The 1980s Media Panic Over Dungeons and Dragons
atlasobscura.com
atlasobscura.com
So yeah, the SJG "Cyberpunk" raid was probably the peak of the anti-D&D frenzy. That's not just moms and journalists freaking out. That was the full authority of the US government.
Nitpick, but the work in question was "GURPS Cyberpunk", and its not a game in itself but a genre supplement for GURPS, SJG's generic RPG.
> So yeah, the SJG "Cyberpunk" raid was probably the peak of the anti-D&D frenzy.
The SJG raid had pretty much nothing to do with the larger, moralistic anti-D&D frenzy (even though that frenzy did also target other parts of the RPG industry), and was more related to completely separate anti-hacker panic, the bureaucratic turf war between the FBI and Secret Service over computer crime and the Secret Service's desire to show results on that front (coupled with a near-complete lack of knowledge about what it was doing in that field), and the fact that the freelancer who was writing GURPS Cyberpunk was a highly-visible hacker with an arrest record.
Other than the fact that it happened to effect a company in the same industry, it was a completely separate thing.
The author of the SJG book, Loyd Blankenship, was involved in the transmission and storage of the 911 documents that the Secret Service was all fired up about. He ran the Steve Jackson Illuminati BBS. My favorite part of the Hacker Crackdown book is when Sterling talks about how Steve Jackson couldn't convince the investigators that what he'd written was a game. They kept insisting it was real.
EDIT: From Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Sundevil "The raid on Steve Jackson Games, which led to the court case Steve Jackson Games, Inc. v. United States Secret Service, is often attributed to Operation Sundevil, but the Electronic Frontier Foundation states that it is unrelated and cites this attribution as a media error." Whoops! My bad.
"Journalists" like Geraldo Rivera exploited this panic quite thoroughly in the 1980s: http://io9.gizmodo.com/5829171/when-geraldo-rivera-took-on-s...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Procter_%26_Gamble?section=17#...
Their lyrics, their iconography, their album illustrations were all trotted out as 'proof' that the bands had sold their souls to the devil and were trying to recruit us to the dark side.
It didn't intersect it so much as it was a component of the broader Satanic panic.
Did they worry that someone was going to perform dark rituals so well that they actually summoned the devil?
Edit: I'll add I don't go around telling people how silly I think they are for believing these things, but it makes as much sense to me as telling me aliens live in our shoes and if we don't tap then three times before taking then off they will harm us.
People say we've come to our senses, but the unreasoning panic about anything that might be related to pedophilia is actually still very much with us.
In the same way the Iraq War itself is not discredited, while the evidence presented at the time is.
Honestly, it was a great way to keep kids off the streets. You were motivated to sit around for hours, doing something harmless while being very social. For many introverted kids, it was a godsend.
Needless to say, lulz were had.
Player Kill by DM fiat? No wonder people were upset!
In prison, I DM'ed 4 game groups a week. All the introverted guys flocked to the games, and I watched them develop social skills over the years. They had to learn to interact with each other, share, work together, and express themselves if they were to be part of my games.
Also, if you are not familiar with the larger DnD online community, this link may be a good place to start:
Years later, what I realized was that all those people who were in a tizzy were reflecting their own fears onto the game. The highly Christian saw demonic influences. The tightly-wound saw loss of control (letting random chance determine reactions). The extroverts worried that their children weren't getting out often enough to meet other children.
Single player dnd?
I was young and it was my first brush with a moral panic. Changed my perspective. Made me realize that it's not Evil per se that you need to watch out for, but simply regular people who are afraid of something.
I guess fire is the only way to get the demons out. Makes you wonder how they thrive in hell.
This bit of Christian mythology does make sense, I find. Actually, a fair few do, it's just that, well, angels and demons, right?
Oh and now that I mentioned it, there's an RPG where you play devils or angels duking it out in the land of the living:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_Nomine_%28role-playing_game...
... and I even have a hard copy, that I picked up from Oxfam. Hmmm...
If my Dad had burned ANY of my books that would have probably also burned any relationship. I can only guess at the sense of betrayal, and that's one of those run away and join the circus type events or go to a far way college / join the military life choices.
Did you friend benefit from this experience? In fairness it could have freed up time for team sports or community service.
It's a good thing that the moral panics we have right now are clearly righteous and accurate, and the people being attacked and ostracized unquestionably deserve it.
If you were into any kind of nerd subculture, or really just any subculture to begin with, then it's really hard to describe the sense of social isolation that you would have felt prior to online communities (especially if you didn't live in a major city).
The Internet has ushered in an era of social fragmentation, but before then there an immense pressure toward social cohesion and conformity. Today, no matter what you're into, there's a subreddit and 1,000 other websites dedicated to that. There is community, social connection. Conventions and other gatherings emerge from that.
Back in the 80's, there was just... nothing. You were a freak, and completely socially isolated, just for being into non-pop musical genres... or having hobbies and interests other than those deemed mainstream (e.g. sports, hunting and fishing, etc).
Yes, there are still moral crusaders today. There are still assholes in Kentucky that don't want to give marriage licenses to gay people, and so on. I don't mean to make light of that. But it's just... not... the... same... as it was a generation ago, when any deviation from the norm placed you in complete social isolation without even an online escape.
There are a lot of similarities between this generation of moral panic and the past, but the differences are not at all an improvement.
In the 80's, moral panics led people to write leaflets, call their senator, and push their local TV station to cover it. Today, technology lets the people caught up in a moral panic directly interact with the people they see as the cause of their panic. It's not surprising that we see brigades and harassment on those new front lines.
Of course, that doesn't tell us that every antagonistic movement is a moral panic. But certainly the moral panics, if large enough, will have unpleasant aspects. That's just the cost of allowing easy direct interaction between anyone at any time.
We as a society have no ability to recognize and arrest a moral panic while it's in progress. At best, the people who point out that it's a moral panic get lumped in with the targets of the moral panic and marginalized.
In fifteen years when we've moved on to panicking about, I dunno, artificial intelligences or space colonization or whatever ("Sixteen Reasons Why Moving To The Moon Is Racist") we'll all look back on 2016 and smugly shake our heads at those ignorant, benighted simpletons and how they freaked out over the most minor things.
However you see maybe D&D is racist : elves have boni in beauty, dwarves are ugly and strong ... but any characters can choose their morale demeanor.
In fact you needed assassins as much as paladin. No true D&D party could survive without diversity of classes, races and moral demeanor.
Yes D&D is a dangerous fantasy.
It is a fantasy that states that for making a strong team you have to embrace diversity and that teach you how to deal with discrimination positively.
It teaches you that mainly your talent were random (initial dices) but it was up to you to make them a strength and it did not even mattered you were weak you could level up through doing.
Yes D&D dangerous fantasies should stop because they are turning kids in better adults better understanding that everything is a weird cocktail of luck and determinism and that we can have nice adventures out of it and improve ourselves.
Dangerous game indeed. Giving hopes to kids should be forbidden. We better need an adaptation of 1984 in AAA format.
This of course isn't all players nor to say that this (honestly really) good interpretation isn't valid, it's just that it's not a constant when it comes to the games. Sometimes a game, despite best intentions, is taken in a less than positive way by a small few.
Though...it would be nice if more players just lived with the results of the RNG.
I have to say the darker and scarier the modules, the more into them we were. We must have played and replayed Ravenloft dozens of times. We made up our own versions to it.
The club instantly folded. We never heard another word about what precipitated it. Seemed pretty late in the game for D&D moral panic, and this was a pretty liberal Chicago suburban school district.
Crazy Egor's, for those of you that remember it, used to advertise on the local independent/proto-FOX station for where I grew up, because their store was local. I once called them up to talk to the station manager about running news stories about the evil of Magic cards... in the late 90s.
"Darker Dungeons" is a similar concept but with some mechanical modifications the author thought were sensible.
http://www.gratisgames.webspace.virginmedia.com/darkdungeons...
Made more frustrating by the fact that they went to the same church as my family... sigh.
Watching the video clips had me howling/cringing. The later frenzy directed at other RPGs, like the SJG stuff already mentioned, just pretty much seals the deal that "the previous generation" (let me live in the past, please) just didn't understand fiction/fantasy. That was a whole 'nother set of data points in my education/maturation process as an independently thinking adult...
For example, Elizabeth Loftus [1] was pivotal in discrediting the "satanic abuse" panic of the 80's (which as other comments say was related to the D&D panic). But she did so a decade later.
I may be a bit old to know, but is this really true now? I wasn't aware RPGs were having that much of a cultural renaissance.
Perhaps my 16 year old, nerdy, Rolemaster-addicted self is vindicated!
Or perhaps it is hyperbole.
larping and d&d is the cool again
My only niggle: "larping and d&d is the cool again" - again? Oh, it very much was not cool the first time around!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b071h083
It's about those old "interactive fiction" books you got in the 80's where you could play a whole adventure by making choices and jumping to different pages and paragraphs. Quite a blast from the past as was being reminded by this article of playing MERP[0] for hours and hours back in the mid to late 80's when I attended college.
[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle-earth_Role_Playing
http://www.wired.com/2014/05/dark-dungeons-movie/
As a gamer myself, it's just kinda weird to watch my favorite hobby get distorted like that. I'd say it'd be more fun to remove all the gaming references and replace them with actual Lovecraftian Cthulhu cultists, but that's just my opinion.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0084314/
Looks like you can watch it here:
They expected bored compliant teens they understood. Liking stuff was a subversive act.
We didn't have book burning though. (saw that down thread, and I can only imagine what younger me would have thought of that!)
I think these games are just great! Many of us took turns being the DM, and that's where a lot of learning happens! Theater of the mind becomes something tangible. You need to make it real enough for the others to get their own creative juices running, and when you do it right, the whole thing is immersive. We soon learned to replace things like, "you enter a dark room and encounter two trolls looking to fight!" with, "you enter a musky, dark room..." Players then ask what do they see, or cast light, or listen, and the whole exchange takes a bit longer. However, the interaction quality goes way up. So does the fun.
A good friend, who died early (sadly), had the seriously great idea to take a movie, "Escape From New York", and turn it into a campaign playable by 4 people. Several of us worked on it, maps, translating rules and setting up the damage tables, etc... so that it would work reasonably with "modern" type weapons, no magic, and so forth.
That campaign ran a few times and we really enjoyed it. Sometimes I feel that's a potential branch of fantasy gaming that got missed, or just seriously under exploited. The D&D idea, rules, dynamics, works for a lot of things. We found that out more or less accidentally. The realizations falling out of that were something our group thought about for a long time afterword.
Sometimes, it was necessary to play the game in secret. A gathering would be arranged under some other pretense. Fear of evil, the devil, and other inane things was enough to make it very highly controversial. Nobody I know was impacted in any way, other than positive ways.
This also made it difficult for both genders to play at times. Our group had one girl in it early on. She really wanted to play the game, and just kept at us, until she was in. Once she was, that was it! We all bonded and it was just something we enjoyed doing. Years later, she talked about that experience at a reunion, and it mattered far more to her than it did us. Being accepted and being able to play on par with the others in the group was liberating and empowering to her. Interesting how these things play out.
I purged my set of stuff during that last year of High School. Sometimes wish I hadn't, as some of it is totally collectible now. And it would be fun to read through and remember... I took a mechanical drafting class once, just for access to the tools to make big, great maps!
Someone should make an audio / text type adventure / campaign. Let the computer be the DM, it can present information in various ways, offer up maps on the screen, and provide audio clues. Maybe it's a stretch, but it could also query the players and take voice commands. The idea here would be to use a display to present and manage all the tedium, but use audio and voice input to actually communicate the players actions and game state in a way that would closely simulate the experience.
I still think we can do more with text adventures. With all the spiffy audio we've got now? Maybe play it in surround! Could be really great!
1980s: Gamers worship satan
1990s: Gamers are violent and shoot up schools
2010s: Gamers are misogynists
Please don't do it again.
It's harmful to optimize for apparent signal/noise ratio at the expense of making it harder to differentiate signal from coherent groupthink noise.
It would be great if all overly political comments could be eliminated [0], but I don't see how that's going to happen. So the tradeoff is either having low-quality irreconcilable flaming, or preventing such by marginalizing dissent and encouraging a groupthink that permeates discussion but can never be called out - the noise will still be present, just masquerading as signal. IMHO it would be better for violent disagreements to act as flypaper and be more easily ignored, ideally through technical features.
[0] I guess that would necessarily include all non-technical anti-surveillance articles/comments as well, due to the opposing viewpoint of pro-surveillance. I don't think it would be good for this community to neuter itself in the fight against surveillance, but here I am showing my own bias.
I get plenty of upvotes (and downvotes) so obviously what I say is resonating with some of the population here.
Edit: To be clear I don't think you can talk about moral panics in gaming without mentioning the one that's currently happening.
You've subtly changed the subject by saying "contentious submissions". That's not what this is about.
The guidelines hold independently of upvotes. HN is a constitutional democracy. If you're tired of following the guidelines, please stop posting here until your energy is recouped.
When I was young, I played dungeons and dragons (the board game). I remember how this campaign ostracised people who wanted to play. In particular, girls were very vicious with the insults about being a freak (to all of us that played).
I would compare the stigma to those that liked computers.
I can't think of a single girl who liked either d&d or computers in the 70s or 80s (my wife tells me she started in computing in the 80s though and I don't doubt her). Strangely, supposedly, revisionist reality is the opposite - girls were driven away by mean men (it's revisionist history, but misogyny is the buzzword of the new century and truth be damned).
I'm glad misogyny was mentioned because my life experience was the exact opposite. However, I enjoyed these pursuits and no amount of bullying stopped me. The attitudes have changed so much today and not for the better.
I was as nerdy a kid growing up as I am in adulthood, and I while I had virtually no problems with girls, I had a whole fuckload of problems with cliquish and bullying boys. That, I'm afraid, didn't do much to make me more tolerant of men bullying and excluding women today.
Take from your bad childhood experiences the lesson that deliberate and calculated exclusion is bad, not the idea that anyone has somehow earned a right to justify excluding others.
I'm going to jump in here and second this. I also had a fuckload of problems with cliquish and bullying boys, and none with girls. It would have been nice if girls had been more interested in me, but I finally figured out much later that much of that was because I never took any initiative and approached them or socialized with them; once I figured that out, and how to be more outgoing with them, things changed rapidly. Boys were always the source of real misery in middle/high school.
I've heard (in more recent years) of girls being vicious little back-stabbing bitches to each other, and there's movies that reinforce that stereotype, but as a boy that got picked on, I never saw that myself or had any problems with girls that weren't my own fault.
Edit: Not sure why I'm getting more than one downvote here. For example, my gaming group in college was about 1/3 women, and they got along fine with the men, in both directions. I could follow rustynails' example and call him a liar and a revisionist for saying that he knew mean girls--but that would be a stupid and shortsighted thing to do, wouldn't it? There are all kinds of people in the world; you don't get to claim that the ones in your little circle are the only prototype for all the rest, for better or worse.
Not from me, but I might explain.
> I'm not sure why you think your experience disproves the experiences of thousands and thousands of other people, though.
[ citation needed ]
A youtuber by the name of Sargon of Akkad had a guest on his show talk about her experiences with online hate after she gave a public talk. The following link is to about 32:00 in:
https://youtu.be/D_Rmbmc1BH8?t=1910
She explains how terribly misogynistic everyone has been. He explains why those insults are gendered: because that works as an insult. Men get different insults than women do. The people claiming "the internet is misogynistic" largely seem to ignore insults directed at men, and talk loudly about the insults directed at women.
She later explains how she gets death threats, and this is an example of online misogyny. He explains slowly that he gets death threats, too.
Her response is that she's clearly shocked. She's never for one second thought that anyone else might be having problems on the net. Just that she's having issues, therefore it's personal, and it's only her (and people like her).
It's an astonishing admission to make publicly. That everyone else on the net is so unimportant as to be not worth human empathy, or even 30 seconds of rational thought.
That's why every time I hear "the internet is evil towards X", I have to ask "Oh? And how is everyone else treated?" Usually the response is "Uh.. I don't know".
Or, as another comment here shows... studies demonstrate that the sex which gets the most death threats, hateful comments, etc. is not women. It's men.
Heck, I've had death threats online. Do I go to sleep worrying about it? No. The people involved are cheap losers who live thousands of miles from me. They can muster up the hate to issue death threats online. They can't muster up the wherewithall to book a bus ticket to my home and ring my doorbell.
The solution to feelings of powerlessness is to give people power. Not to control the majorities speech because a small number of losers are assholes online.
Teach people how to deal with assholes, and they're less afraid. Teach people to be afraid, and they'll demand that we "safe space" the world in order to assuage their fears.
http://www.pewinternet.org/2014/10/22/online-harassment/pi_2...
This is widely believed to be because each form of harassment is specifically targeted to have the maximum effect on the victim. Women are more generally upset by sexual harassment, men are generally more upset by emasculation.
Second, the reason the media narrative seems skewed in the opposite direction is because women are generally more likely to be upset by harassment:
http://www.pewinternet.org/2014/10/22/online-harassment/pi_2...
But neither of those studies are particularly important, because "gaming" is a market so huge that it basically encompasses the entire population, or at least a significant enough portion that any truthful statements that could be made about "gamers" would likely hold equally true of the superset.
Overly broad statements such as yours actually hinder the cause of preventing the above issues, as it denies the existence of healthy and positive women gamers. By getting an accurate picture of harassment in general and how to address it we can more effectively treat it, but painting the whole issue as "because men hate women" is an uninformed appeal to emotion and overly defeatist. It implies that the problem is either unsolvable or only solved by removing men entirely.
Actually it seems quite the opposite of sexism since they're deliberately trying to make the game more accessible to women.
Note this does not mean women are worse at first person shooters, it just means that the game is currently designed for "experts" and there's an adjacent segment that gets exposure to the game via watching their partner play. "Girlfriend mode" is an attempt to reach that segment.
Having a "boyfriend zone" in a women's clothing store would be analogous and also not sexist.
Deleted comment
As for why gaming is so often attacked? I supected it's an audience thing. Hardcore gamers are often conflated with nerds (same with die hard tabletop gamers and roleplayers), and are seen as an 'easy' target for populists and media mouthpieces. People love a scapegoat...
Three women who were interviewed all commented in the video about how BBC misrepresented their views and cherry picked quotes to fit the narrative
YOGSCAST Hannah: I pointed this out during my interview, and said online gaming companies need to step up and help support reporting and banning like DOTA 2/Valve did - looks like that didn't get through, they just kept the bit where I said abuse happens to everyone :(
0Apes0: 3 days ago Being the manager of the HoG (shooting the shot gun) I am very disappointed at the finished edit of this. This was supposed to be a film about women in gaming but 'sorry we had to change direction) in the last couple of weeks. It's only purpose is to make women feel like victims when we're not. MEN and women experience a use everyday online, the bet thing to do is to ignore it and ban the stupid people on Twitter, live, psn and twitch. Not worth the worry. I said this but clearly this was deemed too logical to show and we must all remain victims. Not happy with the finish product only that it's appeared on YouTube and not real TV. Also lol good job at bringing KSI in.
Ms 5ooo Watts: 1 day ago I'm honestly disappointed with how this turned out. I was approached to speak about women in gaming as a whole not to only talk about the negative side. Even during the interview I was asked to give my positive experiences with being a gamer as they didn't want this to be a one sided thing. None of my positive comments about my community and the gaming community as a whole were included at all. The initial email that I received asking for an interview said, and I quote "I’m working on a BBC3 documentary looking at the experiences of female gamers, how experiences are changing (and how the games themselves are changing)" No where in there does it say that the program will be about "the dark side of gaming" I never signed up to be some kind of warrior against sexism online, I was asked to talk about the experiences of women in gaming, how things are changing and how games themselves are changing to reflect women in gaming now being more represented. Not happy at all.
One of the guys who was on the recent BBC series commented on the fact and refused to play along .
> > hasn’t had much to say about
is
> That's simply not true at all. See recent BBC video on 'Dark side of gaming'
Can you agree that a single programme on a minor BBC channel is not much?
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/14/arts/video-games/why-2014-... http://www.cbc.ca/player/play/2565116360 http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/15/living/gamergate-explainer/ fox news: https://archive.is/dycHE
For example:
http://alternatives.gamergate.community/
There's also a fair bit more GamerGate support in the Nintendo fandom, with the bigger sites being at least neutral to it.
But it's still a bit more grassroots, since a lot of the sites on the support list are run by communities and fans rather than corporations.
Anyway, look at it from the media’s perspective. “violent videogames turn your kids into sociopaths” is a pretty great hook, it’s going to get the suburban parents attention, it’s going to turn into endless PTA meetings, it’s going to make it to the House of Representatives. “women are getting horribly harassed in a particular industry” just doesn’t make the headlines.