That thread

[drivingblind]

That thread over on peaseblossom's journal got a little crazy. Unfairly, I think on both sides. And far be it from me to continue to bust on one of the wee faerie folk from the Bard's midsummer dream

Comments

[booyeah]

The thing I think when I see all this (and this is not to negate Pease's feelings on the matter since they're feelings and all) is this

[tundra_no_caps]

Laura Croft is also a modern creation, not from the true era of pulp.

[scholargipsy]

I think this is spot-on: when creating a pulp RPG, mimesis requires a certain amount of sexism, I fear. You can subvert it here and there in your sample characters, illustrations, or play guidelines (and as a GM who's had far more female players over the years than male, I am glad that you do), but you are dealing with a genre whose historical underpinnings assume certain gender norms. Capturing pulp's flavor regrettably requires you to capture its disturbingly-ambivalent-at-best attitudes toward women, Asians, Africans, and other marginalized groups.

As a counterexample, take Eden's sadly canceled Buffy the Vampire Slayer RPG. Though it certainly makes room for the boys, the game must attempt to capture the feeling of a narrative world where girlz rool. And I have no problem at all with that; in fact I love it. It's Buffy. If I wanted the Y-chromosome set to be more important, I'd play something else, right?

I haven't counted the ratio of pics of males to females in Buffy sourcebooks, but I wouldn't be surprised if it favored women

[bruceb]

Wow do I disagree. I don't think anything at all about pulp requires any measure of sexism at all. I think that a lot of guys like having another excuse for another batch of sexist renderings, and yes, I'll include myself in that from time to time. But just as people manage to tell stories about lives in racist circumstances without themselves endorsing the racism, and just as they manage to do it about political ideologies, religions, and other fundamentals that may be very nasty and yet suitable for use in entertainment in some way, so we could do with sexism. Acknowledging the reality of constricted channels through which women can affect the world in a game's milieu and writing and illustrating ways female characters can nonetheless make a difference - whether it's by using the usual channels to their own advantage or finding some way around them - isn't the same as presenting sexist images and ideas as just part of the fun and not anything women (or men) should have any problem with

[palmer_kun]

He's not my friend, I don't think I'm that biased, and I completely agree with you.

I think the single most telling part of her post was (essentially) declaring that she couldn't be bothered to play the game, because there weren't enough strong women in the art, and no slashed genders in the text.

Or, as she said, because she would have to work to supply her own character concept, instead of having one handed to her.

Can we look at the book and extrapolate the examples given to include women and 'foreigners'? Sure, but why should we have to?

Umm, maybe because making a character requires you to do original work and come up with your own ideas.

[drnuncheon]

In the [i]Illuminatus![/i] trilogy by Shea and Wilson, there's a long running bit about the significance of the number 23, and once the characters get tipped off to it, they see it everywhere. The gag is, of course, that you could do the same with [i]any[/i] number and get the same results. If someone is bound and determined to find sexism in a game book, they're going to do it, no matter how much care you take in trying to avoid it.

I do think that continuing any argument is a losing battle. Nothing you say is going to change how she feels, and any attempt to do so is just going to meet with more and more resistance because (to her) you're basically personally attacking her and saying "what you feel is wrong". All you can do is say, "Sorry, I tried my best. Maybe next time I'll be able to do better." And then walk away.

[chadu]

You can unscreen my comments if you want.

Someone else has spoken about the folly of responding to any non-counterfactual criticism, so I don't have to say anything about that.

Personally, I think the reason you're so tetchy about the topic is that you feel you put forth a decent amount of effort to make SotC non-sexist as possible given the genre/period, and that your efforts are being not only disregarded, but actively taken to task as if they were pure, deliberate misogyny (not just sexism).

Feeling like that sucks. Only solution is to smile, thenk person for comments, back away slowly, and grouse privately.

For my part, I found SotC to be surprisingly non-sexist, despite the period/genre, and I think you guys did a decent job of using female heroines of interesting types in the text. I would have liked to see Claire Holloway, but I dig your budget issues. And I think your "hang a lantern on the issue and then ignore it" was a fantastic bit of text.

CU

[drivingblind]

Thanks.

[tundra_no_caps]

Speaking in general, and not about this issue.

Sometimes people don't deserve a "Thank you" for their commentary.

[drivingblind]

Fair points. Thanks. :)