feminist roleplaying

[twelveobin]

How do you bring feminism, or anti-racism or other anti-oppressive thinking, into your characters or your GMing?

Note: if you don't agree with feminism etc you can just pass over this thread. I will not be engaging in debate and I don't encourage anyone else to engage either.

[Dervish]

Probably not the best idea to try to use roleplays as a medium to express social issues and values. As a writer, for a lack of better term (story teller, perhaps?), it's best to make and play characters that have merits that are their own instead of imposed values of the author. Nobody wants to get involved in a roleplay where they feel like they are being preached to, especially if the opinions are particularly hard lined.

That said, if you wanted the values you wish to convey in your characters, the best way to do that is to make them reflect the best positive traits you wish to see. My two favorite roleplay characters of mine are both female characters that don't conform to gender norms and have very strong wills and independent personalities. It helps they're in pretty gender-neutral settings, but overall they're well-developed characters that work well with the casts of characters. Their worth and ability is based off of their own merits, regardless of gender, and that is key. You don't want to more or less shove things down people's throats or become overbearing, otherwise people won't want to associate with a character (or, in extension, you). Having healthy relations with other players and their characters also goes a long way. People more or less want to do this to have fun or tell a story, and it's a lot easier to enjoy yourself if you don't feel alienated or like they're getting preached to.

To be clear, I don't know what you're like and I'm certainly not saying any of that because I think you'll be overbearing or anything, it's more or less a general statement related to the topic in general. The best thing, really, is to show, not tell. Have characters exemplify the traits and ideals you want to convey without alienating or talking down to anyone and it can be great. Just don't use roleplaying as a medium for social commentary, that's a pretty unpleasant line of thinking. Putting it another way, a lot of people use roleplaying as escapism to get away from troubles in the real world. It would be kind of like popping in a new first person shooter on your WiiStation One and being bombarded with messages from the firearms rights lobby in the loading screens or having characters look at a bunch of dead civilians and having your squad mate mournfully lament, "This would have turned out differently if only these people were allowed to conceal carry." or other such hyper-political nonsense.

On the flip side, having characters who are racist/ sexist/ generally awful is a great writing exercise that doesn't reflect on the writer if they're capable of distancing themselves from their characters and it often acts as a great contrast to the rest of the characters, who usually are much more progressive-minded and tolerant. Sometimes, being shown awful traits in a character in a fictional setting is a great way to kind of have a commentary about the real world, and it adds some delightful group dynamics and conflict to work through, and the best part is, your dick character can eventually work his or her way past their narrow worldview and expand a lot easier than somebody in real life. I mean, if the reason your fantasy party can't obtain the gemstone that can save the kingdom because Sir Douchebag of Assholeshire doesn't want some filthy elf bitch (who is the only one who can unlock its power) getting her dirty hands on it because of some deep seated prejudice that goes against all rationality is often a lot more effective at making people reflect on the issue at hand than having a character tell them about how Sir Douchebag is a real turd off handed because he thinks elves or underhanded swine and women are weak and feeble. Being able to have a context for the situation is way more fulfilling and it drives the point home in a memorable way, plus it gives the party something to work together on overcoming.

[twelveobin]

Oh I'm not talking about the values of the characters. I'm talking about the creation of the characters and worlds. Like, often in fantasy genres, dark skin is associated with evil or brutish races, and light skin is associated with more refined races, for example. So anti-racist writing could involve creating a dark-skinned angel or paladin.

[Dervish]

Well, nothing's preventing anyone from doing anything like that. It's up to the players to decide what kinds of characters they want to play, there's certainly no rules saying you can't have black elves in an original setting, for instance.

[twelveobin]

Yeah exactly! ^__^

[HeySeuss]

If the RP is set in something like a historical setting, then I maintain the gender roles and racial/societal prejudices. My tendency to play authentic to the era/setting has nothing to do with my personal preferences in real life.

[twelveobin]

Yeah that makes sense. Like, if you're playing a medieval dude he would probably be a misogynist, but if you were playing a medieval woman she could be resisting in some way or just be a general badass

[idlehands]

twelveobin said
Yeah that makes sense. Like, if you're playing a medieval dude he would probably be a misogynist, but if you were playing a medieval woman she could be resisting in some way or just be a general badass

Or play her in her traditional gender role while still being a strong and important complex character?

[twelveobin]

Yeah that's what I meant by "resisting in some way or just generally badass"

[idlehands]

I don't understand how what you said equals what I said. You're implying that they're bucking the norm, because you say 'resisting'. History was written by men for the most part but that doesn't mean women did not play an important behind the scenes and even in the forefront. If you're saying that female characters should not be limited to damsels in distress, I agree but that's not entirely about feminism, that's just not making a one dimensional character.

[twelveobin]

No I meant the same thing you were saying, not bucking the norm. And i completely agree. I think generally writing fleshed-out women is a feminist action because it is the opposite of objectification.

[idlehands]

I never saw it as feminism, just good writing.

[Igraine]

I personally would not consider it a feminist action at all, so much as simply good writing and character development. I never write for my female characters, no matter the time period or circumstance, as if they (and by extension, I) have anything to 'prove.' As Idle already may have implied, one dimensional characters are simply dull as dirt, and no fun to either read or write for.

[Girlie Go Boom]

Hiiiiiiiiii~~!!^^

K, so like this may not be exactly anti-oppresive thinking... But this was my idea for homosexual females to bypass male-female sexual intercourse in a RP.

My character, JaSi is a faerie that will be able to make babies with another female faerie by using a magical seed. They plant said magical seed and it will grow into a tree and when the flowers on the tree blossoms, baby faeries will be born from the flowers. No need for intercourse, but they must plant the seed together. Magic. Yays^^!! My other charrie, Genie, is from a deviant type of female werewolf that can mate with other females. And if they do mate, the other female will give birth to a wolf cub. Ewww... yes, I knows, I knows, but there is much more to it than that... xDDDDD

And then there is Desiree. My friend also helped me flesh out the the ideas for her attitude. She said that this is my most 'feminist' charrie yet. I had the idea for the Lacroix's and she helped me make her a bad-ass cuz yeah... Bunnita is So Not Badass ;D But I like that her family is always run by a current matriarch. Desiree Anne Simone-Lacroix!

Oh! And this is Duplo. This is Bunnita's 'Wah-I'm-a-girl' charrie. Yes, but she is also a character that can handle herself, but only at night. My friend also said that Duplo is my social commentary charrie... meh, I can kinda' see it, but I don't think she's meant to be much more than a character in a fantasy. Duplo is a neat concept regardless, IMHO. ;D

Okay, so I don't know if that helps the conversation, but there. ;D Right. ~Later~~!!

[idlehands]

I ran this through google translate and it froze up.

[Girlie Go Boom]

xDDD

idlehands said
I ran this through google translate and it froze up.

Right. Sorry. I gets excited and gets all carried away. I'll edit it into human speak. ^^

[Girlie Go Boom]

(Double post. Urps.)

[idlehands]

Bunnita said
xDDDRight. Sorry. I gets excited and gets all carried away. I'll edit it into human speak. ^^

I honestly don't think that's going to help much but go for it.

[Gwazi Magnum]

Depends on the definition of feminism.

-If you mean third-wave, as in the belief/idea that women are always discriminated against, men suck *yadda yadda probably the shit you said you didn't want to debate about*.
I simply don't mention it. I have enough anger/frustration dealing with such people in the real world, I don't want such things also infecting the Fantasy escape I have.

-If you mean the goal of Gender Equality (Basically 1st wave feminism), I normally don't address it. In most worlds/RP's I'm in men and women are already seen as equals, no judgements made so it just doesn't become an issue. So no woman character of mine ever goes around acting like they need to 'prove' anything against men. Men are people, women are people, we're all people.

The only time the topic of feminism may come up is if say I'm writing a Villain and to get across he's a villain I may give him a trait such as "Claims young women as his own property to 'play' with as he wills". Usually it's not a sex specific trait, but some characteristic seen as cruel/evil to help get across that this is an evil dude.

That or it's to fit the setting, such as say a Medieval land. Women are still expected to stay in the house, provide for their husbands, if they resist sexual advances they're called a prude etc.
Mainly as a literary device to get across that this is not a nice world.

[idlehands]

Magic Magnum said
Depends on the definition of feminism.-If you mean third-wave, as in the belief/idea that women are always discriminated against, men suck *yadda yadda probably the shit you said you didn't want to debate about*.I simply don't mention it. I have enough anger/frustration dealing with such people in the real world, I don't want such things also infecting the Fantasy escape I have.-If you mean the goal of Gender Equality (Basically 1st wave feminism), I normally don't address it. In most worlds/RP's I'm in men and women are already seen as equals, no judgements made so it just doesn't become an issue. So no woman character of mine ever goes around acting like they need to 'prove' anything against men. Men are people, women are people, we're all people.The only time the topic of feminism may come up is if say I'm writing a Villain and to get across he's a villain I may give him a trait such as "Claims young women as his own property to 'play' with as he wills". Usually it's not a sex specific trait, but some characteristic seen as cruel/evil to help get across that this is an evil dude.That or it's to fit the setting, such as say a Medieval land. Women are still expected to stay in the house, provide for their husbands, if they resist sexual advances they're called a prude etc.Mainly as a literary device to get across that this is not a nice world.

In the Middle Ages they were expected to resist sexual advances by anyone other than their husbands. I don't think being called a prude was something to worry about but the opposite. If they were open about their sexuality they could end up being labeled a loose woman all the way up to being forced into a priory or even called a witch.