ehhhhhh this actually might or might not be weird depending on the context. if they're talking about their own OCs, it's not weird. if they're talking about playing characters that canonically were abused as children because it's something they are interested in due to their own background, that's also not weird.
if they're taking characters with no canonical child abuse history and adding headcanon child abuse because they were abused and can related, that's a little sketchy. particularly if they're doing it in games. nobody cares if you want to write fic or play musebox shit like that (i mean, probably some people care, but they're nosy and overinvested probably) but it's not cool to do that in games.
Re: PLURK PET PEEVES
if they're taking characters with no canonical child abuse history and adding headcanon child abuse because they were abused and can related, that's a little sketchy. particularly if they're doing it in games. nobody cares if you want to write fic or play musebox shit like that (i mean, probably some people care, but they're nosy and overinvested probably) but it's not cool to do that in games.
so, +.5?