The Culture Beneath the Stairs

They Kissed! : Gays, Bisexuals and Lesbians in Roleplaying

by Conan McKegg
August 8, 2001

Ever since I began working on column ideas I had always wanted to eventually write a column about the place of gays, lesbians and bisexuals in the roleplaying industry. Considering that roleplaying has been considered the domain of the sweating heterosexual, Lara Croft Loving, Gillian Anderson Worshipping anorak brigade; I felt that it was time to banish some of the preconceived myths and offer some points to consider.

This column does not seek to lecture you about what is right or wrong, nor does it endeavor to offer the ultimate solution. Instead, I hope to facilitate discussion about this topic by raising a variety of points for us all to consider.

One of the first things that I noted once I had decided to write this column was that there is a distinct lack of strong Bi, Gay or Lesbian characters in modern roleplaying games. Sure, certain goth-oriented games have included gay or lesbian NPCs, but these are invariably flawed characters.

Now, I am not suggesting that all gaming companies suddenly go out and start including more homosexual characters in their products. Thinks for a moment about the creation of new character class for D&D. Would that be a Prestige Class or a Standard Class? In fact, I'd be inclined to warn against it. To my knowledge, in the current cases where gay or lesbian characters are used these are often either stereotypes or simply added to make the product appear to be "politically correct."

There is a greater problem here though; do we, as writers, designers and producers of gaming products, add gay and lesbian characters into our products and risk being accused of "cashing in" on a trend? Or do we not include the characters and then become accused of being "homophobic."

There seems to be an unusual catch 22 here. With such a loaded topic, it becomes quite easy to fall into a trap of being classed as the evil guy one way or the other. To further compound the problem, is it really the gaming industry's responsibility to tell fans what is ethically right and what isn't. Yet this can also be turned to mean something else. What right do companies have to tell players what they can't play?

I was recently informed about a certain company's preference for players using heterosexual characters in their worldwide campaigns. I am assuming that said company believes that because they are backing the campaigns, they can effectively tell all players and GMs what they can and can't have within the created community.

What do they fear? Offending other players? How about the players who are being told they can't play the character they want to play, because some nerdy guy in Milwaukee doesn't want to see gay or lesbian behavior -- I emphasize that it's not sex but behavior.

While we are at it, I don't want to see violence in my campaigns, because I like the politics -- so no fighters allowed. Oh, and I don't want to see any mention of fictional characters eating pigs, because it is against my religion. Oh! Oh! And I don't want to see any waste by PCs because I am also an environmentalist…well you can see how it soon gets out of hand.

So what is there to fear? The biggest argument given is that such sexuality is "unethical" and "immoral." Ahem. I ask why? Exactly what morals are being broken? Furthermore, to bring us back to topic, why do we have no problems with seeing sexy lesbian babes in games but not mention of gay characters?

Of course a majority of people would argue that roleplayers are a predominately male teens group. But this can't possibly be the case. Sure, back in the days when there was D&D and nothing else, this may have been true. Still, roleplaying has moved quite a distance away from the days of rules-lawyering and simple dice rolls. There is a drive for more story driven games, and with this we are beginning to see a more diverse mix of players. Writers, artists, "cool" crowd, Goths, older generation and younger are being drawn in together to play roleplaying games. Yet the companies continue to target the sweaty-nerd stereotype.

But then, why should we all feel obligated to a group that may not even be a majority within our own sub-culture? An initial thing to note is that often these companies are not actively avoiding the use of homosexual characters; they are simply like the rest of us in this heterosexual saturated society - unaware of the issue.

We never question the sight of heterosexual behavior because we see it everywhere, thus it is considered normal. (Yes, I am aware that it is a natural thing. I am looking at this from a societal point of view, not a biological.) Thus it becomes easy to simply not consider it a problem. It's not callousness or even selfishness. It simply does not occur to some people that there may be another lifestyle that is practiced.

The problem that then arises is that if we actively include any homosexual commentary or imagery, we could end up drawing attention to it because it isn't something that is seen regularly in common everyday life. Now I can see that many gays and lesbians are ready to argue that things like pride parades and Mardi Gras' are designed to show people how many gays and lesbians there are -- but these do not show how normal the lifestyle can be.

If anything, it emphasizes the differences. If we were to do this in a roleplaying sense, using the same ideology, then it would possibly lead to "the gay roleplaying game for gays." Game of "Homos and Dykes" anyone? (Note: I do not mean to be offensive here.)

I would suggest that the answer lies in subtlety. Rather than actively saying "He's gay! She's a Lesbian!" Maybe companies should simply mention "he has a relationship with Mike. She loves Dana very much." This way people may become more comfortable with the concept of same-sex relationships in their games. Stop up-playing it and simply use the basic idea. Then again, maybe it should be left to the players and GMs to make the ultimate decision about whether they feel comfortable with the use of such imagery.

Hopefully this article has managed to draw your attention to some of the issues that surround this matter, not only in a roleplaying sense, but a societal one. At the very least I hope that it manages to stir some intelligent debate about the way such characters, and players, are treated within the roleplaying community. I have attempted to produce arguments from both sides as well as provide some questions that may be interesting to consider. When all is said and done, this is about having the freedom to be who you want to be. In character and out of character.