Playing females as EZ Mode

[Case]

Posting on behalf of another, who wishes to remain anonymous:

I am a man currently playing my first female character on Arm. I was inspired to do so by one of [Case's] characters, actually. In the past, I have played female characters in other games, both tabletop and other muds back when I played other muds.

I have not found playing a female to be "easy mode" in Arm. Quite the opposite, I have found it hard to play in character when other characters act in ways that are inappropriate for the world. I just have to keep reminding myself to stay IC and remember that there is no "win" in Arm.

Yeah, the easy-mode comment is demeaning. It's crap, too. The reasons for that are subtle, maybe. But it's still there.

[Kismetic]

If what you say were true, then why is there an OOC perception of "female = easy mode"?

You know, having read this entire waste of time thread (hey, I've got three months off work, what is a body to do?), I'm not seeing a single bit of anecdotal evidence that females have it easier for anything, except interaction, which prevails as true, yes -- the larger majority of players are male, and that's just human nature.  I'm not seeing any posts where men have declared otherwise.  Really, when even Desertman (sorry, man, but you have classic southern values) says some reasonable things in a thread about sexism, the resulting theme of the day would seem to be self-satisfying noise.

My initial post would've been best corrected as "an attractive character" instead of "an attractive female character" but my edgy humor lands hard in a forum that is so secular and proper that it fails to touch reality.

If you see people doing something overtly sexist, report it, via the request tools.  Otherwise, if this argument is so tired, why do you keep perpetuating it?

[Korgoth]

Wasn't saying anything like that. Some of my characters have been very afraid of strong women characters just as much as strong males. I don't treat women in any different way really. Just was saying there are two ways to balance the scale. One is to add more weight to one side, or remove weight from another.  I've not really read anything about gift giving in docs so maybe that's my fault. I just see plenty of people doing it. People keep saying it's one way, male to female. Why shouldn't it be balanced and go both ways was all I was suggesting.

[Marauder Moe]

You know, having read this entire waste of time thread (hey, I've got three months off work, what is a body to do?), I'm not seeing a single bit of anecdotal evidence that females have it easier for anything, except interaction, which prevails as true, yes -- the larger majority of players are male, and that's just human nature.

Interaction is all I really ever meant, anyway.  Interaction was the context of the original post that spawned this topic.

[Fredd]

Wasn't saying anything like that. Some of my characters have been very afraid of strong women characters just as much as strong males. I don't treat women in any different way really. Just was saying there are two ways to balance the scale. One is to add more weight to one side, or remove weight from another.  I've not really read anything about gift giving in docs so maybe that's my fault. I just see plenty of people doing it. People keep saying it's one way, male to female. Why shouldn't it be balanced and go both ways was all I was suggesting.

Women do give gifts all the time. I think that when a man gives a woman a gift, or tries to smooze up to them people are like "Oh, that's him being a man, I should play something with tits, that's so common." But when a woman does it people are like "Oh! That's so nice and unexpected." And that my friends, is just OOC bleeding into IC.

I run the gamut of Male pc's. pretty ones, ugly ones, rich ones, poor ones. And if I play a desirable male pc, I get gifts all the time from women. be they in the form of favors, or materials.
"But Fredd, that man shouldn't call my buff female warrior pc sexy, or beautiful" Yeah? And I shouldn't have called the ugly chick beautiful at the end of the night in the club either, but I did because I wanted to get my dick wet. That's perfectly in the doc's, actually. Life is short, have fun while you can, fuck what you want is pretty much in the docs, in more PC wording. Want to know what to do? Beat the fuck out of the guy for calling you pretty. It's happened to some of my pc's in the past, and it was a lot of fun.

That being said. Going 'white knight' for a woman is against the docs, and I do see if far far to commonly. If you want to play a white knight type pc. Don't do it just for women, in general. Narrow your focus, and make it more like the docs, and be all white knight for your close friends, male or female.


edited: To remove some of my common dyslexic typos.

[Kismetic]

Fredd ...  *sigh*

craft gdb common.sense into a reasonable conclusion
No recipes matched 'a reasonable conclusion'.

[Fredd]

Fredd ...  *sigh*

craft gdb common.sense into a reasonable conclusion
No recipes matched 'a reasonable conclusion'.

What did I do now? LOL.

[James de Monet]

Just to clarify, I'm not saying there's anything wrong with PCs giving each other gifts. Especially in established channels such as friend to friend, employer to employee, supplicant to authority, etc. Even from suitor to object of desire is fine. I just feel like I see it more from male to female (especially in situations where the male is unlikely to benefit from it) which makes the balance seem less doc-like.

Again though, it could just be that my perception is skewed, or that I'm looking for what's wrong rather than what's right.

[Flincher]

Someone mentioned that there is far more lesbianism than male homosexuality..I'd argue that in RL, society is far more accepting of lesbian sex than they are of gay men and that carries into Armageddon. I know one female player in Armageddon that does sometimes engage in lesbian mudsex but I don't believe they are actually lesbians or bisexual in real life (no clue actually). So its not simply the case of men playing female pc's who get off on lesbian scenes its just an interesting trait of today's society.

[Morrolan]

I'm not convinced playing female characters is always easier. Unfortunately, and apparently inescapably, you are treated differently female or male. It's not always positive for female characters though, arguably a negative for leadership PCs or out of the norm women. By out of the norm, I mean female PCs who do not conform to the stereotype that has this alleged easy mode.

I want to return to this idea here.

I agree with Case, but I'll put it more forcefully:

There is an IG (but OOC-driven) social expectation that female characters conform to Western cultural stereotypes. Often, their leadership seems to be less appreciated. More commonly than male characters, they are rewarded for being sexual objects--paid with increased interaction and sometimes outright gifts.

Admittedly, this is still less common here than in other neighborhoods of the Internet.

[PriestlySiren]

What it is is that female PCs seem to be more approachable and more sympathetic.  After all, IRL, it's usually the men that do the approaching, and it's the men who aren't supposed to be vulnerable/sympathetic.  This is absolutely an innapropriate cultural bleed-over into the game, but it's one that will not be easily shaken.

Playing a vulnerable and sympathetic male seems to result in many unpleasant social consequences, or maybe I'm just doing it wrong.

You said yourself, you mostly play breeds. 

[Iiyola]

There is an IG (but OOC-driven) social expectation that female characters conform to Western cultural stereotypes. Often, their leadership seems to be less appreciated. More commonly than male characters, they are rewarded for being sexual objects--paid with increased interaction and sometimes outright gifts.

I've seen many more PC female whores than male whores IC. Just saying.

[Morrolan]

There is an IG (but OOC-driven) social expectation that female characters conform to Western cultural stereotypes. Often, their leadership seems to be less appreciated. More commonly than male characters, they are rewarded for being sexual objects--paid with increased interaction and sometimes outright gifts.

I've seen many more PC female whores than male whores IC. Just saying.

To paraphrase an old saw about military leadership for women (in the U.S., anyway) women have to choose between the roles of bitch and a whore.

[Marauder Moe]

I would like to note that context of the original discussion was about a newbie player's experience, not that of a leader.

I don't think it's easier to play a female leader PC in Arm.  It might indeed be harder, but my personal sample set does not include a rough-and-tough forceful leader character yet.

[Kismetic]

There is an IG (but OOC-driven) social expectation that female characters conform to Western cultural stereotypes. Often, their leadership seems to be less appreciated. More commonly than male characters, they are rewarded for being sexual objects--paid with increased interaction and sometimes outright gifts.

This is fringe behaviour.  In my own limited experience, this is not prevalent.

I've seen many more PC female whores than male whores IC. Just saying.

It does seem out of ratio, maybe there should be a role call.  

Someone mentioned that there is far more lesbianism than male homosexuality...

Hetero* men have a physiological response to male-to-male coupling, and it can range from discomfort to outright abhorrence.  It is why we fear prison.

*The Kinsey scale was not consulted prior to this post

[Marauder Moe]

Hetero* men have a physiological response to male-to-male coupling, and it can range from discomfort to outright abhorrence.  It is why we fear prison.

I wouldn't say it's physiological.  It may very well be cultural.  There were periods in history (Greek-Roman times) where M/M sexual activity was pretty casual, if not common, while F/F was considered gross and unnatural.

[Kismetic]

Hetero* men have a physiological response to male-to-male coupling, and it can range from discomfort to outright abhorrence.  It is why we fear prison.

I wouldn't say it's physiological.  It may very well be cultural.  There were periods in history (Greek-Roman times) where M/M sexual activity was pretty casual, if not common, while F/F was considered gross and unnatural.

That's a whole other conversation. 

[The Silence of the Erdlus]

For me, anyway, its much more difficult to play a woman than a man but I _can't_ play a man because that thing dangling between my legs will throw me off almost as badly as the lack of boobs and added waist will. Its like playing a five-toed cat.

There is only one reason for that. Getting constantly hit on, something which happens SO often to me in real life that it is literally at the point where I think I'm going to go mad from annoyance. Well lately its been better but that's because I haven't left the house as much as I usually do.

People in the game are better about it--- I honestly don't play the most approachable people--- but it still happens with relative frequency if I'm not playing a breed or a witch.

Not a big deal. That would like saying people sneezing pisses you off. For some reason its easier to deal with in the game because I tend to play people who get the urge to tell these people to go suck it or laugh in their face. In real life I'm much nicer and just ignore them because I don't wants to hurt their feelings.

EDIT: Mistake I half-corrected.

[Marauder Moe]

...wat?



Sorry, I do not mean offense, but I'm baffled and amused by the notion that a virtual dong is what's keeping you from playing a male character.

Hetero* men have a physiological response to male-to-male coupling, and it can range from discomfort to outright abhorrence.  It is why we fear prison.

I wouldn't say it's physiological.  It may very well be cultural.  There were periods in history (Greek-Roman times) where M/M sexual activity was pretty casual, if not common, while F/F was considered gross and unnatural.

That's a whole other conversation. 

Indeed.

[Morrolan]

That's a whole other conversation.  

I'd say it's definitely related to this conversation. We're talking about playing a game that challenges Western cultural definitions of gender. Taking part in that game isn't easy. That is exactly the topic.

Maybe homosexuality is another thread, but the naturalization* of gender identity and roles is exactly the point.

*Naturalization here refers to the belief that culturally dictated ideas are seen to be inherent and true across all times and cultures.

[catchall]

Hetero* men have a physiological response to male-to-male coupling, and it can range from discomfort to outright abhorrence.  It is why we fear prison.

I wouldn't say it's physiological.  It may very well be cultural.  There were periods in history (Greek-Roman times) where M/M sexual activity was pretty casual, if not common, while F/F was considered gross and unnatural.

That's a whole other conversation. 

Actually it's not.  You're making a claim about human physiology. It's not a different conversation; it's a direct and damning indictment of your completely unsourced claim. (It's also a really common claim of anti-gay bigots who want to claim it's just "natural" to seethe hatred of gay people. Great company you're keeping there.)  People of other cultures have the same physiology but different responses.  You can't make claims about human physiological universals, then handwave away (or smiley-tongue-face away) the glaring counterexamples.  (Particularly not if you're also in the habit of declaring, by fiat, that your opinions are "reasonable conclusions," and implying that everyone that doesn't agree with you is an irrational fool.)

You also can't declare, by fiat, that an insufferably banal and unimaginative sexist comment constitutes "edgy humor" that everyone else is just too "secular" (seriously, wtf?) to understand, but that is a whole 'nother conversation.

[Riya OniSenshi]

There is an IG (but OOC-driven) social expectation that female characters conform to Western cultural stereotypes. Often, their leadership seems to be less appreciated. More commonly than male characters, they are rewarded for being sexual objects--paid with increased interaction and sometimes outright gifts.

This is fringe behaviour.  In my own limited experience, this is not prevalent.

If your experience is limited, you can not claim this to be fringe behaviour.

I see it much too often for it to be anything close to "fringe". Most people that see it may not even recognize it for what it is if they're used to seeing it normally.

[lordcooper]

There is an IG (but OOC-driven) social expectation that female characters conform to Western cultural stereotypes. Often, their leadership seems to be less appreciated. More commonly than male characters, they are rewarded for being sexual objects--paid with increased interaction and sometimes outright gifts.

This is fringe behaviour.  In my own limited experience, this is not prevalent.

If your experience is limited, you can not claim this to be fringe behaviour.

I see it much too often for it to be anything close to "fringe". Most people that see it may not even recognize it for what it is if they're used to seeing it normally.

To be fair, the reverse is also true.  Those occasions you have witnessed may have been the only times this occurred.

[Case]

Wow, this thread exploded overnight.

Don't let this devolve into bickering, especially about homosexuality. That homosexuality is relevant to a discussion about playing females as a strategy is even more bothersome imo. There are more gay or bi girls IG to my knowledge than gay or bi guys. That's predictable.  Gay guys are awesome though!  A shame there's not many, but predictable given the demographic (I do contribute with the majority of my PCs being bi).

Back on topic:
I understand the gender and sexual politics at play here. I'm not ignorant of the motivations or cultural bent or social mores that produce the situation. I took a greater offense that it got brought into the New Players forum - I consider misinformation or joking to newbies about things counter to the docs a Bad Thing.

I have found a lot of this thread interesting. I don't always agree with it, but so what? I'm not here to snipe anybody (not a political thread) and I'm not here to be snarky (anywhere else), I just had an emotional problem as per the OP and wanted to raise it for discussion. I posted it here in World Discussion for a reason - because I care about the IC representations of women and men and the RP surrounding them. I don't care if you don't like playing women or guys, don't care if you're gay or bi or totally straight, don't care if you open jars for women IRL, don't care if you're Desertman with views from 1850, don't care if you're a liberal fag like me, the fact RL even comes into it is the problem! We can untangle a lot of ourselves from our characters already. A lot of RP here on Arm is fucking awesome. Yet, when it comes to this problem, preferential treatment of women or the perception of it, it becomes a spoken fact, an unwritten rule and something we cannot change because: straight man likes girls and lesbians are hot. Are we that simple?

[Kismetic]

Sorry, I do not mean offense, but I'm baffled and amused by the notion that a virtual dong is what's keeping you from playing a male character.

lol

You can't make claims about human physiological universals, then handwave away (or smiley-tongue-face away) the glaring counterexamples.  

Moe already corrected me.  It's surely cultural in origin, but that's not a subject material for this thread.

I'm sorry you read into my words that way.  I'm a bit disappointed that Case would take it in a similar light, too, as her and I are/were friends.  I'm fairly confident that the subject matter of this thread occurs minimally in the game, and is easily correctable using the proper tools.

Yet, when it comes to this problem, preferential treatment of women or the perception of it, it becomes a spoken fact, an unwritten rule and something we cannot change because: straight man likes girls and lesbians are hot. Are we that simple?

Ugh, yes.  Yes, we are.