While this article is already out-of-date in terms of its political statements, I think it’s vital reading for anyone playing a post-apocalyptic RPG. There’s some thought-provoking stuff in there, and I encourage you to think of ways to apply it to your game of Apocalypse World.
http://thebaffler.com/blog/fear-feminist-future-laurie-penny
Do you have any thoughts on how this kind of dynamic has appeared (or failed to appear) in your game?
How might you do things differently in your next game (or even the next session)?
Very interesting. The whole “in a dangerous setting, men will rule” idea seems to be dependent on the assumption that women can’t be good at violence.
By “this kind of dynamic” appearing in my games, do you mean “feminism causing the apocalypse,” “the apocalypse being a male power fantasy,” or “men feeling threatened by empowered women”?
The assumption that women can’t be good at violence is baffling. Especially when we talk about guns. Even a toddler is letal with a gun.
Well written article. Thank you.
Sebastian Baker That’s actually a good question: Why did patriarchy arise in most societies around the globe at least after the agricultural revolution? – We simply don’t know. Male aggression is likely a factor, but how does that turn into a patriarchy in most cases?
Pompeius Pomponius I don’t think patriarchy in
history is that much of a mystery. The real mystery is why it took so long to admit it was wrong.
Excellent questions, Sebastian Baker. All of the above! Very much so.
Paul Taliesin Well, I’ve never played a game where feminism caused the apocalypse. I don’t know which of my friends would be interested in that or not, so I’m unlikely to suggest it to my gaming group either.
As I’ve played and run it, Apocalypse World tends to have elements of power fantasy, but it’s not specific to gender. Just because of the preferences of some of my friends, the party usually has, at minimum, one badass warrior woman and one non-violent but very manipulative man. Depending on how you look at it, it could almost be a fantasy of getting to have the kind of power that’s typically “reserved” for the other gender.
But of course, in the games of AW that I’ve played, empowered women are definitely threats. That’s just because anyone with any kind of power is a threat in AW, as per the rules.
Sebastian Baker, that sounds like what I’ve seen, as well. (And imagining a post-apocalyptic nightmare world being brought on by feminism is beyond my abilities!)
AW has a few implications written into the rules which I read as creating room for different interpretations instead of handing down an authoritative vision.
For instance, the most dangerous individuals (who wield might through violence) are “Hard”, not “Strong”. I think that’s an interesting – though subtle – distinction. The apocalypse, in this game, is not about the strongest having the upper hand, but those with the most determination: the hardest. Strength (physical strength, and particularly upper-body strength, anyway) can be said to have a gendered component, but determination and iron will can belong to anyone.
That kind of thing gives us room to imagine the apocalypse in different ways and explore different visions of the future.
Although it’s intended as a political message, Bill Maher makes an interesting observation about female authority figures in post-apocalyptic fiction here:
youtube.com – Real Time with Bill Maher 2016: Miss Me Yet? Donald Trump – HBO 30 Nov 2016 New Rule (starts at the relevant moment; no need to watch the whole thing)
(Also, Sebastian Baker, I’d be happy to chat about college with you, but I don’t seem to be able to post in that thread myself. Message me if you want some thoughts!)