A version of this article was originally published by Pelgrane Press, in the Honey & Hot Wax anthology edited by Lucian Kahn and Sharang Biswas. (more…)
Tag: Sex
-
Sex, Romance and Attraction: Applying the Split Attraction Model to Larps
Written by
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Nordiclarp.org or any larp community at large.
The Split Attraction Model (SAM) was created within the aromantic (often shortened as aro) and asexual (often shortened as ace) communities to build language to describe members’ experiences. The model can be used to expand language in describing larps, in setting expectations, and in player negotiations. The language and understanding of the split attraction model helps to reduce struggles and misunderstandings.
To understand the Split Attraction Model, it’s important to understand the difference between sexual and romantic attraction, as they are often conflated. Sexual attraction is an attraction that would make someone desire sexual contact with the object of their attraction. Romantic attraction is an attraction that would make someone desire romantic contact with the object of their attraction. There is a societal view that people may experience sexual, but not romantic, attraction to a particular person: but the converse isn’t widely acknowledged, and when it is, it is generally presented in a negative context.
Split Attraction Model
It is helpful to start with some background to best understand the model. Asexuality is a sexual orientation where a person experiences little to no sexual attraction to anyone, and aromanticism is a romantic orientation where a person experiences little to no romantic attraction to anyone. That these are separate orientations, and that they are separate from more widely-known orientations, can be understood via this model. While the SAM is known and inherent in aro and ace communities, it can also be put to use elsewhere, including larp.
The Aromantic spectrum Union for Recognition, Education and Advocacy (AUREA) defines the Split Attraction Model as:
The Split Attraction Model (SAM) is a framework that makes a distinction between experiences of attraction, depending on certain characteristics, and conceptualizes them as different types of attraction. Commonly used are: sexual, romantic, aesthetic, alterous, platonic and sensual attractions.
An Introduction to Aromanticism, The Aromantic spectrum Union for Recognition, Education and Advocacy 
The Split Attraction Model (Laura Wood) The above diagram offers a simplistic view of the model. Sexual and romantic orientations are considered separately. The left column indicates whether someone experiences sexual attraction, and if so to whom. If someone experiences little or no sexual attraction they may be considered asexual and if they experience little to no romantic attraction they may be considered aromantic. If they do experience sexual or romantic attraction then they would be considered allosexual or alloromantic respectively.
Someone who experiences no sexual attraction, and romantic attraction to the same gender as themselves could be considered asexual and homoromantic. Someone who experiences sexual attraction to a gender other than their own and no romantic attraction would be heterosexual and aromantic. It can also apply to allo identities — for example someone might be sexually attracted to multiple genders (pansexual) but only romantically attracted to a gender other than their own (hetroromantic).
While the SAM was developed by the aro and ace communities, it is intended to be agnostic to commonly recognized orientations. Another example is someone who is heterosexual and biromantic who might otherwise be seen as “straight”.
The SAM in Larp
In the rest of this article, we will be discussing the SAM, and applying it in ways that refer to players’ interests within larp, which may or may not match their personal orientations. It can be common for a straight player to roleplay romance with players of the same gender, or to not have any desire to roleplay sex in larp. Likewise, an aro player may or may not want to roleplay romance in larp.
Larp often uses the terms ‘romance’ and ‘romantic’ as attributes to describe content, focus, or in creating character relationships: but the meaning varies and is often left unspecified. In some situations this means flirting, courting, and expressing feelings of love between characters. In others it may mean or include intimate or sexual content, in the background, off-stage or on-stage using metatechniques, or otherwise. This conflation is understandable, as many people view romance and sex as going hand in hand, and many societies avoid direct discussion of sex in public.
Larp Development
Understanding the SAM can be an asset to larp designers who need to understand the approach that they want to take to attraction in their larp.
It can help designers decide what they want to include in the larp. The model can examine whether romance is present in the larp and whether sexual attraction is assumed or played out. Even larps that don’t feature characters with romantic and sexual orientations that differ from each other might benefit from understanding how much play they want around each of these areas. For example many UK Freeform larps focus on romance, but don’t often have on-stage play around sex, although sexual attraction in the romantic relationships is usually assumed.
Working out the focus designers want to place on romantic and sexual attraction can also help development of metatechniques. If sexual attraction is an important element of the larp, then metatechniques used for sex generally reflect this, whereas if it’s less important then metatechniques may be less elaborate or omitted all together.
Using this model also opens designers up to the possibility of other relationship models such as queerplatonic relationships (ie close relationships which are not primarily romantic or sexual in nature) and a general approach of relationship anarchy (ie a belief that relationships should not be bound by set rules other than those which are mutually agreed upon).
Describing a Larp
Consent-based larp requires as a foundation that all involved are aware of what they are consenting to, which is something the SAM can help with.
When providing the details of a larp, it is common to include an overview of content potential players can expect, the principles of the larp, or a design document. Using the SAM when writing and sharing these details can remove ambiguity of what content players would be signing up for. This description or document can separately specify if romantic and sexual content is included, along with what is meant in each of those cases.
For example, without using the SAM, a larp may commonly indicate “romantic plots between characters feature strongly in this larp”. To some people, they may assume this means flirting, courting and expressions of love, and want to sign up for that, only to get to the larp and discover sheets which describe sexual content and a defined metatechnique that players can optionally use to represent physical intimacy during game. Using the SAM, this same larp might say “This larp strongly features romantic plots between characters including flirting, and expressions of love as well as sexual content in the background and use of a physical intimacy metatechnique.”
Character Creation
By separating sexual and romantic attraction and detailing how they are expressed within the character, the model can be useful for creating characters based on the type of play that participants want to experience.
It can allow them to understand exactly what they are opting into. They can feel comfortable creating or signing up for a character who has a romantic relationship(s), without feeling that there will be expressions of sexuality that they are uncomfortable with, or conversely can play a sexually driven character without feeling that there is an expectation that a romance should develop.
This can be used to build participant confidence in knowing that they don’t have to opt out of romantic or sexual relationships entirely in order to get the type of play that they enjoy. It also means that there is less uncertainty about whether a relationship will develop in a way that all the participants are comfortable with, leading to increased confidence during the larp. It gives agency to participants by allowing them to choose what is being expressed, rather than making assumptions about what trying to pursue a specific type of relationship entails.
Player Negotiation
In order for the participant in a larp to fully understand what they are consenting to, it is important that as few as possible assumptions are made about the nature of play. This is particularly true around romance, sex and relationships where participants might find it necessary to set boundaries for personal comfort but struggle to do this where the SAM model isn’t normalized, leading to players either continuing with scenes that make them uncomfortable or opting out of romantic or sexual play completely. Not only does that unnecessarily limit play, it can cause games which feature these things heavily to be unplayable by some people as they would be shut out.
The majority of people have expectations of what a romantic (or sexual) relationship should entail which are carried into larp. When two or more characters are defined as being in a relationship, it is generally understood that this will include romantic and sexual aspects. Discussion of participant boundaries would normally take place, but generally would start with the expectation that the player is comfortable in participating in at least some metatechniques involving symbolising sex within the relationship (assuming such metatechniques exist within the larp.) There would also be the assumption that the participant would be comfortable with playing on some romantic attraction, possibly as an endgame in a relationship which is initially based on sexual attraction.
By using the SAM the participant can discuss the sexual and romantic attitudes of their character, as well as the boundaries they are setting as a player. It also means that the other player in the relationship can understand the intended trajectory and steer play accordingly. Use of the SAM can also allow more people to play larps that feature romance or sex, by providing more detailed aspects to be negotiated on.
Posed photo from Live or Die: Break the Wheel, a Game of Thrones larp (photo: Maya Kuper) Examples of the Split Attraction Model in Larps
Just a Little Lovin’ (Tor Kjetil Edland and Hanne Grasmo) could potentially allow players to use the SAM during play. One of the key themes of the larp is ‘desire’: and there are metatechniques to offer sex and to play out a sexual encounter with the amount of desire and passion discussed beforehand by the participants. Afterwards each character gives a monologue about what occurred, which could allow them to express a (lack of) romantic attraction.
Cult used a technique where when characters negotiated physical intimacy off-game, they also discussed how the characters felt about it and how it would affect their relationship. Due to the setting (a manipulative and exploitative religious cult) it was assumed that not all sexual attraction would necessarily have a romantic element.
Born this Way (Rei England) has opportunities for participants to calibrate their relationships with each other and specifically to ask questions about any sexual or romantic attraction, or deepening of a queerplatonic relationship, as separate emotions, rather than assuming that one entails the other.
More Than Friendship (Quinn D and Eva Schiffer) specifies both romantic and sexual relationships and orientations in the main description, to be explicit and remove ambiguity. There, while the focus is specifically on platonic relationships, romantic and sexual orientations still need to be specified separately.
Currently in larps there seems to be more opportunity to convey that sexual attraction might not be romantic, than to convey that romantic attraction might not be sexual, as the metatechniques used generally focus on sexual activity.
Underexplored Topics
Most of the above is focused on romantic and sexual attraction because they are the most recognized and explored in larp. But the SAM also invites us to look at other types of attraction. While some larps do include some of these, there is a lot more that can be explored. In the same way larps often use romantic and sexual attraction to draw characters towards each other, these other types of attraction can as well.
A larp setting where appearance is important could lean heavily on aesthetic attraction. One focused on exploration of touch could explore sensual attraction. And almost all larps can focus on platonic attraction between characters. These are not often explored in larp simply as a reflection of our amatonormative society which supports the widespread assumption that everyone is better off in an exclusive, romantic, long-term coupled relationship, and that everyone is seeking such a relationship; and which prioritizes romantic connections above all others. By untangling these assumptions larp has more and various directions to explore.
Wrap Up
Using the SAM can help larp designers and players think about sexual and romantic attraction separately throughout the larp process. This allows more deliberate design and roleplay by examining and breaking into pieces something that society just assumes all goes together. And it better supports consent in larp by helping everyone understand what is included, instead of players interpreting things differently. The SAM can function as a language and tool in larp to recognize and apply the distinctions it brings. And it can help expand the topics explored in larp.
This article was released to coordinate with Aromantic Spectrum Awareness Week, and inspired on the Ace / Aromantic Spectrum Larpers group.
Resources
Ace / Aromantic Spectrum Larpers Facebook group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/1133807373664006
Guidelines for Asexual and Aromantic inclusive larps: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1V2pArroYr4g0DMA0e3QMCuAVc8A6siw6R5TfIXIh8Zk/edit?usp=sharing
“I Don’t Get It”, a larp about asexuality available in the Make a Scene anthology: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/makeascene/make-a-scene-larp-anthologies
History of the Split Attraction Model:
https://historicallyace.tumblr.com/post/152267147477/what-kind-of-attraction-a-history-of-the-split
Cover photo: An in-game wedding during Live or Die: Break the Wheel, a Game of Thrones larp (photo: Maya Kuper)
-
What Does it Mean When Sex is Sexy?
Written by
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Nordiclarp.org or any larp community at large.
Sex! Isn’t it great? And a significant and thought-provoking part of human experience. Interesting because of the effects it has on people; dramatic because of the emotional stories that can be woven around it; fun because it’s (usually) enjoyable, and we’re all grown-ups here, aren’t we?
Larping succubi. Photo by flickr user danielle_blueIf you’re designing a larp about any aspect of human experience that’s not entirely abstract, and you’re working in anything like the Nordic tradition((It’s different in the US and UK traditions: and maybe in other countries as well, we don’t know.)), there’s a good chance that you’ll be thinking about the possibility for characters to engage in sexual activity of some sort. And, because this is a larp rather than a sex holiday, you’ll be thinking about what sort of technique(s) to use to represent different types of activity. Even in the most permissive of larp cultures, fully-indexical wysiwyg((What You See Is What You Get – ie. direct representation.)) dkwddk((Du Kannst Was Du Darstellen Kannst – ie. direct action.)) sex would generally be thought of as a bit extreme.
So, then, there’s a whole spectrum of different techniques and meta-techniques available out there, in extant successful larps, for representing sexual activity – from flirtation up to various different modes of coition.
Meta or Not?
A brief digression. There’s a distinction here between diegetic representational techniques – where the players are doing something that is actually how their characters engage in sexual activity, but which has been designed to be different from the way normal humans do – and meta-techniques – which are in some way abstracted representations of sexual activity. So for example if you use Ars amandi as a way of representing your characters engaging in sexual intercourse, that’s a meta-technique. But if caressing each other’s arms and shoulders is actually how these characters have sex – as in Mellan himmel och hav – then that’s a diegetic technique. Your choice which you want to use! From the point of view of this argument, it doesn’t matter much: holding someone’s hand is holding someone’s hand, whether it’s diegetic or not.
Okay Then, Back to the Spectrum
We are going to argue that the most important thing about how you’re going to represent sex is: how sexy do you want it to be? So, as Kat Jones described in a talk((Jones, K. C. 2016. ‘Touching on Taboos: Exploring Sexuality and Intimacy Through Larp’, keynote address at Living Games Conference 2016. https://youtu.be/Whk-gsw3zFk [accessed 26 July 2016].)) at Living Games Conference, it might involve two players dropping out of the larp together for 15 minutes and killing time somehow in a part of the play space where the other players can’t see them: when they rejoin the larp, it is considered that they have had sex (in some way that’s unimportant to define in detail). That’s at the ‘not very sexy’ end of the spectrum.
- Slightly sexier: the players sit aside together and agree, out-of-character, what sexual activity their characters are going to engage in. This is then decreed to have happened, without any attempt at actually representing it.
- Slightly sexier still: the players hold hands and gaze into each other’s eyes while doing the above.
- More sexy: they stroke each other’s arms and shoulders, or other not-generally-thought-of-as-erogenous zones, either schematically (me caressing you like this represents this particular sexual act) or just generally.
- Also more sexy (in some ways but not in others): players agree on the sexual activity that’s going to happen, then play it out using a prop wooden phallus rather than making any actual sexual contact.
- Potentially much more sexy: players use a red–yellow–green safety system, whereby they can represent any level of sexual activity by making ever closer and more involving physical contact, until one of them decides that’s enough.
Perhaps you’re thinking here “Hold on a minute – holding hands, gazing into eyes, stroking arms and shoulders, that’s not sexy!” Well… maybe it hasn’t been for you, with the people who you’ve so far done that with in larp. But think: if you’re doing that with your real-life partner, then it’s a level of foreplay. Some people who you larp with, you will find attractive, whether you want to or not: or they may find you attractive. In that situation, there are no non-erogenous zones.
From the 2014 run of Just a Little Lovin’. Photo by the organizers, from a talk at Prolog 2015.But Why Would You Actually Want It to Be Sexy?
Well, here are a few of the possible reasons:
- More immersive: the closer that player actions can be to character actions – ie. the less abstract the representation – the less it breaks immersion. If your character is doing something sexy (or painful, or joyful, or angry, or whatever) then having something close to the same experience yourself as a player will help you feel your character’s feelings more closely and intensely.
- More aesthetically satisfying: using a non-sexy technique to represent sex is generally pretty clumsy. It involves people dropping out of the game, it may involve elision of time, it may involve people coming back into the game not looking anything like they’ve just been having sex… and so on. If you pride yourself on the representation level of your larp, non-sexy sex is understandably unappealing.
- More convincing and authentic: if your body is feeling genuine sexiness-related hormones and endorphins coursing around it, you’ll find it easier and more natural to relate to the person who is causing those as your sexual partner in the larp.
- More ‘hardcore’: if you’re aiming for representation of ‘unfun’ sexual activity, involving suffering, coercion and other grimness, then using authentically sex-related physicality can sometimes make it more impactful than abstraction could.
- More fun: what’s not to like about sexiness? People enjoy it! We are all adults here, and it’s not doing anyone any harm, as long as it’s all fully consented.
So What’s Wrong with That, Then?
Maybe nothing! But we would like to suggest that sexy sex in larp may not always be an unalloyed good thing. Not because we are repressed and joyless Puritans((Mo was brought up that way, it’s true, but he’s been doing a fairly good job of shaking it off.)) – but because we think there’s a need to be thoughtful about what you’re asking of participants, which isn’t always being addressed.
Touchy Culture
As larp becomes more international, larpers from a wide range of different cultures are becoming involved. We wonder if there is sometimes an unexamined assumption that being comfortable with touch, and happy to accept it as without actual sexual meaning – as is common in some European cultures – is in some significant way more progressive and enlightened than the caution around touch that’s present in other cultures. And that accordingly, players from those other cultures – or players who don’t identify with that aspect of their home culture – should learn to power through their discomfort; or else should just be prepared to exclude themselves from larps that are going to involve touch?
Now if your larp is entirely designed around skin-on-skin contact, that’s one thing. But not many are… Much more common is that a player could comfortably go through a whole larp avoiding skin-on-skin contact, other than when it comes to use of a sex technique or meta-technique.
Larp Is Not a Bubble
Participants in larp also have an existence outside it, which will include loved ones of one kind or another – including sexual partners. Now, of course, there are many scenarios where partners are entirely happy with people engaging in sexytimes activity with others while on larp, for example:
- There is no partner.
- Relationship is an open one.
- Partner is happy with ‘what happens on larp, stays on larp’.
- Partner doesn’t want to know what happens on larp.
- Partner thinks they know what happens on larp, but doesn’t actually know everything.
- Partner has discussed boundaries for how sexy/unsexy a range of larp activity they are OK with.
And then for younger players, these considerations may also apply to parents/guardians. It’s not enough to expect players to say to their significant others, when asked why exactly it is that they were smooching away like that at the weekend, “You don’t get it! It’s larp!”
Communication
Suppose that you’re in the ‘have discussed boundaries’ category. When you sign up for a larp, is it always made clear whether the sex techniques involved might transgress those boundaries? Organizers are impressively organized about communicating practical details of larps, these days, but something like “this larp will be using Ars amandi as a sex meta-technique” is not always seen in advance of signup. Should it be? – is that as important as letting prospective players know that the larp will be eg. physically arduous?
From an ars amandi workshop. Still from a video by Harrison Greene.As a designer you want your players to be engaging with and exploring their relationship to the issues that your larp is bringing up; not spending emotion and energy on negotiating around the borders of their partner’s preferred physical boundaries.
Exclusion
We go to great lengths to make our hobby welcoming and inclusive for everyone who wants to participate. It feels wrong for people who don’t want to play out sexy sex mechanics to be the one group that it’s OK to exclude.
So who are we talking about as being excluded here?
- People who for cultural reasons are uncomfortable with touching those with whom they aren’t actually intimate.
- People whose relationships have boundaries that don’t include sexy doings with others; or who haven’t fully discussed where such boundaries might be.
- People who, perhaps because of trauma, are psychologically uncomfortable with physical intimacy in general.
- People who find intimacy highly emotionally affecting, and so are wary of engaging in it.
- People who just don’t want to be doing that sort of thing in their larp, for whatever reason.
(Of course, you will probably have opt-outs available, intended to allow players to halt sexual activity before their boundaries are reached. But opting-out isn’t always easy or possible, in the heat of the moment: and discomfort, of participants or their partners, may also be caused by what other players are doing around them.)
Now without those people present, you’ll still have a great selection of larpers. But is there a danger that they will fall into a relatively narrow psycho-social description? – even a stereotype?
The Down-low
We are not saying that representing sex in larp is a bad thing – far from it. But we are saying that it should always be a considered ingredient – like all design decisions, it would benefit from a debate and some questioning and not just be accepted as a default. Does your larp need to allow for sexual activity between characters? – if yes, then the next question is, how should that be represented in a way that supports the design needs and the larp aesthetic? And part of that question is: how sexy does it need to be?
We feel that there are likely to be a range of answers to that question: and that, while for many larps, a high-sexiness technique or meta-technique will be entirely appropriate; for others, a low-sexiness one will be more applicable. And we also feel that, no matter how you turn and twist it, some methods are more inclusive than others. Sometimes at the cost of narrative effects; and sometimes at the cost of players.
Cover photo: From the 2014 run of Just a Little Lovin’ (photo by the organizers, from a talk at Prolog 2015).
