PG-13 Clarification and Other Stories

Lerytha · Post by **Lerytha** » Wed Aug 22, 2007 11:27 am

I'll keep this simple, and just for the record state that I'm not looking for a morale/ethical exploration of sexual things. As much as I love FK, there's better places to argue about stuff like that. However, I wish to ask two questions.

1. Is the MUD still PG-13?

I remember there being a debate a while back about rape and matters like that, and it seemed (to me) that people were supporting a relaxation of the PG-13 rating, but did not support including something as inappropriate as rape on the MUD. Is that correct? Are we now allowed to discuss such matters as "sex" and the like? Mainly just for clarification, that.

2. Is it possible to remove the application requirement for "same-sex" PCs?

Okay, so this is a request. Basically, I am just calling into question the need for a player to "apply" for a character like this. I was wondering what people/the imms think of it. Is it needed? The helpfile says something like "people wishing to RP a same-sex-attracted character must apply to the imms and state that they understand the PG-13 rating". I understand and appreciate that the imms have never denied a request like this. However, I'm just wondering if it is neccessary to apply? I know personally I dislike the fact (as a liberal, I admit) that someone who wishes to play a "same-sex-attracted character" has to apply stating they understand the sex policy whereas "normal" (and I use the term loosely) characters do not.

PS: Please, please, please... I'm not posting this to provoke a major idealogical debate which may cause problems if there are traditional people here against others. Obviously if you disagree with my personal ideals, that's fine! I just want to make sure all possible replies are kept strictly civil, because I am firstly curious about the first question, and quite determined about the second.

Anyway, just two questions I'd appreciate either answers/input into.

~Ol

Amalia · Post by **Amalia** » Wed Aug 22, 2007 12:05 pm

I believe the helpfile concerning same-sex-attracted characters has already been updated to exclude the application-- on my return, someone told me it happened about the time management changed. I'll admit, I'm thrilled to see it; the old policy almost made me leave the MUD the instant I saw it.

Horace · Post by **Horace** » Wed Aug 22, 2007 12:29 pm

I'd like to see the application process stay.

The main reason being that once you start showing affection toward another character in public, if it isn't done discreetly it stops being a role play between two characters and starts affecting all characters around. Once that happens you start to go into the cultural acceptance/prevalence of actions like that.

If Calimshan is loosely based off Arabia, does the middle eastern outlook on such unions apply? Would Chessentans (loosely based off greece and rome) be more accepting of it and more ingrained in their society? Are evil cities more likely to tolerate it than a generally good aligned city? Are drow alright with it, and orcs against it? Halflings, gnomes, elves, dwarves? The perceptions of good and evil and the perceptions of the orientation itself is 100% subjective to the player...which will undoubtedly cause inconsistencies in the cultures of the game.

None of these questions are answered within the genre. And when something isn't answered within the genre, it's safe to say that the question is outside the scope of the game.

With that in mind - I think it's important to continually remind players who choose to play a character with that orientation, that for the sake of the game there needs to be an emphasis on discretion.

Lerytha · Post by **Lerytha** » Wed Aug 22, 2007 12:30 pm

Oh. That's what happens when you post without access to the helpfiles. Gah. My apologies, it appears that I am several several months behind the matter.

Rhiel · Post by **Rhiel** » Wed Aug 22, 2007 3:27 pm

Well said, Horace. Very little could be added to that. I would only break it down to a single axiom.

FK is a game in which people have come to enjoy themselves and take a break from "reality." I personally do not wish to confront society's deepest conflicts in my leisure time, so I think the safest route is to simply minimalize the impact of such issues. It is something handled well in this game, methinks, and good RP can occur without such touchy subjects being an integral part of it.

On the other hand, certain RP's fit certain characters. Again, such things should be considered on a case-by-case basis. Being a liberal myself, I have no problems for or against, I am only concerned with the purity of my leisure time

Mele · Post by **Mele** » Wed Aug 22, 2007 4:52 pm

As far as I knew, the PG13 thing was in because of the mud club, which is no longer part of FK. (They've all grown up at this point, really.)

I honestly don't see a reason to keep it in at all, frankly. What Horace said can fly on any relations in game. Any couple should be descrete and polite in public, not just same sex. But hey, what you do in your own time, somewhere I'm not seeing, that's all you.

When the rule to app for same sex couples came in while the mud club was around I could understand it. If a parent saw something they didn't like and brought it to the school, it would come down on the teachers head who was hosting the club - no bueno. Since we are no longer hosting it specifically for high school kids at school, what any younger player does is done somewhere it's no longer responsible for a teacher to monitor - it's not FK's job to raise people's teenagers and make sure they don't see things only half of society doesn't approve. From either same sex or opposite sex couples.

Horace · Post by **Horace** » Wed Aug 22, 2007 5:24 pm

This is the internet. If you don't put some rules up, we're gonna have to add a lot more different styles of leather chaps to accommodate our new "players".

The discretion part, that I was shooting for, wasn't implying that gay couples are reduced to just a sly smile and straight couples can go to town in the market fountain. As with all couples, discretion should be a priority...it just goes double for same sex relationship roleplays. I'm positive no one wants to, in character or out of character, deal with the derogatory terms of that nature which would pretty quickly roll around - currently it isn't a problem at all.

Mele · Post by **Mele** » Wed Aug 22, 2007 5:41 pm

Ew. lol NOT where I was going with that.. at all. :) A bit too far into what I meant. :D I didn't mean it that far.

Rhiel · Post by **Rhiel** » Wed Aug 22, 2007 5:47 pm

Again, I am inclined to agree with Horace.

It's not that I condemn such practices, I am, after all, a liberal. It is just more-shall we say-appropriate to keep it ALL to a minimum. That includes same sex, opposite sex, ANYTHING related to "mature content."

Think of it like this, at school there is never allowed ANY type of PDA (Public Display of Affection) and normally no propaganda supporting one ideology or the other. It is not that such practices are condemned, it is simply more socially appropriate to eliminate it entirely. That way, there can be no problems. At all.

Any time there is a group of people gathered together from any of the various walks of life, ideological/philosophical/religious conflicts are BOUND to crop up. While the religious issue is not so large a problem (due to in-game faiths), the others STILL are very pertinent.

So, in order to cater to a large variety of personalities, certain rules MUST be put in place to maintain order and civility. Such is the way of things. Anarchy is not the way.

We are all here to have fun, and while (as I've said) I certainly don't condemn any of the various things being discussed, I cannot say that I think they should all be fully supported and allowed to run amuck. That will cause serious problems, as I'm sure any person who follows the logic to its conclusion to its end can see what I mean.

However, as Mele pointed out, private affairs are just that - private. If no other parties are present to be offended, then there is no offense. So, I see no reason why such RP couldn't be conducted in such a private setting. Say, for example, a personal domicile, or perhaps a stretch of wilderness away from heavy traffic?

What I say only applies to those areas that are "public domain." People SHOULD be allowed to RP their character true to form, and if privacy is upkept, why shouldn't it be allowed?

Alvirin · Post by **Alvirin** » Wed Aug 22, 2007 5:49 pm

Sincerally I think that whatever shouldn't do a gay couple it shouldn't be done by a straight couple, and the other way around.

Horace · Post by **Horace** » Wed Aug 22, 2007 5:51 pm

I'm just goofin - though I could go for a nice pair of chaps.

I've just seen a lot of muds/mushs that sort of embrace the "everyone is an adult here" mentality and it becomes apparent pretty quickly that age isn't a very accurate measurement of when someone is able to act like an adult. If we're the Lucas Arts of roleplaying, i'm perfectly alright with that.

Rhiel · Post by **Rhiel** » Wed Aug 22, 2007 5:57 pm

Ok Horace, I am sad because I did not understand your Lucas Arts reference -- And I am a HUGE Star Wars fan :

:

Mele · Post by **Mele** » Wed Aug 22, 2007 5:59 pm

I'm not for the everyone is an adult thing - If you want to be an adult, go to AIM. ;) I don't want to be made uncomfortable by someone trying to be an adult to me in game because they can. But then I feel double sided because if two other people want to .. be adults.. and it's not near me, eh. It's not my business. *shrug*

Horace · Post by **Horace** » Wed Aug 22, 2007 6:13 pm

For Rhiel - and anyone else interested.

George goes out of his way to avoid same sex relationships - because of the obvious conflict it can cause with a large demographic of people. I don't think anyone minds a guy and a gal giving a peck in the market, but some characters may be prone to respond to two dudes kissing. Then out of character people get upset that characters said something that may also apply to them out of character in a mean way....and it spirals out of control.

And then the builders are spending all their time coding new varieties of chaps.

Caelyvar · Post by **Caelyvar** » Wed Aug 22, 2007 6:26 pm

I am afraid I have to come firmly down on the side of being able to talk about your relationships in public, if someone gets offended, they can, its their right and if done properly it can lead to some very good RP

But I dont think I would want to watch ANYONE groping in public, this is an IC and OOC oppinion. But I just cant bring myself to care what you do in the privacy of your own dwelling

But I do think we could use some new varieties of chaps

Horace · Post by **Horace** » Wed Aug 22, 2007 6:28 pm

Caelyvar changed my mind. I'm now for everything

*rubs hands together* I'm gonna get me so many chaps

Lerytha · Post by **Lerytha** » Wed Aug 22, 2007 6:29 pm

IC is IC. Yes, there may be some people who make OOC points IC, but personally, if its in your CHARACTER'S head to be bigoted, rude, obnoxious, etc, then that is what your character is. If a male character of mine happened to kiss another male (or female, lets not forget them - people seem to overlook that they are slightly more prevalent on the MUD) in the Square, and people reacted (ICly) then I would have absolutely no problem with that reaction whatsoever.

If we can RP racism towards humans, we can RP other factors.

Yet I'm going to say now (unless the imms decide otherwise), if "straight" couples are allowed to peck each other on the lips in a Market Square, then any "gay" characters (male or female) I play will also do exactly the same. If "straight" people aren't allowed, then I won't either. The only way to work it out properly is to ensure complete equality in regards to the rules, then expecting people to accept IC consequences of whatever they do.

~Ol

Caelyvar · Post by **Caelyvar** » Wed Aug 22, 2007 6:32 pm

I hate to say it Lerytha but that is how I RP caelyvar, I have never dont anything I have not seen a straight couple do

I believe in equality and if the Imm's see that caely holding hands with her significant other in MS as wrong then I think that the straight couples should be held to the same standards.

Arothian · Post by **Arothian** » Wed Aug 22, 2007 10:24 pm

Lerytha wrote:but personally, if its in your CHARACTER'S head to be bigoted, rude, obnoxious, etc, then that is what your character is.

HEY!

Glim · Post by **Glim** » Wed Aug 22, 2007 11:26 pm

Not just on the point of same sex and relationships, but as an overall PG-13 rating, the mud is already past that.

Think about it, you can:
*Follow a god devoted to whipping for sadistic pleasure (Yes, Mele, I know that's not all it, but you get the point

)
*Encounter demons and devils (yes, even sexual ones)
*Kill animals/humans/monsters.
*Torture animals/humans/monsters
*Skin either dead or alive animals/humans/monsters
*Sacrifice a living (code-wise) being to a deity

And more!

I mean, if you really think about it RPly wise... practically everyone on this mud has MURDERED someone. That's a pretty bad thing.

So, why does everyone have a problem with two girls/guys showing affection in public when right after they will go out and cut some poor guy's head off and not bat an eyelash?

I would hope that most of the people that play this mud are mature enough to handle these and if it is against what they believe in then to remove themselves from the picture. I am not saying quit the mud, but leave the room you are in. If you are uncomfortable, remove yourself. The rules/laws on this mud shouldn't be there to babysit folks.

This is, of course, my opinion. Feedback is always welcome,