, though the political winds have shifted recently and those types are in decline.
Yes, having diversity of THOUGHT is a wonderful thing, in general. That's why I'm having this conversation with you. :)
Happy gaming to you and God bless you.
Bookoo, there is a difference between accepting scientific fact that there are two sexes, and obeying some civil cultural norms that are accepted.
DeleteTransgenderism has been a fact since the 20th Century and actual gender reassignment has been an operation done since the 1950s. It has been recognized by psychiatrists.
I can disagree with several modern transgender demands, while also respecting that if a person makes the decision as an adult, works to assimilate themselves to the different gender, that I will call them by their name and their pronouns.
That's not denying science, that's just not being an asshole. I'm betting if you were that way to your trans co-worker you'd get disciplined for that. I'm betting if you did that around your peers, they'd call you out on that behavior.
The person who said "so, a man" lost all good credibility to rebut any statements by her just based on that. You could have pushed back against her statement about "bad tropes", which I think is a modern puritanical view that tries to make all old fiction as something bad.
But when you focus on that one thing, you lose any serious credibility.
Yes, there is a difference. But "civil cultural norms" that ask someone to deny basic reality are not civil and should not be normal. Asking someone to agree that the grass is green and up is down and that a cat is really a dog or they get canceled is not civil and not a good thing. The same applies for asking someone to agree that a man can become a woman. Everyone used to know this until about 5 minutes ago.
DeleteYes, men have wanted to be women, and vice versa, for a long time. That doesn't change the reality of their biological sex. They have mental disorders.
If a delusional adult wants to attempt to live as the opposite sex, they have that right. But they do NOT have the right to have anyone else nod, smile, and agree that they are the opposite sex, denying basic biological reality.
Lying to make someone comfortable is not good, it's not respectable, and it's not civil. It's cowardice.
Fortunately, society seems to be shifting away from your point of view and back towards mine.
And no, "So, a man", is just stating a fact. It may make you squirm and make you frown, but that is a YOU problem, not a problem with the person stating the fact. If someone cannot hear a very basic biological fact without becoming uncomfortable, they have some issues.
"When you focus on that one thing, you lose any serious credibility". Ironic, since you seem to be focusing on exactly that one thing.
Bookoo: "Everyone used to know this until about 5 minutes ago."
DeleteAs I've stated, it's been over 50+ years.
Bookoo: "That doesn't change the reality of their biological sex. They have mental disorders."
Yes, there's something called Gender Dysphoria. And one of the treatments for it, according to the psychiatric associations, is gender reassignment.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_dysphoria
Bookoo: And no, "So, a man", is just stating a fact. It may make you squirm and make you frown, but that is a YOU problem, not a problem with the person stating the fact.
It doesn't make me squirm, except for the fact that somebody is excusing crude behavior in the name of "science". And you miss the point I was trying to make. You did not address the original poster's points, by using that statement you dismissed her as a "crazy person" rather than dispute other areas you might disagree with.
What's been over 50 years? Gaming. Yes, within gaming communities and society at large, people used to understand a man cannot become a woman.
DeleteYes, but it's still a mental disorder and you cannot change your biological sex.
"Crude behavior". LOL. Yes, calling a duck a duck is crude behavior, but it's not crude behavior to pretend you are the opposite sex and ask everyone else to go along with the ruse.
Encouraging delusion and mental illness is not kind, it is not respectable. It is cowardice.
If you have a paranoid gamer who insists the Chinese government is spying on him and that they have bugged the room, would you meekly nod, smile, and agree, since you don't want to ruffle feather or (god forbid) challenge this person's delusion. Would you smile and nod if you have a gaming buddy who insists he is destined to become the next King of Prussia, because that's what he identifies as?
You have bought into lies that have been foisted upon you and are meekly agreeing in order to not ruffle feathers.
You need to study up on Alexander Solzhenitsyn, who wrote and spoke eloquently about the Soviet insistence that citizenry must agree to certain untruths or face the consequences.
Live not by Lies.
Bookoo: "Yes, but it's still a mental disorder and you cannot change your biological sex."
DeleteYes, but you can change your gender and pronouns. Sex change operations have existed since the 1950s. It's not that new.
Bookoo: "Encouraging delusion and mental illness is not kind, it is not respectable. It is cowardice."
So, why do people who actually treat people with this have accepted this as a treatment. You are speaking about "delusion and mental illness" but you are not looking at how the actual professional treat this. What is your informed medical and psychological opinion? And remember, people who go through this (in a healthy way) go through a lot of treatment and therapy before committing to such a change.
Bookoo: "If you have a paranoid gamer"...
Those are different cases. I feel you are using your personal objections against transgender folks to excuse behaving like an asshole.
From my perspective, it's the difference between saying as a medical professional that being overweight is bad, and saying to your friend "you are a fat pig". The former is okay, the latter is not. If your religious beliefs included thinking homosexuality was a sin, you can private believe that, but would you shun a gamer who was gay from your table. Would you say "you are a sinner and are going to hell"?
Bookoo: "Live not by Lies"
The world is a little more complex than how you perceive it. All I can tell is that the way you are arguing this, you are definitely coming off as a person who is not welcoming at the gaming table.
No, sex change operations have not existed since the 50s. You are not "changing your sex".
DeleteIt's real simple. Wishing you were a thing or thinking you are a thing doesn't make you that thing. A man who wishes he was a woman can't become a woman, period.
You are also behind the times on the acceptability of that as a treatment. People are realizing that they have been sold a bill of goods. You don't perform surgery on people with anorexia to get them to what they imagine themselves to be in their heads. You don't perform surgery on people with body dysmorphia to get them to what they delusionally think they are.
And finally, there is a mental disorder where people identify as someone with a limb or two or three. We don't perform surgery to cut off their healthy limbs in order to conform to their delusions.
You seem as if you have been woefully deceived.
Speaking truth to lies is not "being an asshole", and even if you think it is, I'd rather be an ass than a coward, as it seems you are being.
"A fat pig" is not accurate. A person is a not a pig. That is not true. However, telling a man that he is a man is completely, 100% accurate.
The world is not more complex than I'm seeing it in the ways you are suggesting. You have simply bought into lies.
You need to study up on Alexander Solzhenitsyn, who wrote and spoke eloquently about the Soviet insistence that citizenry must agree to certain untruths or face the consequences.
Live not by Lies.
I am not welcoming to those who would ask me to lie for their own comfort, yes. There are far more important things in life than being "welcoming" to delusion at the gaming table.
Bokoo, buddy. I have sad news for you. Your whole world is invented and you lie about it all the time. Countries, companies, religion, social classes, property... All of those are inventions and ways we chose to classify things and nevertheless I doubt you refuse to call someone born in France a French. The thing that makes all of that "real" for you is not science. It's just law and that was invented too. That should be enough for you to be respectful to someone that has changed their sex by law.
DeleteYou're not a scientifically minded person who lives not by Lies. You're just selecting the inventions that conform to your prejudice.
Sambarikov, buddy, I have awful news for you. A man cannot become a woman! I know, shocking, but true. If you need to lie down to take in this objective reality, please feel free. If you have difficulty understanding the difference between objective and subjective reality, I can recommend some basic courses for you.
DeleteIf you believe a man can become a woman if he just wants it badly enough, boy, I have a wonderful bridge to sell you in Brooklyn. :)
"Prejudice". LOL. Yes, I am prejudiced towards believing that a man cannot become a woman and vice versa.
"Selecting the inventions". Yes, oh wise one. Understanding the difference between male and female is just something I "invented". You are a hoot. :)
DeleteI'm not arguing objective truth, sweetie. I'm arguing about your point of not telling lies when your whole world is made of invented stuff you're pretty comfortable to go along with.
DeleteYou don't scientifically own anything in your house, but your ok with saying that's your stuff and you wouldn't like if someone came and took it away.
But you are very annoyed when asked to call someone by the name they were allowed to have by law.
The same thing is the basis for both claims. You're choosing only one.
Do we agree with that?
I’m with you, James. I started gaming in the early to mid eighties. There was a sense of freedom and exploration then that is largely missing now, subsumed under the oppression of corporatism, and modern progressivism (neo-Puritanism). Ironically, there was far more inclusivity and diversity of thought (the only type that matters) in that earlier period of gaming. There was a dignity then. Come as you are. Voice your opinion. We all respected one another enough to voice disagreement and understand the other, not being a fragile snowflake, would be just fine. I consider myself a restorationist and seek to reclaim this buried legacy. Those times can be reinvigorated and I do my part every gaming session.
ReplyDeleteI thought games were apolitical, until mid/late-80s I was playing sand-table Tractics, and some of the players only played Germans, and then showed up in Nazi uniforms. NOPE, OUT. Group didn't last long after that. Playing at the World has a lot of examples of that in fanzines going back to the '60s.
ReplyDeletePlaying Varg's game Myfarog isn't acceptable, right? Because he has an offensive view and puts it in his game, and it's validating that by playing along. I've quit playing a couple of other creator's games because they're either trolling or seriously gone far right-wing, and if I see someone does play their games, I don't play with them.
This is unfortunate, but there's millions of non-shitty people and games.
Side note: there is very little online about playing with a sand table. This would be something worth restoring for posterity
DeleteI notice the 'freedom' faction sorta seems torqued that people are using -- actually, no, ABUSING! -- freedom to _not associate with them_, which is entertaining enough just on its own.
DeleteI'd could bet that most (if not all) the comments I see talking about how inclusive and understanding their gaming groups were in the old times are coming from straight while males because that was most of the public of TTRPGs back then.
ReplyDeleteIf you see some discussions appearing now that were not present back in the 80s/90s, that's probably because people who had those opinions were just not present in the hobby.
You can just look through other comments in this very post to see some of that "inclusion and understanding" which is a very sad thing.
Newsflash: there is nothing wrong with straight, white, males, and there is nothing wrong with a hobby that predominantly appeals to them. Different types of people prefer different things and make different choices. Nothing wrong with that.
DeleteI never said there's anything wrong with it. Sorry bud, you completely missed the point.
DeleteI never said you did. I did not miss the point at all. I simply made one of my own.
DeleteGot it. You're just being defensive for no reason at all.
DeleteYou are the one who seems defensive, Sambarilov, as well as evincing some reading comprehension isssues.
DeleteSure
DeleteEveryone's experience is different. I know for me over my 40+ years of gaming, I've gamed with all sorts of people: black, white, Asian, gay, straight, men, and women. I've never come across any bigotry or gatekeeping of any kind.
DeleteOVERALL, the gaming community has ALWAYS been inclusive, even though there may have been isolated occurrences of bigotry and gatekeeping. That is unfortunate and sad. But to say that the gaming community was never inclusive until recently is false and revisionist history.
this is coming from what some people may label as a "straight whit male", who so happens to have a child in the 20s who is gay.
And if we're going to be using labels (which it seems a lot of people are hung up on), I'd rather use the label "GAMER" and be done with it. That's the only one that matters.
Let's pretend that all the comments in this post were coming only from gay, black, immigrants and other marginalized people who played TTRPGs in the 80s. Do you think they would be telling the same stories about how great it was back then and how awful it is right now?
Delete"marginalized peoples" LOL. You seem like a far leftist who is spouting these terms that have been brainwashed into you. "Gay, black, immigrant..." Nobody cared about any of that back in the day. They were there to game, not to interrogate your superficial identity.
DeleteThe problem is prejudice has always existed, and gamers aren't immune to it.
DeleteThere were fewer minorities in gaming likely because it didn't become more mainstream. And I don't think the games themselves have a lot of systemic racism built in. The people complaining about Orc = Black Person, having handicap-accessible dungeons, and saying the existence of slaves in a campaign setting glorifies it are being ridiculous.
However, anybody who says "They were there to game" is also being overly simplistic. People hated on other people all the time. People even disliked different editions of D&D or would fight over the type of fiction you had. People had and acted on their own prejudices. Gaming wasn't this utopia of tolerance anymore than it was inherently racist or sexist.
Yes JRT. You got it
DeleteExactly right, blackstone. 100%. Well said.
DeleteWow. When I was talking about "unlikeable" people in the hobby, I was mostly just talking about people who are awkward/smell bad/ect. Comment section has really broadened my definition.
ReplyDeleteThis "restorationist" comment is interesting. There are a TON of millenial and gen z members of the OSR, but I think most of us are defining the "R" in "OSR" as "Renaisance." In other words we are looking to the the past for inspiration on how to play and design our games. However we're not necessarily interested in reviving the politics, or even the gaming culture, of eras that we were not even alive for. We grew up on hip hop and electronic music. Remix culture is in our blood, and we see every obscure module, fantasy heartbreaker, and well-worn garage sale splat book as material to "sample." We love restorationists that scan long lost books, but once we've downloaded the pdf, we dont necessariy have any problem swapping out chunks of material, tweaking rules to fit our table, or otherwise making the game our own.
I think for most OSR players that have no memory of the Reagan administration, the idea that playing older editions of D&D would be a political reaction seems as bizzare as saying you bought a record player to fight woke culture.
You seem to be conflating a few things. In my comment identifying myself as a restorationist, I never mentioned politics. You did, though. You also mention "remix culture". If you were not alive and gaming in the 70s and 80s, you may fail to realize that "remix culture" already existed then. That was a HUGE part of what gaming entailed for many groups. Take the bare bones skeleton of rules and suggestions and "remix" your way into your own version of rules and campaigning. It was a blast and it sounds like you are doing some of the same things today.
DeleteI tried to play D&D in the 80s with a bunch of straight white guys (like me), but there was too much joking, bashing, cussing, and boozing going on. It was like trying to play with orcs. There has to be an agreement between the people at the table. There was no agreement but self-indulgence and self-expression, so we had no game. Without an agreement, and rules of engagement and behavior, the game suffers. Maybe this is all just common sense and I'm wasting my breath saying stuff that doesn't need to be said. But in my experience, there was no golden era when people were nicer.
ReplyDeleteDo only straight white guys joke, bash, cuss, or drink? That sounds like (racist) stereotyping.
DeleteDidn't say that or intend to imply it. I'm saying there needs to be an agreement about behavior for the game to thrive.
DeleteI think there’s a pretty big difference between “I thought we were going to play a serious game but instead we played casual nerd poker” and “I showed up and people were bigots”. The first is just a mismatch of styles. A couple of my players during Covid would smoke a joint while playing, which was fine because nobody was treating the game seriously, which is what we all needed at the time. I’m sure there were more "serious” tables too during the golden age. You just wouldn’t get games luxe Phoenix Command if everyone was playing a beer and pretzels game
DeleteGot it. Agreed, but those are usually things addressed before the campaign starts by most groups, in my experience. If a behavior issue asserts itself during a campaign, simply address it. Humans will be humans and issues will arise in any endeavor. That's just life.
ReplyDeleteCampaigns are like long term relationships without the sex. Sometimes you’ve got to go on a few bad dates before you find the one
ReplyDeleteWell looks like Grognardia has drawn the the attention of the "We're the right side of history, now shut up you bigot!" crowd.
ReplyDeleteI haven't read anyone at all being told to shut up; if anything the conversations are rolling along at an unusually good rate. Mind you, I'm not kinkshaming anyone: if being told to shut up is your yum, I hope you find it somewhere!
Delete(Maybe James will want to cull this comment; it's getting a bit long and stuffy in here. I'm cool with that. I don't think I'm articulating what I'm thinking very well here anyway.)
ReplyDeleteI'm reading "community" here (and in related) threads -- e.g., "the gaming community", "the [brand name] gaming community", "our gaming community", "my gaming community". It occurs to me that these are all really quite different things and perhaps important and useful distinctions in their meaning can get lost in between the writer and the reader, under the vague cover-term "community".
It's one thing to say: "The gaming community (the TTRPG hobby) is going to exclude tech bros." It's another to say: "My gaming community (the group(s) I play in) is going to exclude tech bros." While in that example both are, _obviously_, the only morally correct policy to follow, they're making very different claims to control 'social space' and ability to constrain other people's behavior, freedom, and choices.
This is really perceptive -- thank you.
DeleteThe fact is, a lot of this is due to changes in society and the times. Back in the 70s and 80s, the cultural message was unbridled freedom and tolerance. Live and let live. Agree to disagree. Respect differences of opinion, lifestyle, think outside the box, challenge the establishment, but always be free to be whatever and respect everyone else for doing so. Of course in hindsight, that was often more on paper than in practice, but at the time it encouraged that sort of ‘nothing greater than differences’ social mentality. Which was why the press’s war on D&D was so strange. A decade of telling people to be creative, use imagination, be different, and respect everyone for doing so – yet the ones saying it pounced. Anyway, while some can look back and remember rank divisions then, it was nonetheless covered with a veneer of ‘let’s all get along’. Today, of course, that’s not the case. Today we are taught to judge, to condemn, to point fingers. It’s practically mandated from the top down. And while the objects of our perpetual wrath might not specifically include one’s favorite RPGs, that sort of social conditioning tends to spread and expand and trickle down. So a generation weaned on the idea that we judge, we hate, we condemn, we eradicate will probably be adding daily to the topics that deserve such treatment. In fact, in a truly bizarre spin, our sensitivities would have us abolish the idea of races or gender differences in the game, but then think nothing of pointing out and even judging the differences of those who play it. Again, not that it didn’t happen way back then, it just had to be covered up or spun in a way to insist that wasn’t really happening even if it was. As opposed to today, when especially younger generations are taught that anything less than total condemnation is the same as partaking in the problems. To be honest, given the zeitgeist, I’d be shocked if this wasn’t how things were conducted today with games, RPGs, or any other part of life.
ReplyDeleteExactly right, David! Having the right cultural and societal aspirations and targets matters. Of course, everyone won't always hit the target, that's obvious. But telling everyone what's expected and where we are aiming, that's the job of a healthy society. The 70s and 80s did that well, even if (obviously and as is always the case), everyone didn't always live up to the aspirations. That fact doesn't mean you change the target to the ludicrousness of what it largely has become.
DeleteThe irony of writing about how the OSR discourse can be exhausting, only to be met with maybe the most exhausting discourse in this blogs history is just now hitting me.
ReplyDeleteYou think we can keep this convo going another day?
Nostalgia is apparently an inexhaustible fuel, so, yes.
DeleteIt might be worth asking, say, gay men whether they feel that they were more accepted in the past than now.
ReplyDeleteIf the answer is, as I suspect, no, then that's not gamers becoming less accepting. It is, at most, a change in what is acceptable.
But that's harder to argue against.
It sounds much more reasonable to say, "People are so judgmental nowadays. I wish it was like it used to be", than to say, "I was more comfortable when the gays were out and that one guy who knew way too much about the Wehrmacht’s order of battle was in, than now when it's the other way round."
That has nothing to do with gaming and more to do with society. Remember, even Obama, after he was elected publicly supported the Defense of Marriage Act and said he opposed gay marriage. Society's view of gay people has changed rapidly.
DeleteYou have it exactly backwards, and the fact that you isolate gay men specifically illustrates this. Back then the Game afforded a really fun and creative community to everyone - the common denominator was "playing the game." aka weirdos who actually liked playing roles. The game wasn't for you to work out your identity back then, it was for you to craft - and play with - an artificial identity, and to play at that identity's development.
DeleteA Christian who loved the game back then was FAR more likely to struggle with finding his place at the table because of society, the church community/family, and the flamboyant atheists who also liked to play as well than was someone who was either closeted or openly gay.
EVERYONE who played back then was, at some point in their career, suspected to be a queer satanist of some stripe. So if you actually happened to be one, if anything, you felt in good company.
We were also, in a sense, united in our Outsiderism. It was our own space because many of us didn't fit in Elsewhere, and that reinforced our belonging.
ReplyDeleteBut that also made it something of a secret society: I remember clearly my high school friends and I recoiling in horror when a bunch of younger kids started playing D&D *in the cafeteria during lunch period* — because just like Fight Club, the first rule of D&D was you *didn't do that in the open where people could see you.*
Have you seen Zero Charisma?
Deletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2pF-CrfxIlg
Its kind of about what your taking about, but also about how groups that are, as you say, united in outsiderism are also more likely to tollerate terrible behavior as they are limited in the friends they can make. As more "insiders" join the group, this is great for most people as they no longer have to deal with toxic people, but a disaster for toxic people who cant or wont change their behavior.
It kind of does a neat trick though, in that it makes you feel bad for these toxic people. Like, what if your an asshole, but part of that has to do with neurological differences? What if you need to make A LOT of changes in your life to fit in, and you dont have the social suport to help you make those changes?
I love it, but again it came out just before I started playing, so I dont know how much of an exageration it is.
Everyone's experience is different. I know for me over my 40+ years of gaming, I've gamed with all sorts of people: black, white, Asian, gay, straight, men, and women. I've never come across any bigotry or gatekeeping of any kind.
ReplyDeleteOVERALL, the gaming community has ALWAYS been inclusive, even though there may have been isolated occurrences of bigotry and gatekeeping. That is unfortunate and sad. But to say that the gaming community was never inclusive until recently is false and revisionist history.
this is coming from what some people may label as a "straight whit male", who so happens to have a child in the 20s who is gay.
And if we're going to be using labels (which it seems a lot of people are hung up on), I'd rather use the label "GAMER" and be done with it. That's the only one that matters.
Well said! This is exactly right.
DeleteI've been a gamer (in Belgium) since the early 80s. I was recently interviewed for an upcoming book about geek culture in the 80s and 90s, and the topic about differences between then and now came up.
ReplyDeleteThe major difference is that large parts of "geek culture" have become mainstream, and hence, less "edgy". The sharp edges, including weird cross-over interests - and which formed part of the appeal - have been filed away. I remember entering dark game /comic/weird stuff shops, which you entered without knowing whether you'll come out alive :-) Now, Forbidden Planet in London has become a tourist attraction with tourists buying a Harry Potter or Doctor Who pin.
That's neither better or worse, but different. The main thing is that "gaming" used to be a subculture where the weird kids (and young adults) could feel at home, a place where you could share your weird and unknown interest, whatever they were. It might be such "safe havens" still do exist, but they might not be centered around gaming culture anymore. But I don''t really know ... the only thing is that when I meet my gaming group (all 50+ guys), we're still talking about our geeky interests ;-)
The definition of "geek and weird" has also changed. It's almost has become a lifestyle. "Look, I'm wearing funny glasses and I like Star Wars, so I'm a geek!"
Yes, I think the gatekeeping people might subscribe today is forgetting the fact that this used to be a niche hobby, it only gained some popularity in the 1980s, but most of that audience was the typical "nerds". Now it's a lot more mainstream, so the original outcasts have to compete with the minority outcasts on different levels.
Delete