"Sensitivity" Issues

[Cap'n Gravelock]

Hello everyone, I'm pretty new to the RPG crowd to be honest. I only started GM'ing recently. Although I do have a lot of experience when it comes to video games.

I'm currently creating my own setting that I hope to use for both a novel series similar to Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time as well as an RPG like Starfinder or Death Watch. Hopefully soon, I will be able to post the essentials of it here. However, I'm often worried that my work might be considered "misogynist" because of some key themes as I can describe it as being similar to the Gor series.

Could you please give suggestions on how I can avoid making a work offensive to anyone?

P.S.: I'm very sorry for bringing politics in this. I don't mean to but I just want to be careful. I don't want trouble.

[2D8HP]

...Could you please give suggestions on how I can avoid making a work offensive to anyone?....

Not offend anyone?

Can't be done, except by them not knowing about it.

There's billions of people, and someone is going to be offended.by most anything.

Care about how many, who, and why.

Is what your creating for a group of players you know, or for general publication?

[Cap'n Gravelock]

General Publication I guess.

[TheStranger]

I'm often worried that my work might be considered "misogynist" because of some key themes as I can describe it as being similar to the Gor series.

Well, yes. Given that the sexual subjugation of women is pretty much the defining feature of the Gor series, I could see how people might get that idea. Full disclosure - I haven't read the Gor books, and I don't know anything other than what's on wikipedia. Maybe there are amazing redeeming qualities, I'm not condemning the books wholesale. But if subjugation of women is a key theme (and I assume that's what you were getting at because why else use Gor as your comparison), then you can't really put "misogynist" or "sensitivity" in quotes.

I'm well aware that writing about a thing is not the same as condoning it, and it's entirely possible to tell a very good story in a setting with those elements. But you'll absolutely catch a load of criticism if your work makes it to the wider audience, and there's no way you can avoid that. That's assuming your goal is to write mainstream fiction, not niche erotica, of course. There are much darker fantasies lurking on the internet, and I'm not judging anybody's fetish.

Anyway, if that's the story you really want to tell, tell it and let the chips fall where they may. I'm certainly not saying you should self-censor. But... if you're going to worry about how it might be perceived, be realistic about it.

[2D8HP]

General Publication I guess.

@Cap'n Gravelock,

I'm not a moderator so my words are nowhere near official, but given some of the subject matter that you've mentioned in this and some others of your threads and are interested in, before you post much on them, I suggest re-reading the

Forum Rules

to decide what to post.

For more clarifications on those rules, you may wish to PM a Mod, or ask in the

Board/Site Issues subforum

[brian 333]

Let the marketplace correct you.

I'm not advocating that you intentionally offend people, that's just rude. I'm also not advocating for anything that our current culture finds inherently offensive because that's just crass.

What I am advocating is to follow your muse and write what you want to write, and accept the fact that in a politically correct society which has become as dogmatic as ours that there is no way to avoid offending someone. The real question is, how important is this material?

Many writers held up today as geniuses were iconoclasts in their day. Gulliver's Travels was seditious, the US Declaration of Independence was treasonous, On The Origin Of Species was heretical, and Atlas Shrugged was regressive. Each of the writers in these cases had a point to make and were willing to risk the potential end of their careers and possibly their lives to make it. I'm not saying any of these writers was right or wrong, but that they wrote in a climate which made the writing risky.

So, how important is your subject? Is it central to your theme, something for your characters to embrace or overcome, or be overwhelmed by? Or is it simply window dressing? You can easily change the curtains, but fixing the foundation requires that you rebuild the house.

A story or setting based in Imperial Rome which espoused equality of the sexes would be historically inaccurate, but a story set in Imperial Rome so the author could frivolously detail the exploitation of women for prurient purposes would be needlessly offensive to many, and it would have little to do with any "greater theme" I can think of at the moment.

So, two questions for you:

What is the thematic purpose of the inclusion of the socially unacceptable parts, and
How important is this concept to you?

If your writing works without the offensive material, and/or if you have no real point to make by its inclusion,you should leave it out because alienating a potential part of your audience for no purpose is called being an ass. If it is important, and you are prepared for the inevitable wave of hate which results, it's called being visionary.

What does your muse tell you? What value does this work bring to society?

[Cap'n Gravelock]

Well, yes. Given that the sexual subjugation of women is pretty much the defining feature of the Gor series, I could see how people might get that idea. Full disclosure - I haven't read the Gor books, and I don't know anything other than what's on wikipedia. Maybe there are amazing redeeming qualities, I'm not condemning the books wholesale. But if subjugation of women is a key theme (and I assume that's what you were getting at because why else use Gor as your comparison), then you can't really put "misogynist" or "sensitivity" in quotes.

I'm well aware that writing about a thing is not the same as condoning it, and it's entirely possible to tell a very good story in a setting with those elements. But you'll absolutely catch a load of criticism if your work makes it to the wider audience, and there's no way you can avoid that. That's assuming your goal is to write mainstream fiction, not niche erotica, of course. There are much darker fantasies lurking on the internet, and I'm not judging anybody's fetish.

Anyway, if that's the story you really want to tell, tell it and let the chips fall where they may. I'm certainly not saying you should self-censor. But... if you're going to worry about how it might be perceived, be realistic about it.

Thank you. I think I will post my work for critique on a new thread. It's a science fantasy story about the descendants of humanity.

[Cap'n Gravelock]

@Cap'n Gravelock,

I'm not a moderator so my words are nowhere near official, but given some of the subject matter that you've mentioned in this and some others of your threads and are interested in, before you post much on them, I suggest re-reading the

Forum Rules

to decide what to post.

For more clarifications on those rules, you may wish to PM a Mod, or ask in the

Board/Site Issues subforum

Thank you for pointing that out. I'll keep the forum rules in mind. Losing track of rules is one of my biggest problems in a lot of instances. Now I at least know what to avoid and take note of.

Let the marketplace correct you.

I'm not advocating that you intentionally offend people, that's just rude. I'm also not advocating for anything that our current culture finds inherently offensive because that's just crass.

What I am advocating is to follow your muse and write what you want to write, and accept the fact that in a politically correct society which has become as dogmatic as ours that there is no way to avoid offending someone. The real question is, how important is this material?

Many writers held up today as geniuses were iconoclasts in their day. Gulliver's Travels was seditious, the US Declaration of Independence was treasonous, On The Origin Of Species was heretical, and Atlas Shrugged was regressive. Each of the writers in these cases had a point to make and were willing to risk the potential end of their careers and possibly their lives to make it. I'm not saying any of these writers was right or wrong, but that they wrote in a climate which made the writing risky.

So, how important is your subject? Is it central to your theme, something for your characters to embrace or overcome, or be overwhelmed by? Or is it simply window dressing? You can easily change the curtains, but fixing the foundation requires that you rebuild the house.

A story or setting based in Imperial Rome which espoused equality of the sexes would be historically inaccurate, but a story set in Imperial Rome so the author could frivolously detail the exploitation of women for prurient purposes would be needlessly offensive to many, and it would have little to do with any "greater theme" I can think of at the moment.

So, two questions for you:

What is the thematic purpose of the inclusion of the socially unacceptable parts, and
How important is this concept to you?

If your writing works without the offensive material, and/or if you have no real point to make by its inclusion,you should leave it out because alienating a potential part of your audience for no purpose is called being an ass. If it is important, and you are prepared for the inevitable wave of hate which results, it's called being visionary.

What does your muse tell you? What value does this work bring to society?

It's actually an important plot point. I'm trying to point the "cycle of abuse" and how to overcome it. I'll post a sample of what I'm talking about in another thread for critiquing.

[jqavins]

As others have said, publishing this (in any sense of the word) without offending anyone is impossible. To offend the fewest people you can, be up front about what it is. People who would be offended will mosty stay away, and those that don't by and large deserve what they get.

I once asked a moderator if it would be acceptable to start a thread about eroticism in game. Not including any erotic or prurient material in the thread, but maturely discussing how such things could be handled in a game. I was told this would not be appropriate.

My point? This forum has "family friendlyness" rules that could be called puritanical or prudish. I'm not saying this to complain, but to advise: don't post your material, or much if any discussion of your material here. Your stuff might be socially important, it might be harmless kinky fun, and it surely has a place, but that place is not this place.

[sengmeng]

It's really about how you portray it. Blazing Saddles has been simplisticaly described as a racist movie, but the racists are the villains for the most part and they ar eportrayed with a host of other failings; being about racism is not promoting racism. So is misogyny in your story what the heroes do, or the villains? Or is it universal? If you don't portray it critically, then yes, that's offensive (and also a very juvenile male fantasy that I will absolutely judge you for).

[Lvl 2 Expert]

It's actually an important plot point. I'm trying to point the "cycle of abuse" and how to overcome it. I'll post a sample of what I'm talking about in another thread for critiquing.

So it's a drama about abuse packed in science fantasy elements so you can enlarge it? As long as that's clear to the reader, if it's portrayed as a bad thing, it should be fine.

[brian 333]

So it's a drama about abuse packed in science fantasy elements so you can enlarge it? As long as that's clear to the reader, if it's portrayed as a bad thing, it should be fine.

I'd like to point out the Archie Bunker method, in which the sympathetic character espouses unsavory beliefs because he has no other point of reference. We, the viewers, know Archie to be indoctrinated in his views, and we realize he has no coping mechanism to help him learn when he is confronted by the consequences of his beliefs.

A character or society mired in intolerance can be forgiven for being an ignorant victim of their culture, but not for being an active agent pursueing an agenda he knows to be harmful, hurtful, or intolerant.

[jqavins]

I'd like to point out the Archie Bunker method, in which the sympathetic character espouses unsavory beliefs because he has no other point of reference...

When you put it that way, I had a character like that once. The DM set up a campaign that started in an evil theocratic society in which the weak are exploited and abused by the powerful, among other things. Most of the party were enlightened rebels, but I played a "good boy" who believed that the weak were inherantly inferior and god had put them on earth to be exploited, and the other evil things his parents and church had taught him. He was a young, eager church policemand who got caught up by accident with the rebels, and gradually had his eyes opened.

[RagingKrikkit]

Welp, this thread has quickly become a microcosm of why I so heartily dislike the forum rules regarding real-world beliefs, with everyone tiptoeing around a hamstringed discussion trying not to get banned. For my part, I will keep this short and vague.

If you are intent on portraying something that you expect a significant portion of your audience to consider objectively morally wrong, keep in mind wither you are trying to advocate or simply depict that thing. If you are advocating, then be prepared to defend it from a lot of very angry people. If you are depicting, then feel free to sprinkle in reasons why the thing is bad or does not/would not work, and never underestimate the value of a little authorial intent. You will likely still receive some form of backlash even if you are merely depicting, but expect it to be primarily limited to people who cannot tell the difference between advocating and depicting.

[Max_Killjoy]

Worry less about people who are looking to take offense managing to do so, and more about whether you're handling the subject matter in a nuanced, mature, and responsible way.

[Cap'n Gravelock]

Welp, this thread has quickly become a microcosm of why I so heartily dislike the forum rules regarding real-world beliefs, with everyone tiptoeing around a hamstringed discussion trying not to get banned. For my part, I will keep this short and vague.

If you are intent on portraying something that you expect a significant portion of your audience to consider objectively morally wrong, keep in mind wither you are trying to advocate or simply depict that thing. If you are advocating, then be prepared to defend it from a lot of very angry people. If you are depicting, then feel free to sprinkle in reasons why the thing is bad or does not/would not work, and never underestimate the value of a little authorial intent. You will likely still receive some form of backlash even if you are merely depicting, but expect it to be primarily limited to people who cannot tell the difference between advocating and depicting.

Like, I want to avoid the fiasco that was Folca.

Actually, being a victim of abuse myself, I found him EXTREMELY creepy. However, I still incorporate him in some campaigns when I GM.

[King of Nowhere]

It's also a matter of how you describe it. If you write "in this world those things happen", you are writing a world with dystopic elements, or you are showing the bad guys doing bad stuff. If you are spending pages and pages describing it accurately, the reaction will be totally different.

[Knaight]

Well, yes. Given that the sexual subjugation of women is pretty much the defining feature of the Gor series, I could see how people might get that idea. Full disclosure - I haven't read the Gor books, and I don't know anything other than what's on wikipedia. Maybe there are amazing redeeming qualities, I'm not condemning the books wholesale. But if subjugation of women is a key theme (and I assume that's what you were getting at because why else use Gor as your comparison), then you can't really put "misogynist" or "sensitivity" in quotes.

It's also pretty much the defining feature of A Handmaids Tale (partially because that's what the viewpoint character was dealing with personally; the broader society in that book was screwed up in a lot of ways), and that catches approximately no flak for being misogynist, instead pissing off an entirely different group of people. Depiction is not endorsement, particularly well handled depiction that shows negatives.

Not offend anyone?

Can't be done, except by them not knowing about it.

There's billions of people, and someone is going to be offended.by most anything.

Care about how many, who, and why.

Is what your creating for a group of players you know, or for general publication?

Also, all of this - with a particular emphasis on "who". I'm sure you've got a fair few organizations that can be neatly classified as groups of terrible people you strongly dislike. Their opinions can basically be disregarded, though them getting particularly loud and hostile over you can be an indication that you've done something right at times. People you actually respect, and who seem to generally have a good head on their shoulders? That's a group worth paying attention to.