http://www.3plusplus.net/2012/12/why-are-there-no-girl-wargamers/

I find a lot of agreement here, though I think it's generally more likely that girls are more interested in painting over pushing toys around a table.

I have a problem that some of the points as to why girls don't play 40k come across as though they were written by a desperate white knight who doesn't actually understand women.

The "boobplate" claim is one of them. Having feminine armor that covers the entire body is going to be more attractive to women than gender ambiguous armor. It's fully functional armor, and already a departure from highly revealing armor. Women would rather look attractive than look like a Space Marine.

The author should have complemented Dan Abnett for having at least two books where specifically mentions how the military clothing makes female characters more attractive.

One thing I would like to mention to all the desperates is that boobs do not show through armor. Stop crapping on the Scharzenkommando stormtrooper models (basic stormtrooper models with masks) because they don't have boobs. At the level of armor and clothing they wear, there's nothing that is going to visually tell you the sex of the model. Deal with it. Sorry I couldn't give you pleasure by putting down "female models" on the table.

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:
http://www.3plusplus.net/2012/12/why-are-there-no-girl-wargamers/
One thing I would like to mention to all the desperates is that boobs do not show through armor. Stop crapping on the Scharzenkommando stormtrooper models (basic stormtrooper models with masks) because they don't have boobs. .

Do you have to mention you're space Germans with every post ?

Still, the article was an interesting read.

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:
I find a lot of agreement here, though I think it's generally more likely that girls are more interested in painting over pushing toys around a table.

Congratulations on proving the author's point.

The "boobplate" claim is one of them. Having feminine armor that covers the entire body is going to be more attractive to women than gender ambiguous armor. It's fully functional armor, and already a departure from highly revealing armor. Women would rather look attractive than look like a Space Marine.

Yeah, of course women care more about looking attractive than men. Did you actually ask any women what they would prefer, or did you just decide for them?

(Hint: there's a wide range of preferences among women, and the moment you declare "women want to look attractive" you reveal your own ignorance.)

 blood reaper wrote:
Still, the article was an interesting read.

I thought it was really good that it brought up the problem of people tolerating the sort of behavior that keeps women out of the hobby, because it is strongly disproportionate. I think though that pushing toys around a table is going to have less appeal to girls than other games.

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:
http://www.3plusplus.net/2012/12/why-are-there-no-girl-wargamers/
One thing I would like to mention to all the desperates is that boobs do not show through armor. Stop crapping on the Scharzenkommando stormtrooper models (basic stormtrooper models with masks) because they don't have boobs. .

Do you have to mention you're space Germans with every post ?

Well seeing as how they are not from Germany, they are not trolling. You are trolling by trying to bring up problematic topics. I am really sick of your trolling, including attacks against people with obvious disabilities. I know that you are the troll behind the attacks on the English Sturmkrieg, the forum, and Dark Emperor's wiki.

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:

The "boobplate" claim is one of them. Having feminine armor that covers the entire body is going to be more attractive to women than gender ambiguous armor. It's fully functional armor, and already a departure from highly revealing armor. Women would rather look attractive than look like a Space Marine.

The author should have complemented Dan Abnett for having at least two books where specifically mentions how the military clothing makes female characters more attractive.

One thing I would like to mention to all the desperates is that boobs do not show through armor. Stop crapping on the Scharzenkommando stormtrooper models (basic stormtrooper models with masks) because they don't have boobs. At the level of armor and clothing they wear, there's nothing that is going to visually tell you the sex of the model. Deal with it. Sorry I couldn't give you pleasure by putting down "female models" on the table.

Erm.. The one female wargamer I know plays CSM and 'nids.

Not a single slaaneshi model in sight.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:
I find a lot of agreement here, though I think it's generally more likely that girls are more interested in painting over pushing toys around a table.

Congratulations on proving the author's point.

The "boobplate" claim is one of them. Having feminine armor that covers the entire body is going to be more attractive to women than gender ambiguous armor. It's fully functional armor, and already a departure from highly revealing armor. Women would rather look attractive than look like a Space Marine.

Yeah, of course women care more about looking attractive than men. Did you actually ask any women what they would prefer, or did you just decide for them?

(Hint: there's a wide range of preferences among women, and the moment you declare "women want to look attractive" you reveal your own ignorance.)

In the first point, it's speculation about a gender based interest. Would you have a problem with this? "In general, boys don't like to play with Barbies."

I'm not saying all women would find it attractive, or that they should find it attractive. I'm saying that he shouldn't jump to the conclusion that anything attractive=objectification and is degrading. It's a common tactic of desperate boys to try to impress girls by going off on things that are "sexist." I've seen the argument made quite a few times in GW. What I haven't seen in the same location is girls point out that they prefer SoB armor to Space Marine armor. That might cause an overload for them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Selym wrote:

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:

The "boobplate" claim is one of them. Having feminine armor that covers the entire body is going to be more attractive to women than gender ambiguous armor. It's fully functional armor, and already a departure from highly revealing armor. Women would rather look attractive than look like a Space Marine.

The author should have complemented Dan Abnett for having at least two books where specifically mentions how the military clothing makes female characters more attractive.

One thing I would like to mention to all the desperates is that boobs do not show through armor. Stop crapping on the Scharzenkommando stormtrooper models (basic stormtrooper models with masks) because they don't have boobs. At the level of armor and clothing they wear, there's nothing that is going to visually tell you the sex of the model. Deal with it. Sorry I couldn't give you pleasure by putting down "female models" on the table.

Erm.. The one female wargamer I know plays CSM and 'nids.

Not a single slaaneshi model in sight.

The one woman I know who actually plays, has SoB and Space Marines.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Is there actually anything in the canon that explicitly says that there can't be any female space marines?

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:

 blood reaper wrote:
Still, the article was an interesting read.

I thought it was really good that it brought up the problem of people tolerating the sort of behavior that keeps women out of the hobby, because it is strongly disproportionate. I think though that pushing toys around a table is going to have less appeal to girls than other games.

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:
http://www.3plusplus.net/2012/12/why-are-there-no-girl-wargamers/
One thing I would like to mention to all the desperates is that boobs do not show through armor. Stop crapping on the Scharzenkommando stormtrooper models (basic stormtrooper models with masks) because they don't have boobs. .

Do you have to mention you're space Germans with every post ?

Well seeing as how they are not from Germany, they are not trolling. You are trolling by trying to bring up problematic topics. I am really sick of your trolling, including attacks against people with obvious disabilities. I know that you are the troll behind the attacks on the English Sturmkrieg, the forum, and Dark Emperor's wiki.

One.They are heavily influenced by Germany in various ways. Denying it is pointless.
Two. I'm not trolling, I'm making a point about an annoying habit of your posting.
Three. Trying to play a victim card by bring up disabilities. Obvious sign you have no form to your argument.
Four: That's the only truth in your post.

My wife plays and loves it. We both started at the same time a little while before we got married.

However, I could see how the specified behavior would drive a women away... But to be honest I have never seen such behavior at any of the shops I have visited (I know I don't visit them often). There was always at least one there. Not to mention all the shops had at least one female employee, one was a manager who played Orks.

My friend is a wargamer, and she is a girl.

We also have quite a few girls at my FLGS.

I think the whole gender assumption that they would rather look attractive than look "functional" (or look like a Space Marine as you said) is a pretty broad assumption. They all actually like the look of "realistic" models in a sense that girls don't look like sex toys and guys aren't ripped and over-the-top.

While I would agree that wargaming is a man dominated interest, mostly because guys have a natural wiring to fight and like things that fight while women don't have that natural wire so war is "cooler" to males than females generally speaking, women can easily enjoy it. Local player behavior can vary though, if you have a lot of those sexist and "vile" players at your place then women will be less inclined to play.

Not quite sure what side of the fence you are on though

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Is there actually anything in the canon that explicitly says that there can't be any female space marines?

Yes the implants are designed for male physiology and hormones, they won't bound with female anatomies.

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Is there actually anything in the canon that explicitly says that there can't be any female space marines?

Yes, in the SM codex. It talks about the genetic therapy, and says females are genetically inadaptable to it.
Also, I believe there was one primarch who tried to make a SM breeding programme, to make organic marines, but it created faaaar too many mutants. I believe he had to kill them all and then exiled himself.

Although, there is a book by Dan Abnett, called "The Killing Ground" where the exiled Ultramarine Captain Uriel Ventris visits an Iron warriors planet, wherein there were "Daemonculaba".
Basically giant mutant pregnant women who were forced to give birth to full-grown chaos marines. There were also a feth-ton of mutant failures however, and all the marines produced were male...

I find these articles interesting. They take an interesting phenomenon, which is that despite no shortage of female gamers hardly any play wargames, and seemingly always come to the conclusion that it's due to the social failings of male wargamers.

So, rather than consider that there might be something simply unappealing to women about the game, they assume that out of all human activities, wargaming attracts the most socially repuslive enthusiasts. It's an odd conclusion.

Eldercaveman wrote:

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Is there actually anything in the canon that explicitly says that there can't be any female space marines?

Yes the implants are designed for male physiology and hormones, they won't bound with female anatomies.

What is the source for this?

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:

Eldercaveman wrote:

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Is there actually anything in the canon that explicitly says that there can't be any female space marines?

Yes the implants are designed for male physiology and hormones, they won't bound with female anatomies.

What is the source for this?

5th ed SM codex.

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:

Eldercaveman wrote:

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Is there actually anything in the canon that explicitly says that there can't be any female space marines?

Yes the implants are designed for male physiology and hormones, they won't bound with female anatomies.

What is the source for this?

The SM codex, can't name the page though...

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:

Eldercaveman wrote:

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Is there actually anything in the canon that explicitly says that there can't be any female space marines?

Yes the implants are designed for male physiology and hormones, they won't bound with female anatomies.

What is the source for this?

http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Creation_of_a_Space_Marine#.UUTcoBcqx9M

Lexicanum wrote:They must be male because the zygotes are keyed to male hormones and tissue types.

Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:

Eldercaveman wrote:

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Is there actually anything in the canon that explicitly says that there can't be any female space marines?

Yes the implants are designed for male physiology and hormones, they won't bound with female anatomies.

What is the source for this?

Selym wrote:

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:

Eldercaveman wrote:

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Is there actually anything in the canon that explicitly says that there can't be any female space marines?

Yes the implants are designed for male physiology and hormones, they won't bound with female anatomies.

What is the source for this?

5th ed SM codex.

washout77 wrote:

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:

Eldercaveman wrote:

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Is there actually anything in the canon that explicitly says that there can't be any female space marines?

Yes the implants are designed for male physiology and hormones, they won't bound with female anatomies.

What is the source for this?

The SM codex, can't name the page though...

blood reaper wrote:

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:

Eldercaveman wrote:

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Is there actually anything in the canon that explicitly says that there can't be any female space marines?

Yes the implants are designed for male physiology and hormones, they won't bound with female anatomies.

What is the source for this?

http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Creation_of_a_Space_Marine#.UUTcoBcqx9M

Lexicanum wrote:They must be male because the zygotes are keyed to male hormones and tissue types.

Them

 washout77 wrote:
My friend is a wargamer, and she is a girl.

We also have quite a few girls at my FLGS.

I think the whole gender assumption that they would rather look attractive than look "functional" (or look like a Space Marine as you said) is a pretty broad assumption. They all actually like the look of "realistic" models in a sense that girls don't look like sex toys and guys aren't ripped and over-the-top.

While I would agree that wargaming is a man dominated interest, mostly because guys have a natural wiring to fight and like things that fight while women don't have that natural wire so war is "cooler" to males than females generally speaking, women can easily enjoy it. Local player behavior can vary though, if you have a lot of those sexist and "vile" players at your place then women will be less inclined to play.

Not quite sure what side of the fence you are on though

Good point.

On the overly ripped male models, I just thought of this:

I admit I didn't get too far into the article because I find it incredibly offensive and sexist.

Making the claim that women want to be treated with respect and like human beings, then following it up with a generalization about how men, including my self apparently, are busy trying to get into their pants, treating them like idiots, and oogling them. I'm not sure about other people, but I've never seen an example of the "typical horny geek" in my entire life and I've hung out with quite a few nerds in my day. I find it incredibly offensive for an article to paint such a picture of me and the people I know and to try and establish that we just can't keep it in out pants and play a game.

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:

Eldercaveman wrote:

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Is there actually anything in the canon that explicitly says that there can't be any female space marines?

Yes the implants are designed for male physiology and hormones, they won't bound with female anatomies.

What is the source for this?

Rick Priestley's 1988 article "The Origins of the Legiones Astartes" which has been reprinted pretty much constantly throughout the game's entire lifespan, pretty much unchanged. It's literally one of the oldest unchanged pieces of the 40K canon there is, lol.

 Savageconvoy wrote:
I admit I didn't get too far into the article because I find it incredibly offensive and sexist.

Making the claim that women want to be treated with respect and like human beings, then following it up with a generalization about how men, including my self apparently, are busy trying to get into their pants, treating them like idiots, and oogling them.

Ditto. I've only seen a few people who are like that, and none of them were wargamers. (They were a bunch of idiots at my school).

 Savageconvoy wrote:
I admit I didn't get too far into the article because I find it incredibly offensive and sexist.

Making the claim that women want to be treated with respect and like human beings, then following it up with a generalization about how men, including my self apparently, are busy trying to get into their pants, treating them like idiots, and oogling them. I'm not sure about other people, but I've never seen an example of the "typical horny geek" in my entire life and I've hung out with quite a few nerds in my day. I find it incredibly offensive for an article to paint such a picture of me and the people I know and to try and establish that we just can't keep it in out pants and play a game.

It also mentions that people tolerate that behavior.

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:
In the first point, it's speculation about a gender based interest. Would you have a problem with this? "In general, boys don't like to play with Barbies."

Hint: a big part of the reason boys don't play with "girl" toys is because everyone around them says "those are for girls" and makes their life hell if they disagree.

I'm saying that he shouldn't jump to the conclusion that anything attractive=objectification and is degrading.

So you just ignore the common marketing strategy of using attractive women as sex objects to appeal to men?

It's a common tactic of desperate boys to try to impress girls by going off on things that are "sexist."

Oh good, dismiss criticism as "white knighting" as if the only reason anyone could possibly say something like that is to impress a woman.

 Savageconvoy wrote:
Making the claim that women want to be treated with respect and like human beings, then following it up with a generalization about how men, including my self apparently, are busy trying to get into their pants, treating them like idiots, and oogling them.

Sorry, but it's true. That kind of behavior is extremely common. Yes, specific men might not be guilty of it, but the hobby in general (as the article is addressed to) certainly is.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Savageconvoy wrote:
Making the claim that women want to be treated with respect and like human beings, then following it up with a generalization about how men, including my self apparently, are busy trying to get into their pants, treating them like idiots, and oogling them.

Sorry, but it's true. That kind of behavior is extremely common. Yes, specific men might not be guilty of it, but the hobby in general (as the article is addressed to) certainly is.

I've never seen any evidence of it. Have you?

What's your opinion on this, Melissia?

Selym wrote:
I've never seen any evidence of it. Have you?

No, but only because there haven't been any women playing 40k while I've been there and I don't pay attention to D&D/MTG/etc elsewhere in the store.

Now, the important question here is are you a man or a woman? Because if you're a man you need to thinking for a moment about how easy it is to miss inappropriate behavior that isn't directed at you. And then you should see what other people have to say. For example, the "worst game store" threads usually have a nice supply of comments like "my wife won't even go in the store because of the people there".

 Peregrine wrote:

Selym wrote:
I've never seen any evidence of it. Have you?

No, but only because there haven't been any women playing 40k while I've been there and I don't pay attention to D&D/MTG/etc elsewhere in the store.

Now, the important question here is are you a man or a woman? Because if you're a man you need to thinking for a moment about how easy it is to miss inappropriate behavior that isn't directed at you. And then you should see what other people have to say. For example, the "worst game store" threads usually have a nice supply of comments like "my wife won't even go in the store because of the people there".

I am male, but I can see where inappropriate behaviour is used (I was brought up in that kind of family).
Though I must admit I've never seen "worst wargaming store" threads.

Well let me turn the logic back on the original article.

It's because of YOU. People like you who perpetuate the idea that the wargaming, and the "geek" community as a whole, is filled up with a bunch of savage drooling man-children who will hump the most feminine leg in the room at the first sign of a skirt.

It's because you focus on the issue of gender instead of character.

It's because you think that women don't play wargames because of something men do to chase them away, instead of assuming it's by their own conscious decision.

Here's a quick question. How many black wargamers do you know? How many Hispanic?

I don't know how many I've encountered or played against, because it never even occured to me. I didn't stalk the first black person I saw gaming and asked if he's there to purchase for his white friend. I didn't ask him if he got lost because the game is predominantly white males that play. I did the exact same thing I did to any women I see in the game.
I didn't care. It didn't even register in my mind the slightest bit. Quite frankly I was more concerned about the physical appearance of my opponent's models.

Part of the difficulty I have playing is that I don't generally find 1v1 games of anything very appealing. I can't even remember the last time I played anything 1v1 against a friend that wasn't a tabletop wargame.

I enjoy competitive games a huge amount, but nearly always in a team context, and for whatever reason most wargames seem to be aimed primarily at 1v1 games instead.

I think the problem behind that is more due to board size than anything else. Too small of models and you don't really get a good feel for them, too large of a board and it's too much empty space, too small and you spend entire turns just moving into range, and so on. Throwing extra people onto the board starts to become problematic especially when most like to play games of 1.5K plus.

Personally I've found 500-750 team games to be decent size and very fun. Just enough that you're complimenting instead of hindering your team mate.

It is interesting now that I think of it. I guess just due to the limited market it's hard to establish games designed for 4 players.

I found it funny that he argued that "Women like being treated with respect; they like being treated as equals" after using the argument about fawning over a woman. Obviously women who liked being fawned over aren't women following that logic.

Edit:
I'll also butt into this with some First Hand Experience (tm). I live in shared housing, I've had maybe 6 females living with me at some point. Whenever I suggest they give it a go the excuse is "I don't have the patience" or "it looks difficult".
Isn't that the point of a hobby? Gaining patience and trying something hard? Oh well, horses for courses and it takes all kinds to make a world, what?

So is this article also implying that wargamers are socially awkward nerds who don't normally talk with women?

I find myself having to ask this after spending the last couple minutes facepalming over the posts in this thread-- what the hell leads many of you guys to think that you know a single thing about why women do or don't play 40k, to the point where you think you know enough with such extreme surety that you are willing to say that your assumptions apply to ALL women?

Hell, I don't do that in this kind of discussion despite having the advantage of BEING a woman.

Well the logical way to find out why women do not play 40k would be to conduct a survey and just ask them.

 Melissia wrote:
I find myself having to ask this after spending the last couple minutes facepalming over the posts in this thread-- what the hell leads many of you guys to think that you know a single thing about why women do or don't play 40k, to the point where you think you know enough with such extreme surety that you are willing to say that your assumptions apply to ALL women?

Hell, I don't do that in this kind of discussion despite having the advantage of BEING a woman.

Most of the posts seem to be either joking, banging on about fluff, regaling tales of "women are just like blacks and hispanics, I don't care" or being insulted by grouping ("YOU ARE THE PROBLEM" out right slaps them).
Which posts you were facepalming about?

Another "first hand experience (tm) story". After Christmas there was a kiddies group going on at GW before the games. Half the children there were female. None of the children turn up for games after that though, maybe children don't play because we're all smelly and not nice.

Well in our defense here...
In our country 80% of women are more interested in keeping the traditions, listening to country music, party, drink, sing, talk the entire day, doing hair, doing nails, working and having fun xxx time. 19% that actually read a book in their life are more concerned with politics and talking entire day about how desperate situation is in our country. And that 1% that actually read something other than love or politic book ( read: fantasy and sci-fi ) or go as far as play some video game either never hear of 40k or is not interested in that.
In my 9 years of wargaming I only meet one female who like fantasy and 40k - and she was only painting miniatures ( even for money to add ).

I can say the same thing for every other country in our area - we do not play because in our traditions sci-fi does not exist and females are those who keep our traditions alive. So Easter Europe can be excused from that theory, same goes for Islamic countries.

 Blaggard wrote:
I found it funny that he argued that "Women like being treated with respect; they like being treated as equals" after using the argument about fawning over a woman. Obviously women who liked being fawned over aren't women following that logic.

There's a difference between expressing interest in someone and the kind of awkward obsession the article is talking about.

It may be that some people like the awkward obsession.
Some mothers do ave em, what?

 Blaggard wrote:
It may be that some people like the awkward obsession.
Some mothers do ave em, what?

Yeah, I'm sure that the people who enjoy awkward obsession (especially when they're trying to play a game) are really more than a tiny minority...

I don't like having people fawning over me while I'm gaming. I'm trying to play a game, dammit.

>> Not that it ever really happens since everyone knows my girlfriend will run them over if they try anything, but...

Oh more of this! For the sake of the heavens above get over the fact that people have different tastes in hobbies.
I am less than surprised that the OP brings this up, and then by default mentions his Nazis in space. But then again this is Dakka

Not really a surprise to me, a lot of the gamers at my flgs don't look like the type of guys who know how to socialize well with women.

It's kind of a theme.

We had an interesting convergence here: the inevitable nazi reference from one poster, and the inevitable tantrum from another that occurs in any thread that discusses gender.

If someone would blame the victim we may have a trifecta.

On topic: people like different things. This can be generalized about along gender lines(along with many other other considerations) with the occasional exception. It's why we have marketing, for example.

 Trondheim wrote:
Oh more of this! For the sake of the heavens above get over the fact that people have different tastes in hobbies.

The point is not that it's some kind of disaster that people have different tastes in hobbies, even different tastes that (on average) are divided along gender lines, it's that inappropriate behavior by certain elements of the community (unfortunately far too common elements) drives away people who otherwise would be interested in the hobby.

 Monster Rain wrote:
It's kind of a theme.

We had an interesting convergence here: the inevitable nazi reference from one poster, and the inevitable tantrum from another that occurs in any thread that discusses gender.

If someone would blame the victim we may have a trifecta.

On topic: people like different things. This can be generalized about along gender lines(along with many other other considerations) with the occasional exception. It's why we have marketing, for example.

Well if the women were not so sexy they wouldnt be getting harrassed.
End sarcasm.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Trondheim wrote:
Oh more of this! For the sake of the heavens above get over the fact that people have different tastes in hobbies.

The point is not that it's some kind of disaster that people have different tastes in hobbies, even different tastes that (on average) are divided along gender lines, it's that inappropriate behavior by certain elements of the community (unfortunately far too common elements) drives away people who otherwise would be interested in the hobby.

I know but still, Sometimes I wish more gamers and male players in particular would take the time to learn social skills. Or spend time out of the hobby room, but one can dream eh?

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

 Monster Rain wrote:
It's kind of a theme.

We had an interesting convergence here: the inevitable nazi reference from one poster, and the inevitable tantrum from another that occurs in any thread that discusses gender.

If someone would blame the victim we may have a trifecta.

On topic: people like different things. This can be generalized about along gender lines(along with many other other considerations) with the occasional exception. It's why we have marketing, for example.

Well if the women were not so sexy they wouldnt be getting harrassed.
End sarcasm.

You have to mean it for it to count.

JWhex wrote:
Well the logical way to find out why women do not play 40k would be to conduct a survey and just ask them.

Yes, that would be a good idea. But who do you ask?

Meh, I find a lot of what the article said as wrong.

My wife does not play 40k because of the men. If it was the guys at the FLGS that grossed her out, I would make her armies so we could play at home.
She does not like the game for the same reason she does not like chess. Strategy games don't do it for her.

personally i think women dont play 40k for the sheer fact theres always way less women in the nerdy scene than men. Its evening out these days, but in general gaming/computers are a guy's thing because its nerdy. 40k is something that if you arent into gaming/computers you'll probably never hear of it.
The one girl i know that even knows wtf 40k is plays necrons. Shes been a nerdy gamer about as long as me (20years, started playing the Atari when i was 4 lol yea we had that for eons before we got a NES or SNES) and found out about 40k because some of the people she plays online with mentioned it.

I dont know a single person that got into 40k or any other miniatures that isnt also into some form of video game. and thb, female gamers are still rare (i dont mean the cutsie-cute ones that go 'haha yea btw im a girl i play COD' and are more annoying than 5yearolds on xbox live)

 Vineheart01 wrote:
in general gaming/computers are a guy's thing

I'd like to see actual evidence of this.

 Melissia wrote:

 Vineheart01 wrote:
in general gaming/computers are a guy's thing

I'd like to see actual evidence of this.

Evidence? Go play some online game and just keep track how many girls you come across. Goto a LAN party and see how many girls there are. Probably the only one you would find a fair amount of girls on average is a board-game group (40k technically is a boardgame i guess but its kind of an oddball)
Dont need to study it to realize theres easily 10men for every 1 woman (probably worse than that) in the gaming scene. Thats why guys gawk over a girl gamer especially if shes attractive, theyre so damn rare to find unless theyre a gamer because of their husband lol. Even then theyre kinda rare.

Gaming and being nerdy go hand in hand. When you think nerd you think the skinny dweeby boy with BCGs and a pocket protector, not a girl. Like i said its been evening out lately but its still mainly a guy's thing. Im not trying to denounce girl gamers either, just saying its usually men playing. I wish more girls DID play so it wasnt so damn hard to find one that had the same interests i do lol.

 Vineheart01 wrote:
[snip]

So all you have is anecdotal evidence, right.

Video game industry research states that women in their twenties are more likely to buy and play games than men in their teens.

As for the rest-- I was in a clan in TF2 that was about half female players. Most players didn't speak at all, so making an assumption on their gender would have been ignorant (I don't speak much in games myself), but of those that did speak, I honestly didn't notice the huge discrepancy that you mentioned. Does that count as evidence in your book?

 Vineheart01 wrote:
Evidence? Go play some online game and just keep track how many girls you come across.

That doesn't mean it's inherently a "guy thing", especially since this discussion is happening in a thread about how inappropriate behavior drives away women who would otherwise be interested. If every time you play a game online you get the horrible combination of abuse and awkward obsession you're pretty quickly going to either stop playing the game or pretend to be a man.

Dont need to study it to realize theres easily 10men for every 1 woman (probably worse than that) in the gaming scene.

Depends on the game. For example, rpgs are much more evenly balanced.

Thats why guys gawk over a girl gamer especially if shes attractive, theyre so damn rare to find unless theyre a gamer because of their husband lol.

No, they gawk because they don't understand (or don't care about) boundaries. We're not talking about thinking to yourself "hey, she's cute" and getting back to your game, we're talking about the kind of creepy obsession and/or desperation that makes people uncomfortable.

@Vineheart the majority are males but that doesnt mean females can't or shouldnt. know some female wargamers myself tough they are more into the painting part.

 Vineheart01 wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

 Vineheart01 wrote:
in general gaming/computers are a guy's thing

I'd like to see actual evidence of this.

Evidence? Go play some online game and just keep track how many girls you come across. Goto a LAN party and see how many girls there are. Probably the only one you would find a fair amount of girls on average is a board-game group (40k technically is a boardgame i guess but its kind of an oddball)
Dont need to study it to realize theres easily 10men for every 1 woman (probably worse than that) in the gaming scene. Thats why guys gawk over a girl gamer especially if shes attractive, theyre so damn rare to find unless theyre a gamer because of their husband lol. Even then theyre kinda rare.

Gaming and being nerdy go hand in hand. When you think nerd you think the skinny dweeby boy with BCGs and a pocket protector, not a girl. Like i said its been evening out lately but its still mainly a guy's thing. Im not trying to denounce girl gamers either, just saying its usually men playing. I wish more girls DID play so it wasnt so damn hard to find one that had the same interests i do lol.

You're wrong on pretty much every level here. While it's true that when I go to my main gaming club, there are usually only three girls in the 40k rooms including me, that's because most of the female members of the club are in the RPG, Board Game or TCG rooms.

When I went to the other club, it was pretty much a 50/50 split. As for video gaming, since guys often refuse to believe a girl is a girl or make fun of them if they do reveal themselves as such, it's generally easier to pretend to be a guy. I did it for years.

The manager of my local GW is a woman, just thought I'd put that out there.

The vocal and obnoxious players in MMORPGs tend to be male, but the players I know who play the most on WoW are actually women. Women make up at least 40% of gamers. They just don't go around proclaiming it because of the backlash.


However, I don't see wargames of any variety particularly appealing to women even the ones that are gamers. Women are more detail oriented, men tend to look at the big picture. The grandiose aspect of 40k and WHFB appeals to the male desire to command armies or witness battles unfold. Women will be more attracted to the hobby aspect of it or tabletop RPGs. There are plenty of disgusting males into tabletop RPGs, cosplay, MtG and other card games, video gaming, LARPing, etc and you find lots of women in all of those...

Yea im one of those guys that never believed someone was a chick on WoW till i heard their voice on TS/Vent or something because of people like my brother that actually posed as a chick for years for whatever reason, even had a few guys gawking over "her"
It is probably just my experience that says there arent many girls, but i still stand saying theyre rare.

It's my opinion that a lot of "nerdy" culture is perceived as pretty male dominated and off-putting to women (even if the figures don't bear that out, I'd say that society as whole perceives it as such) and I find that unfortunate, and you may ask why I care. Well, from a purely self-centred point of view getting stuff like wargaming introduced to more people is something I like the idea of just because I think it's a cool hobby, not that I ever think it'll really make steps into the "mainstream" the way video games have done a bit in recent years (but at least you'd find it easier to get a game ). For an example of how nerdy stuff can be off-putting for women, just look at things like online writers fulminating over "fake geek girls" - what woman would want to get into a hobby where she's having to prove herself according to some unwritten set of arbitrary credentials? It's not GI Jane with Land Raiders.

Note: I'm not saying the above is or is not representative of 40K players as a whole. I was simply using it as a hypothetical example of how a female who was interested in joining a particular group of like-minded people might be turned away by certain attitudes within the group. For "being called a fake geek girl" you could substitute "being fawned over by creepy guys," "having people automatically assume she isn't competitive and is only in it for the painting," etc.

Overall I think women will only be able to participate truly equally in the hobby when people stop regarding female wargamers as a mysterious separate species and instead, when seeing someone at the other side of the gaming table, whether they're man, woman or squig, simply sees another person with the same hobby. It sounds like there might be a few places where that's the case, and I reckon that one way to get a male group to accept more women is for some to get their foot in the door. But I also think that kind of thing can really only be done among gaming groups on a group-by-group basis and a lot of it is dependent on the women being accepted. Considering the time and effort that takes, it's no surprise some women don't even bother.

If you look around the net for gamer demographics you'll find women consistently rate 45% and above in terms of total gamer population, just because they aren't all grrrl gamers who take every opportunity to advertise themselves doesn't mean they aren't around. I myself lead a clan of around 120 members in APB:Reloaded, we have a pair of grrrlgamer types, and a large silent majority who prefer to keep their gender secret from the rest of the community. Not surprising as I've been forced to remove members who believed sexually graphic comments were appropriate as soon as they found out this particular members sex.

Unfortunately in spite of these demographics gamers still have the stereotype of being acne-riddled socially slowed teenage boys and sweaty neckbeard types neither of which are particularly endearing to the would-be femme-wargamer.

Biology has its role too, if I turn up for a game and find out my opponent is a cute girl (never happened) I'm much more likely to go easy on stuff like 'oh you forgot to declare that charge? no problem you can do it now instead', I'd rather she finishes the game wanting to play me again than say 'oh wow I totally destroyed that chick, they're so bad at games lol'. does that make me a sexist? a white knight? No, it makes me a single straight male.

That depends. If you'd also do the same thing for a male gamer you knew was a newbie, I'd say that means you you want to be helpful towards people who you think are new to the game, which is an admirable trait-- it's just that maybe you're a bit too willing to think that women are new to the game (which can come to haunt you if you go too far with it and get owned by or piss off a veteran gamer because of it).

American stereotypes rear their ugly head. Here in London gamers tend to be relatively socialised, urbane and sophisticated.

There are male pursuits and there are female pursuits.

Why aren't there more women into Football and Wargaming? Same reason there aren't more men into Ballet and Knitting.

Asmodai Asmodean wrote:
There are male pursuits and there are female pursuits.

That's a bizarre way to look at things.

I would prefer to say that most leisure pursuits are simply "human" pursuits. More and more, the gender norms are being changed on both sides-- for example, recently, the womens' bouts in mixed martial arts have become better rated than the men's bouts, meanwhile, for anyone who thinks fashion is a "womanly" thing, you haven't paid much attention to history have you?

Women don't play Warhammer because it doesn't interest them, plain and simple. Believe me if there were groups of women wanting to play wargames in general but couldn't because of the boys club they would make a game marketed to girls. Manufacturers would not let such a large market slip through their fingers because of horny, smelly many beasts. If women were interested they would make their own game. Warhammer is a game made by men and made for men. Is it a surprise that the founders of warhammer are men and that the staff is pretty much all men?

Yes there are a few women who are interested in the game and some of them don't play because of the boys club but by far the majority of them that want to play will play. But game stores are not the only place to play and you hear about guys getting together at each others houses to play but you don't hear about girls having a girl night and playing warhammer.

 lambsandlions wrote:
Believe me if there were groups of women wanting to play wargames in general but couldn't because of the boys club they would make a game marketed to girls.

The free market doesn't work that way.

It's run by people, not god. People with a lot of emotional, cultural, and historical baggage. It is inherently flawed because it is made up of and run by people who themselves are inherently flawed, because they're merely human.

In the end, "the market" doesn't make the decision to develop and release a new product, or start a new business, or take advantage of a new market. A person does-- an entrepreneur. If no one is stepping up, then it just isn't happening even if there's a market. This is why "consumer confidence", "investor confidence", and so on are tracked as vital indicators of the market's health. Because neither consumers nor investors are rational agents; they're humans.

 Melissia wrote:

Asmodai Asmodean wrote:
There are male pursuits and there are female pursuits.

That's a bizarre way to look at things.

I would prefer to say that most leisure pursuits are simply "human" pursuits. More and more, the gender norms are being changed on both sides-- for example, recently, the womens' bouts in mixed martial arts have become better rated than the men's bouts, meanwhile, for anyone who thinks fashion is a "womanly" thing, you haven't paid much attention to history have you?

But you agree that there are gender norms. Sure there is going to be cross over because nothing is simply black and white but for the most part women have thing they enjoy that are different than thing that men enjoy. You mention women's MMA getting better rated but you fail to mention that the audience is still predominantly male. And male and female pursuits do change with time. Historically men were more concerned with fashion but in this day and age fashion is almost exclusively women's territory. When people go down the red carpet all the men are wearing black suits while women are wearing everything from silk to feathers to meat. Fashion magazines for men are about picking a tie that matches your shirt or how to wear a watch while fashion magazines for women showcase new and exciting trends.

Men and women are just different.

 lambsandlions wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

Asmodai Asmodean wrote:
There are male pursuits and there are female pursuits.

That's a bizarre way to look at things.

I would prefer to say that most leisure pursuits are simply "human" pursuits. More and more, the gender norms are being changed on both sides-- for example, recently, the womens' bouts in mixed martial arts have become better rated than the men's bouts, meanwhile, for anyone who thinks fashion is a "womanly" thing, you haven't paid much attention to history have you?

But you agree that there are gender norms. Sure there is going to be cross over because nothing is simply black and white but for the most part women have thing they enjoy that are different than thing that men enjoy. You mention women's MMA getting better rated but you fail to mention that the audience is still predominantly male. And male and female pursuits do change with time. Historically men were more concerned with fashion but in this day and age fashion is almost exclusively women's territory. When people go down the red carpet all the men are wearing black suits while women are wearing everything from silk to feathers to meat. Fashion magazines for men are about picking a tie that matches your shirt or how to wear a watch while fashion magazines for women showcase new and exciting trends.

Men and women are just different.

Also you have to look at the reason women's MMA has had it's recent boon? Ronda Rousey. And for two reasons, 1) She is flipping good! Good to the point where it actually made Dana White, back peddle on what he said about woman, and allow them in the UFC.

And sadly, number 2) Sex sells. It is as simple as that.

Warrior woman.

Mah boi, the fightin' girls should look something like this.

 Furyou Miko wrote:
When I went to the other club, it was pretty much a 50/50 split. As for video gaming, since guys often refuse to believe a girl is a girl or make fun of them if they do reveal themselves as such, it's generally easier to pretend to be a guy. I did it for years.

My wife does the same.

I mean, she doesn't pretend to be a guy but she doesn't talk on the mic in order to not have to deal with the hordes of troglodytes.

You'll have to shout louder AbusePuppy, I cannot hear you from the top of your ivory tower.
Except for the models remarks, most of these are stereotypes. They don't play because of me? Like me in specifics? Candice collects necrons and I've played D&D with her and the rest of the group, so what's her problem with me? When I met Meredes in the Square One GW we chatted about the lore of Wood Elves. So what's her problem with me?

"When you smell like a fething pile of gak for Christ’s sake take a bath once a week goddamn- that’s why women don’t play this game."
Huh? I want a peer-reviewed study in a recognized scholarly journal that points to a significant personal hygiene deficiency in wargamers. Give me charts. Give me numbers. Give me figures. Not the hearsay of some guy on the internet, nor a hundred examples of people who say they go to a club where they know someone "like that."

 lambsandlions wrote:
But you agree that there are gender norms.

I don't agree that gender norms are relevant. They're remnants of a disgustingly misogynistic culture that we're still in the process of struggling to throw off.

Simply thinking (and for the sake of argument, if they are in fact) bad, surely they're still relevant.

MarsNZ wrote:
If you look around the net for gamer demographics you'll find women consistently rate 45% and above in terms of total gamer population, just because they aren't all grrrl gamers who take every opportunity to advertise themselves doesn't mean they aren't around. I myself lead a clan of around 120 members in APB:Reloaded, we have a pair of grrrlgamer types, and a large silent majority who prefer to keep their gender secret from the rest of the community. Not surprising as I've been forced to remove members who believed sexually graphic comments were appropriate as soon as they found out this particular members sex.

Unfortunately in spite of these demographics gamers still have the stereotype of being acne-riddled socially slowed teenage boys and sweaty neckbeard types neither of which are particularly endearing to the would-be femme-wargamer.

Biology has its role too, if I turn up for a game and find out my opponent is a cute girl (never happened) I'm much more likely to go easy on stuff like 'oh you forgot to declare that charge? no problem you can do it now instead', I'd rather she finishes the game wanting to play me again than say 'oh wow I totally destroyed that chick, they're so bad at games lol'. does that make me a sexist? a white knight? No, it makes me a single straight male.

To be fair, my only opponent is female, and we both allow that kind of stuff for each other (taking actions when we forgot to earlier) as long as it wouldn't really affect anything that's gone on since then. However, she's my mom, so I don't think that the normal biology reason has anything to do with it.

Mostly it's because we don't play often and we're still learning the rules as we go - though I did give the rulebooks a solid read-through before we played, and I have the mini-rulebook in the bathroom for more reading - I really can't stand just sitting still to read a book anymore, and haven't been able to since I read Faith and Fire, which was a bit of a struggle to get through - - and she's got a pretty terrible memory to begin with. Fortunately, not Alzheimer's (she's been tested, and the test was negative, so just a crappy memory).

I will admit, my personal hygiene used to be pretty terrible, but there was a medical reason for it - namely, that I believed that the water would turn to pink goop which would then proceed to murder me because it was alive. As it turned out, I was quite ill with schizophrenia at the time. Meds and therapy have helped a lot, and my hygiene is much better now - admittedly, still not perfect, but much better than once every 3-4 months.

Did you spend one too many nights watching Ghostbusters?

It's entirely possible that most women who decide not to play 40K, do so because of the men who do, lol.

It's also possible that most women-- or men for that matter-- simply never HEAR about 40k. I mean, despite the size of this forum we have to remember it's a pretty niche hobby.

I meant (in a bit of a snarky way) that it's entirely possible that some women who are interested in 40K (or wargaming in general) might actually be turned off by what they see upon going into the average gaming store. I think that my wife's virtual immunity to teenage or teenage-acting men (she is a high school teacher, and a geek besides) is the only reason she stands going into game stores with me.

 AegisGrimm wrote:
It's entirely possible that most women who decide not to play 40K, do so because of the men who do, lol.

Explain women participating in other 'nerdy' activities enjoyed by socially awkward, unattractive, and often misogynist men.

Explain women participating in other 'nerdy' activities enjoyed by socially awkward, unattractive, and often misogynist men.

I have absolutely no clue, there. More power to 'em, they apparently can focus on their like of a hobby enough to ignore the bad aspects. If I shared a hobby that was largely made of socially lacking women, I seriously dunno if I could keep on it.

 Melissia wrote:
It's also possible that most women-- or men for that matter-- simply never HEAR about 40k. I mean, despite the size of this forum we have to remember it's a pretty niche hobby.

Right on the money.

Till i actually decided to finally delve into 40k (i knew about it for 2-3 years never got into it till Aug2012 when i got to korea and instantly found like 10+ people that play a LOT lol) most of my friends never heard of it. I started showing off my paintjobs and theyre all like "So what is this for?" even the gamer ones.
I mean, is 40k advertised at ALL these days except to those who already purchased something and get those emails from gw?

 Melissia wrote:
Did you spend one too many nights watching Ghostbusters?

Ghostbusters 2, actually, but yeah, that's the movie my brain was translating into real life in that instance.

 Amaya wrote:

 AegisGrimm wrote:
It's entirely possible that most women who decide not to play 40K, do so because of the men who do, lol.

Explain women participating in other 'nerdy' activities enjoyed by socially awkward, unattractive, and often misogynist men.

I have never come across a gamer like this.

In my local GW it is mostly kids, typical GW. In my gaming club, most guys there are married with kids.

I've seen a couple of 40k players like that, but I see it a lot more in video gaming. Oddly enough there are a lot more women in the video gaming crowd than the wargaming one, despite the fact that video gamers, in my experience at least, are typically much more immature and often very hateful individuals.

I can vouch for that. As bad as the reputation is, I still get the feeling, however anecdotal, that wargamers are better behaved than video gamers, especially on XBL.

 Melissia wrote:
I can vouch for that. As bad as the reputation is, I still get the feeling, however anecdotal, that wargamers are better behaved than video gamers, especially on XBL.

For some reason, that reminds me that a number of years ago, Blizzard was looking at adding a feature into World of Warcraft which would allow players to customize their characters' dance moves.

Unfortunately, that will never be, because the first thing that the people who tested that feature did with it, was make the characters look like they're having sex.

So Blizzard scrapped the idea and it's not coming back, probably even IF the playerbase proves it can act like a mature adult.

Which isn't too likely, given how the forums are looking...

I can tell you I met more women on Wizard 101 than anywhere else. World of Warcraft has to be a close 2nd.

I would guess 40k has fewer female gamers than average but MMOs it has to be really close. My best friend in Everquest was a girl pretending to be a guy so she didn't get hassled.

(To whoever mentioned TF2. I so miss TF2) Why does the the Heavy get all the best lines? Don't run it's only ham. I renamed my sandwich soylent green.

 Melissia wrote:
I can vouch for that. As bad as the reputation is, I still get the feeling, however anecdotal, that wargamers are better behaved than video gamers, especially on XBL.

Because, despite what the internet will tell you, people are generally decent. And it takes a special kind of person to be pointless rude or obnoxious face to face with someone. But over a game of COD through a MIC? Anyone can do it. Hell I'll admit, I've played drunken games of COD with friends on XBL and gave some people some serious abuse when I was a bit younger. It was hilarious then, a little embarrassing looking back on it now, would I ever be like to someones face? No, because I wasn't dragged up.

 Mythra wrote:
I can tell you I met more women on Wizard 101 than anywhere else. World of Warcraft has to be a close 2nd.

I would guess 40k has fewer female gamers than average but MMOs it has to be really close. My best friend in Everquest was a girl pretending to be a guy so she didn't get hassled.

(To whoever mentioned TF2. I so miss TF2) Why does the the Heavy get all the best lines? Don't run it's only ham. I renamed my sandwich soylent green.

My guild in WoW has a very simple solution to creeps hassling people. They get booted. Instantly.

I <3 my guild.

Also, they put up with my silliness and insanity, and the guild leader and his wife both adore me and my cuddly demeanor.

Also, I loved playing Heavy. The only thing I didn't like about it is the Medics that assume I have some sort of clue what I'm doing and instantly get up next to me to heal me and assume I'll protect them. I'm just terrible at that, so they die, then I die, then I go and swap to Demoman or Soldier or something.

A big part of it anonymity. It's a lot easier for some punk to be a troll when they can avoid face to face confrontation. I know any disrespect towards women would not fly at any of the FLGS in San Antonio. Come to think of it, there are several women working at each one (or at least three of them, I rarely use the fourth store I know of).

Honestly, the idea that the store is off putting to women interested in "nerdy activities" at all is really laughable down here. There are women working there and several women that do tabletop RPing and various CCGs. I just don't think wargaming is particularly appealing to most women. Its not like the general populace even knows much about it at all. If it ever gets brought up in a discussion people always ask, "Oh, is it like D&D?" You'd literally have to be living under a rock at the bottom of a swamp to not be aware of the various conventions, video gaming, RPing, cosplay, etc, but wargaming hasn't reached that level of popularity.

At the same time, I wish to repeat this link, for those that don't really understand how unpleasant it can be for women to get in to nerdy things. There's also the whole "fake geek girl" crap as well...

All things told, I still think the wargaming community is more pleasant than many other, less niche communities like comic books, anime, gaming, etc. The main thing about wargaming is, well, it is extremely niche.

Key points

Findings indicate that, on average, the female voice received three times as many negative comments as the male voice or no voice. In addition, the female voice received more queries and more messages from other gamers than the male voice or no voice.

On several occasions the female condition was exposed to derogatory gendered language. For example, in one particular game nearly every utterance made by the female condition was met with a negative response by a particular gamer. When the female condition said ‘hi everybody’, the other gamer responded with ‘shut up you <censored>’ followed a few seconds later with ‘she is a <racial epithet> lover’. When the female condition said, ‘alright team let’s do this’, the other gamer replied, ‘feth you, you stupid <censored>.’

imo, this belongs in the Damsels in Distress thread as well, as this reinforces the fact there is a massive amount of misogynist behavior going on in the online and gaming community.

Already posted it there. It was ignored.

 Melissia wrote:
Already posted it there. It was ignored.

So you posted it there and a certain philosoraptor conveniently ignored while going on a tirade about how women are not subject to significantly more abuse in the gaming community?

This calls for a double facepalm.

I've known personally two girls that gave 40k a try. the first liked daemons but she had the personality of "I'm attractive, I have nerdy stuff, Pay attention to me."the handful of games she actually played she ran slanneshi all the way. daemonettes lead by the masque and a herald of slaanesh and a prince of slaanesh in the back. When she lost she pulled a fit and when the group(We're all adults and she was a friend) tried to give tips it was immediately useless according to her. Thus we all walked away from her and focused on other games. She really wanted attention and we can't all put forth helpful tips if all we're getting is crying. We did the same with some of the guys who wouldn't listen too.

The second is listening much better and not complaining as much. But her first army is DE. A very hard army. but she takes it in stride. It's a rough bump road but the group supports.

Didn't a women win the 40k side of the bay area open? I think that shows that women can be just as good or better in this case than 100 other guys.

I wish I had met a girl wargamer, but since I haven't I can't really contribute fully in the topic except to voice opinion. I'm just glad that there are women here to voice their opinions.

 dreamakuma wrote:
I've known personally two girls that gave 40k a try. the first liked daemons but she had the personality of "I'm attractive, I have nerdy stuff, Pay attention to me."the handful of games she actually played she ran slanneshi all the way. daemonettes lead by the masque and a herald of slaanesh and a prince of slaanesh in the back. When she lost she pulled a fit and when the group(We're all adults and she was a friend) tried to give tips it was immediately useless according to her. Thus we all walked away from her and focused on other games. She really wanted attention and we can't all put forth helpful tips if all we're getting is crying. We did the same with some of the guys who wouldn't listen too.

In the end, though, that's really no different than the donkey-cave jocks who can't stand to be associated with "nerd" or "geek" stuff. Hell, I got viciously mocked by them, BOTH genders, in high school myself.

As technology and geek culture becomes more mainstream, these people will slowly fade away.

I'll throw in my 2 cents here;

I've cajoled my girlfriend into playing 40k a few times, and she's enjoyed it (and beaten me every time somehow, and I swear I'm not throwing the game or anything), but the reason she doesn't want to make a hobby of it; time investment. Simply put, she doesn't really want to build and paint an army, it holds no real appeal to her; the final product is fun, and she's always willing to give my Marines a whirl (she's quite fond of the dreadnought, makes sound effects for it), but doesn't want to go through the hundreds of hours involved in getting to that step.

In the end, the whole 40k hobby attracts a certain group of people, requiring a confluence of a number of different character traits which are not especially commonplace. I know a few women who dig the whole hobby, some who just want to do the painting/modelling side, and some who just want to play the game, and I know men in all those categories as well. As to why women don't play 40k en masse, I think a lot of that has to do with the attitudes of the general community.

Simply put, 40k communities tend to not be very female friendly in my experience. My own group isn't hostile in any direct way, but a lot of those involved have absolutely zero capacity to engage with the opposite sex in any functional manner, and that forms a barrier. I enjoy playing a few games with my girlfriend at home with my marines and guard, but the "group," well half of them will just stare at her cleavage, the other half will be patronizing buffoons, and a handful will behave like normal human beings. You can likely imagine which ones are single, and have been for a long time. Ultimately, if an individual or group wants to get women more involved, or anyone really outside their "sphere," the key is being inviting, normalizing the experience, and learning how to interact with other people.

Anyways, that's just my opinion and experience, take from that what you will.

Hey, at least you tried not to be condescending and mean, so I appreciate the input at least.

I've played at several FLGS and GW stores over the years I've been gaming. I seen and played with numerous female gamers. I've been to stores where they were worshiped and the females took advantage of that. I've seen stores where the men behave inappropriately and then get subsequently kicked out for it (which speaks to the whole "no one does anything about it"), I've never seen it tolerated. I've seen females go in intentionally seeking attention.

Yes I've witnessed most of the "stereotypical" interactions described above. But I've also seen them in many other places as well. The work place, most other hobbies/games/clubs, online gaming, you name it. Do they exist? Yes. Is it fair? No. But does it generally keep women from participating in what they want? Rarely, at least in my experiences.

Now in fairness, it was only 2 or 3 stores I noticed females being treated differently in any way, and all the rude offenses were dealt with by staff. The two places I frequent now (a GW and a FLGS), you would never notice these things (aside from when an attractive girl enters and turns a few heads, but nothing different than anywhere else, and the guys aren't rude or gawking at her). And we do have a decent number, at least 30-40%, at my local GW, and around 25% at my FLGS, of female gamers. Our local GW manager is a woman, and a bunch of her female friends play there.

My wife, unfortunately, has no interest in warhammer, but does play lots of other games, she just isn't interested. Is it because she's a woman? No. Is it because male gamers offend her in some way? No. It's because she, as a human, decided she wasn't interested.

I'd say in some places, these "stereotypical" interactions may deter women from getting into wargamming, but I don't think it's fair to put all the blame of the gender balance on male gamers as a whole. I'd be quicker to blame society as a whole and their misconception of gender roles, but please lets not open that can of worms.

Also I have never seen someone at any of the stores I've been to fit into the role of "sweaty neck beard" or have noticeably poor hygiene.

My two cents, YMMV

 Melissia wrote:
Already posted it there. It was ignored.

Where is this thread?

I am finding this thread very interesting...and extremely redundant...

Why? This is all the same kind of comments, points, arguments, articles and the back and for this pretty much the same as it was on RPG boards years ago.

The first thing is that gender should be a complete non-issue when it comes to social interaction with a gamer of any sort. The limit that everyone has to get past is that the game was originally created by men for a male dominated market. While females have been into the hobby for who knows how long, if not from the start, the iconography and stories are severely male dominated and male focus.

I personally have never treated female gamers or nerds any different. I have seen both sides of it also. I have seen people treat females as nothing more than kids that needed their hands held and I have seen them treated like 'equals'. When it comes down to it, their treatment by men is no different then any other subgroup in the hobby, just that their 'difference' is more visible (same with the 'child' category)

The article originally presented though seemed to just blame the guys that play. The problem with that, it is not the people who play the necessarily get them interested. If a female finds it interesting, they will pick it up and play. If they enjoy it, they will continue playing. If they don't - they won't. This is the same way that males are. Attempting to draw that gender line and segregating females into their own subgroup of gamers is part of the problem.

Basically - male, female, young, old, disabled, whatever - if we stop focusing on these aspects and just look at them being 'gamers', stuff like this article in the OP and such would never come up.

 Amaraxis wrote:
I am finding this thread very interesting...and extremely redundant...

Why? This is all the same kind of comments, points, arguments, articles and the back and for this pretty much the same as it was on RPG boards years ago.

The first thing is that gender should be a complete non-issue when it comes to social interaction with a gamer of any sort. The limit that everyone has to get past is that the game was originally created by men for a male dominated market. While females have been into the hobby for who knows how long, if not from the start, the iconography and stories are severely male dominated and male focus.

I personally have never treated female gamers or nerds any different. I have seen both sides of it also. I have seen people treat females as nothing more than kids that needed their hands held and I have seen them treated like 'equals'. When it comes down to it, their treatment by men is no different then any other subgroup in the hobby, just that their 'difference' is more visible (same with the 'child' category)

The article originally presented though seemed to just blame the guys that play. The problem with that, it is not the people who play the necessarily get them interested. If a female finds it interesting, they will pick it up and play. If they enjoy it, they will continue playing. If they don't - they won't. This is the same way that males are. Attempting to draw that gender line and segregating females into their own subgroup of gamers is part of the problem.

Basically - male, female, young, old, disabled, whatever - if we stop focusing on these aspects and just look at them being 'gamers', stuff like this article in the OP and such would never come up.

+1

Wargaming is a strange little niche that is a pain in the ass to get into. Not just monetarily but getting into the community is not easy either. I am grown ass man ( and a handsome one at that) and even I had trouble getting into the community. It is hard to make the leap from the internet to the real life scene because you people are just an awful bunch of whiny asshats.
I was terrified that my FLGS would be full of jerks who with just words can suck all the fun out of a game i was just getting into. Luckily i found out one of my coworkers was also into it and i was able to find a good group of guys to enjoy the game with. You really can't be surprised that there arent many people of either gender in this very small niche market of expensive plastic toy soldiers. No disrepect. <that makes everything i said not offensive >

Edited by Mannahnin

1. It's hard to take that sort of article seriously when the same contributor has an article on the same blog who's thumbnail is a female depiction of a Khorne Berzerker with the Boobplate that he bemoans in his other write up.

2. Making sweeping, sexist generalizations about Male Hobbyists won't help your point about fixing sweeping, sexist generalizations associated with Female Hobbyists/Hobbyist Hopefuls. It makes people resentful and hostile and will generally stir up more aggravation and exacerbate the problem.

3. The bottom line is you need to treat everyone as a person first and then whatever their race/gender identifier is last. It should be a tertiary concern. That's really all it is. I simply see a person who wants to play 40k, or talk about 40k, or paint 40k and I see a common interest. Doesn't seem difficult, does it?

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:
http://www.3plusplus.net/2012/12/why-are-there-no-girl-wargamers/

I find a lot of agreement here, though I think it's generally more likely that girls are more interested in painting over pushing toys around a table.

I have a problem that some of the points as to why girls don't play 40k come across as though they were written by a desperate white knight who doesn't actually understand women.

The "boobplate" claim is one of them. Having feminine armor that covers the entire body is going to be more attractive to women than gender ambiguous armor. It's fully functional armor, and already a departure from highly revealing armor. Women would rather look attractive than look like a Space Marine.

The author should have complemented Dan Abnett for having at least two books where specifically mentions how the military clothing makes female characters more attractive.

One thing I would like to mention to all the desperates is that boobs do not show through armor. Stop crapping on the Scharzenkommando stormtrooper models (basic stormtrooper models with masks) because they don't have boobs. At the level of armor and clothing they wear, there's nothing that is going to visually tell you the sex of the model. Deal with it. Sorry I couldn't give you pleasure by putting down "female models" on the table.

1.I'm a girl, and I like painting, and playing. You know, the whole hobby?

2. I don't want my female character's to be attractive, any more than you want your marneus calgar's and such to be attractive. I, like you, want my character's to be badasses. More Ripley, less Stripley.

3. We don't want to be attractive. We want to be hardcore badasses, along the same lines as, say, every male character in the game above a grot.

4. Yes, I'll admit, it's hard to tell through the armour, and that's a good thing, it leaves it up to the imagination. But they could very easilly, release a tiny bit's sprue with headswap options for a female sergeant for guard, and such.


Now, this article is pretty much right. First thing I was told, when I expressed an interest in 40k, was that I should play sisters of battle, or eldar, or dark eldar. I looked at the models, cringed at the spandex-power armour of the sisters, winced at the battle thong's of the dark eldar, and in honesty, was quite happy with the normal eldar. Suitably badass, without being in a thong. But they diddn't seem to understand I diddn't -have- to play a female army, just because I was a female gamer.

I Chose Nurgle daemons. And to this day, I get the oddest look when I bring out my army and it isn't sisters of battle, but quite possibly the grossest army in the game.

In short, this isn't the 1950's, I don't pop on a pinny, and paint up some models, only to never use them. I play for the exact same reasons you play, because it's a badass setting.

And generally, if I ever get hit on when i'm just out to play games with people, I have a great way of changing the subject to put them off. "Hey, check this out, I painted the ass-maggot's on my great unclean one yesterday "

Now, this article is pretty much right. First thing I was told, when I expressed an interest in 40k, was that I should play sisters of battle, or eldar, or dark eldar. I looked at the models, cringed at the spandex-power armour of the sisters, winced at the battle thong's of the dark eldar, and in honesty, was quite happy with the normal eldar. Suitably badass, without being in a thong. But they diddn't seem to understand I diddn't -have- to play a female army, just because I was a female gamer.

That's one thing that's a very true mindset of a large portion of wargamers, in that I have seen multitudes of posts over the years suggesting that a guy get his significant other into the game by handing her "the girl army" to play.

Although maybe I should try that with my wife, because the current "Girl Armies" are somewhat lower tier choices- meaning I would possibly stand a better chance of not getting my butt kicked in games with her.

 AegisGrimm wrote:

Now, this article is pretty much right. First thing I was told, when I expressed an interest in 40k, was that I should play sisters of battle, or eldar, or dark eldar. I looked at the models, cringed at the spandex-power armour of the sisters, winced at the battle thong's of the dark eldar, and in honesty, was quite happy with the normal eldar. Suitably badass, without being in a thong. But they diddn't seem to understand I diddn't -have- to play a female army, just because I was a female gamer.

That's one thing that's a very true mindset of a large portion of wargamers, in that I have seen multitudes of posts over the years suggesting that a guy get his significant other into the game by handing her "the girl army" to play.

Although maybe I should try that with my wife, because the current "Girl Armies" are somewhat lower tier choices- meaning I would possibly stand a better chance of not getting my butt kicked in games with her.

The irony is, the male bias isn't quite as pronounced as it first seems.

Space marine chapters (INC CSM) - Entirely male
Tau - Gender neutral, female named character, and there is very little to distinguish between the gender's, so a fire warrior could easily be male or female, to the tau, it doesn't matter, for the greater good and all that.
Eldar + dark eldar, gender balanced
Sisters - Predominantly female
Orks - Gender neutral (Asexual Fungaloid's)
Tyranid's - gender neutral (There is only really one type of tyranid that has a defined gender, and that is the queen's in their hivefleet's, who I believe do not reproduce, but rather gather the information from the hivemind, rather than through breeding)
Daemons - Gender neutral (Don't say daemonettes, they assume a form their enemy finds attractive. Against sisters, they would appear male, and hunky )


The balance only seems off, because half the army's, are space marines, and all space marines, are male. A throwback bit of lore from the 80's.

So yeah, ask her if she cares about the gender of the army. If she doesnt, let her see all the armies. If she does, show her all the non-space marine armies, as each of those is either gender balanced, or gender neutral.

I always found the assumption of "play the "girl" army rather idiotic.

Out of the female gamers I know personally, they're into Tyranids, Space Wolves, Daemons and Tau.

There is something to be said for finding something you can identify with, but that's not the only consideration people make, and I feel that is more of a "thing" in video games, RPGs and the like. In 40k, you want something "cool," something which can wreck face, and to be honest, aside from the Guard, there isn't much to identify with personally in the setting.

For instance, I play Guard not because I can empathize with them, more because normal people with basic gear fighting monstrosities from the void is pretty damn cool. My girlfriend, well she thinks a guy raised by wolves, riding a giant wolf with lightning claws is, in fact, the coolest thing ever. At no point to gender roles come into the equation with 40k army selection.

Everything being equal, I AM thinking of painting up some sort of cool female Inquisitor character for my wife, for use in games of "In the Emperor's Name", now that I came across that little gem of a game. I think there is actually something to be said for having an army led by a character you can relate to, and gender is an easy way to go. Just not the ONLY way.

I'm a male, yet I chose the girliest army going. Blood Angels

I think women don't play 40k for the same reason men don't watch Cougar Town: because they have a preconceived notion on what it contains, based on the name, and already have decided it's not for them.

I thought Cougar Town was going to be like Sex and the City or Desperate Housewives, because of the name. BUT IT'S NOT. IT'S PRETTY GOOD.

So I think they should rebrand 'Warhammer 40,000' as '40,000 AD' or something less silly. There aren't any important Warhammers in 40k, that's WFB. The Emperor didn't use a hammer, neither did Horus, and you could still call it 40k.

Evileyes wrote:


1.I'm a girl, and I like painting, and playing. You know, the whole hobby?

Marry me.

Evileyes wrote:2. I don't want my female character's to be attractive, any more than you want your marneus calgar's and such to be attractive. I, like you, want my character's to be badasses. More Ripley, less Stripley.

3. We don't want to be attractive. We want to be hardcore badasses, along the same lines as, say, every male character in the game above a grot.

Is it too much to ask for both? ^^;

4. Yes, I'll admit, it's hard to tell through the armour, and that's a good thing, it leaves it up to the imagination. But they could very easilly, release a tiny bit's sprue with headswap options for a female sergeant for guard, and such.

Now, this article is pretty much right. First thing I was told, when I expressed an interest in 40k, was that I should play sisters of battle, or eldar, or dark eldar. I looked at the models, cringed at the spandex-power armour of the sisters, winced at the battle thong's of the dark eldar, and in honesty, was quite happy with the normal eldar. Suitably badass, without being in a thong. But they diddn't seem to understand I diddn't -have- to play a female army, just because I was a female gamer.

I Chose Nurgle daemons. And to this day, I get the oddest look when I bring out my army and it isn't sisters of battle, but quite possibly the grossest army in the game.

In short, this isn't the 1950's, I don't pop on a pinny, and paint up some models, only to never use them. I play for the exact same reasons you play, because it's a badass setting.

And generally, if I ever get hit on when i'm just out to play games with people, I have a great way of changing the subject to put them off. "Hey, check this out, I painted the ass-maggot's on my great unclean one yesterday "

ew, Nurgle. I take the marriage proposal back. :p Not because they're gross, but it's a matter of Principle. I follow Tzeentch... when I'm not playing Undead Terminators or Fetish Nuns (Yes! I AM that rare creature known as a female wargamer who actually plays Sisters of Battle!)

AegisGrimm wrote:That's one thing that's a very true mindset of a large portion of wargamers, in that I have seen multitudes of posts over the years suggesting that a guy get his significant other into the game by handing her "the girl army" to play.

Although maybe I should try that with my wife, because the current "Girl Armies" are somewhat lower tier choices- meaning I would possibly stand a better chance of not getting my butt kicked in games with her.

Ah yes. "Girl armies". I have a female friend who plays Eldar because they have lots of wings. I have a female friend who plays Tyranids because gribbly scythey things are way cooler than sad armies made of lots of little men, and I have a third female friend who 'plays' Slaaneshi Daemons because they looked fun to paint.

Eldercaveman wrote:I'm a male, yet I chose the girliest army going. Blood Angels

Nothing to say, just Quote For Laughs

VorpalBunny74 wrote:I think women don't play 40k for the same reason men don't watch Cougar Town: because they have a preconceived notion on what it contains, based on the name, and already have decided it's not for them.

I thought Cougar Town was going to be like Sex and the City or Desperate Housewives, because of the name. BUT IT'S NOT. IT'S PRETTY GOOD.

So I think they should rebrand 'Warhammer 40,000' as '40,000 AD' or something less silly. There aren't any important Warhammers in 40k, that's WFB. The Emperor didn't use a hammer, neither did Horus, and you could still call it 40k.

WTF is Cougar Town? As for 40,000 AD, we're not Judge Dredd.

 Furyou Miko wrote:
WTF is Cougar Town? As for 40,000 AD, we're not Judge Dredd.

Cougar Town is a TV show. It doesn't have Cougars in it, either the animals or women who date younger men. I avoided it because of the name, judging the book by its cover, and if I hadn't been referred to it by my wife would never have watched and liked it.

'40,000 AD' was just a suggestion that would allow the 40k jargon word to stay. How about '40,000 Anno Domini'?

In my experience, women don't play 40k or WFB simply because they aren't interested in it. My wife, and my friends' wives are familiar with the game because of our occasional gaming, but just have no interest in playing. This same group of women doesn't hesitate to join in when my friends and I are having a night of M:TG or Munchkin. Hell, my wife even used to play MUDs. We were both in a US leading WoW end game guild until we decided to have children. But when I bring up 40k, she just has a complete lack of interest. My friends have similar experiences with their wives.

Although this isn't really restricted to women. Most of my male friends are completely baffled about table-top gaming as well. As one of the posters above said, it's a pretty niche hobby.

EDIT: spelling

I just don't think the setting appeals to women in general. That being said my Gf and a few other females play 40k at our local FLGS, but we see them more often in the fantasy side than the 40k side.

I think the overall design of the armies is somewhat to blame for this. My Gf plays Tau, one of the others nids, and the other crons. if you notice pretty much these are the only armies that are ambiguous to a point. While tau may be men in those suits they all look like robots, bugs are bugs, and crons are just robo zombies. I have yet to see a girl at our FLGS look at a SOB box without disdain for the models.

The other factor? Its wargaming. Tanks and stuff. While I can't say that girls hate tabletop gaming (on the contrary they love tabletop games in general) wargaming is not a particularly appealing thing to women on the general front. Women are generally outnumbered 10-1 in a FLGS unless they are playing card games or in someones DnD group.

Wargaming is competitive, DnD or other RPG tabletop games favor more creative thinking. see where this is going?

Well, cougar town technically DOES have a cougar in it.

Courtney Cox-Arquette is old enough to be one - it's a long time since she was the teenager pulled out of the audience in a Bruce Springsteen video ("Dancing in the dark", btw).

It's also set in a particular Florida town where cougars are infamous.
In the "predatory" female sense.

I have a theory after watching a study on pheremones. You see there is only a brief period of time in a woman's cycle when they find male BO smell tolerable.

The other 27 days of the month it's downright revolting to the mass majority of them.

Now stop in your local bunker/game store on a busy saturday. What does it smell like? Funky BO. lol

Ok maybe not a sound theory but I'm sticking too it.

Seriously in the front of the rulebook on "Playing the game..." it should start with...
Step 1 - Take a shower, brush your teeth, swish some mouthwash, put on clean clothes (IE they just came out of the washer not "They smell clean to me!" because you can't smell your own funky self)
Step - 2 Then head to the game store....

Lots of interesting onions on this thread. Here is mine.

I don't know why females don't gravitate to 40k like we men do. It could be a lot of things, societal influences, lack of interest in these type of games or it could be male behavior. Often, the truth is not one extreme thing but in the middle of a lot of things. I am not a woman and I cannot speak for them. But, I do doubt it's male behavior because, as some people pointed out, there are a lot of females in online vidya games. Hell, most of my WoW friends are female. (I have no idea how that happened. I don't specifically pursue them). We all know how guys can be in Children's Online Daycare and other such games.

However, I am man so I can say this: I don't care whether or not my local 40k scene has women in it. If there is any, great, but if not I won't lose sleep over it. Sorry to say it, but in my experience women are not much more interesting than men are. So, having women in the store would just be like having more guys there unless you wanted something out of them.

Actually, from these posts, it seems like females gravitate to non Imperial armies (Tyranids seem to be common, but I could be wrong) so it would somewhat different from having more guys there.

 TheCustomLime wrote:
Lots of interesting onions on this thread. Here is mine.

I don't know why females don't gravitate to 40k like we men do. It could be a lot of things, societal influences, lack of interest in these type of games or it could be male behavior. Often, the truth is not one extreme thing but in the middle of a lot of things. I am not a woman and I cannot speak for them. But, I do doubt it's male behavior because, as some people pointed out, there are a lot of females in online vidya games.

That last bit is fairly simple. We can mute you in an online game, but if someone creeps on us IRL, not much to be done about it.

And you probably have a surprising amount of wow friends who are girls, because wow generally is more gender balanced than most games, only it's not as often women will go into proper chat's and tell people they are, unless they trust the people in their guild, for example.

I feel this bears repeating:

 Melissia wrote:
I find myself having to ask this after spending the last couple minutes facepalming over the posts in this thread-- what the hell leads many of you guys to think that you know a single thing about why women do or don't play 40k, to the point where you think you know enough with such extreme surety that you are willing to say that your assumptions apply to ALL women?

Hell, I don't do that in this kind of discussion despite having the advantage of BEING a woman.

The thing is, the various women who look at GW products and 40k in specific, and then decide it's not for them or that they're put off by the culture or that they just can't afford it or whatever reason (not a single person has brought up the massive cost of the hobby yet? I'M SHOCKED I TELL YOU SHOCKED!) that women in general don't get in to the hobby... all of them have their own unique experiences and reasons.

Some of them genuinely aren't interested, just like many men aren't. Some of them just can't afford it, and so they look for a cheaper hobby. Some of them are put off by the geek culture (which can be very off-putting at times). Some of them look down on it as nerdy so they don't want to associate themselves with it. Some of them just don't have time to put in to the hobby to begin with, it IS a time consuming hobby after all. Other times, they see that the store is full of relatively affluent white men and think that they just won't fit in, so they go somewhere else.

Really, this thread is in dire need of perspective, rather than a bunch of people theorymongering and trying to label and explain the actions of half of the goddamned human population as if we were a single monolithic group.

Why not title the thread '..why people don't play 40k.'

And then add that despite the massive investment required in time and money, the god awful rules, poor game support, poor quality products, the RoW embargo, the ban on bits sellers, CHS law suit fiasco, and the Spot the Space Marine Amazon backlash...

Some people still play 40k...And some of these players are female...

 Melissia wrote:
I feel this bears repeating:

 Melissia wrote:
I find myself having to ask this after spending the last couple minutes facepalming over the posts in this thread-- what the hell leads many of you guys to think that you know a single thing about why women do or don't play 40k, to the point where you think you know enough with such extreme surety that you are willing to say that your assumptions apply to ALL women?

Hell, I don't do that in this kind of discussion despite having the advantage of BEING a woman.

The thing is, the various women who look at GW products and 40k in specific, and then decide it's not for them or that they're put off by the culture or that they just can't afford it or whatever reason (not a single person has brought up the massive cost of the hobby yet? I'M SHOCKED I TELL YOU SHOCKED!) that women in general don't get in to the hobby... all of them have their own unique experiences and reasons.

Some of them genuinely aren't interested, just like many men aren't. Some of them just can't afford it, and so they look for a cheaper hobby. Some of them are put off by the geek culture (which can be very off-putting at times). Some of them look down on it as nerdy so they don't want to associate themselves with it. Some of them just don't have time to put in to the hobby to begin with, it IS a time consuming hobby after all. Other times, they see that the store is full of relatively affluent white men and think that they just won't fit in, so they go somewhere else.

Really, this thread is in dire need of perspective, rather than a bunch of people theorymongering and trying to label and explain the actions of half of the goddamned human population as if we were a single monolithic group.

But like...you understand that women wargamers are the minority of wargamers, right?

Like...you understand this is, ultimately, a male-dominated hobby. Right?

I take it you didn't actually read the post you just responded to.

 Melissia wrote:
I take it you didn't actually read the post you just responded to.

Oh no, I did. And I don't think your jab at my credibility here is necessary.

I simply asked you two questions. No need to insult me.

 TheCaptain wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
I take it you didn't actually read the post you just responded to.

Oh no, I did. And I don't think your jab at my credibility here is necessary.

I simply asked you two questions. No need to insult me.

Questions that were already answered in the post above.

To summarize: "there are a wide variety of reasons that might discourage a woman from playing wargames." My point is, given the huge amount of reasons that might discourage a woman from playing, attempting to claim that any one reason is the specific reason for ALL women is nonsense.

Attempting to establish that "this is a boy's club" and making exclusionary generalizations without any statistically relevant knowledge of the subject is just petty and silly. Also unscientific.

 Melissia wrote:

 TheCaptain wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
I take it you didn't actually read the post you just responded to.

Oh no, I did. And I don't think your jab at my credibility here is necessary.

I simply asked you two questions. No need to insult me.

Questions that were already answered in the post above.

To summarize: "there are a wide variety of reasons that might discourage a woman from playing wargames." My point is, given the huge amount of reasons that might discourage a woman from playing, attempting to claim that any one reason is the specific reason for ALL women is nonsense.

Attempting to establish that "this is a boy's club" and making exclusionary generalizations without any statistically relevant knowledge of the subject is just petty and silly. Also unscientific.

Melissia,

Unless I'm gravely mistaken, I think you may have misinterpreted what he was saying.

I don't think he was trying to make those points at all, but instead express that the number of men who look past the things that discourage people from playing is disproportionately higher than the women who look past them. It may just be an anomoly of statistics, but the number of men who play vs women is staggering.

OK, so here's something I find curious and interesting - and I'm guilty of doing it myself.

There are at least three or four women posting on this thread. So why do we still refer to women playing in the hobby as "they" or "them"?

Surely, we should be saying "we" or "us"?

Are we subconsciously disassociating ourselves from our femininity to better fit in with the group? Or are we at the point of genuinely considering ourselves a different 'kind' of female to the ones who don't play?

I got one for you guys: Men and women have different interests.

Most women have little interest in the military. About 5% of the US Marine Corps are women. I rarely see women riding motorcycles (but I fall in love the moment I do). Most women don't play video games. They have a whole slew of hobbies that they enjoy and most guys don't. I don't see what the big deal is.

And I'm not sexist. Saying we are different doesn't mean that we aren't equal. I just have a lot of female friends and none of them have ever shown the slightest inclination in playing 40K. Its not like they were discouraged from doing it as a child because its not lady like or that GW is marketing 40K stricktly to men. Are there exceptions? Absolutely. But in general women are just not interested in the game and that is fine by me. I'll enjoy my game and they can go and drink wine and watch romantic comedies.

 Furyou Miko wrote:
OK, so here's something I find curious and interesting - and I'm guilty of doing it myself.

There are at least three or four women posting on this thread. So why do we still refer to women playing in the hobby as "they" or "them"?

Surely, we should be saying "we" or "us"?

Are we subconsciously disassociating ourselves from our femininity to better fit in with the group? Or are we at the point of genuinely considering ourselves a different 'kind' of female to the ones who don't play?

Nah. I'm referring to the ones that don't play as "they" because I play the game and they don't. I also don't like to speak for anyone but myself.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Davespil wrote:
I got one for you guys: Men and women have different interests.

The overwhelming majority of which are societally enforced, rather than biological.

Breaking down the societal barriers requires people to keep an open mind instead of just saying "go away, this isn't your thing woman". Which I know that wasn't your intent, but that can be the actual effect regardless of intent, if you aren't careful in how you word yourself.

 Melissia wrote:

To summarize: "there are a wide variety of reasons that might discourage a woman from playing wargames." My point is, given the huge amount of reasons that might discourage a woman from playing, attempting to claim that any one reason is the specific reason for ALL women is nonsense.

Has any one poster claimed that their reason was the end-all, be-all reason why there aren't more girls in LGS'?

As far as I've gleaned from reading the thread, it seems like a collective of ideas being thrown into a hat as possibilities.

I don't see the posts in this thread as mutually exclusive "My post is why girls don't 40k." "No, my post is why!"

It feels like "Maybe girls don't 40k because of X" "Yeah, or Y and Z" "I know a girl that didn't mind XYZ, but B and C is what put her off."

Because I agree with you. I'm sure Men and Women share a lot of reasons why the hobby could be unappealing to them. But there are a lot of gender-specific reasons too, it would seem.

If I may throw my contribution into the hat, as per one reason girls may avoid the hobby:

I've been accompanied by a few attractive girls into my LGS on occasion, and one one occasion met a pair of attractive young women who were there waiting to drive the one's brother home.

All these girls had two things in common.

-They were College-age and attractive.
-They were made uncomfortable by the environment.

The pair of girls, I noticed enter the LGS one saturday evening. Forgive me for stereotyping, but they did not look like the kind of girls you would find in the LGS. They looked like they'd be more comfortable at the mall or a College Party. Anyways, as I sat back painting, I occasionally witnessed a player or two being what I describe as "aggressively friendly" with them. One by one, guys would approach them with a flurry of awkwardness that you could tell was putting them off. Now, I pride myself on being well dressed, clean, and physically fit, so you could say I violate the "basement dweller" stereotype that often pervades nerd-culture, and was sadly in full show this particular night. So, eventually, the girls gravitated to me, where it seemed like they just wanted someone "normal" to talk to while they waited for their friend/brother.

I explained to these girls, as well as the girls I've brought in myself, that females (specifically those with traditional-good looks) in my specific LGS is a rarity, and though sincere, some of the gentlemen that regularly attend can be a bit, for lack of a better word, awkward. Both the two, as well as the ones I myself know, made it rather clear to me that this behavior made them quite uncomfortable; the "aggressively friendly" behavior that, from a distance, seemed just like nerds slowly gravitating to these girls like zombies.

Now, I cannot say for certain if this phenomena even effects anyone anywhere else, but I know it made five girls very uncomfortable with the prospect of spending extended time in a LGS. That much I can be sure of.

-TheCaptain

 TheCaptain wrote:
Has any one poster claimed that their reason was the end-all, be-all reason why there aren't more girls in LGS'?

Yes. Numerous posters have done so.

 Melissia wrote:

 TheCaptain wrote:
Has any one poster claimed that their reason was the end-all, be-all reason why there aren't more girls in LGS'?

Yes. Numerous posters have done so.

Ah, well, as a sane person with basic understanding of sociology, I agree with you.

There is almost never one specific reason why a group of people doesn't like something.

People are too complex for that.

I've been avoiding this thread with a ten foot pole, but Melissa has a point - this is a perfect metaphor for the "women's health board" deciding women's contraception when the board members were two priests, a catholic bishop, rabbi, and two professors of ethics.

All were male, and all voiced very popular views of both party lines of a large community, but failed to miss the central point.

They were men.

They were men discussing a woman's issue as though they knew the very thoughts of those lives their opinions affected when the simplest thing they could have done was get five completely random women off the street and ask;

"Hey, you're a woman, what do you think we should do when passing legislation pertaining to what you can and can't do about your body?"

The same opportunity has presented itself here, and a woman has answered for what she believes is the consensus of why women don't engage in the hobby - which she has made clear is that there isn't one exact reason.

I have a tendency to believe her over 5 pages of "we know best".

 Melissia wrote:
Other times, they see that the store is full of relatively affluent white men and think that they just won't fit in, so they go somewhere else.

Yeah right. You expect me to believe that women don't like relatively affluent white men.

Lets be honest, the type of men you generally see in a hobby store aren't the type that attract most women. That might be a reason they are turned off from the game.

I believe Captain and myself would disagree with you - we share the same violation of the sterotype.

 Davespil wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Other times, they see that the store is full of relatively affluent white men and think that they just won't fit in, so they go somewhere else.

Yeah right. You expect me to believe that women don't like relatively affluent white men.

As a general rule, I have found that people are more likely to try to socialize and fit in with those who are more similar to themselves. I do not claim that this is a universal fact mind you, but still, it can be disconcerting to try to fit in to a population that has very different experiences than you do.

Also? Stop assuming that the only reason women would go anywhere is to date men.

This is the redunancy deparment of redunancy. People have been repeating the same nonsense since page 1 now. Can't anyone be bothered to read the actual thread and contribute something worthwhile instead of just repeating the "women don't like smelly neckbeards" nonsense?

And why are we pretending that the female equivalent of neckbeards doesn't exist...I've certainly seen some around...

 Amaya wrote:
This is the redunancy deparment of redunancy. People have been repeating the same nonsense since page 1 now. Can't anyone be bothered to read the actual thread and contribute something worthwhile instead of just repeating the "women don't like smelly neckbeards" nonsense?

And why are we pretending that the female equivalent of neckbeards doesn't exist...I've certainly seen some around...

Yeah, I've known a few myself. Women are pressured by society more than men to look good and have good hygiene, but that doesn't mean that there aren't any women that wouldn't qualify.


During my more depressed moments in high school, I let myself slip in to that territory. Nowadays I exercise and bathe regularly thank you very much, but when you're emotionally unstable or distraught, keeping clean and in shape can oftentimes be a very minor concern.

Or read my post saying that this community apparently is a Fathers Know Best State?

 Davespil wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Other times, they see that the store is full of relatively affluent white men and think that they just won't fit in, so they go somewhere else.

Yeah right. You expect me to believe that women don't like relatively affluent white men.

You think all girls like rich white guys?

What about [Fat, rude, loud, smelly] rich white guys?

What about girls who like [Kind, friendly, attractive] middle-class/poor spanish/black/asian/etc guys?

For what it's worth, this is what GW is looking for when setting up a store: "Demographic Criteria: At least 500,000 total population within 10 miles with 33,000+ 14- to 24-year-old males. Median household income is at least $50,000."

From http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?categoryId=&pIndex=7&aId=3500005&multiPageMode=true&start=8

That said, it's amazing what can happen (and what you can sell) when you just treat people like people. My daughter may have painted her squad of Space Marines pink, but she's 5 and she picked the colour. They shoot at my wife's Orks just fine

 TheCaptain wrote:
What about girls who like [Kind, friendly, attractive] middle-class/poor spanish/black/asian/etc guys?

hehehe...

Sorry, I couldn't help myself. This thread is too tense anyway.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Davespil wrote:
I got one for you guys: Men and women have different interests.

The overwhelming majority of which are societally enforced, rather than biological.

Breaking down the social barriers requires people to keep an open mind instead of just saying "go away, this isn't your thing woman". Which I know that wasn't your intent, but that can be the actual effect regardless of intent, if you aren't careful in how you word yourself.

 Davespil wrote:

What social barrier must be broken down here??? Seriously, this is a game that peaks the interest of a lot more men than women. No one said women can't play 40K as good as a man. No one said that women shouldn't be allowed to play 40K. There is no barrier, just a large amount of women that have no interest in playing.

The societal stigma of "What is and isn't girly" is what Melissia is referencing here, I believe.

Much the same way people would berate a man who likes something that is "for girls" (ex. Brony-hate)

Many folks would likely poke fun at a girl who likes stuff that is "for boys" (ex. female hockey/baseball/rugby athletes having their sexuality questioned)

Brony hate has a lot more to do with the excessive vocality of bronies and the oversaturation of MLP images and fan art everywhere. The fact several bronies at conventions have admitted on video to clopping to rule 34 MLP content doesn't help matters at all. They're basically viewed as an offshoot of the furry subculture which is also painted as perverse due to yiffers.

I'm letting Captain run with this. Stealing the words out of my mouth.

*Shakes fist for being too slow*

 TheCaptain wrote:

 Davespil wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Other times, they see that the store is full of relatively affluent white men and think that they just won't fit in, so they go somewhere else.

Yeah right. You expect me to believe that women don't like relatively affluent white men.

You think all girls like rich white guys?

What about [Fat, rude, loud, smelly] rich white guys?

What about girls who like [Kind, friendly, attractive] middle-class/poor spanish/black/asian/etc guys?

Affluent white men was in someone else's quote, not mine. I did not bring it up, just repeated it.

As far as fat, rude, loud, smelly. I'm gonna go with most people will not like them.

And as far as poor, black, spanish, asian, etc. Again, I didn't write it, I just quoted it.

ANd no one said anything about attraction or dating. Who's sexist now?

 Davespil wrote:

Yeah right. You expect me to believe that women don't like relatively affluent white men.

TheCaptain wrote:You think all girls like rich white guys?

What about [Fat, rude, loud, smelly] rich white guys?

What about girls who like [Kind, friendly, attractive] middle-class/poor spanish/black/asian/etc guys?

 Davespil wrote:

ANd no one said anything about attraction or dating. Who's sexist now?

Neither of us said anything about attraction or dating, actually.

But you insinuated that you don't believe women have the capacity to dislike affluent white guys.

[fixing links and reposting]

No I insinuated that they wouldn't be intimidated by affluent white guys. Melissia brought up dating.

ASFAIK a 'normal' white guy is pretty unthreatening.

 Davespil wrote:
No I insinuated that they wouldn't be intimidated by affluent white guys.

Why?

 Furyou Miko wrote:
OK, so here's something I find curious and interesting - and I'm guilty of doing it myself.

There are at least three or four women posting on this thread. So why do we still refer to women playing in the hobby as "they" or "them"?

Surely, we should be saying "we" or "us"?

Are we subconsciously disassociating ourselves from our femininity to better fit in with the group? Or are we at the point of genuinely considering ourselves a different 'kind' of female to the ones who don't play?

I think it's just academic language. Most of the men in the thread are doing the same thing, except with "men" instead. It's just convention. Maybe it's a bad one in that it makes the topic a bit more impersonal, but there it is.

I'd just like to know who is honestly going to be intimidated by a geeky, skinny, otherwise normal looking white guy.

quote=Amaya 514451 5403277 a440d1ca48e7044d494ac3f4656df52d.png]Brony hate has a lot more to do with the excessive vocality of bronies and the oversaturation of MLP images and fan art everywhere. The fact several bronies at conventions have admitted on video to clopping to rule 34 MLP content doesn't help matters at all. They're basically viewed as an offshoot of the furry subculture which is also painted as perverse due to yiffers.

 Amaya wrote:
I'd just like to know who is honestly going to be intimidated by a geeky, skinny, otherwise normal looking white guy.

Someone who looks into the store, sees only people matching that description, and gets the overwhelming vibe of "I don't belong here."

 Amaya wrote:
I'd just like to know who is honestly going to be intimidated by a geeky, skinny, otherwise normal looking white guy.

Try a dozen of them, some of them (not all) staring at you and making you feel uncomfortable.

HiveFleetPlastic wrote:

 Amaya wrote:
I'd just like to know who is honestly going to be intimidated by a geeky, skinny, otherwise normal looking white guy.

Someone who looks into the store, sees only people matching that description, and gets the overwhelming vibe of "I don't belong here."

I've never seen a store like that, but San Antonio is a fairly diverse city. I think whites are actually a minority here.

It just seems really odd to me, it's like if I were to go to a basketball court and leave because 3/4 guys out there are black. Who cares, we all have a similar interest.

Melissia wrote:

 Amaya wrote:
I'd just like to know who is honestly going to be intimidated by a geeky, skinny, otherwise normal looking white guy.

Try a dozen of them, some of them (not all) staring at you and making you feel uncomfortable.

You have to understand that they are probably not used to seeing nonclones.

 Amaya wrote:
Brony hate has a lot more to do with the excessive vocality of bronies and the oversaturation of MLP images and fan art everywhere. The fact several bronies at conventions have admitted on video to clopping to rule 34 MLP content doesn't help matters at all. They're basically viewed as an offshoot of the furry subculture which is also painted as perverse due to yiffers.

Right, so clearly that has too much jargon for me to understand, but the basic point TheCaptain was making can also be applied to things that guys "shouldn't do", like:

Dancing (makes you gay)
Wearing makeup (makes you weird at the very least)
Fashion Modeling (makes you gay)

Painting or modeling (makes you a nerd or a geek)
Not liking the outdoors (makes you a homebody)
Liking cartoons (Makes you more childish and less like a man)

Not liking beer.

Not liking sports.

Not liking the military.

Not trying to build muscle instead of just staying healthy - (even I'm vain in this area).

Not wanting to be a scientist, politician, businessman/CEO, police officer, firefighter, engineer, mathematician, chef, a soldier, pilot, doctor, lawyer, musician/rockstar (old stereotype), construction worker, miner, artist, or astronaut but would rather be:

A teacher, social worker, stay at home dad, an advocate, a gardener, secretary, telemarketer, pole dancer, pornstar, prostitute, day care facilitator/nanny, model, PR rep, seamstress, or a nurse.

Point is there's a lot of stereotypes out there, and all of them are connected with the idea that there is a role defined by society that we must obtain and fill based on our socioeconomic status and gender. It isn't healthy to think this way, because human's may like structure in their life, but freedom has always has been, still is, and always will be a basic need to have a holistically healthy life. Shackling one's self to a "role" that defines you for the rest of your life rather than living your life to define who you as you wish to be is the fastest way to bring about pain and suffering onto yourself.

You have to understand some people, male or female of any race, often want to avoid causing trouble and don't want to go where they don't feel they belong.

Social awkwardness isn't a male trait.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, to repost what I messed up before....

 Davespil wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Davespil wrote:
I got one for you guys: Men and women have different interests.

The overwhelming majority of which are societally enforced, rather than biological.

Breaking down the social barriers requires people to keep an open mind instead of just saying "go away, this isn't your thing woman". Which I know that wasn't your intent, but that can be the actual effect regardless of intent, if you aren't careful in how you word yourself.

What social barrier must be broken down here?

 DemetriDominov wrote:

 Amaya wrote:
Brony hate has a lot more to do with the excessive vocality of bronies and the oversaturation of MLP images and fan art everywhere. The fact several bronies at conventions have admitted on video to clopping to rule 34 MLP content doesn't help matters at all. They're basically viewed as an offshoot of the furry subculture which is also painted as perverse due to yiffers.

Right, so clearly that has too much jargon for me to understand, but the basic point he was making can also be applied to things that guys "shouldn't do", like:

Bronies are teenage to adult male fans of a children's animated show called My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic. The show was created by Lauren Faust who has a large fanbase from her previous work. Bronies REALLY like the show. They are essentially extremely intense Trekkies. They talk about it constantly, make memes of in show animations and characters, and frequently use characters from the show as avatars on forums. They often spread this content into places where it is uninvited and considered obtrusive. Certain members of the community have admitted to masturbating of fan made pornography of the show.

The combined 'loudness' of the community and 'perverts' within it are IMO the primary causes behind the dislike of Bronies, not that they like a show that is ostenibly for young girls.

Amaya has nailed it.

Liking MLP is one thing, being a brony is quite another. The "victim of gender norms" is a repetitive trope from them as well.

 DemetriDominov wrote:

 Amaya wrote:
Brony hate has a lot more to do with the excessive vocality of bronies and the oversaturation of MLP images and fan art everywhere. The fact several bronies at conventions have admitted on video to clopping to rule 34 MLP content doesn't help matters at all. They're basically viewed as an offshoot of the furry subculture which is also painted as perverse due to yiffers.

Right, so clearly that has too much jargon for me to understand, but the basic point TheCaptain was making can also be applied to things that guys "shouldn't do", like:

Dancing (makes you gay)
Wearing makeup (makes you weird at the very least)
Fashion Modeling (makes you gay)

Painting or modeling (makes you a nerd or a geek)
Not liking the outdoors (makes you a homebody)
Liking cartoons (Makes you more childish and less like a man)

Not liking beer.

Not liking sports.

Not liking the military.

Not trying to build muscle instead of just staying healthy - (even I'm vain in this area).

Not wanting to be a scientist, politician, businessman/CEO, police officer, firefighter, engineer, mathematician, chef, a soldier, pilot, doctor, lawyer, musician/rockstar (old stereotype), construction worker, miner, artist, or astronaut but would rather be:

A teacher, social worker, stay at home dad, an advocate, a gardener, secretary, telemarketer, pole dancer, pornstar, prostitute, day care facilitator/nanny, model, PR rep, seamstress, or a nurse.

Point is there's a lot of stereotypes out there, and all of them are connected with the idea that there is a role defined by society that we must obtain and fill based on our socioeconomic status and gender. It isn't healthy to think this way, because human's may like structure in their life, but freedom has always has been, still is, and always will be a basic need to have a holistically healthy life. Shackling one's self to a "role" that defines you for the rest of your life rather than living your life to define who you as you wish to be is the fastest way to bring about pain and suffering onto yourself.

You forgot male cheerleaders. Also, you need to build some muscle to stay healthy. Without it you are just skinny which is not healthy.

There is a big difference between building muscle and developing your athleticism, but that is not a discussion for this thread.

Yeah, don't get Amaya started on musclebuilding, we may not be strong enough* to get him to stop


*hides from the pun reactions

Your text is fine Melissa. Just saying.

Athleticism requires muscle.

I'd use any excuse to get out of work so if I could get paid leave to take care of my child I'm all for it. I agree with the links you provided. None have anything to do with the current topic unfortunately.

Athleticism requires the development of only muscle that will improve athleticism.

"Muscle building" implies a focus only the development of muscular mass for appearance.

These are two very different things.

 Amaya wrote:
Athleticism requires the development of only muscle that will improve athleticism.

"Muscle building" implies a focus only the development of muscular mass for appearance.

These are two very different things.

I agree, getting shredded is one thing, but getting yolked is 99% for show.

 Davespil wrote:
Athleticism requires muscle.

I'd use any excuse to get out of work so if I could get paid leave to take care of my child I'm all for it. I agree with the links you provided. None have anything to do with the current topic unfortunately.

If you qualify for FMLA, you can take it. It's not restricted to women-only.

Then we agree that athleticism requires muscle, good.

It requires muscle, but it doesn't require brawniness. You can have muscle without being bulked up.

I'm physically quite strong because of various things I don't want to disclose. I'm not 'ripped' in any sense of the word - in fact, aside from having good muscle tone, I'm also overweight (and not in an "I'm not anorexic" way), have a poor cardiovascular recovery time and can't run more than fifty metres without having to switch to walking.

For a less personal anecdote, go look at professional archers. They're athletes. They also tend to be quite rotund.

 Furyou Miko wrote:
in fact, aside from having good muscle tone, I'm also overweight

Is that in the sense of BMI? Because that thing is a joke...

I quite like how this topic has touched on social norms and what not, makes me feel better about reading it during a lecture on that same topic...

I have to come down on Captain, Mel, etc's side of the discussion.

In the sense that I have a noticeable belly and people avoid the topic of bodyweight around me. :p

Although yes, according to BMI I am overweight. Then again, so is my friend who is a rake with ridiculously massive bones - as in you can count his ribs.

 Furyou Miko wrote:
In the sense that I have a noticeable belly and people avoid the topic of bodyweight around me. :p

Do people just randomly discuss bodyweight now? I didn't think that was a subject for friendly conversation unless someone brought up how they were trying to gain or lose weight.

Depends on the country . People in/from Japan will call you fat to your face (even if you aren't). Elsewhere, I'm not sure about.

 Melissia wrote:
Depends on the country . People in/from Japan will call you fat to your face (even if you aren't). Elsewhere, I'm not sure about.

Note to self, don't move to Japan, as awesome as the food is.

 Amaya wrote:
ASFAIK a 'normal' white guy is pretty unthreatening.

That depends. Society tends to extend a lot of privilege to middle and upper class white guys. Courts also tend to be more lenient on them. From the perspective of a likely target of the societal leverage they can bring to bear, I imagine they can be quite intimidating.

Also, describe the average serial killer (or stalker, or date rapist for that matter) for me in terms of class, race and gender, please.

Also, drunk fraternity boys. Usually white, usually average in appearance, and very, very dangerous to be around.

 Melissia wrote:
Also, drunk fraternity boys. Usually white, usually average in appearance, and very, very dangerous to be around.

That's kindof an unkind generalization to make.

 TheCaptain wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Also, drunk fraternity boys. Usually white, usually average in appearance, and very, very dangerous to be around.

That's kindof an unkind generalization to make.

I did specifically qualify it as "drunk" fraternity boys.

People as a group, especially inebriated, can do much dumber and more malicious things than persons as individuals. Sorority girls are similar. Look at the stupidity behind hazing rituals for example-- peer pressure is... an unfortunate thing.

 Melissia wrote:
Also, drunk fraternity boys. Usually white, usually average in appearance, and very, very dangerous to be around.

Oh good lord, don't remind me, I have to walk by a popular sports bar/cocaine dealing front every day home from work. They're charming bunch when inebriated.

It does hold true, in general, however, that any established group is intimidating. Doesn't matter the nature, if you see a group of people all interacting, doing "their thing," it isn't easy to force yourself into that group, particularly if you perceive them as being very different from you. Hence, it's always a good idea when you see someone who seems interested in the game, or has the iconic caseload of stuff, talk to them, integrate them into the group, make them invited. it's much easier from someone inside the group to bring someone in, than for an outsider to break in themselves. Basic sociology really, but then we're back to the front of addressing the subject of why don't more people play 40k, not necessarily the subject of the gender imbalance, which seems to be quite the sticking point.

It's really easy to identify why people in general don't play 40k, but addressing specifics of the player demographic becomes trickier. For instance, I live in an extremely diverse region, yet the only person I know of who plays 40k who isn't white. It's kind of odd, considering Caucasians are actually the minority here, around 40%, lower than that in the under 30 demographic. Yet, while TT is very white, I know lots of people at my university of all sorts of backgrounds who dig Dawn of War 1 & 2, Space Marine and love the setting. There's all sorts of oddities beyond the gender imbalance that I'm totally unequipped to explain. It's not my area of focus nor expertise.

 Melissia wrote:
Look at the stupidity behind hazing rituals for example-- peer pressure is... an unfortunate thing.

Eh. I can kinda vouch that they're largely rooted in tradition, and not without learning purposes.

Silly as it may seem to an outside observer, they actually aren't as absurd as they sound.

Edit: But I digress; a discussion for another day.

Is there a similarly rich tradition for apologists?

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
Is there a similarly rich tradition for apologists?

Meaning?

Meaning that he thinks you hate it too but you went through it so you're trying to explain why you put up with that :cuss

 TheCaptain wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Look at the stupidity behind hazing rituals for example-- peer pressure is... an unfortunate thing.

Eh. I can kinda vouch that they're largely rooted in tradition, and not without learning purposes.

What learning purposes, exactly, does having a person drink so much water that they pass out and have to go to the hospital have?

Hazing has no learning purposes. It's just jackassery meant to enforce loyalty to the group.

 Melissia wrote:

 TheCaptain wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Look at the stupidity behind hazing rituals for example-- peer pressure is... an unfortunate thing.

Eh. I can kinda vouch that they're largely rooted in tradition, and not without learning purposes.

What learning purposes, exactly, does having a person drink so much water that they pass out and have to go to the hospital have?

Hazing has no learning purposes. It's just jackassery meant to enforce loyalty to the group.

That's not a hazing ritual. That's just irresponsibility toward your pledges.

Hazing is bad, and silly.

Hazing rituals are rooted in tradition, and enforce certain qualities the brotherhood in question tries to embody.

IE, loyalty to the group. They serve no other purpose, and often do little but distract the student from their REAL studies.

 Melissia wrote:
IE, loyalty to the group. They serve no other purpose, and often do little but distract the student from their REAL studies.

Not loyalty. There's no hazing for loyalty. It's "I like these people, I'm going to join their club this semester." You place your loyalties out in the open when you decide to join.

Hazing rituals enforce characteristics like integrity, reliability, leadership, etc.

It's not like the movies, nor like the news-headlines. Those are extreme outliers that abuse the privileges they've been given to mistreat people for no reason.

So, give us an example of one of your "good" hazing rituals that does enforce leadership, integrity or reliability?

What even is 'Hazing'?

Crazy yanks and your frat clubs

 TheCaptain wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Look at the stupidity behind hazing rituals for example-- peer pressure is... an unfortunate thing.

Eh. I can kinda vouch that they're largely rooted in tradition, and not without learning purposes.

Silly as it may seem to an outside observer, they actually aren't as absurd as they sound.

Edit: But I digress; a discussion for another day.

Yeah, as interesting as the subject of initiation ceremonies is, it is probably not too on topic for why women don't take part in 40k. You can draw a long bow to it, but saying they don't play 40k because of initiation ceremonies used by fraternities is...pretty out there.

 Furyou Miko wrote:
So, give us an example of one of your "good" hazing rituals that does enforce leadership, integrity or reliability?

The guys are given an extremely difficult/tedious task, but warned about it by several brothers beforehand.

If they don't exploit the information, they showed integrity.

If they exploit the information in a way where the whole group benefits/gets a break, they showed teamwork.

If they exploit the information selfishly, letting a select few of themselves off easy, they misused the information, and missed the point.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 motyak wrote:

 TheCaptain wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Look at the stupidity behind hazing rituals for example-- peer pressure is... an unfortunate thing.

Eh. I can kinda vouch that they're largely rooted in tradition, and not without learning purposes.

Silly as it may seem to an outside observer, they actually aren't as absurd as they sound.

Edit: But I digress; a discussion for another day.

Yeah, as interesting as the subject of initiation ceremonies is, it is probably not too on topic for why women don't take part in 40k

I agree. But it's so darn easy to get sucked into these derailings.

I need help

We should stay on topic, but... In groups which go through a hazing ceremony (not necessarily one of those criminal 'take him drunk and naked into the woods and make him find his way back' ones, and yes in my eyes that counts as murder), there are higher rates of bonding and acceptance within the group towards the individual and vice versa (from the individual to the group), and acceptance by a group which an individual feels responsible to and accepted by does have a great effect on things like self esteem, which in turn can affect things like grades or even health.

However, this is balanced by an increase in bias towards out groups (amongst other things), and while this often manifests in a simple rivalry between frats or houses or what have you, if the existing bias towards outgroups is more, for lack of a better word, negative (i.e. significant views about another race or gender) then the problems that can arise are very clear.

So it is both good and bad. Not to seem like I'm trying to get the last word, or that I believe everything that I say is correct, but back on topic now? It is an interesting enough thread that I don't want it all derailed and what not...

Eldercaveman wrote:

Crazy yanks and your frat clubs

I actually think this in an interesting point. After reading 90% of the posts here, many of the posters who claim that guys are all over any single female who walks in to a store are American. Maybe this action is more rooted in the American society than other places. Obviously a huge generalisation but I mean the American movies/TV I watch are like this, and when I lived in the USA people thought I was shy because I didn't hit on every female in a room.

In my experience, within the UK, if a female walks into my FLGS (or old FLGS), the opposite happens, people shout less, talk less and continue playing their games. It's still a very odd situation to walk into, and I can understand the feeling of "not fitting in" but it certainly isn't intimidating. I know if people go silent when I walk in a room if feels like they either don't want you there, or were talking about you but I'm not scared of those people.

On the (off-)topic of fraternities, in my experience they're harmless, and the media is very keen to paint them as evil and dangerous. I've never been in one - UK universities don't do such weird things, but I knew guys who were in them when I was in the USA.

They're "harmless" so long as you keep a good distance from them and don't try to party with them.

 Melissia wrote:
They're "harmless" so long as you keep a good distance from them and don't try to party with them.

Much like you don't appreciate the negative generalizations being made in this thread toward women, I don't think you should be so swift to negatively generalize in a way that condemns a massive social-cultural niche.

 Melissia wrote:
They're "harmless" so long as you keep a good distance from them and don't try to party with them.

I wouldn't know, I've never been involved with my friends' fraternity activities, everything seemed to revolve around copious amounts of alcohol which isn't really my cup of tea. My experiences with them outside such things were fine though.

 Griddlelol wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
They're "harmless" so long as you keep a good distance from them and don't try to party with them.

I wouldn't know, I've never been involved with my friends' fraternity activities, everything seemed to revolve around copious amounts of alcohol which isn't really my cup of tea. My experiences with them outside such things were fine though.

You guys keep referring to these things as fraternities making it soundalike something from a movie, it all just sounds like a Saturday night with my rugby club.

Lets face it how often do you come across a gaming club that is rowdy? I can't see this being a reason for the lack of woman n 40k, I think as Melissa pointed out earlier in the thread, the main reason is probably learned behaviours passed n from archaic stereotypes of the things genders should and shouldn't do.

Eldercaveman wrote:


You guys keep referring to these things as fraternities making it soundalike something from a movie, it all just sounds like a Saturday night with my rugby club.

]

To be fair that's not a bad analogy.

 TheCaptain wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
They're "harmless" so long as you keep a good distance from them and don't try to party with them.

Much like you don't appreciate the negative generalizations being made in this thread toward women, I don't think you should be so swift to negatively generalize in a way that condemns a massive social-cultural niche.

Tell me this.

Would you recommend a young lady go drinking at a party where she is one of maybe three women amongst ten to twenty young, virile boys, whom are also going to go get heavily drunk?

I'm just being realistic here. I don't like drinking to begin with (and I haven't drank a drop of alcohol in.... close to a decade), but if you're going to do it, you need to be careful around whom.

 Melissia wrote:


Would you recommend a young lady go drinking at a party where she is one of maybe three women amongst ten to twenty young, virile boys, whom are also going to go get heavily drunk?

Only if said women implicitly trusted the "boys" in question.

But like you illustrate, such an example is rather unrealistic, largely due to how unsafe it can tend to be. In a strictly objective statement; the ratios of male to female are much more female-friendly than you seem to believe.

Not in my experience. But all of this kind of misses the point-- yes, a group of white men CAN be intimidating, without even intending to be so.

There is a reason less girls are interested in warhammer than other hobbies. I think its the same reason that less men are interested in ballet, knitting, horseback riding, etc, than women.

 Melissia wrote:
The overwhelming majority of which are societally enforced, rather than biological.

I used to think so, but now I think there is a difference in genders. This starts really early. My 2 year old daughter loves shoes. My 4 year old son does not care -- one pair is good enough for him. My daughter loves frills on her dress. My son does not care about clothes -- hes more interested in toy cars.

Neither me or my wife has encouraged either of our children in any direction. We both are very stern on letting our children play with what they want to -- regardless of gender roles. While its possible that 90% of their preferences fall in what society calls 'gender rolls' randomly, I doubt it.
As a parent of small kids I spend a lot of time with other parents of small kids. It just happens. You see the same thing with other kids. LIttle boys like trains, cars, etc... Little girls like princesses, ladybugs, etc.

It's not a bad thing at all. It just is what it is. It does not make a girl a freak for wanting to play warhammer. If anything it makes her smart.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-CU040Hqbas

This girl knows more about how modern day marketing affects the things we like than the majority of adults.

Melissia wrote:Not in my experience. But all of this kind of misses the point-- yes, a group of white men CAN be intimidating, without even intending to be so.

I find it hilarious that people think a group of geeky white guys are intimidating. Especially at a public location (GW/FLGS) where they are absorbed into their games with toy soldiers and dice rolls.

In all honesty, a group of kindergartners would be more intimidating. You honestly don't know if one them is going to randomly crap their pants or something else disgusting that you'll have to deal with. At least adults at a FLGS typically don't defecate on themselves.

labmouse42 wrote:There is a reason less girls are interested in warhammer than other hobbies. I think its the same reason that less men are interested in ballet, knitting, horseback riding, etc, than women.

 Melissia wrote:
The overwhelming majority of which are societally enforced, rather than biological.

I used to think so, but now I think there is a difference in genders. This starts really early. My 2 year old daughter loves shoes. My 4 year old son does not care -- one pair is good enough for him. My daughter loves frills on her dress. My son does not care about clothes -- hes more interested in toy cars.

Neither me or my wife has encouraged either of our children in any direction. We both are very stern on letting our children play with what they want to -- regardless of gender roles. While its possible that 90% of their preferences fall in what society calls 'gender rolls' randomly, I doubt it.

This. There are gender differences. I don't think they are as extreme as people make them out to be and their are certainly men and women with interests that are outside their socially enforced gender roles. I really don't see how liking princesses is particularly feminine either. How is that different from a little boy wanting to be a prince who goes off and has afternoon tea and crumpets? How is little girls wanting ponies different than a boy wanting to be a cowboy? I think certain slight differences are greatly exaggerated.

Madcat87 wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-CU040Hqbas

This girl knows more about how modern day marketing affects the things we like than the majority of adults.

The majority of adults know very little about anything outside of their specific life experiences and don't seem particularly interested in learning more.

The misogyny in the article (and this thread) is hilarious. Most women deal with creepers ("aggressive friendliness" if you want to invent a new word for it I guess) everywhere, the well-adjusted ones know how to handle it and move on. His white-knight fail of an entire gender just goes to show he's part of the problem; the guy saying "Well if we weren't such stinky ogres to these beautiful creatures that deign to grace us with their presence, they would totally enjoy our overpriced, awkward hobby full of passive aggressive manchildren!" is a bigger part of the problem than an honest creeper, because at least the honest creeper isn't deluding himself. He just wants to get him some. God bless him.

It's so blatantly obvious that women don't play 40k because of the activity and environment it's performed in that by like halfway into page 1 the whole thread did an about-face into some sort of call to arms for eliminating gender roles. Like the discussion is so dead in the water and the article is so bad that we decided we would have more fun talking about gender activism in a wargaming forum instead.

Claiming "Well society makes it that way!" with the implication that women would totally be into wargaming en masse if human history would just cooperate and play out differently than it did, is just as bad as the article linked in the OP - you're assuming agency for this entire group of hypothetical alternate-reality people while denying agency to those people that exist now (You don't like wargaming because *society* told you not to like it! Not because you think it's dumb! Trust me - I know your thoughts better than you!)

If someone wants to start a discussion where we explore an alternate reality wherein hundreds of years of gender roles were somehow not enforced (maybe by like 1400 the thought police really got their system down) and see what the average wargaming store would look like then and assess whether it's an objectively better reality than what we have, and try to figure out with a straight face whether all the smokin hot sorority chicks would be playing space wolves or black templar or Cryx or whatever during happy hour I would love to see how that plays out.

I'm with Davespil - gamestores don't have alot of women in them because wargaming is not an activity that appeals to most women, and who cares?

Your post contains internal contradictions. Are these intended?

If I say "Yes they were totally intended dude" will you point out the "internal contradictions" without using an obnoxious multiquote format?

You appear to agree with the belief that women do not participate in wargaming because of the creepy male clientele and then end your post saying you agree with the statement that women do no wargame simply because they have minimal interest in it.

Those aren't mutually exclusive. You present a group with an activity that doesn't engage them and they won't be engaged. You then show that the environment said activity is being engaged in is in many cases, actively repulsive, and you compound the lack of engagement by excluding any fence sitters or people who might have displayed at some point. Engagement from a group at that point will be at best, a fringe minority. You can have multiple reasons to do/not do something, and that's how most people usually operate.

Even though women engage with similarly "gross" males in other activities such as tabletop RPGs, LARPing, video gaming, cosplay, CCGs, etc.

I just don't think it particularly appeals to women and has little to do with the males in the gaming community.

Well my wife plays 40k, Chaos Daemons and Dark Angels, not once has see been treated any differently playing than anyone else in my LGS. If anyone thinks that they are going to go "easy on" her than they are going to lose, just because her chromosomes are different than a males doesn't make her army any less effective at kicking butt. She likes the game, she likes the hobby and most of all she loves it when she wins! Whenever we go out to the LGS to play, I haven't heard of once that she was being oggled at (except by me! ) or that she felt uncomfortable in anyway, maybe it's just because of the people that we play with but it's really no different. There has to be a certain level of maturity in 40k to really enjoy playing with the wide range of people that play, the OP article is just boyish at best.

As far as any online gaming goes, it's easy to act like a complete fool when it's not your real name or face out there. In wargamming you would be asked to leave if you were acting immature or no one would want to play with you because your behavior is socially unacceptable.

 Amaya wrote:

Melissia wrote:Not in my experience. But all of this kind of misses the point-- yes, a group of white men CAN be intimidating, without even intending to be so.

I find it hilarious that people think a group of geeky white guys are intimidating. Especially at a public location (GW/FLGS) where they are absorbed into their games with toy soldiers and dice rolls.

Be fair. Melissia is not speaking of physical intimidation, but likely social intimidation. A hobby like warhammer can be extremely intimidating if you have never played. You have people talking about all kinds of rules, armies, etc.. It could be very easy to be socially intimidated by that.

Imagine your living in a city like Portland OR, or Seattle WA where knitting has become very popular hobby for women in their 30s & 40s. If you were to walk into a knitting shop it would be intimidating to know what kind of yard to buy, what kind needles you would need, how to cast on, cast off, etc. Sure you could ask one of the women sitting at the shop, but they are all chatting with each other and ignoring you. If someone did not explain that to you and try and introduce you to the group of women knitting (which has about as many men who take up that hobby as warhammer has women), it could be very socially intimidating.

 Amaya wrote:
Even though women engage with similarly "gross" males in other activities such as tabletop RPGs, LARPing, video gaming, cosplay, CCGs, etc.

I don't think those are 'gross' male hobbies.
I know more girls into cosplay than men.
LARPs are cosplay where you get to swing boffer swords. (more girls play healers, but that's another story)
Girls dig video games as much as boys do -- the reason they are viewed as 'boy' hobbies is a throwback to the 90s when PCs were not as common or friendly.
CCGs have become incredibly prevasive in high schools. MTG knows where its market is....

 deffskulla wrote:
Well my wife plays 40k, Chaos Daemons and Dark Angels, not once has see been treated any differently playing than anyone else in my LGS. If anyone thinks that they are going to go "easy on" her than they are going to lose, just because her chromosomes are different than a males doesn't make her army any less effective at kicking butt. She likes the game, she likes the hobby and most of all she loves it when she wins! Whenever we go out to the LGS to play, I haven't heard of once that she was being oggled at (except by me! ) or that she felt uncomfortable in anyway, maybe it's just because of the people that we play with but it's really no different.

Going back to the knitting store anology, that's the exact same thing as you going with your wife to a knitting store and finding its actually really fun to sit, knit and chat with people. It does not make you less of a man than it makes your wife less of a woman for playing 40k.
I wish I could get my wife to play 40k. As night I will paint models while she knits

I didn't say those hobbies were gross, I said some of the males in them were gross as in stereotypical unwashed socially awkward neckbeards. Wargaming is not some haven for rejects from the rest of the nerd community.

Which nerd community are you referring to? We are a pretty diverse group, really.

I can't for the life of me understand the fanatical love of Firefly.

All of them.

Edit: Firefly is overrated as is everything by Joss Whedon. I don't know what's worse Browncoats or Buffy lovers. Is there some reason that they are so fanatical? I swear it's like a bloody cult.

 Amaya wrote:
All of them.

Edit: Firefly is overrated as is everything by Joss Whedon. I don't know what's worse Browncoats or Buffy lovers. Is there some reason that they are so fanatical? I swear it's like a bloody cult.

A cult of awesome.

 Amaya wrote:
Firefly is overrated as is everything by Joss Whedon. I don't know what's worse Browncoats or Buffy lovers. Is there some reason that they are so fanatical? I swear it's like a bloody cult.

Hmm well seeing as logic, reason, awesomeness, and, everything means nothing to you. (How can you hate firefly?)

I guess there is no help for you .

Very typical Browncoat response. "If you don't adore it and worship Whedon, you must hate it."

Please show me where I said I hated it.

 Amaya wrote:
Very typical Browncoat response. "If you don't adore it and worship Whedon, you must hate it."

Please show me where I said I hated it.

Typical internet doesn't understand a joke response.

In case you haven't noticed yet, sarcasm is about as effective on the internet as peace protests were in ending WW2.

 captain collius wrote:

 Amaya wrote:
Very typical Browncoat response. "If you don't adore it and worship Whedon, you must hate it."

Please show me where I said I hated it.

Typical internet doesn't understand a joke response.

Well this just got awkward.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Amaya wrote:
In case you haven't noticed yet, sarcasm is about as effective on the internet as peace protests were in ending WW2.

He said "if logic, reason, and awesomeness mean nothing to you"

Even if you truly don't like logic or reason, I think suggesting you aren't a fan of awesomeness is a pretty clear indicator of some sarcasm.

Insisting on continuing to be insulted even after he pointed out the joke is kinda...excessive.

Actually, I am not a fan of awesomeness for the sake of awesomeness. A great deal of people are fans of awesome and/or cool things simply because they are awesome or cool.

Why would that make it obvious sarcasm? Especially considering that "awesomeness" depends heavily on perspective and context.

 Amaya wrote:
Actually, I am not a fan of awesomeness for the sake of awesomeness. A great deal of people are fans of awesome and/or cool things simply because they are awesome or cool.

Who said anything about unbacked awesomeness? Real awesomeness is what is in question; he made more of a blanket statement.

Why would that make it obvious sarcasm? Especially considering that "awesomeness" depends heavily on perspective and context.

Everyone likes SOME awesomeness. Or rather, most people. The post referred to awesomeness, which is defined by your perspective and context.

What you find awesome and what I find awesome are different, but we both can agree that we like awesome things. He also put in a winkyface. It was pretty clear sarcasm.

 Amaya wrote:
All of them.

Edit: Firefly is overrated as is everything by Joss Whedon. I don't know what's worse Browncoats or Buffy lovers. Is there some reason that they are so fanatical? I swear it's like a bloody cult.

Your welcome to your opinion. The box office disagrees. The Avengers became the third highest-grossing film worldwide
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Avengers_(2012_film)

You do know that using sales as a measuring stick of something's quality or lack thereof is illogical and meaningless right?

 Amaya wrote:
You do know that using sales as a measuring stick of something's quality or lack thereof is illogical and meaningless right?

Actually, sales are a good indicator of quality when there lacks much substantial, quantitative means of assessing quality.

Put simply: sales are really the only way to tell if a movie is good.

 Amaya wrote:
You do know that using sales as a measuring stick of something's quality or lack thereof is illogical and meaningless right?

Uh....no.

What you view as quality is subjective. What society views as quality is quantitative. The measuring stick for this is sales of a movie / viewers of a TV show / etc. Simply put, the more people go out and see a movie, the better society as a whole views the product.

While you might think that Joss Wheden's works are garbage, society as a whole as liked some of his works greatly.

No, all they do is indicate the film's mass appeal.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 labmouse42 wrote:

 Amaya wrote:
You do know that using sales as a measuring stick of something's quality or lack thereof is illogical and meaningless right?

Uh....no.

What you view as quality is subjective. What society views as quality is quantitative. The measuring stick for this is sales of a movie / viewers of a TV show / etc. Simply put, the more people go out and see a movie, the better society as a whole views the product.

While you might think that Joss Wheden's works are garbage, society as a whole as liked some of his works greatly.

Where have I said Whedon's work is garbage?

 Amaya wrote:
No, all they do is indicate the film's mass appeal.

And the goal of films is to appeal to the masses.

A good film is one that accomplishes this goal.

"Article on why women don't play 40k"

What does Wheden have to do with this?

But if we're going completely off topic here.

I hate Buffy, liked Firefly, enjoyed Serenity and loved The Avengers.

the article talks about women not playing 40k, because all 40k players are the stereotypical 40k players...

no one sees the irony in this?

I see none of the mentioned behaviors at my 40 shop, GW or in tournies, and have only met 3 female players in 14 years.
I only met 4 "neckbeards" in the same time period.


I could equally say women dont play 40 k as much because they stereotype the gamers as "smelly all male neckbeards who dont know how to deal with women in the same room as them"

in fact, women stereotyping gamers as "smelly neck beards" is likely more the reason why women dont play 40k,

as opposed to 40k players actually BEING smelly neck beard types.

maybe its just my group, but 99% of us smell ok, look well to do with good jobs and living outside our parents basement.

all of the women I ask to describe war gamers describe the neck beard stereotype, without exception, and of course want nothing to do with that crowd

 TheCaptain wrote:


And the goal of films is to appeal to the masses.

A good film is one that accomplishes this goal.

That's false. A goal of some films is to make money by appealing to the masses.
Some are to portray a narrative in a certain style, or to convey a message.

I can't accept your definition of "good" because it means "Transformers" is better than "The Seventh Seal." Mass appeal is only a measure of mass appeal, not cinematography.

Hey, I'm a bit of a film nerd, so I suppose I judge things in a different way to how many times I said "yeah!" while watching the movie, and concentrate on things like editing and narrative. If you were to ask me about music, I'm sure my definition of "good" would be in the mass appeal section...

After rambling, I guess I'm just trying to say that it's not entirely subjective, just like food, music and video games. However mass appeal isn't a good measure of the skill put into creating these things. Man I'm bad at explaining what I think, I'll just leave this conversation now.

 Amaya wrote:
I find it hilarious that people think a group of geeky white guys are intimidating. Especially at a public location (GW/FLGS) where they are absorbed into their games with toy soldiers and dice rolls.

Yes, you would. You do not have the same experiences.

This is not physical intimidation that is being talked about, but social. It is VERY easy for a group to give off a vibe of "you're not a part of the group and you're not welcome here", intentionally or otherwise. This attitude, again intentional or otherwise, attempts to push people away and keep them from integrating in to the culture.

Amaya wrote:Actually, I am not a fan of awesomeness for the sake of awesomeness. A great deal of people are fans of awesome and/or cool things simply because they are awesome or cool.

Usually I don't see things that I'd quite like to put on my sig, but this sentence is just awe-.. err, I mean... special?

Melissia wrote:

 Amaya wrote:
I find it hilarious that people think a group of geeky white guys are intimidating. Especially at a public location (GW/FLGS) where they are absorbed into their games with toy soldiers and dice rolls.

Yes, you would. You do not have the same experiences.

This is not physical intimidation that is being talked about, but social. It is VERY easy for a group to give off a vibe of "you're not a part of the group and you're not welcome here", intentionally or otherwise. This attitude, again intentional or otherwise, attempts to push people away and keep them from integrating in to the culture.

Doesn't seem like this stopped you from doing video games, wargames, or RPGs...

LadyCassandra wrote:

Amaya wrote:Actually, I am not a fan of awesomeness for the sake of awesomeness. A great deal of people are fans of awesome and/or cool things simply because they are awesome or cool.

Usually I don't see things that I'd quite like to put on my sig, but this sentence is just awe-.. err, I mean... special?

My mommy always told me I was special.

 Amaya wrote:
Doesn't seem like this stopped you from doing video games, wargames, or RPGs...

I don't know if you noticed, but I'm not, personally, a very timid person online.

Understatement of the day here.

 Melissia wrote:

 Amaya wrote:
Doesn't seem like this stopped you from doing video games, wargames, or RPGs...

I don't know if you noticed, but I'm not, personally, a very timid person online.

Understatement of the day here.

Jekyll and Hyde syndrome.

And...

My social experiment to prove how quickly the different subsets of nerds can turn on each other is a success.

No one bring up Goku vs Superman, though. I'll lose my damn mind.

 Monster Rain wrote:
And...

My social experiment to prove how quickly the different subsets of nerds can turn on each other is a success.

No one bring up Goku vs Superman, though. I'll lose my damn mind.

I'm happy to oblige.

That depends on which goku we're talking about.

And which Superman. The Golden Age planet juggling Superman with his superpower of "shear outright awesomeness" would be a bit of a challenge to Goku.

The modern Superman, not so much.

 TheCaptain wrote:

 Amaya wrote:
You do know that using sales as a measuring stick of something's quality or lack thereof is illogical and meaningless right?

Actually, sales are a good indicator of quality when there lacks much substantial, quantitative means of assessing quality.

Put simply: sales are really the only way to tell if a movie is good.

...So, what are you implying about Serenity?


Also, it's pretty easy to love Firefly but hate its fans.

A few days ago I brought a couple of friends who were girls to my local shop, nobody hit on them. I actually saw a couple of women playing while there as well.

i know of at least 2 girls who play 40k

to be honest it should just be accepted, they are either interested or not, if they do play just accept them and give them a game like you would anyone else, it would be interesting for sure

secondly any gaming community can be intimidating to anyone new regardles of gender, with women its probably even worse. Though some women don't do themseleves any favours when they dress in certian ways that gets them noticed, i'm not really taken by this to be honest, but for some having clevage on display creates a distraction when they are playing a game etc. However I respect that people can dress any way they want, but they should realise what some male creatures are like, and at a gaming club it can verge on the disrespectful sometimes. I just cannot understand it sometimes, as personally if a woman wants to play 40k she should be respected for it, and treated equally not as something exotic

Well keep in mind, society has trained women to subconsciously take appearance extremely seriously-- appearance matters EVERYWHERE we go, especially when it shouldn't, and we're constantly judged by our appearance instead of by what we do.

So please, don't look down on a woman for dressing nicely, or dressing in a way that's obvious it's intended to attract men. If they act superior and snooty, yeah, that's probably a reason to ignore them, but that's more on an individual basis than on a group basis. And don't think that they're being snooty and superior because they dress attractively.

Same reason they don't really play video games or other "nerd" activities.

 Melissia wrote:
Well keep in mind, society has trained women to subconsciously take appearance extremely seriously.

Just women huh?

More than men.

 Melissia wrote:
More than men.

Closer to the truth. Unfortunately I don't care enough about the subject to bother reading about it. Sociology - the Dane Cook of sciences.

Harriticus wrote:Same reason they don't really play video games or other "nerd" activities.

Even those this is false as has been mentioned multiple times. Read the thread much?

Griddlelol wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
More than men.

Closer to the truth. Unfortunately I don't care enough about the subject to bother reading about it. Sociology - the Dane Cook of sciences.

I think the appearance bit with women is grossly exaggerated. I see tons of college girls walking around in oversized t-shirts, yoga pants, hair uncombed in a ponytail...you know generally unkempt. They always find time for some makeup though...