The following warnings occurred:
Warning [2] Undefined variable $search_thread - Line: 60 - File: showthread.php(1617) : eval()'d code PHP 8.1.27 (Linux)
File Line Function
/inc/class_error.php 153 errorHandler->error
/showthread.php(1617) : eval()'d code 60 errorHandler->error_callback
/showthread.php 1617 eval
Warning [2] Undefined variable $forumjump - Line: 89 - File: showthread.php(1617) : eval()'d code PHP 8.1.27 (Linux)
File Line Function
/inc/class_error.php 153 errorHandler->error
/showthread.php(1617) : eval()'d code 89 errorHandler->error_callback
/showthread.php 1617 eval




Consideration of Disorders and Conditions
#46
Insanity is a legal term. It has little to no bearing in the medical world. In fact, you cannot be diagnosed as insane. It's something courts declare defendants that, for one reason or another, cannot distinguish between right and wrong, and/or reality. Medically, it can be a whole laundry list of things.

That out of the way, having the disorder doesn't make you the subject matter expert. Having the appropriate degree does. I'm also quite sure the person holding that degree would also know how to rp that kind of disorder. As for accurate portrayals by the average Joe? It's hard to say. I'm sure if the person does some arduous research into it, read a few papers and possibly spend some time charting it out, they'll probably play the character decently enough to where it works. Especially since it would make sense for some things to be present in rp.

Like PTSD. And depression. Especially in a war torn world where bad shit happens all the time. You think people can just wade into battle and brush it off like nothing? You think crashing onto a foreign planet with your friends and family dying all round you would be something you get over in a few years? Hell, alcoholism would likely be rampant. Brain damage would also be fairly common in the more veteran fighters, with all the blows to the head.

And then we get into the horrors of war that cause these things. Even as high fantasy as WoW, its fairly grim at the core. Not 40k grimdark, but more a bit dark when you look at events in context. Just wait till Cata rolls up.

You want to know what's offensive? People thinking because they're X or have Y, that they're experts on it and no one else can know what it means to be X or have Y. That such things are only one way and that any other such representation is a stereotype and completely wrong. That you're an ableist for how you rp something or that you disagree. It's offensive that people could be so narrow minded as to hold those views. To think that no one else can truly know what it means for such things to happen. To cry about how labels are bad and then start throwing one out immediately.

You don't like it when people rp such things? Don't rp with them. Cut to the chase. You know they're not just going to stop rping that because someone has their feelings a bit hurt. They're just going to keep rping. Most likely. Go rp with those that you know won't rp such offensive things for you. You'll be happier.
#47
(01-31-2013, 08:22 PM)flammos200 Wrote:
(01-31-2013, 07:53 PM)Wuvvums Wrote:
(01-31-2013, 07:48 PM)hiddengecko Wrote: WoW touches on racism, war, genocide, torture, biological warfare, and even rape.

Wow's racism isn't like racism in real life. I would say the same for biological warfare (there is no such thing as undeath) and the war doesn't feel like the real wars we know in our life time, but the high-fantasy medieval war.

And I think this is another can of worms, but I would be highly worried if we used our rp to parody some things like the racism we find in real life. Like I hope we never go there.

...I find this post offends my sensibilities somewhat. You see, war is a very serious thing. It's demeaning to the human beings that have lost their lives in such to treat it as anything but.

War happens in Warcraft, and it is not at all glorious. If anything, that's because the setting as a whole is a ripoff of Warhammer Fantasy, where, well... let's just say there's grimdark. Nevertheless, War in Warcraft is as atrocious as it is in real life. People die by the sword, or burned alive(which is one of the most agonizing ways to die, mind) by a fireball, or frozen solid by a spell... Or turned into a pincushion by arrows. They still bleed, they still feel pain, they still die. What, then, should make us treat it as any less? Characters have families at home that weep for their passing. Soldiers leave wives to go to war and know full well they may never return. War is hell.

The Scarlet Crusade tortured countless. And they even had racks and everything. They were a parallel to the Inquisition IRL. To deny the existence of atrocity and to shove it under the rug and pretend it never happened is quite frankly a very bad thing in my eyes, because it's like pretending the victims never went through anything.

During Unbroken, Nobundo's storyline, we see torture, implied rape and even suicide. I don't know about you, but those things are pretty damn serious for me. They exist in the Warcraft world, and are a part of the Lore.

Don't get me wrong - We don't use modern tactics in Warcraft, or at least they don't in lore. If anything, they use Ancient tactics, which is a common mistake for Fantasy writers who try to portray middle ages combat. But don't think shoddy writers excuse the subject matter.

Heck, the Goblins in Cata - that one expansion treated as a joke - have a history of slavery and worse. Poor writing makes it seem like a parody, but in the end, there are still people suffering and wasting their lives at another's profit.

Treat serious subjects seriously, because from an IC perspective, they are serious. And as far as OOC goes, please be discrete. Yes, IC anything goes, as long as the people involved are okay with it. But OOC, there are limits, because we're no longer dealing with characters, but with people.

Incidentally, racism in WoW is more akin to Species-ism. Nevertheless, there should be quite a lot of care taken with the subject, as it is a delicate one, just like all the others.

TL;DR: Please, be careful and portray things properly, lest you risk offending others.

But... there's also things in place to protect people that aren't -comfortable- with that sort of RP. Torture, death, slavery, all that jazz, it's been subject to the "If someone isn't okay with it, don't force it on them". Same goes with eRP, even. So why is it that's something that's only reserved for -those- uncomfortable topics, but when people say it's uncomfortable that they see stuff like this, it's suddenly this huge massive issue?

AND. The issue is over people -outright naming- these disorders. Grakor and Rigley have already said they'd rather see people include that if they must by playing it out through symptoms or what have you, rather than outright saying "This is -Insert Disorder here-, and this is how it's done!". Why, because that's what's offensive. These things are so very different, for everyone that's experienced it, and what may be uncomfortable to one may not be for another.






Let me put it to you like this. If I was to have a profile with slavery, rape, and death all in it, would it get approved? Okay, does that stop people from roleplaying it out? No, but -again- that's because we have the rule, if everyone is comfortable with it then do it. Hence why outright saying you have X or Y can be offensive to some but not to others, because for them it may be different and they can feel as if you're mocking them.



I speak from personal experience.
[Image: desc_head_freemasons.jpg]

△Move along.△


△△
△△△
△△△△

#48
(01-31-2013, 08:16 PM)hiddengecko Wrote: I admit that I don't understand why we should avoid attempting to incorporate, for example, the long-lasting trauma that comes of witnessing that kind of horror. Would not doing otherwise cheapen it - even glorify it? While it may be less immediately repulsive, any further observation renders it a far more offensive depiction of warfare.

I think the point is that no one is saying "You shouldn't try to display trauma on a character." What people are saying is "There is a difference between saying this character is traumatized and suffering for it, and this character has this specific condition that others on the server may have IRL."
Have you hugged an orc today?
- I am not tech support. Please do not contact me regarding technical issues. -
#49
[Image: ShieldStatus.jpg]
Quote:[8:53AM] Cassius: Xigo is the best guy ever. he doesn't afraid of anything.
#50
This post is...really going over people's heads, it really is.

No where does the post say 'DO NOT PLAY A CHARACTER EFFECTED BY WHAT THEY WENT THROUGH'.

What a few of us are asking is that you do not name the disorder by name and instead incorporate the symptoms of the disorder into the personality without outright naming it. 'X has a poor attention spawn and often fails to resist impulse urges' instead of saying 'X has ADHD'. 'X does not react well to social situations and often backs away from public and interacting with people. X can sometimes freak out when feeling overwhelmed by crowds' instead of saying 'The character has a social anxiety disorder'.

And yes, people can walk away from a situation if they are uncomfortable. If someone enters an RP where someone is playing a character with a disorder, then they should leave and tell a GM they think something is being portrayed poorly. However, if someone playing a character with a disorder enters an RP, why would the person uncomfortable be the one that has to leave? At that point, I think the disorder character should either tone it down or be the one to leave, where as if the one who was uncomfortable enters the RP, they ought to be the one to back up.

That's just my opinion.
#51
(01-31-2013, 08:30 PM)Grakor456 Wrote: I think the point is that no one is saying "You shouldn't try to display trauma on a character." What people are saying is "There is a difference between saying this character is traumatized and suffering for it, and this character as this specific condition that others on the server may have IRL."

Indeed. I do agree wholeheartedly that care should be taken to avoid offending suffers of a [bad thing] through the sterilization or otherwise shoddy portrayal thereof. And, again, I agree with you that Show, don't Tell, is a far better policy to maintain with such things than Telling and not Showing.

My niggling beef with this, as it were, is that we ought not to Tell and Show, which is to be expected when writers regularly exchange material and discuss characters and plotlines.
i am geko
i live heer
and my favorite food is crikkits
#52
(01-31-2013, 08:38 PM)hiddengecko Wrote:
(01-31-2013, 08:30 PM)Grakor456 Wrote: I think the point is that no one is saying "You shouldn't try to display trauma on a character." What people are saying is "There is a difference between saying this character is traumatized and suffering for it, and this character as this specific condition that others on the server may have IRL."

Indeed. I do agree wholeheartedly that care should be taken to avoid offending suffers of a [bad thing] through the sterilization or otherwise shoddy portrayal thereof. And, again, I agree with you that Show, don't Tell, is a far better policy to maintain with such things than Telling and now Showing.

My niggling beef with this, as it were, is that we ought not to Tell and Show, which is to be expected when writers regularly exchange material and discuss characters and plotlines.

No, it's more that if you say "depression" and you try to play depression, (and trust me, this has been the norm in the past) that you could portray it in a way that's not only inaccurate to someone, but also offensive. By eliminating saying that absolutely, it doesn't outright become a portrayal of such, it becomes a cluster of symptoms. Which, again, is usually less offensive that saying "Oh well this is depression obviously because I'm sad". No example can do justice to this, considering this is a broad, wide topic here, but that's the just of it.
[Image: desc_head_freemasons.jpg]

△Move along.△


△△
△△△
△△△△

#53
(01-31-2013, 08:37 PM)Reigen Wrote: This post is...really going over people's heads, it really is.

No where does the post say 'DO NOT PLAY A CHARACTER EFFECTED BY WHAT THEY WENT THROUGH'.

I think people have generally agreed upon the consensus to not act like a d-bag when playing a relevant character.
[Image: tumblr_nfm4t0FZcT1rtcd58o1_r1_500.gif]
#54
(01-31-2013, 08:44 PM)Rensin Wrote: No, it's more that if you say "depression" and you try to play depression, (and trust me, this has been the norm in the past) that you could portray it in a way that's not only inaccurate to someone, but also offensive. By eliminating saying that absolutely, it doesn't outright become a portrayal of such, it becomes a cluster of symptoms. Which, again, is usually less offensive that saying "Oh well this is depression obviously because I'm sad". No example can do justice to this, considering this is a broad, wide topic here, but that's the just of it.

While frustrating, I don't see how it warrants this sort of vitriol. Yes, it bothers me when people portray autism inaccurately, or trivialize religious differences with family or ADD or depression or any number of other things that have personal significance to me, but my response to them is "Do your research next time" rather than not specifically mentioning it.

The prospect of being explicitly forbidden any of them, as you seem to be suggesting, disturbs me. I'm not debating that it's often (usually) in good taste not to, or that it's considerate not to; I don't think it should be disallowed by any means.
i am geko
i live heer
and my favorite food is crikkits
#55
There is more than one way to play a depressed character.
#56
(01-31-2013, 08:51 PM)hiddengecko Wrote:
(01-31-2013, 08:44 PM)Rensin Wrote: No, it's more that if you say "depression" and you try to play depression, (and trust me, this has been the norm in the past) that you could portray it in a way that's not only inaccurate to someone, but also offensive. By eliminating saying that absolutely, it doesn't outright become a portrayal of such, it becomes a cluster of symptoms. Which, again, is usually less offensive that saying "Oh well this is depression obviously because I'm sad". No example can do justice to this, considering this is a broad, wide topic here, but that's the just of it.

While frustrating, I don't see how it warrants this sort of vitriol. Yes, it bothers me when people portray autism inaccurately, or trivialize religious differences with family or ADD or depression or any number of other things that have personal significance to me, but my response to them is "Do your research next time" rather than not specifically mentioning it.

The prospect of being explicitly forbidden any of them, as you seem to be suggesting, disturbs me. I'm not debating that it's often (usually) in good taste not to, or that it's considerate not to; I don't think it should be disallowed by any means.

It's a wound that's still not healing for me. And some others.
[Image: desc_head_freemasons.jpg]

△Move along.△


△△
△△△
△△△△

#57
(01-31-2013, 08:37 PM)Reigen Wrote: If someone enters an RP where someone is playing a character with a disorder, then they should leave and tell a GM they think something is being portrayed poorly.

...Whoah, wait, what? What if they like RPing with that person(the one that's portraying the disorder), or if they're portraying it properly? Why should they be reported for doing something they aren't?

So, all Night Elves who feel uncomfortable or anxious in closed buildings or tight spaces such as caves because they've lived all their lives in open forests and airy houses(Claustrophobia, for instance which is an anxiety disorder) are invalidated? As are the wilderness-dwellers that feel uneasy around crowds of people? Or every Berserker ever?

That just doesn't sit well with me. Reporting a person while they're portraying something properly is wrong.
[Image: 2hhkp3k.gif]
Recommended reads: Divine and Arcane. Also, elves.
Wanna refer me in Tribes: Ascend? Clickies!
#58
I'd like to assume Reigen meant if a player is portraying a character with a disorder and the reporter finds it offensive, Flammos.
[Image: yEKW9gB.png]
#59
(01-31-2013, 09:15 PM)Clovis Wrote: I'd like to assume Reigen meant if a player is portraying a character with a disorder and the reporter finds it offensive, Flammos.

What Clovis said here! I apologize if I didn't make that point clear!
#60
(01-31-2013, 09:15 PM)Clovis Wrote: I'd like to assume Reigen meant if a player is portraying a character with a disorder and the reporter finds it offensive, Flammos.

That makes much more sense, aye.

But... don't we have that in the rules already? I kinda' thought we did... It's about portraying anything offensively, IIRC. From orientations to stereotypes and other such. If we don't, it should be an intrinsic part of Respect.
[Image: 2hhkp3k.gif]
Recommended reads: Divine and Arcane. Also, elves.
Wanna refer me in Tribes: Ascend? Clickies!




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)