(Anonymous) 2025-01-27 02:30 am (UTC)(link)
Choosing not to play anything is cool. Not playing something because you can't get "into it" leaves me thinking you're typing one handed and I definitely don't want to rp with anyone like that.

(Anonymous) 2025-01-27 02:34 am (UTC)(link)
+1

this has been the case every single time i've run into that sort of thing. i'm here to rp, not to cyber.

(Anonymous) 2025-01-27 02:52 am (UTC)(link)
Getting "into it" and masturbating are two completely different things

I cannot get into slice of life games because I'm not here to RP boring RL stuff.

Why does someone *have* to be masturbating if they don't want to RP a specific pairing and, instead, want to focus on a specific dynamic? What weird leap of logic.

SA

(Anonymous) 2025-01-27 02:55 am (UTC)(link)
Actually re-reading the OP why are we assuming they're talking about fucking? For all we know they want to RP domestic/romantic stuff with another dude, but they're not open to it with female characters.

Re: SA

(Anonymous) 2025-01-27 06:06 am (UTC)(link)
Frankly I do find the framing a bit weird and even weirder if they're not talking about rping smut with this. It's not like romantic relationships involve emotions so different they might as well be between different species, if the relationship is m/m vs m/f vs f/f.

They should just say they find one configuration hotter and go on doing what they want to do.

Re: SA

(Anonymous) 2025-01-27 06:42 am (UTC)(link)
Frankly I do find the framing a bit weird and even weirder if they're not talking about rping smut with this

you're projecting

Re: SA

(Anonymous) 2025-01-28 03:31 am (UTC)(link)
"[...] romantic relationships involve emotions so different they might as well be between different species, if the relationship is m/m vs m/f vs f/f."

it's not about emotions being different

is about not wanting to rp that sort of dynamic between a man and a woman

it's the m/f part because they're gay thus fed up of straight stuff not that they think men are from mars and women are from venus

Re: SA

(Anonymous) 2025-01-28 05:13 am (UTC)(link)
So OP can just say "Open to m/m for shipping" like 95% of dwrp instead of being a weirdo about tying their own sexuality to it.

Re: SA

(Anonymous) 2025-01-28 05:29 am (UTC)(link)
you sound straight

Re: SA

(Anonymous) 2025-01-28 07:08 pm (UTC)(link)
no homo

Re: SA

(Anonymous) 2025-01-28 02:16 pm (UTC)(link)
That was why it all sounded so strange to me. Everyone just puts m/m for characters that are 100% straight in canon. Tying it to their sexuality is why most think this is a sex thing.

Re: SA

(Anonymous) 2025-01-28 03:01 pm (UTC)(link)
if you think there's no correlation between the popularity of m/m on this site and the fact that most dwrpers are straight or bi women, you're an idiot

it's not the only factor but it's totally a factor, and pretending it isn't is delulu.

+1

(Anonymous) 2025-01-28 07:37 pm (UTC)(link)
it's cracking me up everyone getting mad at this dude for 'tying' his desire to rp m/m only to his sexuality yet this is the land of m/m because over 3/4ths of the playerbase are women.

like come on some self-awareness please.

Re: +1

(Anonymous) 2025-01-28 09:19 pm (UTC)(link)
heteronormativity is boring anyway

Re: SA

(Anonymous) 2025-01-29 01:17 am (UTC)(link)
eh i don't think you can rule out the fact that statistically most canons have more male characters than female characters so there's a higher probability of people picking male characters to play.

like I'm down for m/f with most of my characters but in practice i wind up playing m/m probably 90% of the time just because that's what most of my options are.

Re: SA

(Anonymous) 2025-01-29 01:27 am (UTC)(link)
bs

stop playing exclusively from shonen manga or the mcu. plenty of canons have more female characters. but those characters dont have the dicks that dwrpers want to ride

Re: SA

(Anonymous) 2025-01-29 01:36 am (UTC)(link)
i don't want to play from trash neckbead anime sorry

ayrt

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-29 03:37 (UTC) - Expand

Re: SA

(Anonymous) 2025-01-29 01:43 am (UTC)(link)
i don't play from either one of those things actually, but carry on.

Re: SA

(Anonymous) 2025-01-29 02:21 pm (UTC)(link)
i will never understand why dwrpers bitch about this and then refuse to actually do anything about it

'someone who is not me should DEFINITELY play from different canons so we get more characters i personally want to smash my barbies against'

Re: SA

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-29 15:00 (UTC) - Expand

Re: SA

(Anonymous) 2025-01-29 03:13 am (UTC)(link)
On average there's a 3 to 1 ratio of male characters to female characters in almost everything mainstream. The bechdel test is a standard so low it's a trip hazard and most things still fail to pass it.

That's what it is. It's not rocket science.

Re: SA

(Anonymous) 2025-01-29 03:35 am (UTC)(link)
It is a factor but it's not the only factor

another factor is the fact most people here are attracted to men

whether they want to write about fucking them or not doesn't matter

more attracted to something > more likely to pay attention to it > more likely to get a voice for it > more likely to rp them > more likely to want to write them smut or not

and on and on it goes

Re: SA

(Anonymous) 2025-01-29 08:19 am (UTC)(link)
"most people here are attracted to men" literally my entire plurk list is queer ppl who are not into men, but play m/m. so idk who u hanging out with from dreamwidth

Re: SA

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-29 11:30 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-29 12:58 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-29 13:33 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-29 13:54 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-29 22:04 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-29 22:16 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 00:45 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-29 22:28 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-29 23:30 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-29 23:48 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 02:31 (UTC) - Expand

+1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 02:50 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 03:04 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 03:13 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 03:23 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 03:50 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 09:55 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 12:41 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 14:26 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 14:31 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 17:04 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 19:27 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 13:07 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 14:34 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 19:28 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 20:22 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 21:20 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 21:48 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 21:56 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-31 03:00 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-31 03:23 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-31 08:58 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-31 09:05 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-31 10:44 (UTC) - Expand

DA

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-31 11:19 (UTC) - Expand

Re: DA

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-31 17:44 (UTC) - Expand

Re: DA

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-31 20:14 (UTC) - Expand

Re: DA

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-31 20:23 (UTC) - Expand

Re: DA

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-31 21:29 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-31 14:10 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-31 15:15 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-31 16:34 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-31 17:20 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-31 16:39 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-31 19:34 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-31 19:34 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-31 19:40 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-31 19:55 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-31 19:59 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-31 20:24 (UTC) - Expand

+1

(Anonymous) - 2025-02-01 01:04 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-02-01 22:44 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-31 21:32 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-31 20:10 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-31 20:27 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-31 20:29 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-31 20:36 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-31 21:31 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-31 22:09 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-31 21:37 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-31 23:18 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-02-02 06:01 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 17:08 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 18:48 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 12:48 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 13:15 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 16:35 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 19:30 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 19:35 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 19:35 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 19:38 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 19:52 (UTC) - Expand

sa

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 19:57 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 20:10 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 20:16 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 20:15 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 20:21 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-31 07:08 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-31 03:28 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 19:33 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 19:36 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 19:45 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 20:07 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 20:09 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 20:30 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 20:40 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 20:20 (UTC) - Expand

+1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 20:27 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 22:34 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-31 00:13 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-31 04:55 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-31 07:10 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-29 23:56 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 00:05 (UTC) - Expand

+1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 00:10 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 00:14 (UTC) - Expand

+1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 00:38 (UTC) - Expand

+1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 00:56 (UTC) - Expand

sa

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 00:57 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 01:06 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-30 02:36 (UTC) - Expand

Re: SA

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-29 12:57 (UTC) - Expand

dda

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-29 14:00 (UTC) - Expand

Re: dda

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-29 14:41 (UTC) - Expand

Re: dda

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-29 15:14 (UTC) - Expand

Re: dda

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-29 18:42 (UTC) - Expand

Re: SA

(Anonymous) - 2025-01-29 13:00 (UTC) - Expand

Re: SA

(Anonymous) 2025-01-29 03:39 am (UTC)(link)
hollywood has been ramping female-led projects for the last decade. even the mcu has more female characters now than it did male characters at its height of dwrp popularity

if you can't find any of them that you're willing to play, and you're insisting it's because none of them are interesting or playable, maybe examine why your argument aligns with the online chuds you despise.

or you just like men because they're hot. just be honest, it will set you free

Re: SA

(Anonymous) 2025-01-29 03:46 am (UTC)(link)
okay, but more female characters numerically =/= more characters that fall into the character types that any given person enjoys rping.

you could give me a canon with nothing but female characters but if none of them fit the particular character types i enjoy writing, then i wouldn't be interested in rping them the same way there are huge numbers of male characters i'm also not interested in rping.

Re: SA

(Anonymous) 2025-01-28 07:32 pm (UTC)(link)
it's not strange at all

op didn't know that's why they're asking. from their post sounds like they've been in psl land for a while now.

dwrp has this problem where it's extremely insular and full of jargon yet gets butthurt at people asking questions so they don't cause problems/commit faux passes.

stop assuming the worst out of people because it's exhausting and primes the space to be wanky