Viewpoint Do you use the LGTBQ Friendly sub genre? Why or why not?

[rae2nerdy]

I will say one thing. I think a lot of the confusion is that tags/sub genre are used very differently in 1x1s vs. Groups.

I think the default in oneXones is that it’s all about heterosexual pairings. So in that case having the LGBTQ Pairings tag would be beneficial. As I think it would work well with the Romantic & Platonic Sub Genres already in use.

For groups since there seems to be this assumption that everyone is welcome by default I think having a exclusionary tag might be better. So like a tag warning of some type.

Ex. Intolerant Themes

I know in fanfic there are ways to put warnings if your work contains themes people might find upsetting so maybe having a similar “warning” might be helpful here.

 

[Delinquent]

However, it's not just that every single person on this thread has that attitude of accepting LGBT in common- it's that the site's rules for a positive environment, the fact that an LGBT tag exists in the first place, the prevailance of LGBT pairings etc... are all indicators that the site in general has this sort of attitude.

Site rules and an LGBT tag proves little to nothing to me, it's so easy to add that practically everyone has them (I mean, even the most toxic forums I've seen have had rules for a positive environment). As does the prevalence of LBGT pairings, all it tells me that some people on this forum is into that (and again, a rp isn't inherently lgbt-friendly just because it includes LGBT characters/relationships).

Anyway, I wanted to see if attitude this really was as prevalent on this forum as you said, and it didn't take me very long to find enough of the same old dogwhistles to convince me that I shouldn't take everything on this forum as inherently LGBT-friendly.

Ironically though, the tag only makes such incidents more likely.

How? Do you think people are using it in bad faith?

I do agree that the tag is a bit too vague, but I think that problem can be solved by making a post explaining it similar to the "prefix guide" thread.

I could also add that again, emphasizing certain locations as "lgbt friendly" may lead to short-term comfort, but it has the opposite effect in the long-term. It isolates players who like to play those types of characters in a much smaller field than the one they would actually be happy playing in if they just gave it a shot, places which though not labelled that way are still accepting of them.

Can't speak for everyone, but that's honestly a sacrifice I think people are willing to make. Joining an rp only to discover that it's not LGBT-friendly when you yourself is a part of the LGBT community isn't exactly a very fun feeling and I'll gladly miss out on a million fun and exciting roleplays if it means I won't have to experience that again.

Also, the obvious solution to that problem is just to use the tag if you're accepting of them and concerned about them missing out. I don't really get why we have to go "well, I won't use the tag so we better remove it".

 

[OverconfidentMagi]

Doesn't site rules cover ooc interactions in relation to LGBT stuff already? No need for a tag that just says "not a dick btw". Keep tags limited to IC themes.

 

[Idea]

Site rules and an LGBT tag proves little to nothing to me, it's so easy to add that practically everyone has them (I mean, even the most toxic forums I've seen have had rules for a positive environment). As does the prevalence of LBGT pairings, all it tells me that some people on this forum is into that (and again, a rp isn't inherently lgbt-friendly just because it includes LGBT characters/relationships).

Anyway, I wanted to see if attitude this really was as prevalent on this forum as you said, and it didn't take me very long to find enough of the same old dogwhistles to convince me that I shouldn't take everything on this forum as inherently LGBT-friendly.

First, I didn't say "everything" would be lgbt friendly, I said it was the default. Regardless it's enough proof for you, I respect your stance there, but everything I've seen from 2015 (when I first joined the forum) to this day suggests that it is that way, so I do believe I am still justified in treating as true. So far all I've been presented that would stand as any form of contradiction to this is "but there some cases which aren't lgbt friendly", which doesn't contradict what I said in the slightest, and "it could not be that way".

I also feel as though "lgbt friendly" in the sense that you're thinking of, may be broader as a term than the one I am thinking of, but this is just a general impression I'm getting to replies so I may be jumping to conclusions there.

How? Do you think people are using it in bad faith?

I do agree that the tag is a bit too vague, but I think that problem can be solved by making a post explaining it similar to the "prefix guide" thread.

The odds that someone would use or does such a tag just to attract more people are far from 0, but that was more incidental to my point and not the main one. I was mainly concerned with the ambiguity of the tag leading to misunderstandings between people who interpret the tag differently.

I wouldn't put my money on it, regarding explaining genre. People are constantly misplacing threads, despite the explanations on top of the subforum, and the various guides available for understanding where to put things, including my own beginner's guide which I link to new members every day.

Can't speak for everyone, but that's honestly a sacrifice I think people are willing to make. Joining an rp only to discover that it's not LGBT-friendly when you yourself is a part of the LGBT community isn't exactly a very fun feeling and I'll gladly miss out a million fun and exciting roleplays if it means I won't have to experience that again.

Alright then. I don't recall if the conversation had moved on to the tag change proposals when I last responded to you, but I feel like that is an entirely legitimate position, and a tag should exist for those who want to avoid that risk. I just feel it'd be more productive to have that tag be one that describes lgbt themes or relationships specifically, as opposed to a roleplay that just also happens to allow lgbt characters to a lesser or greater extent.

Also, the obvious solution to that problem is just to use the tag if you're accepting of them if you're concerned about them missing out. I don't really get why we have to go "well, I won't use the tag so we better remove it".

The problem with that solution is that it is too idealistic. Some of us just don't feel the tag is necessary, or don't feel it is a priority, or think the tag means something different. Others forget to add it pure and simple. This is not something you can fix. Regardless of what people should or shouldn't do, this will continue to happen.

That by itself wouldn't lead me or any other to suggest that it shouldn't be around then. However, the fact that because it is around it spreads a lie about roleplays without it can bring more harm than good.

If every member of lgbt was like you and didn't mind missing out on a whole bunch of potentially fun RPs for that bit of extra safety, then the matter would be completely indifferent to me. Same thing if this misinformation didn't spread or didn't linger in more experienced RPers too. But I seriously doubt that is the case, at least on RPN.

 

[Delinquent]

The odds that someone would use or does such a tag just to attract more people are far from 0, but that was more incidental to my point and not the main one.

Yeah, but are those I'm trying to avoid by looking for rps with tags like this one more likely to use it or not?

I wouldn't put my money on it, regarding explaining genre. People are constantly misplacing threads, despite the explanations on top of the subforum,

Then that's on them if people don't read the thread. I don't think it's too much to ask to at least try a thread to minimize potential confusion (if confusion really is that big of a problem when it comes to this tag).

Besides, we need a thread that explains the meaning and differences between various tags/subgenres anyway (I mean, what's fandom characters and how does they differ from canon characters).

Alright then. I don't recall if the conversation had moved on to the tag change proposals when I last responded to you

Tag, subgenre, what's the difference? As far as I'm concerned they're interchangeable terms. I don't see how changing LGBT-friendly to a tag would make it better.

I just feel it'd be more productive to have that tag be one that describes lgbt themes or relationships specifically, as opposed to a roleplay that just also happens to allow lgbt characters to a lesser or greater extent.

With the risk of repeating myself, LGBT-friendly is different from simply having gay characters.

The problem with that solution is that it is too idealistic. Some of us just don't feel the tag is necessary, or don't feel it is a priority, or think the tag means something different.

if you feel that way, then don't use it. But then you have to live with people potentially missing out on your roleplays. I just find it a bit odd to be so concerned about people missing out on experiences whilst not wanting to make them feel secure enough to partake in said experience.

Also, if only there was a way to minimize the risk of people not knowing the meaning of a tag, like an official explanation from the mods or something.

Others forget to add it pure and simple

Can't you use that argument to justify removing all tags/subgenres? Like, aren't I just as likely to forget to add the anime subgenre?

However, the fact that because it is around it spreads a lie about roleplays without it can bring more harm than good.

It doesn't really spread any lies. It just points out which people feel like being open about being LGBT-friendly is necessary or a priority.

 

[rae2nerdy]

Doesn't site rules cover ooc interactions in relation to LGBT stuff already? No need for a tag that just says "not a dick btw". Keep tags limited to IC themes.

Not specifically. There is a rule about using slurs that also cover LGBTQ terms. Like you can't use the C word that rhymes with blunt and the N word that rhymes with Tigger and the F word that rhymes with maggot.

And of course general harrassment is not allowed. But there is nothing that says you have to be open to LGBTQ individuals specifically.

 

[Idea]

Yeah, but are those I'm trying to avoid by looking for rps with tags like this one more likely to use it or not?

That depends on who you're trying to avoid. People who are openly against lgbt in their roleplays are more likely to not use the tag. People who are trying to have it halfway- say they are open without in reality being- are more likely to use the tag. Intuitively speaking. I say this because people who would bother saying they are open without being are either trying to gain something from it, or are afraid of the repercussions for not being open.

Then that's on them if people don't read the thread. I don't think it's too much to ask to at least try a thread to minimize potential confusion (if confusion really is that big of a problem when it comes to this tag).

Well, sure, but I could also say "it's on them to state that they are not open to lgbt". When dealing with an issue it's important to look at how people will and do actually behave from the available information. If everyone did what they should, then the discrimination wouldn't exist in the first place.

That said, I do absolutely agree with you that it wouldn't hurt at all to have a thread that details more on the meaning of the subgenre and tags. I do believe the reason why they aren't there is because they are a relatively recent addition to the site, in addition to being based on suggestions.

Tag, subgenre, what's the difference? As far as I'm concerned they're interchangeable terms. I don't see how changing LGBT-friendly to a tag would make it better.

That's not what I was refering to. I was referring to the point in the conversation when it was proposed that two distinct tags would be created- one for lgbt friendliness and one for lgbt themes and the like, in order to make things more clear. I disagreed with this proposal, and offered a counter-proposal of just changing the tag to just one focused on lgbt themes and relationships, which the way I see it, would provide all the beneficts of the lgbt friendliness tag while limiting the downsides that I've been talking about. It would allow player so filter for a tag which they felt safe with, but also encourage them to give more of a shot to roleplays without the tag as they grew more familiar with RPN's open community. This way, newer players could rest easy, while more experienced players would miss out on a lot less potential roleplays.

With the risk of repeating myself, LGBT-friendly is different from simply having gay characters.

Well, yeah, you could also play transgender characters, and aromantic characters and so on... but I imagine that's not what you are referring to.

But yeah, we're possibly talking about entirely different things, and have entirely different interpretations of the tag. When I think "lgbt friendly" I think "people who are of the lbgt community or have lgbt characters can come in to the roleplay without being rejected for those causes". If they come looking to specifically explore lgbt issues, or a focus from the part of the overall narrative on their character as a member of the lgbt community, or they want characters to pay attention to the fact the character is lgbt or treat them differently for being that way or if they want OOC special protections for being lgbt- then I would say that doesn't fall under the scope of it. I would say that falls more under the scope of lgbt themes and relationships, which is the alternative I proposed, and which would hence be something a lot narrower.

if you feel that way, then don't use it. But then you have to live with people potentially missing out on your roleplays. I just find it a bit odd to be so concerned about people missing out on experiences whilst not wanting to make them feel secure enough to partake in said experience.

There's more than one reason why I personally don't use it, the ultimate irrelevance being one of them. I get the distinct impression though that those reasons (outlined in my first post on this thread) might just fall outside of what you call "lgbt friendly" though.

That said, I simply don't believe the policy of having the "lgbt friendly" tag is the best one. If an lgbt player happens to come into one of my roleplays, I'll welcome them with open arms, but I am not looking specifically for lgbt players at any point, nor do I have any intentions on focusing on any themes relating to that. If an lgbt player misses out on one of my roleplays, not only are there a million possible substitutes, but if it was because of the tag then it's likely that it wouldn't be the best roleplay for them anyway.

However, a player limiting themselves isn't a matter of one roleplay, nor one player, but many, many roleplays. Even if my roleplay might not be the best for them, who's to say there isn't a roleplay that WOULD be the best for them which they are missing out on? The more roleplays like that there are out there, the more likely that becomes.

And you could respond "well, why don't you just all try putting the tag? Every little bit helps.", and you might have a point (unrealistic an expectation though that may be). However, it wouldn't adress the root of the problem. It doesn't fix that some roleplays, even those that claim to be lgbt friendly, may in fact not be. It also doesn't fix the problem of the misconception that roleplays without the tag may not be (and in all likelihood, mostly appear to not be) against lgbt or rejecting of lgbt at all.

Can't you use that argument to justify removing all tags/subgenres? Like, aren't I just as likely to forget to add the anime subgenre?

Nope. The big difference is that the other tags indicate something is present, but in their absense people don't assume the absense of the thing. If I forget to add "anime" nobody is going to assume that means there can't be anime content in there. But if someone happens to forget "Lgbt friendly" there are people who will absolutely now assume that this RP doesn't welcome them because they lgbt, and assumption which will often be wrong.

It doesn't really spread any lies. It just points out which people feel like being open about being LGBT-friendly is necessary or a priority.

Yes, it does. That's EXACTLY the thing.

Okay, allow me to correct myself. All I'm saying is under my interpretation of the tag. The exact boundaries of how you are perceiving it are yet a mystery to me, so I can't speak of them, and certainly didn't build any of my arguments around it.

Still it does spread the lie that people aren't lgbt friendly in threads without the tag.

 

[Ayama]

Idea

I don't think it's necessarily an assumption that threads without the tag are automatically not ok with LGBTQ+ characters/relationships/issues, but that threads with the tag are. It's desiring that feeling of knowing your characters and associated subplots/issues will be accepted, rather than the uncertainty (and sometimes downright rejection) that gets experienced by members of the community elsewhere.

And you said that, as a consequence of your proposal for eliminating the 'friendly' tag, newer players would essentially be restricted to RPs with LGBTQ+ as a focus, because only older players would know that they were welcome elsewhere, which seems quite unfair. Many LGBTQ+ community members, while wanting an RP environment that is accepting of those themes, have no interest in RPs where it is a major focus.

This is why I believe in the need for three distinctions (see ashwynne's previous post which outlines it far better):
-OOC: it should be in the site rules that players cannot get discriminated against on the basis of sex, age, ethnicity, religion, gender expression, sexual orientation, etc.
-tag: an LGBTQ-friendly/inclusive/whatever tag indicates to players that those characters/relationships/issues are welcome in the RP
-sub-genre: an LGBTQ subgenre indicates that those characters/relationships/issues are a major focus of the RP

 

[Idea]

I don't think it's necessarily an assumption that threads without the tag are automatically not ok with LGBTQ+ characters/relationships/issues, but that threads with the tag are. It's desiring that feeling of knowing your characters and associated subplots/issues will be accepted, rather than the uncertainty (and sometimes downright rejection) that gets experienced by member of the community elsewhere.

If that were the case, then I wouldn't be saying what I am, but that doesn't seem to be what the suggestion is throughout the discussions I have been having in this thread. Maybe I am mistaken on that front, far from me to presume I know more about what you're saying than you yourselves. That said, I still feel that risk is very present- if not in absolute terms (people outright thinking that posts without the tag are not lgbt friendly) then putting the thought in the back of their heads (in other words, creating fear of the roleplays without the tag, and a feeling of insecurity in those when there was previously none there).

Of course the intended is to create a feeling of welcomeness, but what I have been saying is that it can actually have the opposite effect, increasing people's tendency to get into more insular spaces out of a fear that isn't particularly founded in this site at least.

With.that.said. if you want to specifically deal with lgbt issues then I would argue that falls under the proposal I was making- a tag focused on lgbt themes and relationships specifically, rather than having two tags.

And you said that, as a consequence of your proposal for eliminating the 'friendly' tag, newer players would essentially be restricted to RPs with LGBTQ+ as a focus, because only older players would know that they were welcome elsewhere, which seems quite unfair. Many LGBTQ+ community members, while wanting an RP environment that is accepting of those themes, have no interest in RPs where it is a major focus.

When you say you want "an RP which is accepting of those themes but have no interest in roleplays in which it is a major focus", what exactly are you talking about?
I only see one of three potential answers:
A) It's something which would actually require being a major focus of the RP (still within the bounds of the tag)
B) it's something in which you are dragging a theme which doesn't belong in a certain RP into that RP outside the bonds of your character and other associated characters that want to participate in that theme (something which you shouldn't do in any roleplay)
C)something which falls under the boundaries of the character and associated characters that want to participate in that theme.

Presuming it's the latter (because I feel the other two options have already been answered there), we go into why I don't think it would be unfair for newer players who are worried about the potential discrimination to find that the tag focused on lgbt themes and relationships: because their fear isn't actually founded.

For starters, there being a tag of focus on lgbt themes doesn't mean there couldn't be any other focus. If you wanted to make an RP about dragon riders with a bit of lgbt themes, I would say that lgbt tag would still fit.

On the other hand, let's say hypothetically that they are still too focused for you as a newer player. Then, you would have to start looking into RPs without the tag too. Yes, it wouldn't be an easy step to take. But if you can get an agoraphobic to get out of the house, or a person with obesity problems to start exercising, it will be uncomfortable at first, but it will help them in the long run. That wouldn't be an issue with the implementation of this tag, that would be a feature, encouraging people who want a lesser involvement or even no involvement of lbgt tags to explore the community and see just how open it is, to open a wider world for them by giving them an incentive to find out for themselves that this place isn't like those others.

I don't EXPECT anyone to come in knowing how RPN is, but I do want to SHOW them that. It can't be done if they don't take the risk, if what they are shown is a segregative tag that may trick them into thinking a bunch of RPs don't want to welcome them when they actually do very much welcome them. I understand people not being comfortable without a tag to filter and be sure, but I also want them to have the chance to overcome that discomfort.

 

[Delinquent]

People who are trying to have it halfway- say they are open without in reality being- are more likely to use the tag.

I disagree, I think people who pretend to be open about the LGBT community are less likely to use the tag than not. Based on my experiences, those types of people tend to go for a more "it's not that big of a deal" type of argument rather than outright state their "support".

When dealing with an issue it's important to look at how people will and do actually behave from the available information

I still don't really get your argument. Even if some people aren't gonna read such a thread, it'll still minimize the confusion regarding the tag. And it would help to have an official explanation of it to point towards to help those who didn't bother to read that thread.

It would allow player so filter for a tag which they felt safe with, but also encourage them to give more of a shot to roleplays without the tag as they grew more familiar with RPN's open community

I disagree, I think that limiting such a tag to only roleplays that directly focuses on LGBT themes would have the same downsides without any postives. I.e it would only result in people using that tag to find roleplays that they feel secure in being either limited to a smaller numbers of roleplays with much more limited scopes or having to give up using that tag thus removing what made them feel secure in the first place.

If an lgbt player misses out on one of my roleplays, not only are there a million possible substitutes, but if it was because of the tag then it's likely that it wouldn't be the best roleplay for them anyway

Wouldn't that apply to every other roleplay without the tag as well though?

Nope. The big difference is that the other tags indicate something is present, but in their absense people don't assume the absense of the thing. If I forget to add "anime" nobody is going to assume that means there can't be anime content in there.

Maybe it's me being dumb, but I don't see why people would assume that there can still be anime content in an rp without the anime tag yet would assume that people aren't LGBT-friendly without the LGBT-friendly tag.

Still it does spread the lie that people aren't lgbt friendly in threads without the tag.

No, it doesn't. It just gives people the option of skipping the guessworks and stick to roleplays they know are LGBT-friendly rather than taking unnecessary risks.

 

[Idea]

I still don't really get your argument. Even if some people aren't gonna read such a thread, it'll still minimize the confusion regarding the tag. And it would help to have an official explanation of it to point towards to help those who didn't bother to read that thread.

I agree on the official explanation front, but it wouldn't minimize the confusion. From where I stand, what would minimize the confusion is having a tag that is less ambiguous and not framing whether someone is friendly to lgbt or not on a tag.

I disagree, I think that limiting such a tag to only roleplays that directly focuses on LGBT themes would have the same downsides without any postives. I.e it would only result in people using that tag to find roleplays that they feel secure in being either limited to a smaller numbers of roleplays with much more limited scopes or having to give up using that tag thus removing what made them feel secure in the first place.

For my answer to this, I direct you to my latest response to Ayama

Wouldn't that apply to every other roleplay without the tag as well though?

Nope- that has mostly to do my other reasons for not wanting the tag, besides the one of thinking it unecessary. To those that feel it is unecessary though, the RP is still entirely welcoming to the lgbt player as if they had the tag, they just didn't feel it necessary to state what to them was obvious.

Maybe it's me being dumb, but I don't see why people would assume that there can still be anime content in an rp without the anime tag yet would assume that people aren't LGBT-friendly without the LGBT-friendly tag.

Because for some people "I just couldn't care less" isn't an option they tend to feel is real. In my book "I couldn't care less" AKA not rejecting people or characters that are LGBT, but also not pursuing that content or featuring it in the RP, is still "lgbt friendly"- after all if you personally want to explore lgbt things with your character, then you are free to do so in one of my RPs, it will just be limited to your own content and those who want to do it with you, not be a focus of the narrative (I'm using myself as an example here, not an end all be all). This also plays into the "us versus them" mentality, in this case that if someone isn't expressively (AKA putting the tag there) for lgbt, then they are against it. Or possibly, the person may not even consciously, intellectually believe this, but still fear the dread at the possibility, thus treating RPs without the tag as if they aren't lgbt friendly, regardless of whether they are or aren't.

That's just me trying to explain what I've observed and read though. The simple fact is that the other tags just aren't taken with the level of seriousness this one is. They are an add-on to attract people to a roleplay, not something which will define whether someone will or not actually join.

I disagree, I think people who pretend to be open about the LGBT community are less likely to use the tag than not. Based on my experiences, those types of people tend to go for a more "it's not that big of a deal" type of argument rather than outright state their "support".

No, it doesn't. It just gives people the option of skipping the guessworks and stick to roleplays they know are LGBT-friendly rather than taking unnecessary risks

Since on these two points we're just going off on our own experience (and other experiences we've read about) I propose we agree to disagree on these. There would be no way to present a further argument for them other than statistics after all.

 

[Amyleii]

just to preference my position on this discussion with some semblance that the discussion pertains to me as a member of both this site and the lgbt, I am Transgender Asexual and my point I wanted to make is this. The tag itself is not a bad thing, and the suggestion to make it specific to LGBT-themed rps is also not a bad suggestion or in anyway in my eyes a malicious attack on the lgbt, it is an honest and thoughtful idea that is considerate of the people the tag effects. on the one point the LGBT members of this site do deserve to know that the people they are RPing with are friendly towards them, on the other hand the site is supposed to be safe for all anyway so the tag is mute if the site really is for everyone. I think the idea behind changing it to be only rps that are LGBT-themed makes sense from both sides. it allows LGBT members to RP comfortably while also allowing the site to feel more welcoming to the lgbt on all RPs not just the LGBT-themed ones. I am not sure how a suggestion like that would make someone "queerphobic" when it is vary clearly a suggestion to make the site more friendly and open. that is just my take on it.

 

[GM Angel]

New to this site specifically but for me the tag is just an easy way of letting people know they are safe from bigotry in my game and can make Lgbtq+ characters and just be themselves etc. without problems.

 

[ProphetessCassandra]

I am also new. I thought the tag meant that the RP was open for LGBTQ+ characters to join. So, I was mostly looking at games that had the tag.

 

[Dede]

Subgenres are precisely that. Subgenres. Being "friendly" to LGBTQ players or characters is not in my mind a subgenre in any sense of the word. It says nothing about the theme or the setting or the nature of the roleplay. It is a personal statement or stance towards discrimination, and in my opinion a completely empty one, since it is, and ought to be, the default position of civilised society and of all members of this site, presumably under the TOC, to be accepting of everyone regardless of their sexuality.

I will reiterate my point. RPN should not rely on the personal preferences of its members to weed out discrimination. That is such an arbitrary and a counterintuitive position to take. The tag has a tendency to be divisive because it is. It leaves open the possibility that RPs without the tag will be unwelcoming. In this way, it is a concession that bigotry has won the day, rather than an actual solution. The very fact that it exists makes people more wary, not less -- as clearly evidenced by the fact that some people will not even consider looking for roleplays unless the tag is present. Equality ultimately benefits from less segregation, not more. Not to get too political here, but the history of all civil rights movements ought to prove that.

This is not about added security or peace of mind or whatever. People from all walks of life can be discriminated against at any time. Yes, some experience it more frequently than others. I do not mean to slight anybody when I say that LGBTQs are not the only group of people exposed to bigotry, whether here or elsewhere. Should discrimination arise, they or anyone witnessing ought to report it to the staff. Yes, we have to be proactive as a community in staying vigilant, reporting these incidents, and making our LGBTQ friends feel at home site-wide. But it also has to be top down, and RPN needs to have a firm stance on discrimination. What we should definitely not do is encourage people to stay in safe little pockets, which is a victory for the bigots and a loss for everyone else.

EDIT: I also wanted to add that by this present logic RPN might as well have checkboxes for 'Black friendly' 'Asian friendly' 'Disability friendly' 'Jew friendly' 'Atheist friendly' and whatever else bigots might discriminate against. It doesn't, I think, because it knows that asking people to say what they want to tolerate is not the right way to combat discrimination, not by a long shot.

 

[SpectrumCrow]

Personally, I use it for a number of reasons. The first one being mainly to get it out there, I am open to LGBTQ stuff and don't tolerate any sort of bigotry out the bat. I know this site is very welcoming and such, I just really feel the need to be careful and to protect myself by making sure it's out of the way before I get to know someone. It's the internet, you know? Also just if it helps make anyone feel more comfortable. But also, my characters are almost always LGBTQ in some form! And sometimes I like to delve into those topics and themes that come with sexuality and gender identity and such.

 

[Amyleii]

Yes. All these points are valid and true. That why having the tag is actually not as helpful as a lgbt-theme tag. Because by having it on your own rp you are implying your rp is more open then rps that don’t have the tag which in turns makes those rps less likely to be played because I think we have a large lgbt community on the website. If it has a lgbt-theme tag instead you know that you are welcome to have an lgbt character as a part of the story without fear, while other rps are meant to be friendly towards lgbt as a whole though they may not focus enough on things like lgbt for it to be tagged as such. For instance bnha takes place in high school and some people might not be comfortable with any sexuality in high schoolers so the lgbt tag may be unneeded, but that does not mean lgbt members are unwelcome.

 

[Delinquent]

I agree on the official explanation front, but it wouldn't minimize the confusion.

How? If there was an official explanation of what the tag meant then surely more people would be able to read it and thus no longer be confused on what the tag means, thus minimizing the number of people confused by it.

This also plays into the "us versus them" mentality, in this case that if someone isn't expressively (AKA putting the tag there) for lgbt, then they are against it. Or possibly, the person may not even consciously, intellectually believe this, but still fear the dread at the possibility, thus treating RPs without the tag as if they aren't lgbt friendly, regardless of whether they are or aren't.

I think people are maybe blowing up the whole "everyone is going to assume that I'm homophobic if I don't use the tag" thing out of proportion a bit. I mean, to use the same argument you used to justify why you think that being LGBT-friendly is the "default" on this forum so far there's nobody in this thread that thinks that any RP without the tag is inherently LGBT-unfriendly, just that it's not a gamble worth taking to find out. And to add some more, admittedly anecdotal, evidence to prove my point. In my city, there's a couple of businesses that advertisers themselves as being LGBT-friendly and some that don't and despite me being fairly active in my city's LGBT community, I've yet to meet a single person who assumes that the latter are inherently less open to LGBT costumers.

For my answer to this, I direct you to my latest response to @Ayama

My issue with that response is that being LGBT-friendly and dealing with LGBT themes are not the same. They're often connected, but it's possible to be one without the other.

An LGBT-friendly rp would be one where I could say, play a trans character whose gender identity isn't even a part of their personality without having people accuse me of bringing in politics. Or where I can play a gay kid without being told that "people are uncomfortable with any sexuality in high schoolers" whilst everyone is ignoring all the straight romance going on. Or where LGBT+ characters aren't treated like a walking joke because "haha, LGBT+ people sure are icky and gross". Etc etc...

Unless you're really stretching the definition of a what a theme is, the tag wouldn't cover any of these scenarios. And if you do stretch the definition that far, in which case congratz you've replaced one vague and confusing tag with another vauge and confusing tag that basically means the same thing and will be used in the same way.

 

[Idea]

How? If there was an official explanation of what the tag meant then surely more people would be able to read it and thus no longer be confused on what the tag means, thus minimizing the number of people confused by it.

It would lessen the number, but it wouldn't minimize it, the way I see it anyways. I believe that a more effective method to eliminiate the confusion would be to elimintate having a tag that creates the confusion by being what the person who is supposed to put or not the tag puts as a default.

For the sake of argument, for instance, let's say that I am wrong on the subject and it isn't the default. Even then there will be people, myself and others, who will be confused by having to put a label which to us reads "this RP has something which is the same as 99% of other RPs".

I think people are maybe blowing up the whole "everyone is going to assume that I'm homophobic if I don't use the tag" out of proportion a bit. I mean, to use the same argument you used to justify why you think that being LGBT-friendly is the "default" on this forum so far there's nobody in this thread that thinks that any RP without the tag is inherently LGBT-unfriendly, just that it's not a gamble worth taking to find out.

So far you've been the only one to state "it's not a gamble worth taking" as an argument. While you are correct that nobody stated that not having the tag inherently makes you be homophobic or even just not welcoming of lgbt, the idea that a tag is necessary for an experienced player to feel safe implies that the lack of the tag feels unsafe. That itself is a problem (people being made to feel unsafe), but it's understandble and in that regard I do believe it is absolutely correct in giving them their own space. However, promoting that fear and feeling of discomfort, that I can't get behind, and that's what I believe that tag ultimately does. It doesn't make believe that those without the tag are homophobic, but it puts in the head of those who never felt that way that they encounter that discrimination when they might never actually run into it here, and for those who already had that fear it can augment it.

If what I had been told over these discussions were that, even if the risk is absolutely minimal, it's worth it to miss out on a bunch of content to avoid that one potential incident of rejection, then yeah by all means have your tag or two (I wouldn't say three, cause at that point that seems a bit much, but two for the sake of clarity absolutely). However, either this is not what I've been told or it wasn't made clear. You're the only one so far who has presented me with an argument that aknowledges both costs and benefits, rather than just one or the other.

And to add some more, admittedly anecdotal, evidence to prove my point. In my city, there's a couple of businesses that advertisers themselves as being LGBT-friendly and some that don't and despite me being fairly active in my city's LGBT community, I've yet to meet a single person who assumes that the latter are inherently less open to LGBT costumers.

Remember when I told you about people that could and do use the tag because it'll get them more people looking at their roleplay? Yeah, this example kind of falls on that.

An LGBT-friendly rp would be one where I could say, play a trans character whose gender identity isn't even a part of their personality without having people accuse me of bringing in politics. Or where I can play a gay kid without being told that "people are uncomfortable with any sexuality in high schoolers" whilst everyone is ignoring all the straight romance going on. Or where LGBT+ characters aren't treated like a walking joke because "haha, LGBT+ people sure are icky and gross". Etc etc...

Yeah, absolutely agree that's lgbt friendly not lgbt themes. And you're right, lgbt themes and lgbt friendly are not the same. That said, lgbt themes does imply lgbt friendly, and my entire point on lgbt friendly hinges on the fact that it doesn't really need to be said and creates a false impression by seeming like it does through the tag's existence. For the same reason it wouldn't make sense to have a "roleplay" tag or a "not a racist" tag.

Yes, lgbt friendly and lgbt themes are not the same. But if one is willing to sacrifice the choices in roleplay for the sake of safety, then going exclusively into roleplays with a tag indicating lgbt themes and relationships, rather than a separate tag with lgbt friendliness, would be a minor inconvenience at best (seeing how that does not eliminiate that the roleplay have other tags and such). The safety in filter is still there this way- but not having a separate "lgbt friendly" tag would encourage players to try roleplays without those tags. Those who don't want to take the risk regardless could simply stay within the more confined tag, I doubt it would make much of a difference to them. But to others a whole new world would open to them. I would proceed with the description, but at that point I'd just be repeating myself.



In any case, I'm sure we're all tired of this discussion. As per an agreement I've made, I'll be leaving things with this response being my last on this thread (save for anything I absolutely have to respond to, but even if adressed I'll probably stop engaging in this specific discussion now). If anyone absolutely wants to continue it with me, my PMs are always open.

I'd like to thank you and Ayama for remaining civil in this discussion, which may be a very sensitive topic for you. I don't doubt your impression of me may not be the best ever, but I hope there is no ill will between us at least.

See you around.

 

[Dede]

I have a few questions for those proposing the 'LGBTQ friendly' tag should stay, despite the fact that it is clearly not a sub genre at all and obviously does not belong there, and sticks out like a sore thumb:

1. In the interest of fairness to others, can we also have separate sub genres to serve every other discriminated group represented on RPN, namely racial, ethnic, religious, and so on and so forth?

2. Now that our new tags number in the dozens, would it not be practical to condense them into one, namely: "Discrimination free" or "No bigots allowed"

3. At which point does this tag become redundant, because it is basically saying the same thing as the terms and conditions of this website ought to already state in the first place?

A ridiculous victory for the bigots that we are willingly making such concessions to them. I'm not sure what else to say other than I hope RPN makes the right call.

 

[Delinquent]

So far you've been the only one to state "it's not a gamble worth taking" as an argument

I'd argue that the fact that people keep liking the posts in which I state that argument implies that they agree with me on that.

and my entire point on lgbt friendly hinges on the fact that it doesn't really need to be said and creates a false impression by seeming like it does through the tag's existence.

And my entire point hinges on the fact that it needs to be said and that you can't assume how LGBT-friendly something is based on the forum having a "positive environment" rule and because everyone insists being LGBT-friendly is the default. I've fallen for that one enough as it is.

Remember when I told you about people that could and do use the tag because it'll get them more people looking at their roleplay? Yeah, this example kind of falls on that.

And remember when I told you that the kind of people I'm trying to avoid by using tags like LGBT-friendly is less likely to use them.

But if one is willing to sacrifice the choices in roleplay for the sake of safety, then going exclusively into roleplays with a tag indicating lgbt themes and relationships, rather than a separate tag with lgbt friendliness, would be a minor inconvenience at best (seeing how that does not eliminiate that the roleplay have other tags and such).

But it does restrict you to roleplays where LGBT themes is an actual part of the rp. And as LGBT-friendly and dealing with LGBT themes aren't the same, it's not unreasonable for people to want the former without the latter.

 

[Turnsole]

I haven't read all the replies because there's a whole lot but I see many people just referring to the romance aspect. LGBT+ isn't just about the relationships you have with people but about gender identity as well. For me it's important to know that my characters will be accepted and respected even if it isn't a romance plot. I don't think there is a single character of mine that isn't LGBT+ in some form so it's an important thing to me, as well as being part of the community myself.

So, for the people saying they don't use it because they only do MxF or plots without romance, what about trans or gender diverse characters? The T is literally right there.

 

[OverconfidentMagi]

So, for the people saying they don't use it because they only do MxF or plots without romance, what about trans or gender diverse characters? The T is literally right there.

Not sure how using the tag for the T is any different than the LGorB. If being trans or gender diverse is a main theme of the story, sure I'd use the tag. Otherwise nope, and the idea of using a tag as some sort of inclusivity bat signal feels kind of slimy to me.

 

[Ayama]

Yes, lgbt friendly and lgbt themes are not the same. But if one is willing to sacrifice the choices in roleplay for the sake of safety, then going exclusively into roleplays with a tag indicating lgbt themes and relationships, rather than a separate tag with lgbt friendliness, would be a minor inconvenience at best (seeing how that does not eliminiate that the roleplay have other tags and such).

I disagree that, for players who don't know whether or not their characters will be accepted in an RP without it having the friendly tag, people not using the tag is a 'minor' inconvenience because, depending on how widespread the behavior is, it could essentially prevent them from joining nearly all the RPs they would otherwise be interested in.
I too appreciate that everyone in the discussion remained civil, as it is quite an important and interesting one! I will admit there were a few things about the way you expressed yourself sometimes that rubbed me the wrong way, but I think it's very important that everyone here feels safe to express their opinions! ^w^

Dede
I don't think anyone here is arguing to keep the tag as is- the fact that this thread exists and has had such active contribution over the last few days (and that it's being watched by the mods) is testament to the confusion and problems surrounding it. I think it's just that there are differing opinions on how to change it. I think we all agree that LGBTQ+ as an accepted element and LGBTQ+ as an actual theme are two different things. I think both sides are trying to accomplish the same goal, but with different methods.

The first proposal, which I outlined in a previous post (possibly too poorly to be comprehensible) is for three distinctions:
-OOC: it should be in the site rules that players cannot get discriminated against on the basis of sex, age, ethnicity, religion, gender expression, sexual orientation, etc.
-tag: an LGBTQ-friendly/inclusive/whatever tag indicates to players that those characters/relationships/issues are welcome in the RP
-sub-genre: an LGBTQ subgenre indicates that those characters/relationships/issues are a major focus of the RP

The second proposal is to change the sub-genre from 'LGBTQ+-friendly' to simply 'LGBTQ+' or 'LGBTQ+-themes', and for LGBTQ+ inclusiveness in RPs to be recognized site-wide. I'm not against this, per say, but wouldn't want to support this plan without a few conditions, such as:
-polling the site membership to make certain an overwhelming majority are in favor of it
-if/when the change is made, having possibly some kind of announcement so that people are aware of it
-having the non-discriminatory policy (both in OOC and in RPs- and not just for LGBTQ+) be stated in the sites rules

 

[Idea]

will admit there were a few things about the way you expressed yourself sometimes that rubbed me the wrong way

May I inquire as to what these were? While I can't promise to change any particular thing, there may be things I'm doing that give the wrong impression without realizing, so I'd appreciate the feedback.