Problematic Character Designs

Many writers enjoy using rpgs and creative writing to explore traits, cultures, or experiences very different from their own, and hey - if it fits in our game's setting, we're all about giving people the space to do that. But not everyone seems to succeed in doing so in a respectful way.

It's sometimes like those sad culturally appropriated and grossly stereotyped Halloween costumes. Where a writer presents a character who is more of a caricature of some marginalized culture. Where the character is mostly based on stereotypes or the special snowflake exception to stereotypes (which still supports a stereotype).

So how do you deal with a character biography like that, as an admin? How much responsibility do you take to educate yourself about the culture being presented? Have you ever accidentally let something through that turned out to be a problem? What role do you see yourself having as an admin when it comes to letting writers down gently (or not) when it comes to rejecting problematic elements?

I'll be happy to share my experience later on. :)

 

At 'Souls, most of the problems we have with character biographies stems from realism concerns. Thankfully, most of the time we do manage to catch these at the joining phase and the player is asked to edit until their character's in compliance. When realism concerns do crop up later, it's pretty much the same process -- players are asked to edit -- though occasionally some creative finagling may be required to re-write their bio in a way that both allows them to keep certain elements and fit in with our established canons.

For cultural issues, I can only think of one instance when a user incorporated a swastika in their character design (it was a scar or tattoo or something, I forget) and was asked to remove it. I think it's harder for typical "cultural appropriation" to occur on our board because the characters aren't human, and even when human cultures inspire things (the AniWaya pack is largely inspired by the Cherokee), it's a given that things would have changed under the influence of non-humans. I think AniWaya's take on this pretty much says it all, actually.

 

CoSC has 'Souls advantage of being an animal based (Warriors Cats) RP, so human culture isn't frequently inserted into the game. Our main demands for edits are people using a human point of view for their character histories when making clan members or coat colors/patterns that just don't exist.

In the end what is and isn't appropriate to a game is 100% up to the people who run a game. It's not a case where "free speech" plays any role in what is or isn't permitted (that is, the owners run it, and can choose to limit speech on their own turf as they see fit). Keeping it private if it's something sensitive isn't a bad plan. It also permits the whole affair to happen quietly while ruffling as few feathers as possible. Though if the user refuses to change a character that is problematic for whatever reason, I generally go with a policy of "If you must have that thing, then maybe this isn't in the game for you". There is a reason there are so many games out there.

 

The biggest problem we've had at Risk isn't cultural or even realism. It's been both "all mighty" and surprisingly, length.

Starting with the latter, I'm not usually one to care about a profile length but we have a person on board that literally details everything out in the profile and I had several people comment to me about how that's intimidating, especially since this writer was due to be a staff member. I know I look at staffs profiles first and if I saw this girl's profiles, I would be tempted to not join because my brain automatically says "there is no way I'll match or live up to that". Plus, with profiles, it should be more of an "at a glance" type thing, for me personally, and we didn't want her to be lacking in writing partners just because every single one of her profiles was a novel. Things have since been taken care of as we say and worked with her to shorten them to where everyone's happy, including the player, but honestly, it wasn't a problem if ever dreamed of having before.

Risk's main problem, because it's a "gifted" rp, I guess you could say, has been people wanting to be all powerful and the bestest ever with their powers. A headache most definitely but in the reincarnation, we've incorporated a level system to hopefully balance everything out. We'll see though. So far, so good.

 

I think that's mostly the approach we've taken to using on Risk. Make your character how you want, play them how you want (within reason), and just have fun. I've spent too much time on previous sites policing applications and such and it was just icky and stressful. The mostly hands off approach seems to be working however and people are happy, so....

 

CoSC goes to the other extreme. We do police application, but mostly for fitting into the world. Though I do ask people to explain how conflicting traits work in the personality. Though I generally do try and work with people to figure out how to make what they want work within the CoSC world (sometimes difficult. the source material has a very black/white version of good/evil that CoSC makes a purposeful effort to stay clear of). I find it less stressful to fine-tooth an application for the game, then deal with people who are using canon warriors instead of CoSC Warriors once they're in game.

But it is important for each game to find the system that works for them. I've always said "not every game is for every player", and I'm thinking that "Not every character creation system works for every game" is a direct outgrowth of that.

 

This is how i am doing too. If the writer hasn't understood yet how the world was in 1700s, and he comes with too advanced technology (or mentality, for the princess warriors which I don't accept) he is asked to edit. I don;t accept first characters as female pirates (otherwise there would have been a shipload of them), but I accept them as second characters for dedicated writers. I don't accept female captains, though. There have been only 2 in the whole history...

Also, the history and the personality mustn't conflict between them, and they must make sense. One doesn't get born already knowing lots of things...

 

Checking to see if a character is compatible for a game is super important, especially with special settings/circumstances. I think where I get my "leniency", I guess you could call it, is that Risk is a modern setting. We can generally leave it to the player to figure out if their character is game-compatible or not.

 

Hmm, maybe I didn't explain my question right. I've seen many topics that talk about application processes, how to vet new characters, how far admins go to encourage quality characters. I think you all have some very thoughtful responses there, but they're not quiiite on topic? But I don't see very much discussion about what could be racist, sexist, ableist depictions, and how a site handles them.

I don't mean characters who hold racist, sexist, ablist beliefs. I mean characters who themselves represent an problematic view (or ignorance) on the part of the writer about the group they're depicting.

So I guess I'll weigh with some of my examples.

We once had a member apply with a transgender character, which itself is totally acceptable. However, the words he used to describe his character were derogatory and/or language used to abuse transgender people. Even though his intent was to explore an identity through roleplay, he didn't take the time to research it and approach it with sensitivity and wholeness. So the depiction of his transgender character was a harmful series of stereotypes, stereotypes that contribute a culture of violence against transgender people. We had staff who were more familiar with the lives of transgender people and so we handled it by having the member go back and re-write, and consider more carefully.

We have also had times when members wanted to depict a stereotypical g*psy character in our role-play which is set in modern-day UK and Ireland. Of those times, one of the writers actually did research into a specific ethnicity as they currently live in Ireland and approached the character in a way that did not use racial slurs or pervasive and harmful stereotypes (like Pavee all being culturally swindlers, dishonest, etc). But other times, writers have presented characters that were an amalgamation racist stereotypes that are not only untrue, but have been an integral part of how these peoples were and are institutionally oppressed. (Murdered, relocated, discriminated against, barred from public services, etc.) Again, we dealt with this by pointing the writer towards resources that would better help them understand what they were achieving.

I guess the reason we do this is that we don't want our site to be a place that supports nasty stereotypes. We want our site to be a safe place for all kinds of people. As admins, our members trust us to keep the gate and maintain an open and inclusive space.

So I guess that's the kinds of questions I was asking. :)

 

The character you're talking about (in which the application contained abusive language) wouldn't have been covered by my character policies. The player would have been given a single warning (because it sounds to be relatively unintentional) and told in private that such things are not acceptable under the CoSC Harassment Policy. They'd be offered 24 hours to correct the abusive language in the profile or the profile would be deleted (CoSC apps are viewable by the public, and such things would harm the image of the game).

So I would think it would depend entirely on your harassment policy. Normally CoSC is no tolerance, but in situations where it's suspected to be unintentional we do grant a single warning (unless it's directed at a person, in which we would also require an apology, either public or private depending on where the issue occurred).

I think you handled the situations well. Giving the people a chance to repair the problem, and being clear that abusive stereotypes are not tolerable. I also hope that these players learned things and had minds open by new information through your guidance.

 

I hope so too. It's frustrating that sometimes people have a blacklash against what they perceive as political correctness, but in all of our cases the writers have been overall very keen to clear things up. Because, like you say, their intention is rarely to cause harm, if ever.

 

Wow yeah thats hard. I tend to look for realism as well, and the fact that they thought out their character properly an wholy and not decided to just slap a character up.

 

This! I gave up on caring because (no offense although I'm sure that someone will take offense) a stereotype is there for a reason..... It's not because people are trying to be mean... it's because they are actually true.

The gross gamer that sits behind their computer and troll each other, fat and gross... they exist. It's not just a stereotype but I've seen them.

I take it this way. You are playing a game and unless it's game breaking face destruction? Let it lie. There is no reason to stress over something to hurt someone elses feelings because of their ignorance.

I play on London RPs but I know nothing about London short of what I've seen on BBC and do you think I'm going to base all of my information off of Dr Who, Catherine Tate, Sherlock and Jekyll? Not likely. I can glean some truthful information from there but that's it. Catherine Tate is FILLED with Stereo types though. >_>

 

I believe there is a reason to "stress" because allowing negative stereotypes to persist (especially the creative space I am trusted to gatekeep) creates real-world consequences. Something 'small' like fat writers seeing yet another conflation of 'fat' with 'gross' (which contributes to lowered self-esteem, institutional discrimination, and actual physical danger fo fat people), or something 'large' like depicting Roma as untrustworthy and exotic - an actual stereotype that has led to the actual genocide of those people.

So for me, the feelings of those who are harmed by stereotypes are more important to me than the feelings of people who use those stereorypes to entertain themselves.

 

Sorry for double-post, but I wanted to add that I understand the choice to just not get involved. We have to choose our battles. I'm not offended by that choice.

But I do disagree that stereotypes are about harmless fee-fees.

 

I would like to disagree with the statement that stereotypes are actually true. You use the "Fat, trolling gamer" and call them gross. That stereotype is hurtful. There is no way to say "fat and gross" without knowing you are being cruel towards that person. There might be overweight gamers, but you consider nothing about the reasons /why/ that person is what they are. They could very well have a thyroid problem. Maybe they come from a part of the world where obesity is commonplace and culturally ingrained (something people are trying to fight against). Maybe they're so angry and lashing out as a troll because they're a victim of bullying in day to day life.

There are instances in which people will fit Stereotypes, but characters made exclusively to match a stereotype are not acceptable. It's one thing if a person has created a well-rounded character with motivations that happens to fit a stereotype and rather another to just blindly write a stereotype treating it as if the stereotype is fact.

I'm a D&D player. I'm neither male, single, or resident of my Mother's basement. In fact, of the 20 some people I've played with over the years, only one has ever fit that stereotype, and then only by coincidence (he was socially adept, under 18, and it was coincidental that the bedroom he'd had since about the age of 10 was below grade). Stereotypes ignore diversity and let people cop out on actually creating a character who is well developed when they're permitted to be treated as facts.

 

You're reading too far into it. I am a gamer, I have the friends that fit the stereo type and of those that fit the stereo type it's completely choice. No thyroid problems, no part of the world that they come from. I have a friend that is plain flat out rich, he can get 50,000 dollars cash handed to him if he lost weight. All he has to do is get off of his computer and work out some, eat healthier.... He doesn't because he doesn't want to.

I think that considering there are more to peoples motives for a stereotype is almost as hurtful as considering that there are none.

I think that restricting stereotypes is silly. I will always think it's silly because all you are doing is restricting your players creativity (regardless if it's not very creative). You can run your game any way you want but I will state quite factually that you are just hurting the person you are denying.

I only have one stipulation to this: Those with ulterior motives.

You never know who has ulterior motives until they get into the game play.

At this point since you guys are not actually reading what I'm saying and just defending something that to me is a moot point I'm leaving this conversation so don't expect me to come back to it.

 

Despite your intent to leave this discussion, I'm going to anyways, to continue the discussion. Even if it's with others, rather than you.

You seem to misunderstand the idea most people are supporting. If you proposed a heavyset gamer character with the background you supplied for your friend, I would have accepted it. Why? Because you explained him not just as a stereotype, but as a person. It ceases to be a stereotype at that point and comes a proper character. Basically, instead of saying "He's a gamer, so he's fat", you say "He's been overindulged and spoiled his whole life, which has let to him practicing poor eating and exercise habits. He's also a gamer." It's not a case of gamer=overweight. It's a case of lifestyle=overweight.

There is a valid discussion here, as to when something is a properly validated character, and when something is a stereotype. In my personal opinion, it's a stereotype when there's a huge overarching group comprised of many personalities being boiled down to a single thing (a counter example to the gamer example being used would be the effeminate gay male or the butch lesbian. They do exist, but they must more than just a stereotype).

If forcing people who use a stereotypical character to describe that character's background and show why they fit that stereotype is wrong is "restricting creativity" I will happily do so. Because those who use a stereotype and can't justify it within the profile of the character don't have the creativity required to play that stereotype with the sensitivity not to be abusive towards others. I would much rather "hurt" a single person (though I don't see how pointing out that they're overgeneralizing an entire group of people is hurtful) than let them be abusive towards an entire subset of others.

It's not the well thought out character with clear motivations and reasons beyond "They're in group X" that this post is targeting. It's the player who creates a gamer character and says "He's a gamer. That means he's overweight, too." I've been chased by stereotypes for years (the most recent one I face down regularly is that I married another gamer. I got to go from "She's a gamer-girl, that means she's a slut" to "She's a gamer-wife. That means she only plays because her husband does". Being lumped into a stereotype is not fun. While I do know gamer-wives who only played because the husband did, that doesn't make all women who game and are married to a gamer people who only play because the husband does.) They are hurtful, and they limit characterization.

If a player is using a stereotype because that is how they think that group is, then there is a problem that needs dealing with. If a player is using a stereotype because the character they created just happens to fit within that stereotype... Well... It just isn't the same.

I really hope this didn't just turn out to be a giant word-vomit and actually made sense and answered Morrigan's concerns. As much as they think we're not reading what they're saying, I think it goes both ways. I don't think anyone who has spoken up so far as against the use of stereotypes is also for the ban of every character who happens to fit within a stereotype...