Hey guys I’m quite new to the whole 40k scene but after watching the hilarious Text to Speech show on YouTube last year I’ve been interested in trying out the game itself. However from a lot of groups I’ve met they’ve been maybe not hostile per day but a little gate keeping. How can I join in the fun on the hobby when I’m looked upon as not belonging? Is there anything I can do to make the community more welcoming to me?
1. Enjoys the hobby on her own.
2. Is the girlfriend of a guy who participates in tabletop games. Should the relation end so will her interest in the hobby.
Apart from this my local GW store manager is a woman who lives and breathes the hobby. She is very dedicated and thus managed to outshine all previous store managers in my home town who were all male. With the exception of her only very few women were regular customers in the GW store during the pre-Corona era.
A couple of years ago I frequented a youth club for 12 months to do intro games for new players. Two of them were women and both times it wasn´t 40K to be played but Blood Bowl. In my entire hobby time (25 years) I haven´t played 40K against a woman. Not because of gatekeeping but women are rare as unicorns in this hobby as they tend to prefer doing other things in their spare time.
Demo games in stores are a decent place to start. If you've got more than one store to choose from, you can sus out the attitude of the staff.
If you've got good staff, you're likely to have good players.
The other advantage of a demo game is you can get a feel for which game or which force you might be interested in.
These days, I tend to favour collecting small forces of many factions- it makes it easier to play with friends, because you can supply models for people who might be curious enough to play at home, but not in stores.
Enjoy what you enjoy and ignore anyone who isn't accepting of you.
I haven't met any such person that would gatekeep a woman out of the hobby and I would posit the average tabletop gamer is a little more socially adept than your average geek so you'll eventually come across some good people in your quest.
It's a hurdle that the community as a whole is struggling to get over but in some places, it is getting better. The sad fact is there is nothing you can (or indeed should have to) do to make the community you are trying to join more welcoming. Your best bet is probably just to keep going along and hopefully, people will just get used to you being there but it's no sure thing.
Good luck though, I wish you all the best in finding a group that welcomes you with open arms.
I think in any setting where every member of a group is some specific category - whether that be a sex, a race, an age or any other kind of general setup - being 'the first different one' is always going to present unique challenges and engender suspicion.
If possible ignore/avoid the gatekeepers and find a group more accepting of newcomers and women. If you have some friends with an interest in the game or already into it stick with them, go with garagehammer instead of playing at a store etc.
Depending on the gatekeeping involved there may be some solutions too. For example, if the issue they are having is not wanting to play smaller than 2000 points, you can always see if someone is interested in playing doubles, so you can bring what you have and they make up the remainder. It really depends on the type of gatekeeping though - a group going "ew women" will probably not change their thoughts.
If you can't find anybody locally or within an acceptable range, I hear Tabletop Simulator has a fairly active 40k community as well, though much with any community you'd have to filter out the bad actors but it does expand the pool of possible players to anybody with a computer. Vassal is also an option, though I don't think its as active as it used to be back in the day.
Mistresspaige wrote: Hey guys I’m quite new to the whole 40k scene but after watching the hilarious Text to Speech show on YouTube last year I’ve been interested in trying out the game itself. However from a lot of groups I’ve met they’ve been maybe not hostile per day but a little gate keeping. How can I join in the fun on the hobby when I’m looked upon as not belonging? Is there anything I can do to make the community more welcoming to me?
Wargame groups, whilst being a social activity, can tend to sometimes have a higher proportion of people who are less experienced at being social. So some of it isn't that they are gate-keeping because you're a woman, its just part of them not being as social as some others. They can be equally "unwelcoming" or such to men as well. It's generally not intentional and in my experience most gamer clubs are more than happy to have new people turn up. Sometimes they don't have a designated person to welcome and orientate new people into the group so there can be a bit of a tricky moment for anyone getting into a new club.
I echo what others have said above, go forth and play. Chances are once the models are down and the dice are rolling many of the insecurities will start to melt away without any great work from either side. In my experience the best way at a gamer group to break this ice is through games themselves.
Now you might bump into some issues like people wanting to play 2K point games or only play against "painted armies" and such even when you are new, that's just them, but you do no harm at all in asking around and finding games.
Gaming is a great hobby with so many different aspects to it.
I am sorry that you experience that from the community. I sincerely wish you the best! In my experience people generally don't even understand how their behavior, sometimes with the purest intentions, can be off putting to others (although I am certain that other issues occur as well). Microaggressions such as "mansplaining" how your army works seems to be a common complaint, even when the army is sporting a relatively high quality paint job (indicating that the woman has clearly a bit of experience with the hobby). Men sometimes think this is a gentlemanly thing to do; correct them with direct, assertive, but not aggressive language.
A woman will obviously have better advice and understanding of what sort of microaggressions and implicit (or explicit) biases you have experienced, and how to correct them. The following is from my understanding as a male.
Men often need to be told in direct, firm, but arguably nonaccusatory language. "Please let me learn my army/the rules/the game for myself. I do not like it when you take time out of this game to explain to me the rules. I like making mistakes myself and learning that way," as an example.
Keep in mind that we men are generally unaware of what you experience as a woman because we are not the focus of discrimination against women. Anything I know is purely because I listen to what women say and fight that urge to explain why they are wrong and mansplain how the woman got it wrong. Your perspective may not fit their understanding and cognitive dissonance tends to make people change the facts to match their perspective, as you likely have noticed. It is entirely up to you to determine how much patience and effort you want to expend to overcome this wall you are hitting, and I bet it will be quite a challenge. This experience may be awkward for you, hopefully so it does not have to be for future women! I personally hope that if nothing else, you wedge yourself into the local community because I would love to see more gender diversity in this hobby.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Would you be willing to describe some of the behaviors that have been troubling you?
Ignore your gender and just get involved would be my recommendation. Doesn't matter what race/sex/gender/religion etc etc etc you are, what does matter is if you hate Space Commies and Elves. Hate is ok, but only fictionally.
vipoid wrote: Could you give an example of the gatekeeping you've experienced?
Sure Thing. One example I’ve had is treating me with kid gloves. Many think I don’t know much and need everything pointed out too me when I played. Another is they go really easy on me. Or on the other hand I’ve won a game and the guy gets upset saying he let me win or you just got lucky.
I’ve also had examples where I try to add my thoughts to a conversation and are just blatantly ignored for the other guys instead. Or that my opinions arnt worth their time.
Worse was one guy who was constantly eyeing me with anger and hostility.He never said anything straight to my face but I could tell he didn’t want me there. That I wasn’t welcome.
Mistresspaige wrote: Hey guys I’m quite new to the whole 40k scene but after watching the hilarious Text to Speech show on YouTube last year I’ve been interested in trying out the game itself. However from a lot of groups I’ve met they’ve been maybe not hostile per day but a little gate keeping. How can I join in the fun on the hobby when I’m looked upon as not belonging? Is there anything I can do to make the community more welcoming to me?
I don't know the details of your circumstance, but maybe this can be applicable.
One of the things I've consciously done to help myself be more welcome in a community (i've change local metas a lot over my 20+ wargaming "career") is I've always shown up with painted miniatures. I think painted models can have a really big effect, because it shows a certain level of dedication to the hobby. The effect might be meta dependent, but even in a local group where people comfortably play with grey plastic, in my experience people will always acknowledge and respect a decently painted model/squad/army. As you're new, that might be a little tricky, as you might not even have experience painting models, and then you might not want to paint models if you're not sure it's a faction you want to play. . . but I'd think about it a bit.
Beyond that I'd mostly echo what's being said above, a combination of "find a group that's welcoming" and "be prepared to bear a little awkwardness while getting to know a group". Get to know them, let them get to know you, etc.
But like, if you can show off a few nicely painted models, not even a whole army, I think that can really help. And if it doesn't work, at least you got some nicely painted models out of it!
vipoid wrote: Could you give an example of the gatekeeping you've experienced?
Sure Thing. One example I’ve had is treating me with kid gloves. Many think I don’t know much and need everything pointed out too me when I played. Another is they go really easy on me. Or on the other hand I’ve won a game and the guy gets upset saying he let me win or you just got lucky.
I’ve also had examples where I try to add my thoughts to a conversation and are just blatantly ignored for the other guys instead. Or that my opinions arnt worth their time.
Worse was one guy who was constantly eyeing me with anger and hostility.He never said anything straight to my face but I could tell he didn’t want me there. That I wasn’t welcome.
Honestly I could chalk the first two up to awkwardness. . . but the third, I dunno. Honestly that might just pass with familiarity? I find in some situations if you can just ignore the "wierdo" while you become more familiar with the rest of a group, things can get around to a decent place. But not being there, I really don't know.
vipoid wrote: Could you give an example of the gatekeeping you've experienced?
Sure Thing. One example I’ve had is treating me with kid gloves. Many think I don’t know much and need everything pointed out too me when I played. Another is they go really easy on me. Or on the other hand I’ve won a game and the guy gets upset saying he let me win or you just got lucky.
I’ve also had examples where I try to add my thoughts to a conversation and are just blatantly ignored for the other guys instead. Or that my opinions arnt worth their time.
Worse was one guy who was constantly eyeing me with anger and hostility.He never said anything straight to my face but I could tell he didn’t want me there. That I wasn’t welcome.
You mentioned that you were new so it's possible that the first two are just a consequence of that. I think a lot of players probably don't want to just stomp inexperienced players because it's a rather hollow victory and doesn't provide much opportunity for them to learn the game. Not trying to disparage your skills in any way, just saying that if I'm against a player who's indicated that they're fairly new, I'll probably want to focus a little more on trying to show them the ropes, rather than aiming to table them by turn 2.
The third is just a bad loser, though.
The other things you mentioned are definitely more unpleasant. Maybe them ignoring you could be anti-social (I know some people who don't know how to talk to others will often just try to avoid talking to them altogether, without realising that this usually comes across much worse), though it could be more malicious.
If there are some within the group who don't ignore you or treat you with hostility, you could perhaps focus on more on mingling with them and see if the others come to accept you when you've been with the group a little longer. If nothing else, this might help with members who might be struggling due to social awkwardness or miscommunicating in attempting to show you the ropes, as both of those should diminish as they get used to you and see that they don't need to treat you with kid gloves anymore as far as games go. And if any of them can honestly never accept you for no other reason than because you're a girl, then they're probably not worth getting to know anyway.
(I know some might advise just finding another group but I'm well aware that this often isn't a simple matter.)
vipoid wrote: Could you give an example of the gatekeeping you've experienced?
Sure Thing. One example I’ve had is treating me with kid gloves. Many think I don’t know much and need everything pointed out too me when I played. Another is they go really easy on me. Or on the other hand I’ve won a game and the guy gets upset saying he let me win or you just got lucky.
I’ve also had examples where I try to add my thoughts to a conversation and are just blatantly ignored for the other guys instead. Or that my opinions arnt worth their time.
Worse was one guy who was constantly eyeing me with anger and hostility. He never said anything straight to my face but I could tell he didn’t want me there. That I wasn’t welcome.
Unfortunately the first example is one of the most common complaints of women trying to get into the gaming community. I've heard that generally Age of Sigmar communities are a lot less like what you are experiencing, but within the 40k community it sort of is the last bastion for toxic masculinity.
My personal recommendation is definitely to communicate with whoever you feel most comfortable with about these issues. I also recommend, again, firm and direct language alerting people that you do not like playing with the kid gloves. "Please don't advise me on how to play my own army." "Please let me make my own decisions during my turn." "Please let me decide which strategems I want to use and when." "Please stop backseat gaming." Hell, if they seem to have issue with you saying this you can firmly state that you do not like it when they pull their punches and how these behaviors make you feel. You could even state that it doesn't make you feel like you belong there, when they treat you differently like that. Like I said, we men do not know what it's like to be women and we will not give you what you need unless you are direct. Most of us are not interested in placing ourselves in your shoes so you may need to be willing to do the work for us. You should not have to game in those conditions and you honestly should not even need to be having this conversation with us in the first place.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I would also like to reiterate that it is completely normal for you to feel and react the way you do. As for the creep glaring at you, I've got two suggestions. Break the ice yourself and humanize yourself to him by trying to build a friendship with him or avoid him, and voice your opinions with someone you are comfortable with to see if they can talk to him on your behalf. Regardless, I would not expect significant changes from him quickly.
Strg Alt wrote: My experiences with women in the tabletop hobby:
There are two types:
1. Enjoys the hobby on her own.
2. Is the girlfriend of a guy who participates in tabletop games. Should the relation end so will her interest in the hobby.
Apart from this my local GW store manager is a woman who lives and breathes the hobby. She is very dedicated and thus managed to outshine all previous store managers in my home town who were all male. With the exception of her only very few women were regular customers in the GW store during the pre-Corona era.
A couple of years ago I frequented a youth club for 12 months to do intro games for new players. Two of them were women and both times it wasn´t 40K to be played but Blood Bowl. In my entire hobby time (25 years) I haven´t played 40K against a woman. Not because of gatekeeping but women are rare as unicorns in this hobby as they tend to prefer doing other things in their spare time.
The reason women are rare is the gatekeeping. Heck whole society can get in on it. Used to be a time when it was asserted women just don't like DnD. Lo and behold, in the years 2021 dnd has flourished amongst female players.
But for something like warhammer, tween disdain and creeping, hard to be a lady in a game club.
Just have to get lucky I suppose that your club isn't crummy in this way.
Mistresspaige wrote: Hey guys I’m quite new to the whole 40k scene but after watching the hilarious Text to Speech show on YouTube last year I’ve been interested in trying out the game itself. However from a lot of groups I’ve met they’ve been maybe not hostile per day but a little gate keeping. How can I join in the fun on the hobby when I’m looked upon as not belonging? Is there anything I can do to make the community more welcoming to me?
Wargame groups, whilst being a social activity, can tend to sometimes have a higher proportion of people who are less experienced at being social. So some of it isn't that they are gate-keeping because you're a woman, its just part of them not being as social as some others. They can be equally "unwelcoming" or such to men as well. It's generally not intentional and in my experience most gamer clubs are more than happy to have new people turn up. Sometimes they don't have a designated person to welcome and orientate new people into the group so there can be a bit of a tricky moment for anyone getting into a new club.
I echo what others have said above, go forth and play. Chances are once the models are down and the dice are rolling many of the insecurities will start to melt away without any great work from either side. In my experience the best way at a gamer group to break this ice is through games themselves.
Now you might bump into some issues like people wanting to play 2K point games or only play against "painted armies" and such even when you are new, that's just them, but you do no harm at all in asking around and finding games.
Gaming is a great hobby with so many different aspects to it.
Something I have seen a lot of ladies who have tried to get involved which, uh, no dudes have, is really awkward flirting and other types of thirsting.
Automatically Appended Next Post: One actual answer I can think of requires a lot of space and money.
And that is build your own game room and invite people to play with you, that way you can curate who you interact with.
I been slowly building to that before my life became a daily nightmare
Mistresspaige wrote: One example I’ve had is treating me with kid gloves. Many think I don’t know much and need everything pointed out too me when I played. Another is they go really easy on me.
I think I might accidentally do this sometimes.
To be fair to myself, I think I do it to newb dudes too. It probably does feel sexist sometimes, even though I certainly don't intend it as such. Also, I'm certainly not saying it wasn't sexist when you experienced it- I wasn't there and have no idea- if that's how it felt, I take your word for it. I just know I tend to take it easy on newbs regardless of age, gender, game or army.
Fun fact: I met my wife at a games convention in 1996; we played in a Cyberpunk 2020 RPG, and later that weekend I GMed a Vampire that she played in; the last slot of the weekend I GMed Kult and she was in that one too- probably the most legendary single gaming session I've ever participated in; players were in character for four straight hours- we could have sold it as an audio book.
She was one of 3 women in attendance at the event and there were about 60-70 dudes. One of the other women was an organizer of the tourney- I forget whether she was the VP or the President of the Gaming Society that year, but she filled both chairs at one point or another in her three-year stint on the executive.
Fun Fact 2: Four years later at Gencon, my wife and I played in a 50 player, two-night, live-action Shadowrun. I won 1st place on the first night; she took 1st place on the second. Someone at the event described us as matching rattlesnakes.
(Not so humble brag. Everyone needs a good story though, right? Don't worry- the ending is humble: we're both old and busted now- but still happily hitched)
Now in most instances this refers to sporting teams or movie studios. Having a lot of losses, people questioning you, well... winning solves everything. Start winning, whatever came before will slowly drain away.
In this context I don't specifically mean winning games, but rather show up with something prized within the community: A cool looking fully painted army. Obviously easier said than done, but if you draw attention to the fact that you're just doing what "the boys" are already doing, it could remove any potential us/them barriers.
stratigo wrote: Lo and behold, in the years 2021 dnd has flourished amongst female players.
Is it though? Or is it just the ones that do play get the most signal? I play D&D with one girl, but in all the hobby stores I've been to across my state I've almost never encountered a young girl or a grown woman. I see pictures from events and tournaments and they're either not present, or stick out as one among dozens and dozens.
So, again, has it really flourished, or is the spotlight just being shone upon them thereby making the perception seem that there are so many more of them?
Mistresspaige wrote: One example I’ve had is treating me with kid gloves. Many think I don’t know much and need everything pointed out too me when I played. Another is they go really easy on me.
I think I might accidentally do this sometimes.
Yeah I've totally done that, but I've done it with guys too, and not just with gaming. Just equal opportunity awkward at times. Sometimes I can meet adequately on their wavelength, and sometimes not.
Assume good intentions. Roll with the punches. Build familiarity. Reach mutual understanding, respect and inclusiveness. . . . Hopefully.
But sometimes you can't. If so, either live with it or walk away.
stratigo wrote: Lo and behold, in the years 2021 dnd has flourished amongst female players.
Is it though? Or is it just the ones that do play get the most signal? I play D&D with one girl, but in all the hobby stores I've been to across my state I've almost never encountered a young girl or a grown woman. I see pictures from events and tournaments and they're either not present, or stick out as one among dozens and dozens.
So, again, has it really flourished, or is the spotlight just being shone upon them thereby making the perception seem that there are so many more of them?
My current D&D group (Roll 20, weekly for 4-5 years now) includes:
Male GM 2 Male Players
3 Female Players
1 AFAB Trans Player
1 other male played with us for a while
3 other women played with us for a while
vipoid wrote: Could you give an example of the gatekeeping you've experienced?
Sure Thing. One example I’ve had is treating me with kid gloves. Many think I don’t know much and need everything pointed out too me when I played. Another is they go really easy on me. Or on the other hand I’ve won a game and the guy gets upset saying he let me win or you just got lucky.
I’ve also had examples where I try to add my thoughts to a conversation and are just blatantly ignored for the other guys instead. Or that my opinions arnt worth their time.
Worse was one guy who was constantly eyeing me with anger and hostility.He never said anything straight to my face but I could tell he didn’t want me there. That I wasn’t welcome.
The first one at least could be them being afraid to stomp the newbie, and would rather overcoddle than throw to the wolves so to speak. I know common advice I hear on these forums is that when there is a new player in the group, play a bit easy - not give away wins mind, but don't throw down a tourny list and beat down the new person's first models. They might be taking this too far and hopefully if you communicate this it will get through to them and they'll stop that.
The other ones are a bit more problematic. Unfortunately there are always sore losers, and people who will just be hostile in general - that is true in most any group. Hopefully by being upfront and straight with them, the ones who ignore you will turn around a bit, though it may take time. They might not realize they are even doing it - sometimes the loudest member of the group ends up pulling all the attention leaving several of the others in the dust. On the plus side, with one on one games, it might be easier to break the ice so to speak, even if the rest of the group is on hand.
H.B.M.C. wrote:Here's an idea: Winning solves everything.
Now in most instances this refers to sporting teams or movie studios. Having a lot of losses, people questioning you, well... winning solves everything. Start winning, whatever came before will slowly drain away.
In this context I don't specifically mean winning games, but rather show up with something prized within the community: A cool looking fully painted army. Obviously easier said than done, but if you draw attention to the fact that you're just doing what "the boys" are already doing, it could remove any potential us/them barriers.
stratigo wrote: Lo and behold, in the years 2021 dnd has flourished amongst female players.
Is it though? Or is it just the ones that do play get the most signal? I play D&D with one girl, but in all the hobby stores I've been to across my state I've almost never encountered a young girl or a grown woman. I see pictures from events and tournaments and they're either not present, or stick out as one among dozens and dozens.
So, again, has it really flourished, or is the spotlight just being shone upon them thereby making the perception seem that there are so many more of them?
Has there ever been a point where women didn't play dnd? My current group is all men, but in the past I've gamed with several women in various groups and various lengths of time. Mind you my experience with dnd/tabletop rpgs only dates to the early oughts to the present, but from personal experience, and memories of old forums, there were always a decent number of women in the hobby. I think its more the spotlight is being shown more on them than before, rather than them not existing - plus since 5th dropped dnd itself has grown a lot in general, so even as a same percentage of the total number of players, there would be plenty more female players than back in the day.
Mistresspaige wrote: Hey guys I’m quite new to the whole 40k scene but after watching the hilarious Text to Speech show on YouTube last year I’ve been interested in trying out the game itself. However from a lot of groups I’ve met they’ve been maybe not hostile per day but a little gate keeping. How can I join in the fun on the hobby when I’m looked upon as not belonging? Is there anything I can do to make the community more welcoming to me?
Happy to have another body in the hobby. Welcome indeed :-)
If by ‘gatekeeping’ you mean wary of someone new, it’s common to all groups. Goes back to the time when we all ran around the savannah and climbed trees. Nobody knows how/where/if you’ll fit in the group, so until you become familiar, they will be unlikely to invest ‘social capital’ in you. So, keep on keeping on :-)
If you think that you are being treated as if you ‘don’t belong’, it’s that, as yet, you don’t? I recently started a new job, and, unsurprisingly, was treated just the same. However, after a while they realised I was just foul and loathsome as they, and it slackened off.
I would not worry about going out of your way to make the ‘community’ more welcoming. Once you have crushed your enemies, driven them before you, and heard the lamentations of their women, they will flee in terror at your very presence. Oh, wait . . .
stratigo wrote: Lo and behold, in the years 2021 dnd has flourished amongst female players.
Is it though? Or is it just the ones that do play get the most signal? I play D&D with one girl, but in all the hobby stores I've been to across my state I've almost never encountered a young girl or a grown woman. I see pictures from events and tournaments and they're either not present, or stick out as one among dozens and dozens.
So, again, has it really flourished, or is the spotlight just being shone upon them thereby making the perception seem that there are so many more of them?
My current D&D group (Roll 20, weekly for 4-5 years now) includes:
Male GM 2 Male Players
3 Female Players
1 AFAB Trans Player
1 other male played with us for a while
3 other women played with us for a while
Cis-Men have been the minority since we started.
Can confirm. Unless groups have persisted for decades, most P&P groups I know tend to have female players.
I'm sorry to hear about your experiences. I'm not sure what advice I can give having never been in your shoes. I hope some members of the dakka community that have experienced stuff like this can give you some advice that'll help.
I hope that if you keep attending, that some of this will lessen with time though, and that you can continue to enjoy the hobby.
vipoid wrote: Could you give an example of the gatekeeping you've experienced?
Sure Thing. One example I’ve had is treating me with kid gloves. Many think I don’t know much and need everything pointed out too me when I played. Another is they go really easy on me. Or on the other hand I’ve won a game and the guy gets upset saying he let me win or you just got lucky.
I’ve also had examples where I try to add my thoughts to a conversation and are just blatantly ignored for the other guys instead. Or that my opinions arnt worth their time.
Worse was one guy who was constantly eyeing me with anger and hostility.He never said anything straight to my face but I could tell he didn’t want me there. That I wasn’t welcome.
Well, the community is full of strange people and I always tried to get along with them. But those people often give up in the long run and never show up again in the gaming group.
More gaming experience would help and also following and participating discussions online (about tactics, army lists).
If your interested in wargaming you could play a game that has a community that doesn't have these hang ups. WM/H, Malifaux, Infinity etc don't seem to have any issues with female players, players of different races, orientations etc.
Outside from gatekeeping within the game (few female models in the game etc.) there probably is some gatekeeping outside the game from the players.
Ignoring it, and fighting it both comes with baggage that takes away from the hobby. My best vice would be to find players who do not gatekeep and have a nice circle of friends/club aquintanses that you can play with.
I know mtg has on occasion had a similar problem. A lot of women organized a loose comunaty of IRL friends and people on Twitter to ensure they had a good gaming circle. Perhaps you could start one of them. Women of magic or women of mana I think the mtg comunaty was called.
Sunno wrote: If your interested in wargaming you could play a game that has a community that doesn't have these hang ups. WM/H, Malifaux, Infinity etc don't seem to have any issues with female players, players of different races, orientations etc.
There is more to wargaming than GW
So: "Welcome to the hobby, just don't play the same game I do."?
vipoid wrote: Could you give an example of the gatekeeping you've experienced?
Sure Thing. One example I’ve had is treating me with kid gloves. Many think I don’t know much and need everything pointed out too me when I played. Another is they go really easy on me. Or on the other hand I’ve won a game and the guy gets upset saying he let me win or you just got lucky.
I’ve also had examples where I try to add my thoughts to a conversation and are just blatantly ignored for the other guys instead. Or that my opinions arnt worth their time.
Worse was one guy who was constantly eyeing me with anger and hostility.He never said anything straight to my face but I could tell he didn’t want me there. That I wasn’t welcome.
I agree with the others, the first examples of explaining the game a lot and going easy on you have nothing to do with you being a woman and more to do with you being new to the game. They are common methods that people use to try and ease people into the game. You can resolve this during the pre-game phase simply by saying something along the lines of "hey lets go all out against each other, play your best etc.." Ergo make it clear to your opponent that you are after a "serious" game without any kid gloves or such. Being clear during the game setup can often avoid a lot of issues that can arise like this and establishes very clearly between all players in the game what the intentions are.
Sure you might still have to remind them to not remind you about things in a friendly way, but otherwise it might well encourage them to take the kid gloves off.
The next point on being a sore loser is just someone being a sore loser. It happens. It has nothing to do with you being a woman, people like that are just like that. It's a maturity thing and some are just more mature than others. As you get settled within the group you'll establish who are sore losers, poor winners, good players, etc.... You'll work out what quirks different people have and which ones are fun to play against and which ones are ok and which ones might give a good game but are a pain if they win and which ones are just best avoided for whatever reason.
The hostile guy is hard, some people have "resting angry face" or "resting serious face" and can appear really miserable without intending it. It's just how they look and sometimes how they act. Sometimes you've just got to shrug off the "evil looks" and move on; focus on the good parts of the evening and those who you do get along with.
Much of this sounds like just being new to any social group. Even as a guy you get ignored at times or people give you odd looks and such. These things happen and it does make things uncomfortable and can make it tricky. Often as not time and simply interacting more breaks down those barriers. Like I said earlier, one issue is that many game groups aren't always the most socially experienced. Many times they don't have someone who is the "welcomer" who welcomes people to the group and helps them settle in. So no one really has that awareness to ease things and make it better for newbies. It's a reason many game groups can have problems recruiting new people. Heck if you stick at it perhaps one day you'll be the one welcoming new people; making them feel comfortable with the group, helping them settle in, giving them demo games and more.
FWIW I hands down go easy on anyone that's new to the game and they are playing an intro game. I will self sabotage to increase likely hood of winning (bring weaker lists primarily)
My reasons for doing this is: Winning feels good. People like winning.
I want them to enjoy themselves and come back and enjoy the hobby.
I admit I might over explain stuff but it depends on what the player is showing me in terms of knowledge they already have.. If they know nothing at all, I will probably explain stuff in copious details and coach them on go and show them how to do better and explain mistakes.. Or if they already know how to play, or claim they know how to play/ don't really like being taught I will just shut up and let them get on with it for the most part.
The forum is divided on this but I personally don't think that's a woman specific thing.. its a new player/ new group thing but thats just my take and every situation will be different.
All of those things you mentioned are what any new players will experiance 99% of the time regardless of gender IMO. Unless you are really lucky and manage to find a chill group without any social akwardness/wierdness.
It might be bit more of awkward if you come across someone extra socialy akward around a woman (the odds are probably positive on this)
I echo other peoples suggestions - Play how you wanna play and certainly don't pay attention to gakky people. Every community tends to have one or two gakky people sadly. Sore losers, know it alls, the people that will tell you how you should play your army etc. You will have to identify the people you don't like to play with and simply don't play/interact with them, and find your own peers who you gel with. Unfortunately there is no way of know until you're in the mix of things.
Hope you find enjoyment in the hobby and wish you many victories in the battles to come!
Youre doing nothing wrong. You don't necessarily need to change.
Could just be social awkwardness on their part, especially around girls. Without being cheeky you might just be the equivalent of a unicorn walking through the door.
We're nerds. :p most of us fell towards the 'less than popular' side of the social spectrum and being honest, Im pretty sure 'I don't have a lot of experience talking to, or dealing with girls' is far from an uncommon experience. Que the usual shyness, awkwardness and maybe a bit of cringe. Unfortunately there might be some hostility or creeping from some corners. Pretty sure most girls experience this and it needs to be called out. Come in with a friend if you need to or stay away altogether if your creep-radar is tingling. You're not wrong.
Familiarity helps. If you're 'one of them' the issues lessen hugely. Right now you're still a unicorn. Keep doing you, reach out if they seem decent but you don't need to xhange you to fit in.
For what it's worth, try and find a gaming space with other girls there rather than a dudefest. Girls make other girls feel welcome in my experience.
As a general rule, consider a slightly adjusted Hanlon's razor: Don't attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by inability. Some people just can't deal with members of the opposing sex very well and react in a defensive manner when they are confronted with their inability in a context they had deemed "safe".
Try to accommodate them a bit for the first couple of sessions so they understand that you are just another 40k enthusiast and not some weird alien entity trying to disrupt their favourite hobby.
Open hostility should be called out to whomever is responsible, though. If you are engaging with a new community in good faith and there is this one guy who just doesn't want a woman around, it's them that needs to adjust.
nah, woman are more than welcomed in this hobby, me my wife and a buddy with his girlfriend were all playing battletech just last night, most of the people in the room at the time were woman and a single trans person was there too.
The other FLGS just up the road has nearly a 50/50 split of men and woman with a lot of families going in with their kids to play board games.
This is indicative of what I have seen having travelled the globe playing this game and others, hundreds of FLGS and GW stores in multiple nations across multiple nations.
You are welcome here and in the community.
However that being said, there is a sad need to gatekeep the bad actors who spread their "toxic" nonsense all over the community, that kind of gatekeeping is both necessary and needed unfortunately and perhaps it is this you are seeing around?
Nerds are insular and male or female it'll take time for close groups to open up to new people.
Let's be honest most warhammer players are on the autistic scale to one degree of another, which comes with the associated social issues.
Exactly this.
One very important thing to be aware of - people on the spectrum often have limited facial expressions or no expressions except extreme ones at all. For a person who is not accustomed with this phenomenon it will look like they are always grumpy or angry.
Another thing - people on a spectrum have a very different approach to friendships and they can become jealous only because they foresee the potential loss of hard earned friends. Tthis may have no basis at all but thay may act hostile towards potential competitor.
And as many in this thread wrote - much of those "gatekeepers" (I really hate this term) are completely oblivious to your gender and you would be treated exactly the same if you were a male "newbie".
While it is certainly possible that some of the gate keeping isn't malicious sexism, there are a lot of people chiming in that it absolutely isn't.
I think as we continue to discuss this, it's important to remember that we weren't there and OP was. So while we can hypothesize that it MAY not have been sexism/ gate keeping/ malice (which I myself have done), none of us can really say for sure that it wasn't either, because none of us were there.
The majority of us have positive experiences in game groups and yet have had times where we've gone to new groups and experienced many of the same things the OP has experienced. This suggests such behaviour is more common in general and isn't linked to sexism but to other factors. Or that any sexism that is a part of the behaviour is a lesser/minor element of that behaviour.
Furthermore its very hard to advise any further when we don't know the group and only know one side of the story. It's healthier to take a more positive approach than to jump down the "its sexism" angle. Especially as dealing with sexism is very hard when a person is totally new to both the hobby and a group. Where general "in jokes" and other social awkwardness and such can be miss-interpreted very easily.
In short the OP still has to make choices of her own as to if she continues with the group she's found; finds a new group; founds a group of her own or even moves onto another hobby. The best we can do is relate our own experiences and impressions and also provide support.
PenitentJake wrote: While it is certainly possible that some of the gate keeping isn't malicious sexism, there are a lot of people chiming in that it absolutely isn't.
I think as we continue to discuss this, it's important to remember that we weren't there and OP was. So while we can hypothesize that it MAY not have been sexism/ gate keeping/ malice (which I myself have done), none of us can really say for sure that it wasn't either, because none of us were there.
Absolutely, but the OP is not immune to drawing the wrong conclusions either, so it is important to mention it. From my personal experience, it's rather unlikely to face open hostility across several gaming groups just for being female, but then again it may be a local/regional thing if that is indeed what transpired.
One other thing to be aware of in the specific 40k context is "factionism". We all know how "entitled" some factions players can behave, and how meta unbalance and lore animosities can spill onto relations between players.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Is it though? Or is it just the ones that do play get the most signal? I play D&D with one girl, but in all the hobby stores I've been to across my state I've almost never encountered a young girl or a grown woman. I see pictures from events and tournaments and they're either not present, or stick out as one among dozens and dozens.
So, again, has it really flourished, or is the spotlight just being shone upon them thereby making the perception seem that there are so many more of them?
PenitentJake wrote: While it is certainly possible that some of the gate keeping isn't malicious sexism, there are a lot of people chiming in that it absolutely isn't.
I think as we continue to discuss this, it's important to remember that we weren't there and OP was. So while we can hypothesize that it MAY not have been sexism/ gate keeping/ malice (which I myself have done), none of us can really say for sure that it wasn't either, because none of us were there.
Absolutely, but the OP is not immune to drawing the wrong conclusions either, so it is important to mention it.
A lot. Often. In fact, it's really very important that it be about 75% of the responses to any person mentioning that they experience some kind of gatekeeping or negative experiences stemming from their personal state of being.
I think 40k can be a real tough hobby for women, so I certainly don’t doubt the OPs experiences or interpretations therof. OTOH, some gaming groups do treat all newcomers with some suspicion. It’s harder for women in many cases, but even to dudes, some groups are insular. That said, I think it’s pretty safe to say that even those groups that are somehow offputting to everybody can kick it up a notch around women.
That all said, how to best handle it probably comes down to your own personality. You may want to speak directly with however seems the most accepting (and/or the “alpha”, if they’re not the sane guy). Sometimes just letting people know they aren’t as subtle as they think works. Alternatively, you can just ignore it and give it time. Unless they’re massive pricks, they’ll just get used to it. Finally, you can ask around, see if there are other groups or people that look to game. A lot of stores have discord channels or Facebook groups, and often the core group on 40k night is a small fraction of the people who play.
The final key, and this applies to anybody trying to break into a new gaming group, is that you need to have clear expectations. It’d be great if you met a great group of people and became lifelong friends, but to start you just want to play some games. If you’re getting in games, and having fun, you’re doing all right.
Well there are multiple online group, I use them for info and aren't 'involved' in them, instead always going to physical clubs.
Are there many clubs near you?
In general female colleagues (who are professional wargamers) find board and counter wargame groups (as opposed to boardgame groups), incredibly sexist and often uncomfortable. During the Trump years the main facebook groups became piles of flaming rubbish with the amount of touchy men suddenly feeling validated.
The model wargame groups vary massively. But I think you will certainly find a higher proportion of 'odd' groups than you would with mainstream hobbies like running.
For historical groups the attitudes in the UK are generally relieved someone wants a game but quite snobbish about the historical knowledge and discussions that inevitably surround each game.
For the 40k/GW ones age seems to play a factor, with very young male groups being often muppets and while some with more 30/40+ members (who typically have their own kids now) can be more mature you will still come across individuals who have no bloody idea how to behave around a person of the opposite gender. Two people in recent months when I have brought friends along to play a game have said comments that made my skin crawl never mind the guests, and they had genuinely no idea why what they were saying would be considered questionable, or that they were actively leering.
So people are people, and gaming has an odd collection, but it can be navigated like any social setting.
I'm the creator/current manager of my town's local AoS Group. I've helped dozens of people get in to their army, help build up their lists, and play against them for their first games, often knowing their army well enough to guide them through a game, even if I don't play that army.
And I've done tutorial matches for people over twice my age and under half my age, and no matter what, if they're ex-40k and Warmahordes tournament players, complete newbs who haven't touched dice, or anything in between, it's good to ask what sort of tutorial match they want. Do they want education through pain, or a slow learn to get a look inside someone's head as they're playing, explaining the thoughts and all the rules as things go?
Different people learn differently, and community ambassadors ought to remember this... but not everyone has to be one. Sometimes, new players run in to an experienced player who just wants to game, and they match up. Maybe they don't have the tact to ask the important questions, before they start explaining in-depth how to play the game if it's not wanted. So, without knowing the full context, it's hard to say if over-explaining a complicated (through sheer number of t h i n g s) game was rooted in sexism.
Above is just my experience as a community ambassador, who hasn't had any ladies interested in joining thus far. So, limited experience in that regard.
I hope you find a group that welcomes you, and wish you some happy wargaming.
It's deliciously ironic that a woman discussing how a gaming group she tried to integrate with made her feel uncomfortable as a woman and half of dakka feels the need to explain how she is misinterpreting the situation she personally was in...
It's a bit of a call back to the female space marine thread where a bunch of men felt the need to explain women's experience in the hobby, even after being told by actual women of their own experiences. The same tired lesson needs to be dragged from that thread: stop telling women what they are experiencing and listen to them.
What a healthy attitude. She came in, asking for advice. Several posters explain that explaining the game to people who profess to be new is normal. And this is now a problem?
Should the whole thread just be "yep that's a sexism, we're all sexist sexists over here"
macluvin wrote: It's deliciously ironic that a woman discussing how a gaming group she tried to integrate with made her feel uncomfortable as a woman and half of dakka feels the need to explain how she is misinterpreting the situation she personally was in...
It's a bit of a call back to the female space marine thread where a bunch of men felt the need to explain women's experience in the hobby, even after being told by actual women of their own experiences. The same tired lesson needs to be dragged from that thread: stop telling women what they are experiencing and listen to them.
I get the optics of it, and I'm not saying you're necessarily wrong as we can't know what other people are thinking, but the first thing I thought was "what was it like when I first got into the hobby." It wasn't anything to do with man/women, but I remember much the same experience being a new person in the group of socially awkward people. Being talked down to or gone easy on because I was a newb, vets getting salty when I beat them and chalking it up to luck, (someone literally tried to flip a table on me in rage when I beat them as a new player once), not being able to get in on the conversations about the hobby because they didn't trust the opinion of the new guy. The only thing she said that I never experienced was that one person giving her the stink eye, I never had to deal with that BS. Did you ever stop to consider that people aren't treating her as "a woman" and just as a person whom they recall sharing a similar experience with?
As for the advise to give to the OP:
In regards to what others have said: It's hard being the "new kid on the block", sometimes it's just that regardless of gender, and sometimes it's not; I'm in no position to say and you should trust your feelings on the matter. At the end of the day, you should be having fun and if you're not, you should find a group that accepts you.
For the original question: From my experience a lot of gamers are some level of both socially awkward and set in their ways, not a very good combination for acceptance of something outside the norm. Sometimes it's unintentional, and sometimes they are dicks. I'm not that great at reading social ques myself, so it took me a long time to suss out who was who in my playgroup (though I assume by default you are much better at this than I). Regardless, you shouldn't have to change to accommodate their issues, if the group you are in doesn't feel welcoming, you should find a group that it. I know it's an unfair pain in the ass, but it is much easier than trying to change the views of a bunch of people that either don't think they have to change or don't want to change. I know a fair few groups in my city and some of them have been really accommodating to new female players (my local league of 34 has two woman that have been doing quite well), some other groups however... really don't treat women well, sadly sometimes it's just trail and error to find the right fit. It shouldn't have to be, but that's sadly the world we live in.
I sincerely hope you find a welcoming place to play that accepts you as you are, if there is one thing I think the hobby needs that GW can't provide, it's fresh voices and ideas. Best of luck.
No. Denying her experience is one of those attitudes that is probably making her feel uncomfortable. It is quite possible that there is a reason why she was the only girl in that venue with a 40k army and based on the successful integration of women into virtually every other corner of nerd culture, I find it more probable that the issue comes from the people in that venue. It could very well be on account of implicit biases, which is why I stated that direct language pointing out the behaviors she doesn’t enjoy is important. Implicit biases are subconscious processes that can create discrimination. Most discrimination occurs not by racists sexists (insert any other applicable -ist here) but by people that genuinely believe they are anything but. I do find it troubling that there is a pattern of denying and rewriting the experience of women to fit men’s experience on this forum however, but this is also a psychological trend that naturally occurs.
macluvin wrote: No. Denying her experience is one of those attitudes that is probably making her feel uncomfortable. It is quite possible that there is a reason why she was the only girl in that venue with a 40k army and based on the successful integration of women into virtually every other corner of nerd culture, I find it more probable that the issue comes from the people in that venue. It could very well be on account of implicit biases, which is why I stated that direct language pointing out the behaviors she doesn’t enjoy is important. Implicit biases are subconscious processes that can create discrimination. Most discrimination occurs not by racists sexists (insert any other applicable -ist here) but by people that genuinely believe they are anything but. I do find it troubling that there is a pattern of denying and rewriting the experience of women to fit men’s experience on this forum however, but this is also a psychological trend that naturally occurs.
So then whats the answer?
Appear hostile to her by grinding her into the ground or handle her with kid gloves (which is standard for playing with new players in general) which I guess is sexist because shes a woman?
Again, its more likely a variation of Hanlon's razor than it is that the venue is fully of misogynists.
macluvin wrote: No. Denying her experience is one of those attitudes that is probably making her feel uncomfortable. It is quite possible that there is a reason why she was the only girl in that venue with a 40k army and based on the successful integration of women into virtually every other corner of nerd culture, I find it more probable that the issue comes from the people in that venue. It could very well be on account of implicit biases, which is why I stated that direct language pointing out the behaviors she doesn’t enjoy is important. Implicit biases are subconscious processes that can create discrimination. Most discrimination occurs not by racists sexists (insert any other applicable -ist here) but by people that genuinely believe they are anything but. I do find it troubling that there is a pattern of denying and rewriting the experience of women to fit men’s experience on this forum however, but this is also a psychological trend that naturally occurs.
Once again, not saying that you're wrong, but I am also certainly not denying her experience. However, people, regardless of race, gender, religion, ect... as part of human nature will fill in the blanks of given situations with their assumptions by default and believe those assumptions to be true (this has been studied in phycology, go look it up if you don't believe me). Sometimes those assumptions are completely correct (sadly this kind of sexist BS happens a lot), but sometimes they are not and are just misunderstandings.
The point I was making was about your assumption that the people here on Dakka were saying what they said because she was a woman. If a man had made this post and it had nothing to do with a gender issue, I could see many of these people saying nearly the exact same thing. So, should we be treating the situation differently because she's a woman? Doesn't that in and of itself imply a gender bias? Don't you think it's natural for a bunch of (as clearly defined in this thread) socially awkward guys, to not feel like they can really weigh in on the gender issue (especially having not been present for any of the situations in question) and focus on the parts of the issue that they can relate to?
To the OP, that all sounds right, yeah. Gamers tend to talk down to anyone new (unless maybe it's immediately clear that they're well-versed), and I have two family who, despite being gamers, don't go to gaming venues because of those attitudes in general and specifically coming out in sexist assumptions (neither are avid gamers but they both definitely know their business), but as a man I've definitely had my share of experiences where I've felt unwelcome in a community of regulars.
Familiarizing yourself with gaming vernacular and broader attitudes would I imagine definitely help, but there's still the issue of sexism. I don't think it's something you can fix within a given community, nor is it something you should feel obligated to try to fix, since it's your hobby and presumably you'd foremost like to have fun with it. Gaming groups often shift, so I wouldn't emphasize trying to change the group, but to find a better environment as that will determine incoming players' attitudes to a degree. I would try to find the most open/progressive store you can find (those which emphasize board games tend in my experience to be less insular and male-dominated). If that's not an option (and here I want to emphasize that no, I'm not saying there are bad environments but mostly things are good, I'm saying there are increasing numbers of good environments but they're still in the minority so it's a real possibility it isn't an option in your area), I would try to try to organize something with friends.
So basically, regarding the initial question, a little show your familiarity, but mostly no, in the current state, unless it's something you really want to work for, no, you should try to find a better community.
macluvin wrote: No. Denying her experience is one of those attitudes that is probably making her feel uncomfortable.
Let's stick to the examples:
1. People went easy on her, letting her win on purpose
Categorizing this as gatekeeping is likely a wrong conclusion. Tying it to her sex alone may also be one, since new players are often treated with kid's gloves regardless of sex/gender. Yes, some men tend to go particularly easy on women for various reasons, but that doesn't imply malicious intent.
Casting this in a negative light at all seems unwarranted, as it is generally good practice to ease people into a new game instead of crushing them. People get discouraged by a bad demo game all the time.
2. People ignored or disregarded her contribution to a conversation (about the game?)
This one is definitely worth closer scrutiny, and it's an expected reaction in the context of 40k. Is it necessarily sexist? No. Could it be? Definitely. Could it be people ignoring a newcomer's input for something they consider themselves to be more competent in? Also possible. Did they flat out ignore her? Red flag, stop engaging with said individuals, not her fault.
3. People eying her with anger, making it clear they didn't want her there
Likely sexist in nature, possibly just anti-social in general or with social impairment unrelated to sex/gender due to a disorder. If it's just an isolated case within a group, give it a shot and see how it goes. Open hostility might prompt a reaction by the person in charge or that individual just needs some time to warm up to new people.
I don't believe doing the above is disregarding her experiences, but trying to contextualize them. The thread started with the premise that what she experienced was a manifestation of gatekeeping against women, which could be the wrong conclusion in some cases. Reading different perspectives on these situations should help her getting into new groups going forward. And I believe that was the reason for asking about it in the first place.
I don't believe doing the above is disregarding her experiences, but trying to contextualize them. The thread started with the premise that what she experienced was a manifestation of gatekeeping against women, which could be the wrong conclusion in some cases. Reading different perspectives on these situations should help her getting into new groups going forward. And I believe that was the reason for asking about it in the first place.
What's the gaming situation like in Aus, is it mostly done in clubs or stores?
My advice would be really simple (it's not really specifically applicable to male/female trying to get a game, but just as a rule of thumb) - find local clubs or gaming locations and visit them, introduce yourself and just see what kind of people they are. I think it's that simple.
I moved to a new area a while back and wanted to find a nice local group; I was after some chilled people, who aren't WAAC/netlisting games, and who had a sense of humour. Basically people who I thought would enjoy gaming with. I don't think it's unreasonable to say that you do get groups who have a certain culture about them (and that's as much on me - we gravitate towards people who are like us naturally, and that's the way those places are.) I tried around a few places, played some intro games until I found a group.
I think if you try a few you will find some people that don't care if you are a guy or a girl, as I think most normal people wouldn't, and then hopefully you will find some people that you can have some relaxed, regular games with. That's all most of us are after at the end of the day!
@OP: I've seen all these behaviors before all over gaming (MTG, RPG groups, wargames...), these are absolutely common and widespread phenomena, not a figment of your imagination. That said I think it'd be a mistake to interpret these as deliberately or maliciously sexist, or to take these as personal attacks, I think the impulse to assume that "woman = n00b that needs things explained to her" is more reflexive misplaced chivalry than any kind of desire to make gaming a boys-only club. If you stick around and push back if you feel like they're trying to push you around I think they'll get used to you and it'll get better.
AnomanderRake wrote: I think the impulse to assume that "woman = n00b that needs things explained to her" is more reflexive misplaced chivalry than any kind of desire to make gaming a boys-only club
Okay, umm, is there any difference here other than intent? Like, they're both sexist and have an exclusionary effect, no?
OP, best thing to do in pickup games is set expectations ahead of time about skill levels, type of game etc. I’d have a chat! Sound out if this potential opponent is just a sucky person, or if they want the same thing from a game as you. Set expectations and both have a better time. Dialogue is key. Sadly you will encounter sexism, gatekeeping, and those who don’t see these things even in front of them. But hopefully pre-game or pre-visit chats will help set up some great games and experiences, and avoid some likely to be poor shows.
macluvin wrote: I do find it troubling that there is a pattern of denying and rewriting the experience of women to fit men’s experience on this forum however
Go re-read your first post - at that point in time the OPs' own comment was 'maybe not hostile per say but a little gate keeping' - and from that and that alone you extracted multiple paragraphs of gender-bias, microaggression, cognitive dissonance, 'mansplaining', and so on. Actually asking for context was an afterthought.
No one here is denying the OPs' experiences. Entering any new group or hobby can be challenging and we can either try and emphasize based our own personal experiences, or make a lot of assumptions about theirs.
AnomanderRake wrote: I think the impulse to assume that "woman = n00b that needs things explained to her" is more reflexive misplaced chivalry than any kind of desire to make gaming a boys-only club
Okay, umm, is there any difference here other than intent? Like, they're both sexist and have an exclusionary effect, no?
No it's not different, but the practical solutions remain the same. Build familiarity, try to correct any problematic behavior, and move past it. First impressions and subsequent assumptions are poor things to go-on anyways.
Strg Alt wrote: My experiences with women in the tabletop hobby:
There are two types:
1. Enjoys the hobby on her own.
2. Is the girlfriend of a guy who participates in tabletop games. Should the relation end so will her interest in the hobby.
Apart from this my local GW store manager is a woman who lives and breathes the hobby. She is very dedicated and thus managed to outshine all previous store managers in my home town who were all male. With the exception of her only very few women were regular customers in the GW store during the pre-Corona era.
A couple of years ago I frequented a youth club for 12 months to do intro games for new players. Two of them were women and both times it wasn´t 40K to be played but Blood Bowl. In my entire hobby time (25 years) I haven´t played 40K against a woman. Not because of gatekeeping but women are rare as unicorns in this hobby as they tend to prefer doing other things in their spare time.
The reason women are rare is the gatekeeping. Heck whole society can get in on it. Used to be a time when it was asserted women just don't like DnD. Lo and behold, in the years 2021 dnd has flourished amongst female players.
But for something like warhammer, tween disdain and creeping, hard to be a lady in a game club.
Just have to get lucky I suppose that your club isn't crummy in this way.
Mistresspaige wrote: Hey guys I’m quite new to the whole 40k scene but after watching the hilarious Text to Speech show on YouTube last year I’ve been interested in trying out the game itself. However from a lot of groups I’ve met they’ve been maybe not hostile per day but a little gate keeping. How can I join in the fun on the hobby when I’m looked upon as not belonging? Is there anything I can do to make the community more welcoming to me?
Wargame groups, whilst being a social activity, can tend to sometimes have a higher proportion of people who are less experienced at being social. So some of it isn't that they are gate-keeping because you're a woman, its just part of them not being as social as some others. They can be equally "unwelcoming" or such to men as well. It's generally not intentional and in my experience most gamer clubs are more than happy to have new people turn up. Sometimes they don't have a designated person to welcome and orientate new people into the group so there can be a bit of a tricky moment for anyone getting into a new club.
I echo what others have said above, go forth and play. Chances are once the models are down and the dice are rolling many of the insecurities will start to melt away without any great work from either side. In my experience the best way at a gamer group to break this ice is through games themselves.
Now you might bump into some issues like people wanting to play 2K point games or only play against "painted armies" and such even when you are new, that's just them, but you do no harm at all in asking around and finding games.
Gaming is a great hobby with so many different aspects to it.
Something I have seen a lot of ladies who have tried to get involved which, uh, no dudes have, is really awkward flirting and other types of thirsting.
Automatically Appended Next Post: One actual answer I can think of requires a lot of space and money.
And that is build your own game room and invite people to play with you, that way you can curate who you interact with.
I been slowly building to that before my life became a daily nightmare
You are comparing apples with oranges. To play D&D you need a pencil, an eraser and a sheet of paper. Done.
To play 40K you need to invest a lot of time in your models: Building, priming and painting. This is something women generally loathe to do. Back in the day three girlfriends visited me and commented about my glass cabinet full of painted minis. These were their responses:
1. Geez, that´s a lot of time investment. You won´t be able to do much else.
2. Waste of time.
3. I could potentially paint a few minis for display myself but never such an obscene amount of models.
1. Geez, that´s a lot of time investment. You won´t be able to do much else.
2. Waste of time.
3. I could potentially paint a few minis for display myself but never such an obscene amount of models.
The first one was my wife's initial reaction to TTGs after a demo game of Wolsung - that this hobby is cool and all, but requires too much commitment. Few years later she got hooked on Zombicide, I dusted my 2nd ed 40k collection, we played a few games and now she is an avid painter and owns a total of 5k points of Tyranids and GSC.
1. Geez, that´s a lot of time investment. You won´t be able to do much else.
2. Waste of time.
3. I could potentially paint a few minis for display myself but never such an obscene amount of models.
My wife:
4. 'That's 'how many' pairs of trainers?'
It's a miracle I got her into bloodbowl. :p
To be fair most of our female friends think my cabinets of dudes are cool nd it's something to value and appreciate- it's not their thing. One does jigsaws and totally 'gets' the hobby/time/relaxing thing.
AnomanderRake wrote: I think the impulse to assume that "woman = n00b that needs things explained to her" is more reflexive misplaced chivalry than any kind of desire to make gaming a boys-only club
Okay, umm, is there any difference here other than intent? Like, they're both sexist and have an exclusionary effect, no?
The difference is in how you deal with it. If people are being accidentally sexist just showing up and confronting those attitudes with evidence that they're wrong might actually help. If people are being deliberately exclusionary that's not really going to work and I think you'd be better off trying to find a different group of people to play with.
Mistresspaige wrote: Hey guys I’m quite new to the whole 40k scene but after watching the hilarious Text to Speech show on YouTube last year I’ve been interested in trying out the game itself. However from a lot of groups I’ve met they’ve been maybe not hostile per day but a little gate keeping. How can I join in the fun on the hobby when I’m looked upon as not belonging? Is there anything I can do to make the community more welcoming to me?
Hi! My recommendation would be to:
A: join an organized league that issues a match schedule or operates as a round robin. From experience, it can be hard to break into a new community since members of the community know each other and organize games with each other causing outsiders to continue to be outsiders. Being on a match roster will go a long way towards getting games, since they don't have an excuse for not playing you.
B: have everything about your game at a higher quality than others in the community. Have more of your models painted, aim for a higher quality, and play a better game. Win.
C: refuse any and all advances. This might go without saying, but it still deserves saying.
Strg Alt wrote: You are comparing apples with oranges. To play D&D you need a pencil, an eraser and a sheet of paper. Done.
To play 40K you need to invest a lot of time in your models: Building, priming and painting. This is something women generally loathe to do. Back in the day three girlfriends visited me and commented about my glass cabinet full of painted minis. These were their responses:
1. Geez, that´s a lot of time investment. You won´t be able to do much else. 2. Waste of time. 3. I could potentially paint a few minis for display myself but never such an obscene amount of models.
First of all, that's not a "women" thing, most men aren't gonna take the time or money to get a painted army either. It's more a general nerd thing and your experiences are anecdotal. I've got a friend who has gotten every girlfriend he's ever had interested in 40k and spends time together with them painting minis.
Secondly, I think the actual issue is with the environments of FLGS's. Many of us probably know women who are into geek stuff but aren't interested in going to the FLGS to play DND because of the way they get singled out there. Magnify that 10-fold with 40k, where the investment is much higher and where playing basically requires you to have a good community who won't alienate them and make them drop the hobby before they've even built up an army.
Strg Alt wrote: You are comparing apples with oranges. To play D&D you need a pencil, an eraser and a sheet of paper. Done.
To play 40K you need to invest a lot of time in your models: Building, priming and painting. This is something women generally loathe to do. Back in the day three girlfriends visited me and commented about my glass cabinet full of painted minis. These were their responses:
1. Geez, that´s a lot of time investment. You won´t be able to do much else.
2. Waste of time.
3. I could potentially paint a few minis for display myself but never such an obscene amount of models.
First of all, that's not a "women" thing, most men aren't gonna take the time or money to get a painted army either. It's more a general nerd thing and your experiences are anecdotal. I've got a friend who has gotten every girlfriend he's ever had interested in 40k and spends time together with them painting minis.
Secondly, I think the actual issue is with the environments of FLGS's. Many of us probably know women who are into geek stuff but aren't interested in going to the FLGS to play DND because of the way they get singled out there. Magnify that 10-fold with 40k, where the investment is much higher and where playing basically requires you to have a good community who won't alienate them and make them drop the hobby before they've even built up an army.
Ah, someone always tries to insinuate that men and women tend to have the same hobbies/interests. Sorry to rain on your parade dude but I have news for you:
Strg Alt wrote: You are comparing apples with oranges. To play D&D you need a pencil, an eraser and a sheet of paper. Done.
To play 40K you need to invest a lot of time in your models: Building, priming and painting. This is something women generally loathe to do. Back in the day three girlfriends visited me and commented about my glass cabinet full of painted minis. These were their responses:
1. Geez, that´s a lot of time investment. You won´t be able to do much else.
2. Waste of time.
3. I could potentially paint a few minis for display myself but never such an obscene amount of models.
First of all, that's not a "women" thing, most men aren't gonna take the time or money to get a painted army either. It's more a general nerd thing and your experiences are anecdotal. I've got a friend who has gotten every girlfriend he's ever had interested in 40k and spends time together with them painting minis.
Secondly, I think the actual issue is with the environments of FLGS's. Many of us probably know women who are into geek stuff but aren't interested in going to the FLGS to play DND because of the way they get singled out there. Magnify that 10-fold with 40k, where the investment is much higher and where playing basically requires you to have a good community who won't alienate them and make them drop the hobby before they've even built up an army.
Ah, someone always tries to insinuate that men and women tend to have the same hobbies/interests. Sorry to rain on your parade dude but I have news for you:
They don´t.
Ah, someone always tries to insinuate that men and women have some kind of biological difference that makes them have different hobbies/interests. Sorry to rain on your parade, dude, but I have news for you.
They don't. Any difference in hobby interest is personal, not gender-based. There's lots of men I've talked to who don't want to play Warhammer. There's lots of women I've talked to who do. It's personal choice and societal pressure, including gatekeeping.
You're putting words in his mouth, though, he never said anything like that, merely stating his experience.
I'm agreeing with both of you, funnily enough. On the one Hand strg alts experience is not unheard of, but the underlying reasons why there are few women in the hobby is a different question altogether and I think we can agree that it's not a biological thing.
Sgt. Cortez wrote: You're putting words in his mouth, though, he never said anything like that, merely stating his experience.
I'm agreeing with both of you, funnily enough. On the one Hand strg alts experience is not unheard of, but the underlying reasons why there are few women in the hobby is a different question altogether and I think we can agree that it's not a biological thing.
I used the word "insinuated" correctly.
I hope we can all agree it's not biological, that "Men are from Mars and Women are from Venus" or some equally outdated, sexist bullhonky. I'll believe it when I see it, though.
Ah, someone always tries to insinuate that men and women tend to have the same hobbies/interests. Sorry to rain on your parade dude but I have news for you:
They don´t.
Plenty have the same hobbies. While some things tend to visually lean more heavily one way of the other, (from my personal experience in knowing hundreds of gamers) they just tend to enjoy them in different ways. The many women I've known to be into things like D&D, Magic, and a few for Warhammer tend to stick to their own personal playgroups. People they know and trust, so not a lot of people outside those small groups know about them and just assume they don't exist, whereas I see far more guys out and about at FLGS's playing there. When I've spoken to them about this, it's often a result of social pressure, feeling like as women they're not supposed to have these hobbies, or feeling the kinds of things the OP has when they've gone out on their own to experience them.
I've been the only guy in an all women D&D group before and the feeling of being the odd one out over and above being the "new person" in a group of friends can be pretty intimidating, even when you know there's not kind of gender discrimination going on.
My wife plays Magic and other board games with me on a regular basis, she's not into it enough to go out to events on her own, but she enjoys playing with me and my other gamer friends when they are over.
In my group of friends way back in High School a few of the women I knew were big Halo fans, and a bunch of us played magic together.
We had a few women who were regulars top finishers in Magic tournaments in out FLGS for a number of years before I stopped going out to tournaments due to life getting in the way.
Just because you haven't had personal experience with women in your hobbies, doesn't mean that they don't exist. Just because demographics skew one way or another, doesn't mean that "women do this and men do that"
I expect that, as pointed out above, people can be weird. Awkwardness around girls is a thing. Incels exist, and do leave their basements for game nights, unprepared perhaps for mixed company.
Truth be told, I would also expect to be treated somewhat awkwardly by some people in this hobby in a new group or community, and I am six feet of cis male in his fifties having been hanging around games stores and comics shops since middle school.
I would say get stuck in, do you, follow your heart and vision, and all will work out in the end.
Fun story time.
I once played in a league at a GW store. One of my games in this league was with one of the few female players I've ever encountered. Any weirdness or awkwardness she may have detected from me had nothing to do with her gender. I was weird and awkward around her because of her foul breath and general lack of hygiene.
Girl gamers can have geek-reek every bit as bad as boy gamers.
Having to travel for work, I often find myself carting my army to whatever game store within an hours drive looking for an opponent.
Even with coming fully prepared with a painted army and willing to play any army or playstyle it can be damn impossible to get a game.
A lot of gamers are turds who spend 99% of their time being a "gamer" and only 1% gaming.
As far as their behavior once they do agree to a game. I find just knowing the lingo when you ask, do they want a casual game, competitive or otherwise seems to help.
Of course telling my opponent that I am looking to get a practice game in for an upcoming tourney or GT tends to get past all the kid glove scenarios.
I'm not sure what anyone is expecting to get out of this thread other than bad takes, or useless advice.
Just be good to everyone, and acknowledge good intentions. You can't change the entire hobby, but BEING there is important.
Ah, someone always tries to insinuate that men and women have some kind of biological difference that makes them have different hobbies/interests. Sorry to rain on your parade, dude, but I have news for you.
They don't. Any difference in hobby interest is personal, not gender-based. There's lots of men I've talked to who don't want to play Warhammer. There's lots of women I've talked to who do. It's personal choice and societal pressure, including gatekeeping.
I recommend playing in private with a group of friends. I've never played at the store and never will, and I'm a cis male. The whole store gaming scene is a big turn off for me.
Mistresspaige wrote: Hey guys I’m quite new to the whole 40k scene but after watching the hilarious Text to Speech show on YouTube last year I’ve been interested in trying out the game itself. However from a lot of groups I’ve met they’ve been maybe not hostile per day but a little gate keeping. How can I join in the fun on the hobby when I’m looked upon as not belonging? Is there anything I can do to make the community more welcoming to me?
It sucks that this continues to happen and it also sucks that you've had replies to this on this thread from people just dismissing it because they don't see it as an issue. I've come across it a lot with friends in the past when I used to go into hobby stores more frequently. More recently, if I go into a store with my wife and it's just such a crappy experience. Or worse if she's ever gone into a store by herself.
I would suggest maybe Dakka isn't the best place to get a good answer, I wouldn't be asking guys on here how best to fit in.
You are you and don't let any weaselly little nerds ruin your experience with a fun hobby.
First off, ask yourself what you want out of the hobby. Are you more interested in the painting and modelling or the gaming or just everything?
Because going into hobby stores doesn't necessarily equate to being part of the warhammer community.
If it is what you want to do, definitely find yourself a different group, there's plenty out there and hopefully with more friendly people.
Best bit of advice I can give is to ask a few women hobbyists online, there's a fair few on instagram. They'd be more than happy to chat to you and help you out. I think you'd get a much better answer.
Lastly, hopefully it doesn't discourage you. It's a fun thing to be a part of, but like most things in life there's plenty of arseholes just desperate to ruin things.
Strg Alt wrote:You are comparing apples with oranges. To play D&D you need a pencil, an eraser and a sheet of paper. Done.
To play 40K you need to invest a lot of time in your models: Building, priming and painting.
Not really. You don't need to prime or paint just to play, no more so than you need to prime and paint a model for your player character in D&D. All you *need* to play 40k are the rules, measures, dice, and models (and those models could very well just be unpainted grey plastic), and that's not even including things like Tabletop Sim.
This is something women generally loathe to do.
In your experience, maybe, but in *mine*, I've found that non-women are just as likely to be adverse to all the painting an modelling too. So, gotta slap a citation needed on that.
Back in the day three girlfriends visited me and commented about my glass cabinet full of painted minis. These were their responses:
1. Geez, that´s a lot of time investment. You won´t be able to do much else.
2. Waste of time.
3. I could potentially paint a few minis for display myself but never such an obscene amount of models.
In the present, everyone I've recently shown my minis to has expressed how impressed they are, and valued the creative display on hand, and otherwise simply enjoyed the spectacle - I've had no distinction, male, female, or enby, in one group feeling put off or making some kind of "haha lol what a loser" comment. Sounds like you had an isolated bad experience.
Octopoid wrote:Any difference in hobby interest is personal, not gender-based. There's lots of men I've talked to who don't want to play Warhammer. There's lots of women I've talked to who do. It's personal choice and societal pressure, including gatekeeping.
Exactly. This idea that there's an innate gender bias is simply oudated and incorrect. Just look at the amount of things that have been reclaimed by women and non-male identities that were once only viewed as "man's spaces".
Tawnis wrote:Just because you haven't had personal experience with women in your hobbies, doesn't mean that they don't exist. Just because demographics skew one way or another, doesn't mean that "women do this and men do that"
And echoed.
Olthannon wrote:It sucks that this continues to happen and it also sucks that you've had replies to this on this thread from people just dismissing it because they don't see it as an issue. I've come across it a lot with friends in the past when I used to go into hobby stores more frequently. More recently, if I go into a store with my wife and it's just such a crappy experience. Or worse if she's ever gone into a store by herself.
I would suggest maybe Dakka isn't the best place to get a good answer, I wouldn't be asking guys on here how best to fit in.
I would also echo this too.
Best bit of advice I can give is to ask a few women hobbyists online, there's a fair few on instagram. They'd be more than happy to chat to you and help you out. I think you'd get a much better answer.
Twitter as well has a solid amount of women hobbyists, who are very familiar with the feelings you're feeling - their insight may be valuable!
This thread is funny to me because I don't think its anything to do with sexism and all about perception.
A few years ago we had a guy join our group. He was in his teens and we're all mostly grown adults in the 35-50 range and he refused to come to any of our houses/meet ups to play. He insisted that we have games at his parents house in his sisters bedroom and just didn't seem to understand that a group of middle aged men wouldn't want to go to the house of similarly aged people to play toy soldiers with their teenage son in their daughters bedroom because it is frankly a bit weird.
I'm sure from his perspective we seemed like a bunch of donkey-caves (despite us explaining the potential awkwardness to him a few times) but sorry, theres no way to make that situation not weird.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Exactly. This idea that there's an innate gender bias is simply oudated and incorrect. Just look at the amount of things that have been reclaimed by women and non-male identities that were once only viewed as "man's spaces".
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Exactly. This idea that there's an innate gender bias is simply oudated and incorrect. Just look at the amount of things that have been reclaimed by women and non-male identities that were once only viewed as "man's spaces".
Such as? Please don't claim video games.
As something as more of a personal interest to me, western theatre, specifically. There was once a point in time, long ago, but still serving my point, where theatre was regarded as for men only, and theatre was dominated by male audiences. At the time, the same arguments were made, that it simply was not a thing for women - but you'd be hard pressed now to claim it.
Similarly, the superhero genre is incredibly popular with audiences across the gender spectrum, not just the traditionally male audience.
Additionally, fields of academia and further education were historically barred to women. The same gender-essentialist arguments were made, and were disproven.
The same can be said for politics, sports, military service, etc etc - it really is a rather pervasive issue.
I'm also curious why you didn't want video games bringing up?
Football, for startes. A pure male thing in Europe until 10 years ago when only in Germany, Norway and Sweden women football was (barely) popular.
Last week 45k people attending the FA women's cup final. Home games for Juventus Women in Champions League all sold out in Italy, and they were played in the male's stadium. Games for the female national team in Italy are broadcasted in the same channel that broadcasts games for the male team, something that was considered science fiction before 2019.
Anything about fantasy also. Until the 80s, and maybe 90s it was a pure male thing. Now we probably have more female LOTR or Game of Thrones fans than male ones. A huge portion of modern fantasy literature is purely oriented towards female readers now, and written by female writers.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Exactly. This idea that there's an innate gender bias is simply oudated and incorrect. Just look at the amount of things that have been reclaimed by women and non-male identities that were once only viewed as "man's spaces".
Such as? Please don't claim video games.
As something as more of a personal interest to me, western theatre, specifically. There was once a point in time, long ago, but still serving my point, where theatre was regarded as for men only, and theatre was dominated by male audiences. At the time, the same arguments were made, that it simply was not a thing for women - but you'd be hard pressed now to claim it.
Similarly, the superhero genre is incredibly popular with audiences across the gender spectrum, not just the traditionally male audience.
Additionally, fields of academia and further education were historically barred to women. The same gender-essentialist arguments were made, and were disproven.
The same can be said for politics, sports, military service, etc etc - it really is a rather pervasive issue.
I'm also curious why you didn't want video games bringing up?
Just opening a space to women doesn't make them "reclaimed". Working sewers is open to women but that doesn't make it "reclaimed" because women tend to not be very interested in clearing fatbergs out of gakky tunnels. Warhammer isn't barred to women but I'd be interested to see your arguments as to how its been "reclaimed" by women when they're still a vast minority in the hobby. Also I excluded video games because almost every time someone claims that women are at least half or a majority of video game players its based on a biased study that considers having Candy Crush installed on your phone as a video game player. Not to mention "reclaimed" implies they were somehow kicked out of it once and then excluded.
Also what the hell is "the superhero genre"? I assume you mean comic book movies?
Football, for startes. A pure male thing in Europe until 10 years ago when only in Germany, Norway and Sweden women football was (barely) popular.
Last week 45k people attending the FA women's cup final. Home games for Juventus Women in Champions League all sold out in Italy, and they were played in the male's stadium. Games for the female national team in Italy are broadcasted in the same channel that broadcasts games for the male team, something that was considered science fiction before 2019.
Anything about fantasy also. Until the 80s, and maybe 90s it was a pure male thing. Now we probably have more female LOTR or Game of Thrones fans than male ones. A huge portion of modern fantasy literature is purely oriented towards female readers now, and written by female writers.
This topic actually deserves its own post to be fair.
As someone who actively supports women's sports (when I met the lady who is now my wife, she played rugby. These days we are both lapsed crossfitters and she will still crush people with weights and pull ups)
I think ten years is incorrect but I know what youre trying to say. The history of women's football goes back a hundred or more years at this point. Women and girls have always played, especially at the grassroots level. With.some sports it's always had a bit more support and sometimes from surprising places - ironically good old Catholic Ireland with all its religious repression a hundred years ago did some good things with camogie back in the 1920s. It's not that women haven't played, its just not been promoted until recently and in fairness this has improved hugely. In some places (England in particular) more than others.
And while there has been a huge push to support and promote the women's game (and I am thinking more of rugby, out of my own familiarity with it, and for the record I support this wholeheartedly- its great to see inspiring female players and its great to see young girls looking to these female players as idols) which now has TV coverage, sone professional players etc and the quality of the game on display iz miles ahead of where it was ten years ago. It's Still a different game though with far less of the physicality and less physicsl prowess on display as you'd see in the mens game and for a lot of people that's a negative. That said,it would be a lie to say it has the same uptake amongst girls as it does amongst guys and likewise for the following of the sport. When Mrs deadnight played, the number of active teams was dwarfed by the number of mens teams. The women's league was 'national' as teams were so thin on the ground and they'd often struggle to field 15 players for a game and would have to travel half a day for a game. Make no mistake things are a lot better now but the number of women playing and the number of teams is still dwarfed by men.
I went to see Scotland v Japan at the rugby recently (women's game and the men's game). The women played out back at the Edinburgh stadium and had maybe 2000 fans. The mens game was packed into the main stadium (70,000 people) and I don't doubt the viewing figures would be equally skewed. Funnily enough the attendance was very gender-mixed so please don't try and imply I'm saying women aren't interested in the sport.
Like rugby, in terms of participation at various levels, we'll never have 50/50 split in ttgs (as opposed to the whole gaming ecosystem inclusive of boardgames etc) and while I am absolutely encouraging to any one (male or female) who wants to take part in the hobby, I don't think we will ever have a scenario where this will change. Specific to ttgs in particular as opposed to other gaming media. Its not so much the hobby component (girls do a lot of hobbycrafting) bit imo, the subject matter (I have female friends who will happily throw down for blood bowl or shadespire, but full in mass battle games and 'eternal war' settings tropes seems less appealing) and the social dynamics that are a big barrier and this isn't really the case in board games or rpgs (or others) which have a far stronger and more intimate social component and the games have a stronger story component (especially for rpgs). With ttgs you can have 50 guys in a room and 25 islands. Its all 'bi'ness' as chloe price would say. Often the 'community' aspect is very superficial and paper thin. In my experience with female sports, and female teams, the social aspect is hugely important.
Get more girls in, have more games that cater to different tastes, especially more casual ones (as opposed to hardcore, heavily technical ones) to get more casually interested folks through the door and maybe things will change. I am not optimistic though I encourage it.
I think ten years is incorrect but I know what youre trying to say. The history of women's football goes back a hundred or more years at this point. Women and girls have always played. It's just not been promoted until recently and in fairness this has improved hugely. In some places (England in particular) more than others.
Absolutely, that's what I meant. Women football in Europe didn't have any media coverage until a few years ago. In Italy women football is still amateur sport until the end of the season, it'll turn into professionism only in 2022. And yet it currently gets a solid coverage while no other amateur sport, including male ones or even any other professional female sport, gets the same kind of attention. That's exponential growth.
But that's just an example. Innate gender bias is definitely a concept of the past.
The main reason why there aren't many women in the hobby IMHO is related to the fact that women on average don't have the same salary and the same amount of free time than males. This hobby requires a massive investment in terms of money and time spent, which is gatekeeping for lots of women. People's attitude is far less gatekeeping I think, as in RPGs women have significant numbers and the community of RPGs is pretty much the same kind of people that do miniatures wargames.
Deadnight wrote: ...bit imo, the subject matter (I have female friends who will happily throw down for blood bowl or shadespire, but full in mass battle games and 'eternal war' settings tropes seems less appealing) and the social dynamics that are a big barrier and this isn't really the case in board games or rpgs (or others) which have a far stronger and more intimate social component and the games have a stronger story component (especially for rpgs). With ttgs you can have 50 guys in a room and 25 islands. Its all 'bi'ness' as chloe price would say. Often the 'community' aspect is very superficial and paper thin. In my experience with female sports, and female teams, the social aspect is hugely important.
Get more girls in, have more games that cater to different tastes, especially more casual ones (as opposed to hardcore, heavily technical ones) to get more casually interested folks through the door and maybe things will change. I am not optimistic though I encourage it.
Interestingly there was a period when female wargaming was a popular middle class pursuit (at least in the English speaking world, no idea about others) and that was in the pre-WW1 period (wargames in the drawing room with the guests darling?). Plenty of articles/books to read on this but my understanding was western societies pushed militarism and military adventures in support of their imperial policies and a more accepted 'glorious' portrayal of war. This participation collapsed following WW1 (for men and women) and the very different experience of war and its consequences. It regained some popularity with boys but I guess the overwhelming societal view kept women out.
See toy soldiers getting mainstream approval again and just like comics and the like you would see an increase in participation of both genders. Sadly I reckon the poor quality of many GW games outside of their core targeted age groups and the block they can be for people to try other games means we would be dependant on them launching games with wider appeal.
The main reason why there aren't many women in the hobby IMHO is related to the fact that women on average don't have the same salary and the same amount of free time than males. This hobby requires a massive investment in terms of money and time spent, which is gatekeeping for lots of women. People's attitude is far less gatekeeping I think, as in RPGs women have significant numbers and the community of RPGs is pretty much the same kind of people that do miniatures wargames.
Honestly I don't know if that's fully true. I'm not arguing that inequality in pay isn't still a thing; but the concept of money and time in Warhammer being barriers above and beyond other hobbies. I think ANY hobby taken seriously will eat up both resources in good measure. Sure some hobbies you can get started with much more cheaply; and others might require less time; but any hobby can take up both in equal and greater amounts than warhammer. Wargamers like to talk a lot about how expensive the hobby is (ok ok how expensive GW is mostly) but in the great scheme of things its not actually much beyond many other hobbies. Lego kits cost just as much; golf clubs you can spend a fortune on just one club; musical instruments can make both pale in comparison. Meanwhile things like drawing, painting, knitting, bird watching, hiking, sports - all those can eat just as many if not more hours as building and painting models.
It's more about choosing to make something your hobby and finding the motivation, money and time for it alongside other things; than it is that those things are pure barriers in themselves unique to that hobby or interest. OF course there are extremes and those extremes depend greatly on a persons background, income and more. However I'd argue that Warhammer isn't on the vastly extreme scale - at least for people in what most would consider a middle-class income.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Exactly. This idea that there's an innate gender bias is simply oudated and incorrect. Just look at the amount of things that have been reclaimed by women and non-male identities that were once only viewed as "man's spaces".
Such as? Please don't claim video games.
As something as more of a personal interest to me, western theatre, specifically. There was once a point in time, long ago, but still serving my point, where theatre was regarded as for men only, and theatre was dominated by male audiences. At the time, the same arguments were made, that it simply was not a thing for women - but you'd be hard pressed now to claim it.
Similarly, the superhero genre is incredibly popular with audiences across the gender spectrum, not just the traditionally male audience.
Additionally, fields of academia and further education were historically barred to women. The same gender-essentialist arguments were made, and were disproven.
The same can be said for politics, sports, military service, etc etc - it really is a rather pervasive issue.
I'm also curious why you didn't want video games bringing up?
Just opening a space to women doesn't make them "reclaimed". Working sewers is open to women but that doesn't make it "reclaimed" because women tend to not be very interested in clearing fatbergs out of gakky tunnels.
Most men aren't particularly interested either. My point is that all of the above things I named *were* regarded as "male spaces", not because it was predominantly men in them, but because they were considered to be spaces *for* men.
There's a difference between "there's a lot of men in this field" and "this field is for men", and for a time, our hobby was widely perceived as one of the latter.
Warhammer isn't barred to women but I'd be interested to see your arguments as to how its been "reclaimed" by women when they're still a vast minority in the hobby.
I don't mean to say that it has been "reclaimed" fully. As this thread shows (and some of the comments made in it), I don't believe that it can be called "reclaimed": but is there a reclamation, and liberation of space? Yes, certainly. Women are more visible and normalised within the wider perception of the hobby, despite some stigmas from certain individuals and groups who view women as encroaching on "their space".
Again, regarding barring - we have to be careful not to lessen the impact of unconscious or societal barring, as opposed to explicit restrictions.
Also I excluded video games because almost every time someone claims that women are at least half or a majority of video game players its based on a biased study that considers having Candy Crush installed on your phone as a video game player.
I don't base it off of that study, I base it off of the fact that most of the women in my life are just as, if not more, involved in video games as non-women. It sounds like a reductive thing to rule out that whole discussion based on one faulty study - as with all my comments, I am basing them on my experiences, and how my experiences fly in the face of any kind of implicit gender bias.
Not to mention "reclaimed" implies they were somehow kicked out of it once and then excluded.
I use reclaimed to refer to becoming accepted and normalised into a space that they have been excluded from, but regardless of the actual terms used, I'm sure you know what I am referring to.
Also what the hell is "the superhero genre"? I assume you mean comic book movies?
I am referring to the entire medium and mythos - whether that be from comics, movies, fandom culture, or fanfiction.
I don't believe doing the above is disregarding her experiences, but trying to contextualize them. The thread started with the premise that what she experienced was a manifestation of gatekeeping against women, which could be the wrong conclusion in some cases. Reading different perspectives on these situations should help her getting into new groups going forward. And I believe that was the reason for asking about it in the first place.
^This.
Finding a new group in the same area might be difficult to achieve. I've learned to deal also with more difficult characters.
Such 'guys' are often the hang ups, goofing off with others in the gaming facility.
How do deal with those people? Depends also on their social background. Here at least I can say that those people are not Univ. students.
Interestingly there was a period when female wargaming was a popular middle class pursuit (at least in the English speaking world, no idea about others) and that was in the pre-WW1 period (wargames in the drawing room with the guests darling?). Plenty of articles/books to read on this but my understanding was western societies pushed militarism and military adventures in support of their imperial policies and a more accepted 'glorious' portrayal of war. This participation collapsed following WW1 (for men and women) and the very different experience of war and its consequences. It regained some popularity with boys but I guess the overwhelming societal view kept women out.
I have hears of this. I think the female experience of war and what it involves is often far darker than that of the men. Frankly I'm not surprised that its 'popularity' as a pursuit fell away once the mangled sons and husbands came home or stories from other women left in the wake of rampaging victorious armies came to light.
Its easy to 'glory up' and put some snazz on the fighting and shooting and winning, not so much the other stuff. Boys fight, girls live with the consequences of what happens and have to pick up the pieces.
See toy soldiers getting mainstream approval again and just like comics and the like you would see an increase in participation of both genders. Sadly I reckon the poor quality of many GW games outside of their core targeted age groups and the block they can be for people to try other games means we would be dependant on them launching games with wider appeal.
I disagree. It's got nothing to do with the quality of the games. Gw are far cleverer than you appreciate- its a lot easier to be a casual 40k/other gw ip consumer than you realise.
Here's the thing - 'fantasy' covers many different things- there are many different avenues into it and many different attractions. It's a very big umbrella. Liking comics and movies doesn't mean you'll like ttgs just because they both fall under the same 'lol, kinda nerdy' moniker.
the comics and movies are as much about characters, their stories, their feelings and relationships as it is about punching thanos in the face. The greatest thing Stan Lee did was put the 'human' in superhuman. You don't really have that with warhammer. There's a reason the modern comics and marvel stuff is popular with more than just stereotypical macho guys.
There are a while swathe of different genres in comics and its not just glorified violence. Ive spoke with several owners of stores because I like the fact that this is happening now. Two of my favourites are the classic transmetropolitan series (dark satire about a hunter s thompson-esque journalist in a mad cyberpunk city trying to tell people 'the truth') and the current 'life is strange' comic from titan, which is a very lgbtq-friendly drama, and direct sequel to life is strange (a game I adore and yes, I needed more of max and chloe, dammit!)
Table top wargames? Yeah you fight with swords... or magic... or spears... or pre modern/modern/sci fi guns. It's not the same as talking about comics or superhero movies and saying 'girls like them too!' There's far less nuance or variety. Like I said, I have better luck getting my girl friends to play blood bowl than 40k.
The_Real_Chris wrote: Two of my favourites are the classic transmetropolitan series (dark satire about a hunter s thompson-esque journalist in a mad cyberpunk city trying to tell people 'the truth')
Patrick Stewart was at one time interested in playing Spider in a live action version...
macluvin wrote: I do find it troubling that there is a pattern of denying and rewriting the experience of women to fit men’s experience on this forum however
Go re-read your first post - at that point in time the OPs' own comment was 'maybe not hostile per say but a little gate keeping' - and from that and that alone you extracted multiple paragraphs of gender-bias, microaggression, cognitive dissonance, 'mansplaining', and so on. Actually asking for context was an afterthought.
No one here is denying the OPs' experiences. Entering any new group or hobby can be challenging and we can either try and emphasize based our own personal experiences, or make a lot of assumptions about theirs.
Good point. The biggest hurdle is finding a good group and that will vary, perhaps wildly, per individual.
Do you like the people in the group? I don't mean you need to be best buds but can you get along?
I'm fairly laid back and don't care who I play with as long as:
They don't take it too seriously, playing with people that swear or carry on when it doesn't go their way ruins a game for me. I'm okay if you are playing hard to win, it's the poor sport I don't want to deal with.
They know basic hygiene, soap and deoderant won't kill you. We'd always joke about MTG players because you could smell some of them when you walked into the store, but this applies to any game system.
There's not something else off putting about them such as blatant racism or sexism, etc.
For each of you, the list of what's acceptable will be different and that's okay. We are individuals after all.
I assume by gatekeeper what is being talked about is similar to the above but in the context of the group itself. Does the amorphous group think you'd fit in. This isn't one or two people but more of a hivemind kind of thing that isn't even discussed amongst group members. It only takes one bad personality to possibly destroy a group. People get tired of 'that guy' and stop showing up or just arrange to play elsewhere.
So there's a two way street to it.
Here are two examples that I have experienced.
My wife is a gamer. We relocated 1000 miles in 2019. There was a game store in our city(it closed due to Covid) that we checked out their board game night. Nice and welcoming people. We didn't feel that we'd fit in well with the group though.
The second is when I tried to get back into 40K before the relocation and had to deal with the dynamic of trying to get into a group.
I quit playing 40K for a long time and tried to get back into it with 8th ed. I went to the FLGS, used to be a regular there prior to my gaming hiatus, prior to 8th dropping to check out what the 40K scene was like and watch some games being played. I was starting from the ground up having gotten rid of all my wargaming gear a few years prior. So I starting building an Ad Mech force around April/May of 18. 8th drops and I have a mostly painted force around 1k points maybe 1250ish.
I bring it in and there's a couple of challenges.
Is my army big enough? All the guys had established armies and liked to play bigger games say 2K pts. So there's that hurdle to deal with. I could reach some larger points values but it would mean using stuff that had been assembled and maybe primed.
Will anyone play a game with me? It was the, I assume common, situation where people would walk in and have prearranged a game or 'hey Bob, let's play'. These guys only knew me from hanging out and watching some games, so it's not like anyone was 'Hey, let's play' until I was the only option left.
life happened and I didn't really get back into it. I think I played 1 maybe 2 games of 8th ed.
Fast forward to today and there's a newer FLGS that opened in my city in 2020. I'll have to repeat the process if I decide to get back into mini wargaming outside my own house. See if the group of people that play there seem like a reasonable fit and hopefully I fit in as well.
Now the OP is female which shouldn't matter but some guys are immature when it comes to how they act around women. That's where you run into the uncomfortable innuendo/inappropriate jokes etc. I'm also sure that there's the risk of sexism because 'she's a girl', 'I'm hungry go make me a sammich' . It's stupid in this day and age but it's real. So that get's thrown in as potential things to watch for that I don't deal with.
Someone mentioned 'mansplaining and kids gloves. This is possibly a two way street. If I am playing with someone new to a game, I will mention things about rules or even tactics as we play, so they can learn. I'll also do my best to not crush them, if that is a possibility. I'll play to win but maybe I won't go all out like I would against an experienced player. Someone could say that I'm 'mansplaining and playing with kids gloves because of gender, if it was with a female. That's the furthest thing from the truth though. I personally feel that games with a new player should be fun learning experiences. That is how the hobby grows, it's not by being a WAAC against a newb that has read the rules and maybe played a few games. YMMV of course.
Interestingly there was a period when female wargaming was a popular middle class pursuit (at least in the English speaking world, no idea about others) and that was in the pre-WW1 period (wargames in the drawing room with the guests darling?). Plenty of articles/books to read on this but my understanding was western societies pushed militarism and military adventures in support of their imperial policies and a more accepted 'glorious' portrayal of war. This participation collapsed following WW1 (for men and women) and the very different experience of war and its consequences. It regained some popularity with boys but I guess the overwhelming societal view kept women out.
I have hears of this. I think the female experience of war and what it involves is often far darker than that of the men. Frankly I'm not surprised that its 'popularity' as a pursuit fell away once the mangled sons and husbands came home or stories from other women left in the wake of rampaging victorious armies came to light.
Its easy to 'glory up' and put some snazz on the fighting and shooting and winning, not so much the other stuff. Boys fight, girls live with the consequences of what happens and have to pick up the pieces.
No, I'm pretty sure watching your friends explode or having your legs blown off is worse than being told stories about it.
The most objectionable thing I found here was the shrugging "I guess girls don't like wargaming". It's not an inherent thing that makes you less likely to play with one type of toy or another. It's gendered socialization. This is proven science.
I remember the last time that came up, some anecdote andies and other such people tried to "debunk" it with one study. So I fully expect that to happen here.
No, I'm pretty sure watching your friends explode or having your legs blown off is worse than being told stories about it.
Learning about how your children were blown to little bits is probably worse. But hey, both men and women have childeren, so why don't we not turn the thread into a pissing contest.
RaptorusRex wrote: The most objectionable thing I found here was the shrugging "I guess girls don't like wargaming". It's not an inherent thing that makes you less likely to play with one type of toy or another. It's gendered socialization. This is proven science.
It's not proven that there's no biological basis for this, however.
RaptorusRex wrote: The most objectionable thing I found here was the shrugging "I guess girls don't like wargaming". It's not an inherent thing that makes you less likely to play with one type of toy or another. It's gendered socialization. This is proven science.
It's not proven that there's no biological basis for this, however.
It's not proven that there's no biological basis that you needed to make that utterly pointless comment, but here we are.
Where is all this talk of women not liking things for biological reasons even coming from? Or that women don't like wargamng by default? Or for that matter that they don't like painting because its too hard or time consuming.
I know anecdotal (but then again, half of this thread it anecdotal evidence), but my girlfriend is the one who got me into 40k, and is the main person I play with. Local game shop (at least pre-pandemic) has several female employees, and one of their big displays for awhile was an army one of them had painted.
Interestingly there was a period when female wargaming was a popular middle class pursuit (at least in the English speaking world, no idea about others) and that was in the pre-WW1 period (wargames in the drawing room with the guests darling?). Plenty of articles/books to read on this but my understanding was western societies pushed militarism and military adventures in support of their imperial policies and a more accepted 'glorious' portrayal of war. This participation collapsed following WW1 (for men and women) and the very different experience of war and its consequences. It regained some popularity with boys but I guess the overwhelming societal view kept women out.
I have hears of this. I think the female experience of war and what it involves is often far darker than that of the men. Frankly I'm not surprised that its 'popularity' as a pursuit fell away once the mangled sons and husbands came home or stories from other women left in the wake of rampaging victorious armies came to light.
Its easy to 'glory up' and put some snazz on the fighting and shooting and winning, not so much the other stuff. Boys fight, girls live with the consequences of what happens and have to pick up the pieces.
No, I'm pretty sure watching your friends explode or having your legs blown off is worse than being told stories about it.
You realize what the "rampaging victorious armies" part of their comment refers to, right? The point stands that it is easier to glamorize the fighting and the shooting aspects of war to...that.
Ah, someone always tries to insinuate that men and women tend to have the same hobbies/interests. Sorry to rain on your parade dude but I have news for you:
They don´t.
Plenty have the same hobbies. While some things tend to visually lean more heavily one way of the other, (from my personal experience in knowing hundreds of gamers) they just tend to enjoy them in different ways. The many women I've known to be into things like D&D, Magic, and a few for Warhammer tend to stick to their own personal playgroups. People they know and trust, so not a lot of people outside those small groups know about them and just assume they don't exist, whereas I see far more guys out and about at FLGS's playing there. When I've spoken to them about this, it's often a result of social pressure, feeling like as women they're not supposed to have these hobbies, or feeling the kinds of things the OP has when they've gone out on their own to experience them.
I've been the only guy in an all women D&D group before and the feeling of being the odd one out over and above being the "new person" in a group of friends can be pretty intimidating, even when you know there's not kind of gender discrimination going on.
My wife plays Magic and other board games with me on a regular basis, she's not into it enough to go out to events on her own, but she enjoys playing with me and my other gamer friends when they are over.
In my group of friends way back in High School a few of the women I knew were big Halo fans, and a bunch of us played magic together.
We had a few women who were regulars top finishers in Magic tournaments in out FLGS for a number of years before I stopped going out to tournaments due to life getting in the way.
Just because you haven't had personal experience with women in your hobbies, doesn't mean that they don't exist. Just because demographics skew one way or another, doesn't mean that "women do this and men do that"
Strange, when I take a stroll at the river all fishermen tend to be male. Guess female fishermen must hide from me as soon as they see me coming. What about soccer fans? Majority of people who watch/play it are males. Ballet? Majority of ballet dancers are female.
And now back to our 40K topic. Who wants to argue with me about the fact that the vast majority of 40K players on this planet are male? Who? Those people will probably also want to prove me wrong when I say water is wet.
Not to derail further but surely the point about women in the hobby is moot discussion topic when the OP of the thread IS a woman and is talking about being already involved within the hobby.
At that point any "women do/don't like the hobby for XYZ reasons" is purely a separate discussion that isn't really going to go anywhere but in circles and isn't going to help the OP nor really help anyone with regard to sexism in the hobby or other social club issues and how one might overcome them.
What exactly is saying “Women don’t like wargames” supposed to accomplish? Because sure, societal gender roles would generally push women away from wargames-but is that a desirable state? Why should we want this hobby to be male-only? I for one would love more players, regardless of gender.
Saying "Women presence is not popular in this specific hobby in this specific time frame" as a basis for "Women are wired diferently" is such a weak argument.
And it just comes down when you look back at history and see how many times random stuff and activities have jumped from being masculine to feminine to masculine again from tatoos to jewelry to high hells to all kind of activities in all kind of societies and ages.
And I'm not saying this to deny that theres clearly gendered dominated activities, jobs and hobbys in our world. Thats just plain sight to everybody. But drawing the wrong conclusions from a sample data is worse than drawing NO conclusion.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Is it though? Or is it just the ones that do play get the most signal? I play D&D with one girl, but in all the hobby stores I've been to across my state I've almost never encountered a young girl or a grown woman. I see pictures from events and tournaments and they're either not present, or stick out as one among dozens and dozens.
So, again, has it really flourished, or is the spotlight just being shone upon them thereby making the perception seem that there are so many more of them?
I'm the only dude in my current group.
Anectodal evidence is just that. On opposite spectrum 0 women here.
Overread wrote: Not to derail further but surely the point about women in the hobby is moot discussion topic when the OP of the thread IS a woman and is talking about being already involved within the hobby.
At that point any "women do/don't like the hobby for XYZ reasons" is purely a separate discussion that isn't really going to go anywhere but in circles and isn't going to help the OP nor really help anyone with regard to sexism in the hobby or other social club issues and how one might overcome them.
But this whole discussion stemmed from OPs initial idea that treating a new player with kid gloves and that someone being a bad loser was sexist and not fairly normal occurrences in the hobby.
Last time I played WHFB I took a fairly low powered Skaven list which had a good turn and my opponent accused me of taking and OP army list on the basis of that one good turn (said skaven army had a bad turn and exploded itself and he didn't mention it). Was he being sexist for getting salty about me killing a lot of ogres?
When two of OPs examples are also experienced by majority of the male players as well it raises questions as to whether or not the cause was sexism or just hobby norms being interpreted that way. It doesn't help that we have a bunch of posters IMMEDIATELY leaping on people saying "OH BUT IT MUST BE SEXIST #BELIEVEWOMEN". Nah sorry, but its more likely that nerds have poor social skills and people go easy on new players to be accommodating than everyone playing the game spends their time on MGTOW forums.
To be fair the OP never said that treating her with kid gloves was sexist, just something she didn't like (she only said she didn't feel welcome) and simply shared her experience to understand if that's normal behaviour and how to get more fun while sticking around the hobby.
I do believe most nerds have poor social skills in general, but people with poor social skills could easily be sexist. We don't know if those specific players the OP met behaved like that because of their poor social skills or because they are actually sexist, or even if them being sexist was intended or not.
Strg Alt wrote:Strange, when I take a stroll at the river all fishermen tend to be male. Guess female fishermen must hide from me as soon as they see me coming. What about soccer fans? Majority of people who watch/play it are males. Ballet? Majority of ballet dancers are female.
And how much of that is biological predisposition, or societal? Because I'm willing to put my neck out and say it's the latter - to which I'd then mention that society changes, and isn't immutable, so we shouldn't make any claims about how people definitely wouldn't be interested in XYZ because of their gender.
And now back to our 40K topic. Who wants to argue with me about the fact that the vast majority of 40K players on this planet are male? Who? Those people will probably also want to prove me wrong when I say water is wet.
No-one is arguing about what the majority is. They're simply arguing about the idea that there's somehow an innate predisposition towards it because of biology, which is patently absurd.
Sim-Life wrote:When two of OPs examples are also experienced by majority of the male players as well
Are they? I mean, in entirety. There's a massive gulf in difference in the minutia of the "same" interaction that could very well add additional contexts and meanings, and in many cases, women and non-men are often perceptive of small changes and indications that men often don't register. I'm not saying that male players don't also experience these issues, but that the point is we simply don't know what happened, and instead of folks coming in and saying "I'm sure you're overreacting" (or words to that effect), perhaps considering that maybe, yes, the testimony of the only person who was *actually there* is the most accurate we have, and may very well have been sexist, it might be more productive.
I dunno, all I'm saying is that OP likely has a very different experience and perception of such encounters than most people here, and so it might be worth hearing that out.
Nah sorry, but its more likely that nerds have poor social skills
Having poor social skills and being sexist aren't mutually exclusive.
kurhanik wrote: Where is all this talk of women not liking things for biological reasons even coming from?
By and large? It comes from dudes.
(Who will of course be *shocked* that there is gatekeeping in the establishment)
Citation?
Well, if I'm correct in my assumption that kurhanik and Catulle are specifically referring to this thread, or Dakka as a whole, then yes, it absolutely comes from dudes - the people who have made such comments use male pronouns, unless I've missed something.
Unless you're asking for a citation that they'd be "shocked" about gatekeeping, that is.
JNAProductions wrote: What exactly is saying “Women don’t like wargames” supposed to accomplish? Because sure, societal gender roles would generally push women away from wargames-but is that a desirable state? Why should we want this hobby to be male-only? I for one would love more players, regardless of gender.
Well, the question is whether or not it's accurate, and if it's accurate it probably isn't immoral to point it out. I think there's a trend, and likely the trend is a result of a complex interplay of biological factors and learned behavior, as the way wargaming is practiced is a heavily "thing-oriented" behavior, and women tend to be more "people-oriented" rather than "thing-oriented." That said, there's plenty of "thing-oriented" women; I work in research science, and know plenty of women who people who hew closely to traditional gender roles would say aren't womanly enough, but they're women, and womanly is as womanly does, so... sucks to be traditionalists, I guess?
To bring it back to wargaming, individual women being into the hobby wouldn't disprove a trend that showed that women were less into it than men, and an overall trend of women being less into it than men doesn't show that individual women who *are* into wargaming are less serious or whatever.
It's also important to note that this "thing-oriented vs. people-oriented" idea isn't about intelligence. No, you're not an inherently smarter person because you like working with objects and abstract systems as opposed to people.
Yer. ‘Parrently the Scandinavians went out of their way to ‘de-gender’ childrens’ upbringing. Seems they still divided themselves into thing/people oriented occupations in later life
Moriarty wrote: Yer. ‘Parrently the Scandinavians went out of their way to ‘de-gender’ childrens’ upbringing. Seems they still divided themselves into thing/people oriented occupations in later life
Would you mind sharing some of these occupations for each category?
Automatically Appended Next Post: also, from a cultural psychology text book... Gender schema theory and social learning theory are the dominant cultural psychology theorems on how gender roles develop.
Modern science does not support your argument. The Scandinavian research for all we know could be due to cultural transmission. Even implicit biases undergo cultural transmission and gender roles are deeply engrained in our cultures. The text covers a few other ways that the research from the Scandinavians could possibly have been biased. I am not saying it is, but you did not produce a source so we do not have much to go on. I've got an open source text book that cites different studies that likely build on other research.
Ah, someone always tries to insinuate that men and women have some kind of biological difference that makes them have different hobbies/interests. Sorry to rain on your parade, dude, but I have news for you.
They don't. Any difference in hobby interest is personal, not gender-based. There's lots of men I've talked to who don't want to play Warhammer. There's lots of women I've talked to who do. It's personal choice and societal pressure, including gatekeeping.
That's a bold claim.
...It's a bold claim that someone's interest in playing games with and painting small miniature models is...not driven by biology?
I would think that would be kind of the null hypothesis, and the whole 'biological basis' would be something that would require pretty significant evidence for me to buy into. Have you spliced the warhammer gene? Found it embedded somewhere deep in the masculoid DNA cortex?
Here, i'll disprove the notion that women do not enjoy spending a huge amount of time meticulously making tiny collectible objects: Go into your internet browser, up at the top, and type in "www.etsy.com"
H.B.M.C. wrote: Is it though? Or is it just the ones that do play get the most signal? I play D&D with one girl, but in all the hobby stores I've been to across my state I've almost never encountered a young girl or a grown woman. I see pictures from events and tournaments and they're either not present, or stick out as one among dozens and dozens.
So, again, has it really flourished, or is the spotlight just being shone upon them thereby making the perception seem that there are so many more of them?
I'm the only dude in my current group.
Anectodal evidence is just that. On opposite spectrum 0 women here.
Yes. Strange that you would respond to my anecdote, and not the "in all the hobby stores across my state ive almost never encountered a young girl or a grown woman" anecdote, and call it out as "just an anecdote."
I've only ever responded with anecdotes...to anecdotes. I'm not WOTC. I dont have their sales data. You're not either. Neither is HBMC. only one of us is actually making a claim, though - implying that women as a whole aren't *really* playing DnD, they're just getting Moar Attentionz On Social Media.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Moriarty wrote: Yer. ‘Parrently the Scandinavians went out of their way to ‘de-gender’ childrens’ upbringing. Seems they still divided themselves into thing/people oriented occupations in later life
These are my favorite kinds of theories, because you can't do anything to falsify it - it's perfect!
Corporate Management: This job is dominated overwhelmingly by men, so clearly it's a 'thing' oriented occupation. Youre in meetings all day long, negotiating, managing your subordinates....oh! but money! it involves money, which is thing. There, we got there, "Thing" oriented!
Fashion Design: Dominated by women, so of course, this one has to be "people!" Well lets see, they work with fabrics, they figure out the forms of the clothing, colors, stitching styles...and then who buys the clothes and put them on? People, duh. Case closed, facts and logic, feminism destroyed.
Head Chef: super male dominated, obviously focused on the perfection of the perfect "pieces de artes" as pagliacci the famous italian chef-philosopher would put it. The team of sous chefs, the customer, all secondary to the achievement of the perfect "thing" of the high-class dish.
Baker: I mean can you even THINK of a more person-oriented job? obviously bakers are so focused on the customer, on working with people in a team to produce the baked goods, its no wonder that so many women are biologically incapable of not gravitating to this field, it's just in their brain wiring!
Damn, this science stuff is so much easier when you just start with the conclusion you want and make sure everything fits perfectly! Why hasn't anyone thought of this before?
It becomes even more interesting when you compare the same activity in different fields or countries.
Take horse riding - go to the UK and the pony clubs and hobby level is heavily dominated by women, as is the marketing, the advertising. Even the casual media "every girl wants a pony". etc...
Now look at competitive horse riding in the races and its heavily male dominated.
Within the same country you've two different gender dominances.
Meanwhile I would be willing to bet that in regions of the USA the hobby to eventing level might well be male dominated or closer to an even split.
And that's just two countries examples. Suffice to say it shows that the potential interest within something is far more than just if you're a guy or a gal. There's elements of upbringing, biology, genetics, marketing, advertising, social pressures, peer pressure, finances, social standing, time, education. There's so many factors and its never even as simple as "X = Y" because there's so many criss crossing aspects that intersect which means that two people of the same gender; or the same financial background; or the same upbringing; etc.. can end up with vastly diverging outlooks and interests.
Heck I've 2 brothers and 2 sisters and whilst we all share similarities we've all different interests and ideas.
Strg Alt wrote:Strange, when I take a stroll at the river all fishermen tend to be male. Guess female fishermen must hide from me as soon as they see me coming. What about soccer fans? Majority of people who watch/play it are males. Ballet? Majority of ballet dancers are female.
And how much of that is biological predisposition, or societal? Because I'm willing to put my neck out and say it's the latter - to which I'd then mention that society changes, and isn't immutable, so we shouldn't make any claims about how people definitely wouldn't be interested in XYZ because of their gender.
And now back to our 40K topic. Who wants to argue with me about the fact that the vast majority of 40K players on this planet are male? Who? Those people will probably also want to prove me wrong when I say water is wet.
No-one is arguing about what the majority is. They're simply arguing about the idea that there's somehow an innate predisposition towards it because of biology, which is patently absurd.
Sim-Life wrote:When two of OPs examples are also experienced by majority of the male players as well
Are they? I mean, in entirety. There's a massive gulf in difference in the minutia of the "same" interaction that could very well add additional contexts and meanings, and in many cases, women and non-men are often perceptive of small changes and indications that men often don't register. I'm not saying that male players don't also experience these issues, but that the point is we simply don't know what happened, and instead of folks coming in and saying "I'm sure you're overreacting" (or words to that effect), perhaps considering that maybe, yes, the testimony of the only person who was *actually there* is the most accurate we have, and may very well have been sexist, it might be more productive.
I dunno, all I'm saying is that OP likely has a very different experience and perception of such encounters than most people here, and so it might be worth hearing that out.
Nah sorry, but its more likely that nerds have poor social skills
Having poor social skills and being sexist aren't mutually exclusive.
Ah, someone always tries to insinuate that men and women have some kind of biological difference that makes them have different hobbies/interests. Sorry to rain on your parade, dude, but I have news for you.
They don't. Any difference in hobby interest is personal, not gender-based. There's lots of men I've talked to who don't want to play Warhammer. There's lots of women I've talked to who do. It's personal choice and societal pressure, including gatekeeping.
That's a bold claim.
...It's a bold claim that someone's interest in playing games with and painting small miniature models is...not driven by biology?
I would think that would be kind of the null hypothesis, and the whole 'biological basis' would be something that would require pretty significant evidence for me to buy into. Have you spliced the warhammer gene? Found it embedded somewhere deep in the masculoid DNA cortex?
Here, i'll disprove the notion that women do not enjoy spending a huge amount of time meticulously making tiny collectible objects: Go into your internet browser, up at the top, and type in "www.etsy.com"
H.B.M.C. wrote: Is it though? Or is it just the ones that do play get the most signal? I play D&D with one girl, but in all the hobby stores I've been to across my state I've almost never encountered a young girl or a grown woman. I see pictures from events and tournaments and they're either not present, or stick out as one among dozens and dozens.
So, again, has it really flourished, or is the spotlight just being shone upon them thereby making the perception seem that there are so many more of them?
I'm the only dude in my current group.
Anectodal evidence is just that. On opposite spectrum 0 women here.
Yes. Strange that you would respond to my anecdote, and not the "in all the hobby stores across my state ive almost never encountered a young girl or a grown woman" anecdote, and call it out as "just an anecdote."
I've only ever responded with anecdotes...to anecdotes. I'm not WOTC. I dont have their sales data. You're not either. Neither is HBMC. only one of us is actually making a claim, though - implying that women as a whole aren't *really* playing DnD, they're just getting Moar Attentionz On Social Media.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Moriarty wrote: Yer. ‘Parrently the Scandinavians went out of their way to ‘de-gender’ childrens’ upbringing. Seems they still divided themselves into thing/people oriented occupations in later life
These are my favorite kinds of theories, because you can't do anything to falsify it - it's perfect!
Corporate Management: This job is dominated overwhelmingly by men, so clearly it's a 'thing' oriented occupation. Youre in meetings all day long, negotiating, managing your subordinates....oh! but money! it involves money, which is thing. There, we got there, "Thing" oriented!
Fashion Design: Dominated by women, so of course, this one has to be "people!" Well lets see, they work with fabrics, they figure out the forms of the clothing, colors, stitching styles...and then who buys the clothes and put them on? People, duh. Case closed, facts and logic, feminism destroyed.
Head Chef: super male dominated, obviously focused on the perfection of the perfect "pieces de artes" as pagliacci the famous italian chef-philosopher would put it. The team of sous chefs, the customer, all secondary to the achievement of the perfect "thing" of the high-class dish.
Baker: I mean can you even THINK of a more person-oriented job? obviously bakers are so focused on the customer, on working with people in a team to produce the baked goods, its no wonder that so many women are biologically incapable of not gravitating to this field, it's just in their brain wiring!
Damn, this science stuff is so much easier when you just start with the conclusion you want and make sure everything fits perfectly! Why hasn't anyone thought of this before?
Exalted.
And just to add a bit more...
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Moriarty wrote: Yer. ‘Parrently the Scandinavians went out of their way to ‘de-gender’ childrens’ upbringing. Seems they still divided themselves into thing/people oriented occupations in later life
Even if you could prove that those Scandinavian families who chose to participate in "de-gendering" where the same Scandinavians who gravitated toward careers in the flawed thing/people dichotomy (which you can't)
And even if you could somehow make the thing/ people dichotomy less flawed...
In order for your statement to be valid, the degendering experiment you speak of would need to have started in 1995-2000 in order for it to have had ANY possible impact on careers that people are choosing today, because it takes 20-25 years of "upbringing" to get from birth to career selection.
You haven't even done the bare minimum required work to prove that a massive degendering experiment happened Scandanavia-wide AT ALL, much less that such an experiment occurred within the required time frame to have an impact upon observable career selection behaviour.
If you do the work and provide the citations to change my mind, I'm willing to change it. Until then, I'm going to continue to operate on the assumption that your argument doesn't really have a leg to stand on.
Good to see the "help a fellow hobbyist" thread turned into "women don't even like warhammer anyway". Good work guys, you're really helping to subdue the notion that there's not a gatekeeping problem in this hobby.
Gert wrote: Good to see the "help a fellow hobbyist" thread turned into "women don't even like warhammer anyway". Good work guys, you're really helping to subdue the notion that there's not a gatekeeping problem in this hobby.
This is the exact reason I didn't want to reply in this thread. Exalted.
Yep. It takes a generation or two of women enduring the awkwardness and other uncomfortable feelings so that women in this hobby become normalized and don’t have to endure the same thing. That’s the lovely process of enculturation. One generation of wargamers seeing women in the hobby regularly should be sufficient to wipe the pseudoscience of “women don’t like warhammer because biology” out of the mainstream discussion.
the_scotsman wrote: ...It's a bold claim that someone's interest in playing games with and painting small miniature models is...not driven by biology?
The claim that biology has no impact whatsoever on hobbies/interests, and that it's all socialization, is contradicted by well-accepted research. There's overwhelming evidence for sex-based toy preferences in childhood, with children as young as nine months old showing markedly different preferences in toys long before they're socialized towards gender-aligned toys. Rhesus monkeys show the same trends. Women with congenital adrenal hyperplasia, a condition which produces more masculine hormonal balance early in development, demonstrate hobby and career preferences more similar to men. A preponderance of evidence suggests that biology and socialization are both components, not just one or the other.
So if anyone's declaring conclusively that either 'women are hardwired to not like wargaming' or 'biology has nothing to do with hobbies', those are purely ideological positions that don't fit the science.
The real questions should be:
1. Can biology alone account for the lack of female representation in this hobby? We can already answer this one: absolutely not. Even if there is a biological basis for men preferring wargaming- which is suspect- it couldn't account for the completely lopsided gender balance we currently observe. Statistical trends between the sexes aren't that one-sided.
2. How much of that lack of representation is on account of community gatekeeping, and how much is due to factors beyond the direct ability of hobbyists to directly influence? Because we can (and should) make for a better and more welcoming community, but that won't guarantee gender parity in societies where military-themed toys and games are socialized as explicitly masculine from a young age. I don't think wargamers have the social power to directly redefine these cultural perceptions.
Ballet and knitting aren't predominantly female spaces because of gatekeeping. If members of either interest think they can, on their own, achieve equal male/female representation by making their community more welcoming, they're setting themselves up for failure. Whether the reason for lack of male representation is the result of biology, socialization, or a combination of the two, it's not something the ballet or knitting communities can fix on their own.
What we can do for wargaming is ensure we provide a welcoming environment, and that means better policing our own. I've seen a lot of shops turn a blind eye to exclusionary behaviors- harassment and leering in particular- and correcting behaviors that alienate prospective players is a bare minimum for improving representation in this hobby. The stereotype (socialization) that wargaming is for men can't be challenged, and socialized perceptions revised, until women are free to participate without being actively driven out. Videogaming is currently going through this process, and if that hobby can do it, so can wargaming.
the_scotsman wrote: ...It's a bold claim that someone's interest in playing games with and painting small miniature models is...not driven by biology?
The claim that biology has no impact whatsoever on hobbies/interests, and that it's all socialization, is contradicted by well-accepted research. There's overwhelming evidence for sex-based toy preferences in childhood, with children as young as nine months old showing markedly different preferences in toys long before they're socialized towards gender-aligned toys. Rhesus monkeys show the same trends. Women with congenital adrenal hyperplasia, a condition which produces more masculine hormonal balance early in development, demonstrate hobby and career preferences more similar to men. A preponderance of evidence suggests that biology and socialization are both components, not just one or the other.
So if anyone's declaring conclusively that either 'women are hardwired to not like wargaming' or 'biology has nothing to do with hobbies', those are purely ideological positions that don't fit the science.
The science is total bs that has accomplished nothing but taking an obvious, immutable truth that even the cavemen understood and introduced nothing but chaos and confusion, resulting in the horror show we're living in. You don't need research to prove that men and women are different, it has manifested itself in all societies across the earth since the dawn of mankind. And these source slinging arguments never accomplish anything or change anyone's mind, just cherry picked counter studies and quibbling about whether the source is credible in an endless loop.
Men and women are different because of social constructs. The same needs across all different cultures arose. We could argue that women with hormone balances that are considered more masculine for example may be more likely to place themselves in a more masculine gender schema. The science is not BS because it does a better job of explaining more phenomena than the explanations we had before. Just because you choose not to understand the science does not mean it doesn’t make sense or is objectively flawed.
The wargaming hobby is a rather big one with many different elements. Just because you have a lot of women crafting stuff doesn't mean that they would like wargaming. I haven't seen anyone claim women wouldn't like the crafting or story telling parts of the hobby which are the 2 parts I have seen women like the most of the wargaming aspect. But if they like those things wargaming probably isn't the best avenue for that, especially not games like 40k or the fantasy equivalent that requires a lot of models. RPGs or boardgames or just doing the crafting part of the wargaming hobby is often more suitable for them if that is what they are after. I have seen many beautiful armies and models painted by women but very few larger collections of a single army/force. The average model I have seen painted by a woman(who didn't just paint 1 time to try it with their bf) is of a much higher quality than the average model painted by a man. Quite clearly the creative aspect of the hobby is a larger draw for women than for men. On the other hand I know a lot of guys who really enjoy the playing aspect of the game and doesn't care at all about the building and painting parts and wish the models came prepainted. There should of course be women like that as well in the hobby but since there are so relatively few of them I haven't met anyone like that yet.
Nothing wrong with having a gender imbalance in a hobby as long as it is a "natural" one and not purely gatekeeping etc. People like different things and you shouldn't try to cater to everyone. Everyone should of course be welcome but there are different parts of each hobby/interest that just isn't as appealing to everyone. Painting a few cool models when you feel like it is entirely different from painting dozens if not hundreds of models of the same unit type for mass battles. Being part of a narrative story is quite different from the average wargame you will play at a store, club or tournament. The closer you get to roleplaying I would think you would have more women and the closer you get to large scale war simulation the more men you will have even if you removed all the other socialized behaviors that might prevent women from joining the hobby,
macluvin wrote: The science is not BS because it does a better job of explaining more phenomena than the explanations we had before. Just because you choose not to understand the science does not mean it doesn’t make sense or is objectively flawed.
I don’t think the laws of nature care if you understand, and you are choosing to ignore thousands of years of Tradition because somebody wrote a paper claiming girls can be boys.
macluvin wrote: The science is not BS because it does a better job of explaining more phenomena than the explanations we had before. Just because you choose not to understand the science does not mean it doesn’t make sense or is objectively flawed.
I don’t think the laws of nature care if you understand, and you are choosing to ignore thousands of years of Tradition because somebody wrote a paper claiming girls can be boys.
Laws of nature or laws of society? Slavery was legal for thousand of years and a consequence of "law of the strongest" which is a law of nature, somewhere it's still legal or tolerated, and yet how many in the civilized world could refer to thousand of years of tradition to make the point that slavery is right as a law of nature?
"Girls can be boys" meaning there are activities/interests/hobbies/etc that are gender locked is complete nonsense in 2021, almost 2022.
Ok. First, this is an entertainment for me, not some Great Crusade. Second, I was agreeing with the previous post, to some extent, that ‘umans do not conform to expectations. Third, words like ‘apparently’ and ‘seems’ do not raise the Standard of Truth for all to behold and cower before. They show the following is not presented as Validated, but as something you might find of interest.
That being said, and I am not savvy enough to post links from the pad here, a Google on ‘Scandinavian occupations by sex’ gives over seven million results, the first of which is a university article on gender segregation in the Nordic labour market. And a second search on ‘Scandinavian gender neutral gives slightly fewer results, the first of which is a NYT article on Swedish gender neutralising attempts. Happy to help
Gert wrote: Good to see the "help a fellow hobbyist" thread turned into "women don't even like warhammer anyway". Good work guys, you're really helping to subdue the notion that there's not a gatekeeping problem in this hobby.
People were helping by explaining that the behaviours OP considered gate keeping were the norm or just an individual's problem. It wasn't until others started flinging accusations of sexism where there is none that people started talking about gender roles. Thinking that any slight against a woman MUST be sexism is dumb because if you view the world through that lens then everyone must be sexist. Women aren't infallible and can misinterpret signals and intentions as easily as anyone else. If a man had started this thread there wouldn't even be a discussion. He'd be told that the norm is to treat newbies with kid gloves, the guy was a bad loser and to just avoid the other guy and the thread would have died at page 2 because no one had anything else to add.
macluvin wrote: The science is not BS because it does a better job of explaining more phenomena than the explanations we had before. Just because you choose not to understand the science does not mean it doesn’t make sense or is objectively flawed.
I don’t think the laws of nature care if you understand, and you are choosing to ignore thousands of years of Tradition because somebody wrote a paper claiming girls can be boys.
Slavery was legal for thousand of years and a consequence of "law of the strongest" which is a law of nature, somewhere it's still legal or tolerated, and yet how many in the civilized world could refer to thousand of years of tradition to make the point that slavery is right as a law of nature?
Thats a false equivalence. Slavery isn't a biological urge.
Thats a false equivalence. Slavery isn't a biological urge.
Neither is a hobby, or a job. My point is that something isn't right/wrong just because it was how things were done for thousands of years. Those "thousands of years of tradition" may be the consequence of cultures that aren't based on gender equality, which is a pillar of modern democratic societies instead. It should be at least.
We're humans, not animals. We are beyond the "laws of nature". In the civilized world at least.
People were helping by explaining that the behaviours OP considered gate keeping were the norm or just an individual's problem. It wasn't until others started flinging accusations of sexism where there is none that people started talking about gender roles. Thinking that any slight against a woman MUST be sexism is dumb because if you view the world through that lens then everyone must be sexist. Women aren't infallible and can misinterpret signals and intentions as easily as anyone else. If a man had started this thread there wouldn't even be a discussion. He'd be told that the norm is to treat newbies with kid gloves, the guy was a bad loser and to just avoid the other guy and the thread would have died at page 2 because no one had anything else to add.
Again, without knowing the specific case you can't know if that was sexism or not. Of course the use of MUST without knowing the facts is wrong as well, but the use of CAN isn't in this matter.
Thats a false equivalence. Slavery isn't a biological urge.
Neither is a hobby, or a job. My point is that something isn't right/wrong just because it was how things were done for thousands of years. Those "thousands of years of tradition" may be the consequence of cultures that aren't based on gender equality, which is a pillar of modern democratic societies instead. It should be at least.
We're humans, not animals. We are beyond the "laws of nature". In the civilized world at least.
People were helping by explaining that the behaviours OP considered gate keeping were the norm or just an individual's problem. It wasn't until others started flinging accusations of sexism where there is none that people started talking about gender roles. Thinking that any slight against a woman MUST be sexism is dumb because if you view the world through that lens then everyone must be sexist. Women aren't infallible and can misinterpret signals and intentions as easily as anyone else. If a man had started this thread there wouldn't even be a discussion. He'd be told that the norm is to treat newbies with kid gloves, the guy was a bad loser and to just avoid the other guy and the thread would have died at page 2 because no one had anything else to add.
Again, without knowing the specific case you can't know if that was sexism or not. Of course the use of MUST without knowing the facts is wrong as well, but the use of CAN isn't in this matter.
There's a difference between tradition and biology. When my dog has puppies she doesn't try to make a nest in a secluded spot or go into labour somewhere she feels safe because it's traditional. She doesn't develop a bond with the puppies because society told her to. Likewise the rest of the pack don't check over the puppies when they're young because of peer pressure, its all an instinctual need that is part of their biology. Animals (which includes humans) follow behaviours dictated by MILLIONS of years of evolution in order to propagate the species. It is genuinely amazing to me every time one of our girls has her first litter of puppies how they just KNOW how to take care of them. No one ever showed them how, they never read a book about it, no one is there to offer advice. Their biology just tells them what to do. Comparative to how long society has actually existed it's not been around anywhere near enough time to overwrite evolutionary behaviours.
Hobbies and (to a lesser extent I would argue) jobs are an outlet for natural evolutionary instincts. Attempting to deny that is just trying to deny those millions of years of evolution. Its more likely that masculine behaviour in women is the societal influence than the other way round.
Gert wrote: Good to see the "help a fellow hobbyist" thread turned into "women don't even like warhammer anyway". Good work guys, you're really helping to subdue the notion that there's not a gatekeeping problem in this hobby.
It's fine, I suspect the OP left a few pages back...
There's a difference between tradition and biology. When my dog has puppies she doesn't try to make a nest in a secluded spot or go into labour somewhere she feels safe because it's traditional. She doesn't develop a bond with the puppies because society told her to. Likewise the rest of the pack don't check over the puppies when they're young because of peer pressure, its all an instinctual need that is part of their biology. Animals (which includes humans) follow behaviours dictated by MILLIONS of years of evolution in order to propagate the species. It is genuinely amazing to me every time one of our girls has her first litter of puppies how they just KNOW how to take care of them. No one ever showed them how, they never read a book about it, no one is there to offer advice. Their biology just tells them what to do. Comparative to how long society has actually existed it's not been around anywhere near enough time to overwrite evolutionary behaviours.
Hobbies and (to a lesser extent I would argue) jobs are an outlet for natural evolutionary instincts. Attempting to deny that is just trying to deny those millions of years of evolution. Its more likely that masculine behaviour in women is the societal influence than the other way round.
And I know lots of cases in which women were horrible to their puppies and had no maternal instincts at all, while some men were amazing in that role. My mum is some sort of activist in the field of pets adoptions.
Women aren't better than men in raising puppies or children, just stereotypes from decades of patriarchal society may let someone believe that. It's like claiming that black people should be relegated to hard work because it's the role they had for thousands of years and evolution made them stronger and more resilient, since it's a fact that on average black people are more fit than whites or people from other ethnic groups.
There is no such thing as natural evolutionary instincts based on genders. "Masculine" behaviour in women always existed, simply in most of the cases it had to be kept hidden or repressed to avoid repercussions. You refer to evolution, but one the last steps in the field of evolution is the actual disband of the gender discrimination as a concept. Not accepting it is denying evolution.
We are not (anymore) animals that simply follow some instincts, we have laws and morals that have nothing to do with the "law of nature". And it doesn't matter for how long some behaviours have been considered normal or even good, we live in 2021, almost 2022 now. Societies are a consequence of evolution, gender equality is evolution. Would you justify slavery just because it was a natural part of the majority of societies in human history barring the last century or so, and law of the strongest always applies in nature?
Thankfully we don't live in The Handmaid's Tale's society.
Any thread here about women participating the hobby or female representation abundantly clearly demonstrates why women might not feel welcome to the hobby.
Paige, in case you still might be reading this, I hope you will find decent sort of people to game with.
There is a difference between different genders/races or whatever to have inclinations towards things and forcing people to do certain things due to those inclinations. Black people might be more fit and is the reason why they are performing so well in sports. We aren't forcing them to do that though. We give people the opportunities and then they can seek them out. We shouldn't change stuff so more whites or asians can play elite sports instead of black people. If among the top 0,1% of athletes blacks are slightly over represented it isn't a problem.
Slavery is forcing people to do things. Not trying to bend backwards to make everything equally represented is the opposite of that. If more women want to knit and more men want to weld we shouldn't force some welders to knit and vice versa.
When people don't have much choice to get a good life then they will turn to the opportunities that exist no matter what race, sex or background they have. Gender norms(be they based on biology or socety) be damned. Which is why in scandinavian countries, where the difference in career doesnt matter much. we have certain occupations and other metrics that are more skewed than in countries that are less wealthy and less equal. Apparently men and women choose different things if they have abundant of options.
So saying men and women as groups have different preferences or inclinations isn't wrong. The thing is on an individual level most of these differences are irrelevant. An individual should be treated as an individual and not the group they come from and we can't know where on the curve/line a certain individual lies anyway before we know them. So on individual behavior we shouldn't put too much weight on their actions or interests. But it does help in trying to understand why we might have less women in wargaming than roleplaying or boardgaming even though it doesn't explain why each individual woman have chosen one over the other.
I have hears of this. I think the female experience of war and what it involves is often far darker than that of the men. Frankly I'm not surprised that its 'popularity' as a pursuit fell away once the mangled sons and husbands came home or stories from other women left in the wake of rampaging victorious armies came to light.
Its easy to 'glory up' and put some snazz on the fighting and shooting and winning, not so much the other stuff. Boys fight, girls live with the consequences of what happens and have to pick up the pieces.
No, I'm pretty sure watching your friends explode or having your legs blown off is worse than being told stories about it.
Actually I think bringing up a typically large family without a male breadwinner in the interwar period before the advent of welfare states was arguably worse, compounded by dealing with the grief. Certainly the incidence of female suicide was shockingly high during this time and one of the the drivers for many of the anti suicide measures that are part of our every day lives now (mostly based around the idea of making suicide take longer as people are more likely to have second thoughts).
So saying men and women as groups have different preferences or inclinations isn't wrong.
No, it isn't.
But do you think as a thought experiment, you might be able to infer a secondary meaning when someone makes a post "Community Gate Keeping For Women" and every response is
"men and women as groups have different preferences"?
Because, to me, what's interesting about that response is that it's not really an answer to the original question, but it implies an answer - "there is not community gatekeeping against women in the wargaming hobby".
The science is total bs that has accomplished nothing but taking an obvious, immutable truth that even the cavemen understood and introduced nothing but chaos and confusion, resulting in the horror show we're living in.
I dunno, I think men like to dominate farming these days, the idea of only letting women do it whilst men are relegated to only hunting won't be popular... People have very blinkered views on traditional roles, traditional views and apparently innate behaviours. What people have done and why has been driven by multiple stimuli, power relationships, threat levels, societal practices and so on. It is remarkably complex with counter examples from human societies through history for nearly every gendered role or practice you could mention. Hell even colours with pink for boys and blue for girls switching over in the 20th century, with non gendered use before then.
Again, what the actual feth does this have anything to do with the initial query of the thread? This entire circle of bs is likely to, if it hasn't already, drive the OP away.
Seriously, she asks a simple question, gave a few examples, and for the first page or so the responses were reasonable - explaining likely reasons for the issues and ways to solve some of them.
Now this thread has devolved into people claiming that women biologically do not like warhammer etc.
That is not the point here. The point is making someone feel welcome in the community, and frankly, we are doing a gak job of it here.
To OP, if you are still here, I'd say look to some of the possible solutions earlier in the thread - talk it out with the group if possible. Some of their antics are likely just trying to be overly nice to the newbie since Warhammer is a complex yet simultaneously shallow game, with way too many rules, special rules, strategems, etc to remember. For the issues that cannot be explained by that - the ignoring you and grunting leering guy, the best solution is to either talk it out or to avoid them. In any group you'll get the kind of person who just are tiring to be around unfortunately, but it is possible to avoid them. You can try bringing a friend into the game if you know anybody interested so you have someone immediately to socialize/play with even when with the full group. If all else fails, you may have to find, or build a new group from the ground up - not ideal, but if the people you are playing with now don't respond well to talking it out it could be better than putting up with a bad group.
Honestly, at this point I'd say look to earlier in the thread where some ideas and pointers were given, maybe find a poster or two with the best advice and send them a pm. They might be willing to give some more insights or ideas.
So saying men and women as groups have different preferences or inclinations isn't wrong.
No, it isn't.
But do you think as a thought experiment, you might be able to infer a secondary meaning when someone makes a post "Community Gate Keeping For Women" and every response is
"men and women as groups have different preferences"?
Because, to me, what's interesting about that response is that it's not really an answer to the original question, but it implies an answer - "there is not community gatekeeping against women in the wargaming hobby".
The topic of gatekeeping women must involve some discussion about whether or not women actually want play the game though, you can't just assume that the lack of women in the hobby is because of some nebulous accusation of general sexism
Sim-Life wrote: The topic of gatekeeping women must involve some discussion about whether or not women actually want play the game though, you can't just assume that the lack of women in the hobby is because of some nebulous accusation of general sexism
No, it doesn't, not when the person who started the thread is a woman feeling like she is being treated differently because she is a woman. She's in the hobby so obviously, she wants to do it. Any discussion relating to "women don't even like Warhammer" is wholly irrelevant to the topic and every single one of you who's been making "but wiminz" posts should be ashamed of yourselves.
Sim-Life wrote: The topic of gatekeeping women must involve some discussion about whether or not women actually want play the game though, you can't just assume that the lack of women in the hobby is because of some nebulous accusation of general sexism
No, it doesn't, not when the person who started the thread is a woman feeling like she is being treated differently because she is a woman. She's in the hobby so obviously, she wants to do it. Any discussion relating to "women don't even like Warhammer" is wholly irrelevant to the topic and every single one of you who's been making "but wiminz" posts should be ashamed of yourselves.
Indeed, in my short time on this forum this thread has been the most disappointing thing I have read.
Worse than the nerf threads
Sim-Life wrote: The topic of gatekeeping women must involve some discussion about whether or not women actually want play the game though, you can't just assume that the lack of women in the hobby is because of some nebulous accusation of general sexism
No, it doesn't, not when the person who started the thread is a woman feeling like she is being treated differently because she is a woman.
And people told her that her experiences weren't unique to her being a woman. At which point people insisted that no, actually it was sexism. Guess all the men who also experienced it were also victims of sexism?
I don't really want to dig deeper into all this "biology vs sociology" discussion, but one parameter that is severely overlooked when discussing wargaming is undisputable gender difference in incidence of autism spectrum disorder. There is about 2.5% prevalence of ASD in population, between 3:1 to 4:1 ratio of males vs females on the spectrum, and males with ASD score significantly higher on excessive interest trait than females with ASD (as well as few other parameters that amount to "social awkwardness"). Observable overrepresentation of ASD people in this hobby as compared to other social activities, paired with acknowledging that ASD is, well, a spectrum and there are sub-diagnosis people who will show similar but less severe traits, illustrates quite well that there are in fact significant biological factors involved in social activity choices and biology based gender differences. It is indeed 2021, nearly 2022 and people could actually reach for current neuroscientific knowledge when discussing such topics instead of relying on left vs right ideological quarrels.
macluvin wrote: The science is not BS because it does a better job of explaining more phenomena than the explanations we had before. Just because you choose not to understand the science does not mean it doesn’t make sense or is objectively flawed.
I don’t think the laws of nature care if you understand, and you are choosing to ignore thousands of years of Tradition because somebody wrote a paper claiming girls can be boys.
Tradition is not a biological construct it is a social construct. Thank you for proving my point. Besides, it’s not just a paper. It is many papers, and the cumulative product of over a century of forward progress having applied the golden standard of logic. That is how the scientific method works.
stratigo wrote: Lo and behold, in the years 2021 dnd has flourished amongst female players.
Is it though? Or is it just the ones that do play get the most signal? I play D&D with one girl, but in all the hobby stores I've been to across my state I've almost never encountered a young girl or a grown woman. I see pictures from events and tournaments and they're either not present, or stick out as one among dozens and dozens.
So, again, has it really flourished, or is the spotlight just being shone upon them thereby making the perception seem that there are so many more of them?
My D&D (and general purpose gaming group) is an even split, 3 men and 3 women - the DM is a woman running a homebrew campaign.
Sledgehammer wrote: I'm not sure what anyone is expecting to get out of this thread other than bad takes, or useless advice.
Yes. I think what OP has is a local problem, and if you want to play locally, you're going to need to address the social dynamics there. Having a lousy gaming store experience is more the normal than the exception, I think though :/
Dragging in some other friends was maybe good advice, though.
Mistresspaige wrote: Hey guys I’m quite new to the whole 40k scene but after watching the hilarious Text to Speech show on YouTube last year I’ve been interested in trying out the game itself. However from a lot of groups I’ve met they’ve been maybe not hostile per day but a little gate keeping. How can I join in the fun on the hobby when I’m looked upon as not belonging? Is there anything I can do to make the community more welcoming to me?
It's tough, there's no easy solution when many clubs are so male-dominated. Probably your best bet is to just dive in and from there try to figure out which players are going to be the easiest to get along with and make them your core circle. Changing views is a difficult, arduous process so probably easier to just try and filter people by what they already believe so you have a positive experience.
And never feel like you have to be friends with everyone, or really even be 'accepted' by the whole community. If your club isn't tiny you're going to be able to just avoid people you don't care for, or who don't care for you. That's fine and good and not worth troubling oneself over- there's a good chunk of our local player base I will never interact with outside of events and it works wonders for enjoying the hobby.
Ah, someone always tries to insinuate that men and women tend to have the same hobbies/interests. Sorry to rain on your parade dude but I have news for you:
They don´t.
Plenty have the same hobbies. While some things tend to visually lean more heavily one way of the other, (from my personal experience in knowing hundreds of gamers) they just tend to enjoy them in different ways. The many women I've known to be into things like D&D, Magic, and a few for Warhammer tend to stick to their own personal playgroups. People they know and trust, so not a lot of people outside those small groups know about them and just assume they don't exist, whereas I see far more guys out and about at FLGS's playing there. When I've spoken to them about this, it's often a result of social pressure, feeling like as women they're not supposed to have these hobbies, or feeling the kinds of things the OP has when they've gone out on their own to experience them.
I've been the only guy in an all women D&D group before and the feeling of being the odd one out over and above being the "new person" in a group of friends can be pretty intimidating, even when you know there's not kind of gender discrimination going on.
My wife plays Magic and other board games with me on a regular basis, she's not into it enough to go out to events on her own, but she enjoys playing with me and my other gamer friends when they are over.
In my group of friends way back in High School a few of the women I knew were big Halo fans, and a bunch of us played magic together.
We had a few women who were regulars top finishers in Magic tournaments in out FLGS for a number of years before I stopped going out to tournaments due to life getting in the way.
Just because you haven't had personal experience with women in your hobbies, doesn't mean that they don't exist. Just because demographics skew one way or another, doesn't mean that "women do this and men do that"
Strange, when I take a stroll at the river all fishermen tend to be male. Guess female fishermen must hide from me as soon as they see me coming. What about soccer fans? Majority of people who watch/play it are males. Ballet? Majority of ballet dancers are female.
And now back to our 40K topic. Who wants to argue with me about the fact that the vast majority of 40K players on this planet are male? Who? Those people will probably also want to prove me wrong when I say water is wet.
And there goes the point that you totally missed.
Yes, there are more men that play 40k than women, a lot more, that was never the point. The point was about your blanket statement that men and women don't have the same hobbies and interests based solely on their gender. That is what was false.
Nightlord1987 wrote: If anyone gives you flakk for any reason, they are not welcome in the community.
We need MORE PLAYERS.
Some of the best painted miniatures I've seen were painted by women from our FLGS (which was sadly shut down 2 years ago)
The issue is that discrimination most often occurs without the discriminating party being aware of it. It might even be benevolent in intention, but still makes the party that was discriminated against uncomfortable. Be firm but polite and point out behaviors you do not enjoy as you see them, and be persistent in wedging yourself into a local community. As you become normalized in your group you will see these behaviors naturally curb as well. And if enough women deal with the awkward and uncomfortable feelings of playing with people that believe women are biologically averse to playing tabletop games that perception will be progressively less influential on their attitudes and therefore behaviors regarding women.
Progress is a slow and painful process. Changing the attitudes an implicit biases that ultimately created that hostile environment in the hobby for women requires either enculturation, which begins at a young age, and requires new generations to mature, or for the people that are exhibiting these behaviors to learn what they are doing is wrong but it’s not their fault, are willing to accept that they are wrong, and are willing to understand how their behavior may be shaped by implicit biases. Unfortunately the most problematic people are the least likely to do any of that, so enculturation is probably the best bet. Case in point: this thread, and any female space marine thread. In either case it involves women being willing to endure that gatekeeping behavior and to wedge themselves into the hobby to overcome the social pressures that keep women out. It will be uncomfortable for everyone involved.
Tradition is not a biological construct it is a social construct. Thank you for proving my point. Besides, it’s not just a paper. It is many papers, and the cumulative product of over a century of forward progress having applied the golden standard of logic. That is how the scientific method works.
So the science can't be wrong? It can't be based on stupid assumptions, be politically motivated, or just be outright propaganda? And all modern science is logical truth while the prior understanding and practices of mankind were just wrong the entire time, not rooted in any inherent human behavior or biology? Men and women have no distinct natural inclinations that resulted in tradition?
Tradition is not a biological construct it is a social construct. Thank you for proving my point. Besides, it’s not just a paper. It is many papers, and the cumulative product of over a century of forward progress having applied the golden standard of logic. That is how the scientific method works.
So the science can't be wrong? It can't be based on stupid assumptions, be politically motivated, or just be outright propaganda? And all modern science is logical truth while the prior understanding and practices of mankind were just wrong the entire time, not rooted in any inherent human behavior or biology? Men and women have no distinct natural inclinations that resulted in tradition?
The reason science is more right than tradition ever will be is because scientists operate under the assumption that they can be wrong. Science has been flawed in the past. The scientific method is the process by which people separate biases from opinions to generate to the best of our current understanding, the most probable truth. The nazis were notorious for attacking intellectual movements and especially science because unless the science was of benefit to their beliefs or produced material that they found beneficiary, it was useless. When science and politics clash, it’s usually the science that is correct.
Of course biases can find their way in the methodology, but we’ve created standards that mitigate them. The biases are not in the methodology of scientific research and experimentation; they will be found in the conclusion that we choose to make based on the results. Using what we find to be the conclusion, we can try to apply it to other things. This is why replicability of results is important for scientific research and experimentation to be worth anything in the arcadeic world. If the research was biased by political ideology or stupid assumptions then when other research is conducted with it, then we would discover that we got some things conceptually wrong.
That is why it is far more probable that after decades and centuries of testing and developing our understanding, that the current science is most likely to be accurate than our understanding of these things a hundred years ago, or 200 or a thousand. We definitely got a lot of it wrong back then, and we probably got a bit wrong now to be honest.
This brings me to another point; I trust science way more than tradition or other knowledge because science is self critical and operates under the assumption that it can be flawed and wrong. It challenges its own results. You, on the other hand, hold that your opinion is an absolute. Science has tested and used to support your opinion, but science has long since identified how personal biases have had a significant effect both on the methodology and the perception of the outcome, and upon further experimentation and research found your explanation to be wanting as it does a poor job of explaining a lot of other behaviors and phenomena.
That is why it is far more probable that after decades and centuries of testing and developing our understanding, that the current science is most likely to be accurate than our understanding of these things a hundred years ago, or 200 or a thousand. We definitely got a lot of it wrong back then, and we probably got a bit wrong now to be honest.
This brings me to another point; I trust science way more than tradition or other knowledge because science is self critical and operates under the assumption that it can be flawed and wrong. It challenges its own results. You, on the other hand, hold that your opinion is an absolute. Science has tested and used to support your opinion, but science has long since identified how personal biases have had a significant effect both on the methodology and the perception of the outcome, and upon further experimentation and research found your explanation to be wanting as it does a poor job of explaining a lot of other behaviors and phenomena.
I'm a bit lost here... Neuroscience has produced a really, really large body of evidence that our brains are deeply gendered. Same goes with psychiatry, in which pretty much all disorders are deeply gendered. Given that psychology is emergent on neurology and endocrinology, how exactly is it "trusting science" to argue, that we are not a deeply biological and gendered species?
How super sad you felt this way. I am not sure any guy could equate the same feeling, but certainly prejudice and bias abounds everywhere, so from a guy's perspective, while maybe not due to gender, certainly from other aspects.
It very much reminds me of my time in the military, which actually was before women were allowed in almost every segment; however, during my time was the great inclusion in every aspect of the military and even as a young guy I could not understand most guys reticence, except I concluded it due to one main, idiotic reason:
They simply felt like their own private club was invaded and they could no longer curse, burp and fart at will.
Stay strong and as you grow in experience and the hobby, create and fill your own club and circle with those that help you enjoy the game. I have played in a few places and tournaments where there were genuine nice people and some total A$$hats - that's just people for you.
Yup. Person comes to the board looking for help about gatekeeping in the hobby and gets a lecture about how men and women are biologically predisposed toward different hobbies.
The nazis were notorious for attacking intellectual movements and especially science because unless the science was of benefit to their beliefs or produced material that they found beneficiary, it was useless. When science and politics clash, it’s usually the science that is correct.
The irony of this statement is palpable.
What would be the standard of evidence to change your mind? If it was proven that there are biological differences between people that make them suited for and inclined toward different things, such as abstract thinking, would you change your position?
Irkjoe wrote: The irony of this statement is palpable.
What would be the standard of evidence to change your mind? If it was proven that there are biological differences between people that make them suited for and inclined toward different things, such as abstract thinking, would you change your position?
I'm sure there's a bear in a forest somewhere who would be happy to discuss the intricacies of 'natural law' with you. Let us know how that goes.
Irkjoe: Do you really feel that this thread where someone came looking for help about gatekeeping of women in the wargaming hobby is the place for this argument?
Da Boss wrote: Irkjoe: Do you really feel that this thread where someone came looking for help about gatekeeping of women in the wargaming hobby is the place for this argument?
I think that if you are going to claim objectivity and use science as a bludgeon then that question is a good test.
Da Boss wrote: Irkjoe: Do you really feel that this thread where someone came looking for help about gatekeeping of women in the wargaming hobby is the place for this argument?
I think that if you are going to claim objectivity and use science as a bludgeon then that question is a good test.
Do you think this is helping the OP find a solution to her problem somehow?
Do you think this is helping the OP find a solution to her problem somehow?
Yes, just not the solution she wants.
Are you telling her she doesn't ACTUALLY like Warhammer? Because, here's the thing. I've not done the research. I've not read the studies, I'm not a sociologist, none of that. If there's a strong preference for men to prefer hobbies like 40k over women... That doesn't matter one whit when you have a woman who wants to play. Because this is not a hypothetical "average woman", this is a specific person who's interested and is facing issues.
JNAProductions wrote: you telling her she doesn't ACTUALLY like Warhammer? Because, here's the thing. I've not done the research. I've not read the studies, I'm not a sociologist, none of that. If there's a strong preference for men to prefer hobbies like 40k over women... That doesn't matter one whit when you have a woman who wants to play. Because this is not a hypothetical "average woman", this is a specific person who's interested and is facing issues.
I'm saying that the miniature hobby is overwhelmingly for men and that the situation where women can just wander into a group of men and game with them like a man is impossible. Women are more concerned with the social aspect while power gamer Timmy and old Gregor want to get granular about points, statistics, and why female marines break the fluff; they don't want to be bothered with her and she's repulsed by their behavior. Imagine if Timmy wanted to drink with the wine mums and watch american beauty, ha!
I'm saying that the miniature hobby is overwhelmingly for men and that the situation where women can just wander into a group of men and game with them like a man is impossible. Women are more concerned with the social aspect while power gamer Timmy and old Gregor want to get granular about points, statistics, and why female marines break the fluff; they don't want to be bothered with her and she's repulsed by their behavior. Imagine if Timmy wanted to drink with the wine mums and watch american beauty, ha!
JNAProductions wrote: you telling her she doesn't ACTUALLY like Warhammer? Because, here's the thing. I've not done the research. I've not read the studies, I'm not a sociologist, none of that. If there's a strong preference for men to prefer hobbies like 40k over women... That doesn't matter one whit when you have a woman who wants to play. Because this is not a hypothetical "average woman", this is a specific person who's interested and is facing issues.
I'm saying that the miniature hobby is overwhelmingly for men and that the situation where women can just wander into a group of men and game with them like a man is impossible. Women are more concerned with the social aspect while power gamer Timmy and old Gregor want to get granular about points, statistics, and why female marines break the fluff; they don't want to be bothered with her and she's repulsed by their behavior. Imagine if Timmy wanted to drink with the wine mums and watch american beauty, ha!
"Hey guys, are women gatekept in the Warhammer community?"
"Yes, but only because women should not be playing Warhammer."
Are we going to be complaining about cooties outbreaks next?
JNAProductions wrote: you telling her she doesn't ACTUALLY like Warhammer? Because, here's the thing. I've not done the research. I've not read the studies, I'm not a sociologist, none of that. If there's a strong preference for men to prefer hobbies like 40k over women... That doesn't matter one whit when you have a woman who wants to play. Because this is not a hypothetical "average woman", this is a specific person who's interested and is facing issues.
I'm saying that the miniature hobby is overwhelmingly for men and that the situation where women can just wander into a group of men and game with them like a man is impossible. Women are more concerned with the social aspect while power gamer Timmy and old Gregor want to get granular about points, statistics, and why female marines break the fluff; they don't want to be bothered with her and she's repulsed by their behavior. Imagine if Timmy wanted to drink with the wine mums and watch american beauty, ha!
If Timmy wanted to drink with the wine moms and watch American Beauty, that'd be absolutely fine. A hobby or activity being stereotypically masculine or feminine doesn't mean jack if it's something you enjoy.
Again, there is (or was, in all probability) an actual woman here saying she enjoys the hobby, and you're dismissing that. You're saying "She doesn't really enjoy the hobby the same way other people do."
You are, in effect, calling her a liar. For what reason? Why?
the_scotsman wrote: ...It's a bold claim that someone's interest in playing games with and painting small miniature models is...not driven by biology?
Yes, and what's more, they made the claim that it was "personal," which is not merely an argument for the null hypothesis, but something else.
the_scotsman wrote: Here, i'll disprove the notion that women do not enjoy spending a huge amount of time meticulously making tiny collectible objects: Go into your internet browser, up at the top, and type in "www.etsy.com"
I never said that was the case. Wargaming is more than tiny collectible objects. Implying otherwise is very disingenuous.
Tradition is not a biological construct it is a social construct. Thank you for proving my point. Besides, it’s not just a paper. It is many papers, and the cumulative product of over a century of forward progress having applied the golden standard of logic. That is how the scientific method works.
So the science can't be wrong? It can't be based on stupid assumptions, be politically motivated, or just be outright propaganda? And all modern science is logical truth while the prior understanding and practices of mankind were just wrong the entire time, not rooted in any inherent human behavior or biology? Men and women have no distinct natural inclinations that resulted in tradition?
What you will find in all instances of science proposing hypotheses that are later disproven, is that it was later disproven by more science.
Unlike subjective social and cultural fields, science is self improving and correcting. When a hypothesis is disproven, it only make science more accurate, by replacing it with a better evidenced explanation.
Modern science being logical truth and prior understanding and practices being wrong are entirely separate things. They aren't related to each other.
you're using a correlation causation fallacy. Sometimes we believed things that were true and sometimes we didn't, but being a tradition or practice has no impact on the chance they were true or not. That's also a fallacy, the fallacy of appeal to tradition.
As science is self correcting, if something comes out with poor assumptions or motivations, it has to go through a gauntlet of denial to reach publication (at least, publication in the scientific field - anyone can put crap online and claim it's serious). And even then, it can and has been retracted, rebutted and made redundant by more science.
This is why when we discuss science hypotheses and resulting theories, we discuss it in terms of consensus based on evidence. That means there is little in the way of research tested as comprehensively to contradict it. Consensus changes if enough new evidence is tested and runs that same gauntlet.
Argument from tradition is basically the analogue equivalent of 'I did my research' through google links....
Gert wrote: Good to see the "help a fellow hobbyist" thread turned into "women don't even like warhammer anyway". Good work guys, you're really helping to subdue the notion that there's not a gatekeeping problem in this hobby.
It's fine, I suspect the OP left a few pages back...
I suspect OP was a drive by posting of an alt account of someone who posts here regularly.
JNAProductions wrote:If Timmy wanted to drink with the wine moms and watch American Beauty, that'd be absolutely fine. A hobby or activity being stereotypically masculine or feminine doesn't mean jack if it's something you enjoy.
Again, there is (or was, in all probability) an actual woman here saying she enjoys the hobby, and you're dismissing that. You're saying "She doesn't really enjoy the hobby the same way other people do."
You are, in effect, calling her a liar. For what reason? Why?
No, Timmy would be a weirdo, he doesn't belong there and the wine mums don't want to hear his scene by scene analysis of how the movie is a subversive loser's fantasy. Everything isn't for everybody and the idea that you will be welcomed by people who want something different out of it is silly. Most men prioritize playing the game, the thing itself, not socializing and chit-chatting over the game.
Hellebore wrote:
Unlike subjective social and cultural fields, science is self improving and correcting. When a hypothesis is disproven, it only make science more accurate, by replacing it with a better evidenced explanation.
Modern science being logical truth and prior understanding and practices being wrong are entirely separate things. They aren't related to each other.
you're using a correlation causation fallacy. Sometimes we believed things that were true and sometimes we didn't, but being a tradition or practice has no impact on the chance they were true or not. That's also a fallacy, the fallacy of appeal to tradition.
As science is self correcting, if something comes out with poor assumptions or motivations, it has to go through a gauntlet of denial to reach publication (at least, publication in the scientific field - anyone can put crap online and claim it's serious). And even then, it can and has been retracted, rebutted and made redundant by more science.
I'm going to echo my original point; you don't need a scientific explanation to prove men and women are different, it's completely self evident. Enter science; now, men and women are the same, interchangeable, or nonexistent. The science assumes that we haven't figured it out yet when the truth has been obvious from the beginning.
Correlation is the first step in determining causation, and the disregard of traditions that might have become traditions because they contain wisdom is a dangerous lesson the west is currently learning imo.
JNAProductions wrote:If Timmy wanted to drink with the wine moms and watch American Beauty, that'd be absolutely fine. A hobby or activity being stereotypically masculine or feminine doesn't mean jack if it's something you enjoy.
Again, there is (or was, in all probability) an actual woman here saying she enjoys the hobby, and you're dismissing that. You're saying "She doesn't really enjoy the hobby the same way other people do."
You are, in effect, calling her a liar. For what reason? Why?
No, Timmy would be a weirdo, he doesn't belong there and the wine mums don't want to hear his scene by scene analysis of how the movie is a subversive loser's fantasy. Everything isn't for everybody and the idea that you will be welcomed by people who want something different out of it is silly. Most men prioritize playing the game, the thing itself, not socializing and chit-chatting over the game.
Well, what if a guy wants to hang out with a lot of women and watch romantic comedies without analyzing it? What's so bad about getting together and hanging out with a bunch of friends? That sounds fun enough to me.
JNAProductions wrote:If Timmy wanted to drink with the wine moms and watch American Beauty, that'd be absolutely fine. A hobby or activity being stereotypically masculine or feminine doesn't mean jack if it's something you enjoy.
Again, there is (or was, in all probability) an actual woman here saying she enjoys the hobby, and you're dismissing that. You're saying "She doesn't really enjoy the hobby the same way other people do."
You are, in effect, calling her a liar. For what reason? Why?
No, Timmy would be a weirdo, he doesn't belong there and the wine mums don't want to hear his scene by scene analysis of how the movie is a subversive loser's fantasy. Everything isn't for everybody and the idea that you will be welcomed by people who want something different out of it is silly. Most men prioritize playing the game, the thing itself, not socializing and chit-chatting over the game.
Correlation is the first step in determining causation, and the disregard of traditions that might have become traditions because they contain wisdom is a dangerous lesson the west is currently learning imo.
Lol. What a nice attitude straight from stone age.
In my own experience much like an earlier post noted. most of the female gamers we see in the FLGS are there because their significant other is into gaming. so, it is usually wives or girlfriends (my wife even used to play with us for a time, but she now prefers MMORPG games she can play online at home).
That is not to say we as male gamers do not want women in the gaming community, we do, but it is the rarity not the norm.
It is similar to many other hobbies, there is a reason why most men enjoy the company of so called "tomboys" girls who like to do the things that guys normally enjoy but women are not drawn to. I used to be an avid off road dirty biker and mountain biker when i was younger and i rarely ever saw any women in our groups unless they were there with their partner for example.
There is also the relationship aspect of time away for guys or girls to hang out with their circle of friends and have some social time away from their partners.
This Fantastic 5th ed blood angels army belonged to a female gamer who was at the time a GW store employee and played because she enjoyed the hobby without a relationship reason to be involved-
Mistresspaige wrote: Hey guys I’m quite new to the whole 40k scene but after watching the hilarious Text to Speech show on YouTube last year I’ve been interested in trying out the game itself. However from a lot of groups I’ve met they’ve been maybe not hostile per day but a little gate keeping. How can I join in the fun on the hobby when I’m looked upon as not belonging? Is there anything I can do to make the community more welcoming to me?
Get Tabletop Simulator from Steam, join the TTS40k discord, learn how to play 40k, and play with the people YOU want to play with.
What's interesting about theConversation article is the suggestion that the 'masculinisation' of certain toys plays into certain exclusionary behaviour by boys towards girls. So a gaming context that traditionally is a male-oriented space will foster behaviour that's less welcoming of female.
It's not the toys or evolution or 'tradition'; only a fool would think that. It's just that the culture of 40k grew as a male-dominated hobby, a result of this (incredibly recent, in humanity-terms) 20th century gendered toy marketing, from the start that makes it harder for women to tap in. Same with bronies!
In my own experience much like an earlier post noted. most of the female gamers we see in the FLGS are there because their significant other is into gaming. so, it is usually wives or girlfriends (my wife even used to play with us for a time, but she now prefers MMORPG games she can play online at home).
That is not to say we as male gamers do not want women in the gaming community, we do, but it is the rarity not the norm.
It is similar to many other hobbies, there is a reason why most men enjoy the company of so called "tomboys" girls who like to do the things that guys normally enjoy but women are not drawn to. I used to be an avid off road dirty biker and mountain biker when i was younger and i rarely ever saw any women in our groups unless they were there with their partner for example.
There is also the relationship aspect of time away for guys or girls to hang out with their circle of friends and have some social time away from their partners.
This Fantastic 5th ed blood angels army belonged to a female gamer who was at the time a GW store employee and played because she enjoyed the hobby without a relationship reason to be involved-
Spoiler:
One of the reason many women, and girls can only join into community’s like this with partners is for safety and that so many space are unwelcoming as this thread shows quite well.
Not only do we need to show up with everything normally expected, but we also need to prove enthusiastically that we are there for ourselves.
When trying to discuss things we like or dislike, we often are met with dismissive responses. That we are somehow breaking into spaces we have been for years, but somehow need to justify it for us to be there.
It is tiresome and happens in everything, guys nearing half my age telling me why we are the ones coming into there space. Gaming, movies and books. It’s all very similar.
But reading this thread I am reminded why I don’t really like modern 40k so much.
Also, this has happen with lego before. They pushed women out with there own marketing, girls where not getting given lego, and then would go on not to share the hobby with there girls or when giving gifts.
Creating a cycle over generations and turning a kids toy, into a boys toy.
This happened as well with the pink isle, a lot of girls like pink and a lot of girls stopped liking toys.
All my toys where from the “Boys section” for the most part, I hated pink on everything>.<
Bit of a rant. And probably the only post I make here.
Irkjoe wrote: Most men prioritize playing the game, the thing itself, not socializing and chit-chatting over the game.
Those you described are what I call TFG or WAAC dudes. I avoid them like plague.
Thankfully in over 20 years of wargaming I only met a handful of dudes that didn't prioritize socializing. The idea that people like that might be the majority in other metas terrorizes me.
If Timmy wanted to drink with the wine moms and watch American Beauty, that'd be absolutely fine.
American Beauty is hands down the best non action American movie that was ever made. Pretty much all men that drink alcohol like wine, and unless we're talking about people with socializing problems what sane single straight man doesn't like being surrounded by women?
It would be a perfectly normal scenario that one you described.
Irkjoe wrote: Most men prioritize playing the game, the thing itself, not socializing and chit-chatting over the game.
Those you described are what I call TFG or WAAC dudes. I avoid them like plague.
Thankfully in over 20 years of wargaming I only met a handful of dudes that didn't prioritize socializing. The idea that people like that might be the majority in other metas terrorizes me.
If Timmy wanted to drink with the wine moms and watch American Beauty, that'd be absolutely fine.
American Beauty is hands down the best non action American movie that was ever made. Pretty much all men that drink alcohol like wine, and unless we're talking about people with socializing problems what sane single straight man doesn't like being surrounded by women?
It would be a perfectly normal scenario that one you described.
Mistresspaige wrote: Hey guys I’m quite new to the whole 40k scene but after watching the hilarious Text to Speech show on YouTube last year I’ve been interested in trying out the game itself. However from a lot of groups I’ve met they’ve been maybe not hostile per day but a little gate keeping. How can I join in the fun on the hobby when I’m looked upon as not belonging? Is there anything I can do to make the community more welcoming to me?
Get Tabletop Simulator from Steam, join the TTS40k discord, learn how to play 40k, and play with the people YOU want to play with.
The same Discord where a weapons-grade MRA idiot posts a hell of a lot? That is not the safe space you think it is.
In my own experience much like an earlier post noted. most of the female gamers we see in the FLGS are there because their significant other is into gaming. so, it is usually wives or girlfriends (my wife even used to play with us for a time, but she now prefers MMORPG games she can play online at home).
That is not to say we as male gamers do not want women in the gaming community, we do, but it is the rarity not the norm.
It is similar to many other hobbies, there is a reason why most men enjoy the company of so called "tomboys" girls who like to do the things that guys normally enjoy but women are not drawn to. I used to be an avid off road dirty biker and mountain biker when i was younger and i rarely ever saw any women in our groups unless they were there with their partner for example.
There is also the relationship aspect of time away for guys or girls to hang out with their circle of friends and have some social time away from their partners.
This Fantastic 5th ed blood angels army belonged to a female gamer who was at the time a GW store employee and played because she enjoyed the hobby without a relationship reason to be involved-
Spoiler:
One of the reason many women, and girls can only join into community’s like this with partners is for safety and that so many space are unwelcoming as this thread shows quite well.
Not only do we need to show up with everything normally expected, but we also need to prove enthusiastically that we are there for ourselves.
When trying to discuss things we like or dislike, we often are met with dismissive responses. That we are somehow breaking into spaces we have been for years, but somehow need to justify it for us to be there.
It is tiresome and happens in everything, guys nearing half my age telling me why we are the ones coming into there space. Gaming, movies and books. It’s all very similar.
But reading this thread I am reminded why I don’t really like modern 40k so much.
Also, this has happen with lego before. They pushed women out with there own marketing, girls where not getting given lego, and then would go on not to share the hobby with there girls or when giving gifts.
Creating a cycle over generations and turning a kids toy, into a boys toy.
This happened as well with the pink isle, a lot of girls like pink and a lot of girls stopped liking toys.
All my toys where from the “Boys section” for the most part, I hated pink on everything>.<
Bit of a rant. And probably the only post I make here.
Exalted. This conversation about women was sorely lacking in input from women and I wish we could hear that perspective more often.
Blackie wrote: Those you described are what I call TFG or WAAC dudes. I avoid them like plague.
It also covers all those people who have poor social skills, low self esteem, introverted personalities, for whom just getting out and playing the game is a social activity, and possibly the only social activity they have.
Shunning them or pushing them to be different is just another form of gatekeeping - there is a difference between not being social and being anti-social after all, and a difference between not being welcoming and being actively unwelcoming regardless of the genders involved.
Blackie wrote: Those you described are what I call TFG or WAAC dudes. I avoid them like plague.
It also covers all those people who have poor social skills, low self esteem, introverted personalities, for whom just getting out and playing the game is a social activity, and possibly the only social activity they have.
Shunning them or pushing them to be different is just another form of gatekeeping - there is a difference between not being social and being anti-social after all, and a difference between not being welcoming and being actively unwelcoming regardless of the genders involved.
Gaming is about having fun and what brings fun is entirely subjective.
I don't have fun dealing with people who only want to win games and consider other players nothing more than "opponents". I understand there are people with poor social skills, low self esteem, etc... but if they decide to be completely unfriendly and repeatedly refuse to socialize that's their choice and I respect it. They're seeking a whole different experience from wargaming than me. Accepting it and moving on is in the best interest of both parts.
That's not really a form of gatekeeping as we want completely different things out of the hobby.
American Beauty is hands down the best non action American movie that was ever made.
Jesus, just when I thought there was nothing new you could say that I would disagree with you throw this at me.
Well of course absolute number one is an exaggeration, let's say my favorite one instead, as it's not possible to objectively declare the best movie in history. Still, American Beauty is universally recognized as one of the best movies in history by both the publics and the critics. It doesn't matter if you like it or not, it doesn't change that fact. There are several universally acclaimed movies that I completely dislike myself, it doesn't mean that they aren't among the best movies in history.
Blackie wrote: That's not really a form of gatekeeping as we want completely different things out of the hobby.
Comes back to the original post and replies. I suppose it's not always a clear line when freezing someone out and labeling them as 'that f-er over there' goes from personal preference to gatekeeping, or how much it matters to the end results.
Mistresspaige wrote: Hey guys I’m quite new to the whole 40k scene but after watching the hilarious Text to Speech show on YouTube last year I’ve been interested in trying out the game itself. However from a lot of groups I’ve met they’ve been maybe not hostile per day but a little gate keeping. How can I join in the fun on the hobby when I’m looked upon as not belonging? Is there anything I can do to make the community more welcoming to me?
Get Tabletop Simulator from Steam, join the TTS40k discord, learn how to play 40k, and play with the people YOU want to play with.
The same Discord where a weapons-grade MRA idiot posts a hell of a lot? That is not the safe space you think it is.
Irkjoe wrote:I'm saying that the miniature hobby is overwhelmingly for men and that the situation where women can just wander into a group of men and game with them like a man is impossible. Women are more concerned with the social aspect while power gamer Timmy and old Gregor want to get granular about points, statistics, and why female marines break the fluff; they don't want to be bothered with her and she's repulsed by their behavior. Imagine if Timmy wanted to drink with the wine mums and watch american beauty, ha!
I'm curious, what about enby folks? What are they more concerned with, seeing as you want to be all gender-reductive here.
Oh, and this whole thing is stupid and utterly shortsighted. Just to clarify.
Hecaton wrote:I suspect OP was a drive by posting of an alt account of someone who posts here regularly.
You suspect, but unless you have proof, all you're doing is further perpetuating the image that women don't "really" belong here.
Do you have any proof to back that up, or are you just stirring?
Apple fox wrote:Bit of a rant. And probably the only post I make here.
A most welcome post, regardless. Thank you for your voice.
A.T. wrote:
Blackie wrote: Those you described are what I call TFG or WAAC dudes. I avoid them like plague.
It also covers all those people who have poor social skills, low self esteem, introverted personalities, for whom just getting out and playing the game is a social activity, and possibly the only social activity they have.
Shunning them or pushing them to be different is just another form of gatekeeping - there is a difference between not being social and being anti-social after all, and a difference between not being welcoming and being actively unwelcoming regardless of the genders involved.
There is a difference, yes, but we should make it very clear that there isn't an excuse for being *anti-social* to someone on the basis of their gender or other such factor.
There is a difference, yes, but we should make it very clear that there isn't an excuse for being *anti-social* to someone on the basis of their gender or other such factor.
I think most gaming groups are just happy to have an active group to play with no matter who they are. granted in any group or organization you can always have selected individuals who are not good people, along with great people as groups are made up of individuals.
Let's face it, we are in a comparatively niche hobby with an equally small fan base that draws in rather eclectic people.
I mean most of the guys i work with in my normal day job could probably rattle off stats for their favorite sports team or star players, stuff i have no interest in (that have a far larger following than war gaming), but i can break down the caliber of various bolt weapons, the difference between the lore of the great houses or MRM, LRM and ATM missile types in battletech, or the alignment of various chromatic dragons etc...
In our regular to semi-regular group of around 20 gamers at the FLGS, we have people from all sorts of ethnic/racial backgrounds, religious & political affiliations, sexual preferences, genders, relationship status etc.... and nobody cares because they are all great people to hang out and game with. some of them i have known for decades to the point we are basically family.
New players are always welcomed and encouraged because building community is as much a part of the hobby as moving toy soldiers around the table.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: There is a difference, yes, but we should make it very clear that there isn't an excuse for being *anti-social* to someone on the basis of their gender or other such factor.
What if they're anti-social behaviour was due to some form of neurodivergence? I'm pretty sure you'd be willing to excuse them then. I dunno, just an impression I get from you.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: There is a difference, yes, but we should make it very clear that there isn't an excuse for being *anti-social* to someone on the basis of their gender or other such factor.
What if they're anti-social behaviour was due to some form of neurodivergence? I'm pretty sure you'd be willing to excuse them then. I dunno, just an impression I get from you.
I wouldn't, because unless we are talking an extreme level of disability social behaviours can be taught and learned.
I have autism and depression, my friend has anxiety and ptsd. We are extremely socially awkward and can be anti social sometimes. Some people are just bad at socializing. I understand the notion to get rid of gatekeeping, and I agree that we shouldn't have social boundaries defined by immutable characteristics, but please do not act like everyone that is socially awkward or antisocial can just get better at being social easily.
Irkjoe wrote: Most men prioritize playing the game, the thing itself, not socializing and chit-chatting over the game
I have to greately disagree with that. Yeah we have the couple tryhards but most people here go to tournaments for the social aspect of all of it. The game is mediocre at is best and just an excuse to hang out, move our painted toys and roll dice.
But maybe thats a cultural difference. I have always heard that american culture is much more cuttroath competitive.
Galas wrote: I have always heard that american culture is much more cuttroath competitive.
Yep. I can speak to my intensity, and I'm not necessarily a bad case.
Personally, I think competitive attitudes should be relegated to actual competition and I actually go out of my way to help my friends when we play casually.
Mistresspaige wrote: Hey guys I’m quite new to the whole 40k scene but after watching the hilarious Text to Speech show on YouTube last year I’ve been interested in trying out the game itself. However from a lot of groups I’ve met they’ve been maybe not hostile per day but a little gate keeping. How can I join in the fun on the hobby when I’m looked upon as not belonging? Is there anything I can do to make the community more welcoming to me?
Get Tabletop Simulator from Steam, join the TTS40k discord, learn how to play 40k, and play with the people YOU want to play with.
The same Discord where a weapons-grade MRA idiot posts a hell of a lot? That is not the safe space you think it is.
what? 0_0
To elaborate, the not-missed-around-here poster BaconCatBug posted there a lot. Turns out he’s a racist too and they binned him off TTS40K Discord by looks of things. Good.
Mistresspaige wrote: Hey guys I’m quite new to the whole 40k scene but after watching the hilarious Text to Speech show on YouTube last year I’ve been interested in trying out the game itself. However from a lot of groups I’ve met they’ve been maybe not hostile per day but a little gate keeping. How can I join in the fun on the hobby when I’m looked upon as not belonging? Is there anything I can do to make the community more welcoming to me?
Get Tabletop Simulator from Steam, join the TTS40k discord, learn how to play 40k, and play with the people YOU want to play with.
The same Discord where a weapons-grade MRA idiot posts a hell of a lot? That is not the safe space you think it is.
what? 0_0
To elaborate, the not-missed-around-here poster BaconCatBug posted there a lot. Turns out he’s a racist too and they binned him off TTS40K Discord by looks of things. Good.
TheBestBucketHead wrote: I have autism and depression, my friend has anxiety and ptsd. We are extremely socially awkward and can be anti social sometimes. Some people are just bad at socializing. I understand the notion to get rid of gatekeeping, and I agree that we shouldn't have social boundaries defined by immutable characteristics, but please do not act like everyone that is socially awkward or antisocial can just get better at being social easily.
Sadly posters in this thread seem to not be aware or not willing to accept how many problems that are attributed to sexism and/or gatekeeping stem from overrepresentation of people with ASD and other social disorders in this hobby.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: There is a difference, yes, but we should make it very clear that there isn't an excuse for being *anti-social* to someone on the basis of their gender or other such factor.
What if they're anti-social behaviour was due to some form of neurodivergence?
What kind of anti-social behaviour are we talking about here? Being blunt/stand-offish to everyone, or using sexist language, racial slurs, and transphobia? I can completely understand being antisocial, but I don't excuse bigotry, and my neurodivergent friends (I cannot speak for myself, as I am undiagnosed) would agree. There is no excuse for bigotry, not even neurodivergence.
Hecaton wrote:I suspect OP was a drive by posting of an alt account of someone who posts here regularly.
You suspect, but unless you have proof, all you're doing is further perpetuating the image that women don't "really" belong here.
I believe Hecaton was suggesting that the OP was the alt account of a female user. I doubt they're correct either way, though.
Oh, that's a very different impression to what I thought they were implying - I got the idea that they were implying that the whole account was made up by a non-woman user. Regardless, I also doubt that to be the case.
TheBestBucketHead wrote:I have autism and depression, my friend has anxiety and ptsd. We are extremely socially awkward and can be anti social sometimes. Some people are just bad at socializing. I understand the notion to get rid of gatekeeping, and I agree that we shouldn't have social boundaries defined by immutable characteristics, but please do not act like everyone that is socially awkward or antisocial can just get better at being social easily.
Again, socially awkward and anti-social =/= sexism. When I'm talking about sexist behaviour, I'm talking about sexist behaviour, not being socially awkward. I would class myself as socially awkward, but I wouldn't class myself as sexist.
This isn't a case of "get better socially", I'm talking about the very real genuine sexism and ideas that "this is not a space for women" - some of which have been espoused in this thread. If we can keep our eyes on that, instead of trying to conflate non-issues with that and thereby drown out those concerns, that would be good.
Irkjoe wrote: No, Timmy would be a weirdo, he doesn't belong there and the wine mums don't want to hear his scene by scene analysis of how the movie is a subversive loser's fantasy. Everything isn't for everybody and the idea that you will be welcomed by people who want something different out of it is silly. Most men prioritize playing the game, the thing itself, not socializing and chit-chatting over the game.
Aww, Irky, your gender roles aren't under assault, you can believe in your natural place in the world all you want, it's not true, it's a construct you lie to yourself about to make you feel special, but you can wallow in your bs forever, nobody's stopping you. We've just all heard it before, know it's bs, and don't mind calling it out as such.
Irkjoe wrote: I'm going to echo my original point; you don't need a scientific explanation to prove men and women are different, it's completely self evident. Enter science; now, men and women are the same, interchangeable, or nonexistent. The science assumes that we haven't figured it out yet when the truth has been obvious from the beginning.
Correlation is the first step in determining causation, and the disregard of traditions that might have become traditions because they contain wisdom is a dangerous lesson the west is currently learning imo.
Strangely, you keep coming back to your (pseudo) science, yet, I haven't seen you cite a single source. Not one peer-reviewed article, is this the science of feelings you're using? I mean, the results of that methodology tend to be inconsistent, but much like your devotion to gender roles, it will help to make you feel special, which is clearly very important to you.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: I would class myself as socially awkward, but I wouldn't class myself as sexist.
Weren't you just saying that people can be discriminatory without knowing it? How do you know your social awkwardness isn't a result of sexism you don't know you have?
Sim-Life wrote: Weren't you just saying that people can be discriminatory without knowing it? How do you know your social awkwardness isn't a result of sexism you don't know you have?
Usually making an effort to use better words (assuming you have the vocabulary) leads to the identification and amelioration of such tendencies. Self-analysis of language use often leads to an analysis of mental structures, pathways, and methodologies which are all tightly intertwined with worldview.
It's a process with many different approaches, but language is generally a good place to start, which is part of the reason it has been a point of emphasis over the past several years for many marginalized groups.
JNAProductions wrote:If Timmy wanted to drink with the wine moms and watch American Beauty, that'd be absolutely fine. A hobby or activity being stereotypically masculine or feminine doesn't mean jack if it's something you enjoy.
Again, there is (or was, in all probability) an actual woman here saying she enjoys the hobby, and you're dismissing that. You're saying "She doesn't really enjoy the hobby the same way other people do."
You are, in effect, calling her a liar. For what reason? Why?
No, Timmy would be a weirdo, he doesn't belong there and the wine mums don't want to hear his scene by scene analysis of how the movie is a subversive loser's fantasy. Everything isn't for everybody and the idea that you will be welcomed by people who want something different out of it is silly. Most men prioritize playing the game, the thing itself, not socializing and chit-chatting over the game.
Correlation is the first step in determining causation, and the disregard of traditions that might have become traditions because they contain wisdom is a dangerous lesson the west is currently learning imo.
Lol. What a nice attitude straight from stone age.
Yeah, I like the GAME the least out of the different aspects of 40k.
The social interplay between warlords and the spectacle of what's happening before/during/after on the table.
If I was privy to this misogyny and outright jerkness at our FLGS I would confront the detestable behaviour. I wish more people would stand up to the bully/ass-hat crowd.
The more people collecting/building/painting/playing 40k the better.
TwinPoleTheory wrote: Usually making an effort to use better words (assuming you have the vocabulary) leads to the identification and amelioration of such tendencies.
So you're saying that the use of certain shibboleths and incantations frees one from the sin of sexism and other forms of bigotry?
TwinPoleTheory wrote: Usually making an effort to use better words (assuming you have the vocabulary) leads to the identification and amelioration of such tendencies.
So you're saying that the use of certain shibboleths and incantations frees one from the sin of sexism and other forms of bigotry?
I mean it definitely explains the word salad I see people use to describe themselves on internet profiles nowadays.
Hecaton wrote: So you're saying that the use of certain shibboleths and incantations frees one from the sin of sexism and other forms of bigotry?
Assuming thought is involved in the process of forming words for you, yes. But we all do things differently, and despite your comment, nothing and nobody can provide absolution, so freedom from sin is simply another illusion in your collection, indeed acceptance of sin is only further illusion. You can think and speak, you can think about how you think and make it more accurate, less emotional, less judgemental, but ultimately, all this up to you, just stop whining when people call you out for being too lazy to make an effort at self-improvement.
Hecaton wrote: So you're saying that the use of certain shibboleths and incantations frees one from the sin of sexism and other forms of bigotry?
Assuming thought is involved in the process of forming words for you, yes. But we all do things differently, and despite your comment, nothing and nobody can provide absolution, so freedom from sin is simply another illusion in your collection, indeed acceptance of sin is only further illusion. You can think and speak, you can think about how you think and make it more accurate, less emotional, less judgemental, but ultimately, all this up to you, just stop whining when people call you out for being too lazy to make an effort at self-improvement.
Hey, we weren't talking about me, buddy.
My implied point was that if you act gakky but use the right words, you're still acting gakky (racist, sexist, whatever). So I don't see much point in the right words; rather, the words you describe seem more about signaling that one is part of a certain culture, what would be the college-educated class in the West.
Hecaton wrote: My implied point was that if you act gakky but use the right words, you're still acting gakky (racist, sexist, whatever). So I don't see much point in the right words; rather, the words you describe seem more about signaling that one is part of a certain culture, what would be the college-educated class in the West.
The point is not to pantomime the right words that you think people want to hear, which is yes, useless, pointless, and disingenuous.
The point is to think about how you speak and improve it, because yes, the words you use don't necessarily reflect your beliefs, but they portray an image to the people you speak to, which leads them to their beliefs about you. You can be lazy, not think about how words reflect thought, portray meaning, but you will run into people who will call you out on it. Language, thought, and belief are all tied together very intimately, changing or improving one, will often lead to change or improvement in the others.
For me, it was the realization that I used words like 'ret4rd3d' (language filters) a lot. One of my old friends had a child who could arguably be said to fall into that category, I would never want that child to hear me use that word and even accidentally think that it applied to them. This led me to think about a lot of the words I use without thinking, which is where my opinions on this subject stem from, as a result the clarity of my speech has generally improved among other things.
I'm still an donkey-cave, but at least I communicate it clearly.
Hecaton wrote: My implied point was that if you act gakky but use the right words, you're still acting gakky (racist, sexist, whatever). So I don't see much point in the right words; rather, the words you describe seem more about signaling that one is part of a certain culture, what would be the college-educated class in the West.
The point is not to pantomime the right words that you think people want to hear, which is yes, useless, pointless, and disingenuous.
The point is to think about how you speak and improve it, because yes, the words you use don't necessarily reflect your beliefs, but they portray an image to the people you speak to, which leads them to their beliefs about you. You can be lazy, not think about how words reflect thought, portray meaning, but you will run into people who will call you out on it. Language, thought, and belief are all tied together very intimately, changing or improving one, will often lead to change or improvement in the others.
For me, it was the realization that I used words like 'ret4rd3d' (language filters) a lot. One of my old friends had a child who could arguably be said to fall into that category, I would never want that child to hear me use that word and even accidentally think that it applied to them. This led me to think about a lot of the words I use without thinking, which is where my opinions on this subject stem from, as a result the clarity of my speech has generally improved among other things.
I'm still an donkey-cave, but at least I communicate it clearly.
But we're not talking about a woman going into a store and a guy launching into an incel-y rant about women invading his space and how they belong in a kitchen. Its about how a woman went to a FLGS and encountered people trying to accomadate a new player, a bad loser and someone looking at her funny. Only one of these thing are probably a gender thing (the last one, if that wasn't clear) and even then we only have OPs perception to go on and women aren't known to be infallible. My wife accuses me of giving her funny looks all the time and usually I'm just emoting at something I'm thinking about like trying to do math in my head or trying to get the most out of my gaming budget.
TwinPoleTheory wrote: For me, it was the realization that I used words like 'ret4rd3d' (language filters) a lot. One of my old friends had a child who could arguably be said to fall into that category, I would never want that child to hear me use that word and even accidentally think that it applied to them. This led me to think about a lot of the words I use without thinking, which is where my opinions on this subject stem from, as a result the clarity of my speech has generally improved among other things.
Oh yeah, I think I was misunderstanding you. I thought you were talking about using academic language as a near-requirement for being not bigoted. I work in academia, and there are an unfortunate number of people who think that the use of "proper language" absolves them from their sexism, racism, etc in that sphere. (My personal favorite was a male sociology professor who told a female physics professor who was a friend of mine that science was a "male way of knowing.")
I heavily agree on avoiding using slurs or derogatory language in the way you describe.
JNAProductions wrote:If Timmy wanted to drink with the wine moms and watch American Beauty, that'd be absolutely fine. A hobby or activity being stereotypically masculine or feminine doesn't mean jack if it's something you enjoy.
Again, there is (or was, in all probability) an actual woman here saying she enjoys the hobby, and you're dismissing that. You're saying "She doesn't really enjoy the hobby the same way other people do."
You are, in effect, calling her a liar. For what reason? Why?
No, Timmy would be a weirdo, he doesn't belong there and the wine mums don't want to hear his scene by scene analysis of how the movie is a subversive loser's fantasy. Everything isn't for everybody and the idea that you will be welcomed by people who want something different out of it is silly. Most men prioritize playing the game, the thing itself, not socializing and chit-chatting over the game.
Correlation is the first step in determining causation, and the disregard of traditions that might have become traditions because they contain wisdom is a dangerous lesson the west is currently learning imo.
Lol. What a nice attitude straight from stone age.
Yeah, I like the GAME the least out of the different aspects of 40k.
The social interplay between warlords and the spectacle of what's happening before/during/after on the table.
If I was privy to this misogyny and outright jerkness at our FLGS I would confront the detestable behaviour. I wish more people would stand up to the bully/ass-hat crowd.
The more people collecting/building/painting/playing 40k the better.
You’ve got excellent attitudes to have, and it is probable that you are aware of this rant. It is worth remembering that because men are not typically the subject of misogyny or sexist rhetoric, we are not going to notice it because we would have to be around the woman it happens to at the time it happens and we would likely have to be paying attention as a lot of these things are micro aggressions, and as we’ve noticed people can respond with a lot of hostility to the idea that they might have a point of view that was shaped by our culture to have biases against people based on various schema. Or even that somebody may not like a particular behavior they are barely aware they are doing, in other words. That is quite a bit that has to align before we will notice it, which is why to us it is under-represented and generally less noticeable. One of the reasons my wife loves me is the fact that I treat her exactly like I would a man; I don’t dramatically swoop in if she has the slightest fall asking her if she is alright, for example. I know that if she wasn’t she would let me know.
Blackie wrote:
Those you described are what I call TFG or WAAC dudes. I avoid them like plague.
Galas wrote:
I have to greately disagree with that. Yeah we have the couple tryhards but most people here go to tournaments for the social aspect of all of it. The game is mediocre at is best and just an excuse to hang out, move our painted toys and roll dice.
But maybe thats a cultural difference. I have always heard that american culture is much more cuttroath competitive.
But the reason you are gathered is to engage in the hobby, not engaging in the hobby just to hang out. Most men prioritize the "thing". I don't mean literally the rules of the game and a bunch of waac players. Women are more concerned with the social interaction while the men are going to care less and be more forgiving of the awkward.
And the details of analogy don't matter, it could be knitting or makeup or whatever.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: I'm curious, what about enby folks? What are they more concerned with, seeing as you want to be all gender-reductive here.
I don't even know what that means but they're men and women so all the same rules apply.
Grimskul wrote: Is it old for me to see NB as shortform for Nota Bene? Something my math teacher used consistently and I've never seen NB as anything else but that.
Well congratulations, you learned something today!
This thread... I do not even know where to begin. As a reminder for everyone, this forum has rules and they are really easy to follow. Number 1 is be polite. It is really easy to do but remarkably some people seem to struggle, if you want to be rude to other people please type out your rant then hit the big red x at the top right of your browser window. If you post rude, bigoted crap here you will be banned, if you post to just stir the pot or spam you will be banned.
Hecaton wrote: My implied point was that if you act gakky but use the right words, you're still acting gakky (racist, sexist, whatever). So I don't see much point in the right words; rather, the words you describe seem more about signaling that one is part of a certain culture, what would be the college-educated class in the West.
The point is not to pantomime the right words that you think people want to hear, which is yes, useless, pointless, and disingenuous.
The point is to think about how you speak and improve it, because yes, the words you use don't necessarily reflect your beliefs, but they portray an image to the people you speak to, which leads them to their beliefs about you. You can be lazy, not think about how words reflect thought, portray meaning, but you will run into people who will call you out on it. Language, thought, and belief are all tied together very intimately, changing or improving one, will often lead to change or improvement in the others.
For me, it was the realization that I used words like 'ret4rd3d' (language filters) a lot. One of my old friends had a child who could arguably be said to fall into that category, I would never want that child to hear me use that word and even accidentally think that it applied to them. This led me to think about a lot of the words I use without thinking, which is where my opinions on this subject stem from, as a result the clarity of my speech has generally improved among other things.
I'm still an donkey-cave, but at least I communicate it clearly.
But we're not talking about a woman going into a store and a guy launching into an incel-y rant about women invading his space and how they belong in a kitchen. Its about how a woman went to a FLGS and encountered people trying to accomadate a new player, a bad loser and someone looking at her funny. Only one of these thing are probably a gender thing (the last one, if that wasn't clear) and even then we only have OPs perception to go on and women aren't known to be infallible. My wife accuses me of giving her funny looks all the time and usually I'm just emoting at something I'm thinking about like trying to do math in my head or trying to get the most out of my gaming budget.
A person doesn’t have to be openly abused to feel excluded and unwelcome. The very fact the OP has had the experienced she has and they have made her feel so unwelcome that she had to come here and post this is a sign that she had a negative experience. The peoples intent is irrelevant really. It’s her experience that matters. What can the community do to make women feel more welcome? In this persons experience it wasn’t welcoming. I am not arguing that the victim should never be doubted, but here we are talking about her lived experience, how a situation made her feel, that’s all we need to know.
Making someone, anyone, feel welcome is a skill and it takes effort. We have all experienced good welcoming experiences in shows, pubs, restaurants etc and all had bad experiences. The key is, one person making that effort and knowing how to do it can all the difference. So the next time anyone new comes into your space, be the person who makes the effort.
Questioning the OPs experience and saying “but did they really do or that or is it up just in your imagination?” Or saying “that doesn’t happen round here” makes you part of the problem. That isn’t welcoming, it’s the opposite.
Feeling a certain way doesn't automatically make it reasonable or justified though. Whether it is needs to be examined in order to make the right call.
Hecaton wrote: My implied point was that if you act gakky but use the right words, you're still acting gakky (racist, sexist, whatever). So I don't see much point in the right words; rather, the words you describe seem more about signaling that one is part of a certain culture, what would be the college-educated class in the West.
The point is not to pantomime the right words that you think people want to hear, which is yes, useless, pointless, and disingenuous.
The point is to think about how you speak and improve it, because yes, the words you use don't necessarily reflect your beliefs, but they portray an image to the people you speak to, which leads them to their beliefs about you. You can be lazy, not think about how words reflect thought, portray meaning, but you will run into people who will call you out on it. Language, thought, and belief are all tied together very intimately, changing or improving one, will often lead to change or improvement in the others.
For me, it was the realization that I used words like 'ret4rd3d' (language filters) a lot. One of my old friends had a child who could arguably be said to fall into that category, I would never want that child to hear me use that word and even accidentally think that it applied to them. This led me to think about a lot of the words I use without thinking, which is where my opinions on this subject stem from, as a result the clarity of my speech has generally improved among other things.
I'm still an donkey-cave, but at least I communicate it clearly.
But we're not talking about a woman going into a store and a guy launching into an incel-y rant about women invading his space and how they belong in a kitchen. Its about how a woman went to a FLGS and encountered people trying to accomadate a new player, a bad loser and someone looking at her funny. Only one of these thing are probably a gender thing (the last one, if that wasn't clear) and even then we only have OPs perception to go on and women aren't known to be infallible. My wife accuses me of giving her funny looks all the time and usually I'm just emoting at something I'm thinking about like trying to do math in my head or trying to get the most out of my gaming budget.
A person doesn’t have to be openly abused to feel excluded and unwelcome. The very fact the OP has had the experienced she has and they have made her feel so unwelcome that she had to come here and post this is a sign that she had a negative experience. The peoples intent is irrelevant really. It’s her experience that matters. What can the community do to make women feel more welcome? In this persons experience it wasn’t welcoming. I am not arguing that the victim should never be doubted, but here we are talking about her lived experience, how a situation made her feel, that’s all we need to know.
Making someone, anyone, feel welcome is a skill and it takes effort. We have all experienced good welcoming experiences in shows, pubs, restaurants etc and all had bad experiences. The key is, one person making that effort and knowing how to do it can all the difference. So the next time anyone new comes into your space, be the person who makes the effort.
Questioning the OPs experience and saying “but did they really do or that or is it up just in your imagination?” Or saying “that doesn’t happen round here” makes you part of the problem. That isn’t welcoming, it’s the opposite.
Have an exalt for having a better point of view than me and wording it better than I can. It should be telling that every time we have a discussion that involves the inclusion of women (and just as importantly, but even more under the radar, non-binary and transgender people) some of dakka’s regulars get so uncomfortable that they need to start looking for every argument they can to justify the opposing side of the conversation. These are perspectives we rarely get and whenever we do get them we immediately get defensive. The sort of stuff that flies out so casually on these threads should prompt everyone on dakka to challenge themselves. I just learned from Sgt. smudge that holy cow, non-binary people are heavily discriminated here and in the hobby as well! I never thought to look at that until some of the rude responses they got. And I realized all the times I didn’t notice that people refused to in other threads to use their preferred pronouns just to spite them.
Hecaton wrote: My implied point was that if you act gakky but use the right words, you're still acting gakky (racist, sexist, whatever). So I don't see much point in the right words; rather, the words you describe seem more about signaling that one is part of a certain culture, what would be the college-educated class in the West.
The point is not to pantomime the right words that you think people want to hear, which is yes, useless, pointless, and disingenuous.
The point is to think about how you speak and improve it, because yes, the words you use don't necessarily reflect your beliefs, but they portray an image to the people you speak to, which leads them to their beliefs about you. You can be lazy, not think about how words reflect thought, portray meaning, but you will run into people who will call you out on it. Language, thought, and belief are all tied together very intimately, changing or improving one, will often lead to change or improvement in the others.
For me, it was the realization that I used words like 'ret4rd3d' (language filters) a lot. One of my old friends had a child who could arguably be said to fall into that category, I would never want that child to hear me use that word and even accidentally think that it applied to them. This led me to think about a lot of the words I use without thinking, which is where my opinions on this subject stem from, as a result the clarity of my speech has generally improved among other things.
I'm still an donkey-cave, but at least I communicate it clearly.
But we're not talking about a woman going into a store and a guy launching into an incel-y rant about women invading his space and how they belong in a kitchen. Its about how a woman went to a FLGS and encountered people trying to accomadate a new player, a bad loser and someone looking at her funny. Only one of these thing are probably a gender thing (the last one, if that wasn't clear) and even then we only have OPs perception to go on and women aren't known to be infallible. My wife accuses me of giving her funny looks all the time and usually I'm just emoting at something I'm thinking about like trying to do math in my head or trying to get the most out of my gaming budget.
A person doesn’t have to be openly abused to feel excluded and unwelcome. The very fact the OP has had the experienced she has and they have made her feel so unwelcome that she had to come here and post this is a sign that she had a negative experience. The peoples intent is irrelevant really. It’s her experience that matters. What can the community do to make women feel more welcome? In this persons experience it wasn’t welcoming. I am not arguing that the victim should never be doubted, but here we are talking about her lived experience, how a situation made her feel, that’s all we need to know.
Making someone, anyone, feel welcome is a skill and it takes effort. We have all experienced good welcoming experiences in shows, pubs, restaurants etc and all had bad experiences. The key is, one person making that effort and knowing how to do it can all the difference. So the next time anyone new comes into your space, be the person who makes the effort.
Questioning the OPs experience and saying “but did they really do or that or is it up just in your imagination?” Or saying “that doesn’t happen round here” makes you part of the problem. That isn’t welcoming, it’s the opposite.
Have an exalt for having a better point of view than me and wording it better than I can. It should be telling that every time we have a discussion that involves the inclusion of women (and just as importantly, but even more under the radar, non-binary and transgender people) some of dakka’s regulars get so uncomfortable that they need to start looking for every argument they can to justify the opposing side of the conversation. These are perspectives we rarely get and whenever we do get them we immediately get defensive. The sort of stuff that flies out so casually on these threads should prompt everyone on dakka to challenge themselves. I just learned from Sgt. smudge that holy cow, non-binary people are heavily discriminated here and in the hobby as well! I never thought to look at that until some of the rude responses they got. And I realized all the times I didn’t notice that people refused to in other threads to use their preferred pronouns just to spite them.
This place is cesspit in many ways but is getting better, because some people make the effort. The fact that those with a negative point of view or bigoted views are starting feel uncomfortable here down to the fact that some will stand up and call out that behaviour for what it is, but importantly fo it well and eloquently. I have learnt a lot this last year on here.
This place is cesspit in many ways but is getting better, because some people make the effort. The fact that those with a negative point of view or bigoted views are starting feel uncomfortable here down to the fact that some will stand up and call out that behaviour for what it is, but importantly fo it well and eloquently. I have learnt a lot this last year on here.
I always liked that the mods here give a pretty large window for people here to discuss/argue their points without getting banned for the slightest infraction.
I do think though that a lot of people here have tried to be more welcoming and accommodating over the years, even though some forums seem to get derailed very quickly into side arguments that have only minimal connections to the original topic.... kind of like this one lol.
Despite being here for 10 years myself, I tend to read a lot more than I post.
This place is cesspit in many ways but is getting better, because some people make the effort. The fact that those with a negative point of view or bigoted views are starting feel uncomfortable here down to the fact that some will stand up and call out that behaviour for what it is, but importantly fo it well and eloquently. I have learnt a lot this last year on here.
I always liked that the mods here give a pretty large window for people here to discuss/argue their points without getting banned for the slightest infraction.
I do think though that a lot of people here have tried to be more welcoming and accommodating over the years, even though some forums seem to get derailed very quickly into side arguments that have only minimal connections to the original topic.... kind of like this one lol.
Despite being here for 10 years myself, I tend to read a lot more than I post.
Likewise. It is improving, and the mods have done much better of late, I think they did a great job on the female marine threads recently in here and it seemed like a full time job for them.
TheBestBucketHead wrote:I have autism and depression, my friend has anxiety and ptsd. We are extremely socially awkward and can be anti social sometimes. Some people are just bad at socializing. I understand the notion to get rid of gatekeeping, and I agree that we shouldn't have social boundaries defined by immutable characteristics, but please do not act like everyone that is socially awkward or antisocial can just get better at being social easily.
Again, socially awkward and anti-social =/= sexism. When I'm talking about sexist behaviour, I'm talking about sexist behaviour, not being socially awkward. I would class myself as socially awkward, but I wouldn't class myself as sexist.
This isn't a case of "get better socially", I'm talking about the very real genuine sexism and ideas that "this is not a space for women" - some of which have been espoused in this thread. If we can keep our eyes on that, instead of trying to conflate non-issues with that and thereby drown out those concerns, that would be good.
I should specifiy that it wasn't you I had an issue with when I said that. Sexism and racism are not excusable by social disorders. However, what can come off as sexism and racism can be. My issue was with someone's implication that we can just get better at socializing, and that's that.
And andykp and macluvin ignore the very relevant critique that people's feelings aren't always valid... avoidance of a strong rebuke to your statement just makes you appear ideologically incoherent.
macluvin wrote: And I realized all the times I didn’t notice that people refused to in other threads to use their preferred pronouns just to spite them.
You know people can't see signatures on mobile or might have them turned off in the forum settings right?
Also I feel like a lot of people could learn a lot about this whole thread by watching Rashomon.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: I would class myself as socially awkward, but I wouldn't class myself as sexist.
Weren't you just saying that people can be discriminatory without knowing it? How do you know your social awkwardness isn't a result of sexism you don't know you have?
Sure - but I'm waiting for someone to correct me on if I do behave in a sexist way. If no-one calls it out, either they don't feel safe to, or there isn't an issue in my behaviour. Considering that I'm part of a group that is more than happy to call out problematic behaviours, I don't think I'm one of them.
Hecaton wrote:
TwinPoleTheory wrote: Usually making an effort to use better words (assuming you have the vocabulary) leads to the identification and amelioration of such tendencies.
So you're saying that the use of certain shibboleths and incantations frees one from the sin of sexism and other forms of bigotry?
I'm saying treating people with respect is usually a good place to start - performative gestures are just that, performative, but the refusal to understand and accept certain terms (ie, not using certain phrases, and wilfully choosing to use problematic phrases) is similarly a pretty bad look.
Actions over words - and sometimes, the action not to use certain words is just as loud.
Sim-Life wrote:But we're not talking about a woman going into a store and a guy launching into an incel-y rant about women invading his space
I mean, did we just miss how there were comments along the lines of "this isn't supposed to be a woman's space, this is a MAN'S hobby"? I think we hit that point already.
Its about how a woman went to a FLGS and encountered people trying to accomadate a new player, a bad loser and someone looking at her funny. Only one of these thing are probably a gender thing (the last one, if that wasn't clear) and even then we only have OPs perception to go on and women aren't known to be infallible. My wife accuses me of giving her funny looks all the time and usually I'm just emoting at something I'm thinking about like trying to do math in my head or trying to get the most out of my gaming budget.
Sure, but the OP is the only person who was actually there. I'm inclined to take her opinion on what actually happened over the opinion of the people who literally weren't in the room when it happened.
Look, all I'm saying is I don't like the precedent of "well, can *really* trust what that woman said, after all - 'women aren't known to be infallible'". At that point, why should we ever listen to any comment anyone makes - all groups of people are capable of lying or misrepresenting.
Irkjoe wrote:But the reason you are gathered is to engage in the hobby, not engaging in the hobby just to hang out.
That's the same thing. The hobby *includes* the hanging out.
Women are more concerned with the social interaction while the men are going to care less and be more forgiving of the awkward.
Are they? What's your source?
Sgt_Smudge wrote: I'm curious, what about enby folks? What are they more concerned with, seeing as you want to be all gender-reductive here.
I don't even know what that means but they're men and women so all the same rules apply.
See, that's where you're wrong, kid.
JNAProductions wrote:Enby is non-binary. Someone who is neither male nor female. It’s another way of writing NB.
I avoid using NB because in some cases, NB is also used to refer to 'non-black', and so I use enby as the phonetic spelling of the term! But yes, absolutely right.
TheBestBucketHead wrote:
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Again, socially awkward and anti-social =/= sexism. When I'm talking about sexist behaviour, I'm talking about sexist behaviour, not being socially awkward. I would class myself as socially awkward, but I wouldn't class myself as sexist.
This isn't a case of "get better socially", I'm talking about the very real genuine sexism and ideas that "this is not a space for women" - some of which have been espoused in this thread. If we can keep our eyes on that, instead of trying to conflate non-issues with that and thereby drown out those concerns, that would be good.
I should specifiy that it wasn't you I had an issue with when I said that. Sexism and racism are not excusable by social disorders. However, what can come off as sexism and racism can be. My issue was with someone's implication that we can just get better at socializing, and that's that.
No, absolutely - my apologies if that came on like I was directly attacking you!
Sim-Life wrote:
macluvin wrote: And I realized all the times I didn’t notice that people refused to in other threads to use their preferred pronouns just to spite them.
You know people can't see signatures on mobile or might have them turned off in the forum settings right?
I should also mention that certain users continued to use incorrect pronouns *after being informed directly within the thread*. I actually raised this issue with the mods, and advocated for having a pronouns section in the left hand section, near the info on our post counts or whatever goofy "role" we have. The thread was locked by certain individuals claiming that my identity wasn't valid.
Since then, no response from the mod team on this matter, so that's peachy.
macluvin wrote: And I realized all the times I didn’t notice that people refused to in other threads to use their preferred pronouns just to spite them.
You know people can't see signatures on mobile or might have them turned off in the forum settings right?
Reminds me of some forums I have visited over the years that have a simple "preferred gender" tag that will then just sit by your username. Been awhile since I posted on some of them but even back in like 2008/9 they were able to have male, female, m->f, f->m etc. It really helped with using correct pronouns and I would not mind at all if dakka included such a feature.
Some misgendering is out of ignorance, I've done it before on boards (I still often default to "he" in anonymous forums, been trying to get better about it and be gender neutral till I know for certain but well, that stuff takes time). The key is correcting the mistake when it gets called out. Sometimes people can get malicious with it however and purposely misgender people.
Hecaton wrote: And andykp and macluvin ignore the very relevant critique that people's feelings aren't always valid... avoidance of a strong rebuke to your statement just makes you appear ideologically incoherent.
As has been previously stated,
a) the OP was the only one there and is the only one whose input we can go on
b) there seems to be a strong trend of women feeling uncomfortable in local hobby communities; even if the OP was misunderstanding the situation it is hardly an explanation that holds water for the majority of women. A second woman also chimed in to this thread to let us know that she experienced similar issues
c) this thread has had some content that was hostile towards women, and content that belongs in an incel forum has been deleted by mods in a recent female space marine thread. The mods do an excellent job curbing the most egregious of offenses but due to the nature of discrimination against certain groups, unless you are the discriminated against party, you are unlikely to be aware of a lot of it because it has to happen around you, you have to be receptive to how it can effect the discriminated against party, and most of it is not going to happen around you anyways so you won’t be aware of the extent in which it occurs anyways. Also also we tend to only consider text book “(insert group here) is inferior” or statements of violence or stereotypical insults directed at said groups as discriminatory behavior. We don’t consider how we may have been raised to treat different groups differently or how we may have been consciously or subconsciously taught to associate different people with different traits; for example, I have an Asian friend. Asians being good at math and schoolwork is a good stereotype right? Except she is terrible at book stuff and it has absolutely wreaked havoc on her mental wellbeing because she basically lived her whole life not living up to society’s expectations of her as an Asian. We don’t consider these things though because we are not often the focal point of these discriminations and biases.
People's feelings definitely matter, all the time.
How others perceive you is the primary driver of your destiny, like cells on an organ, or a child in a classroom.
Even competition itself requires an implicit aire of respect.
Why do you think GW just had to release a rebuke to what happened in Spain?
macluvin wrote: Because being known for appealing to Nazis is damaging to the profit motive?
No, their opponent literally didn't want to play with them, they won those games and huge deal was made about it.
Why would that affect sales? I guess because angry customers would buy less....
As has been previously stated,
a) the OP was the only one there and is the only one whose input we can go on
Y'all were drawing the comparison out beyond this one case.
macluvin wrote: b) there seems to be a strong trend of women feeling uncomfortable in local hobby communities; even if the OP was misunderstanding the situation it is hardly an explanation that holds water for the majority of women. A second woman also chimed in to this thread to let us know that she experienced similar issues
Isn't that confirmation bias? A woman who hasn't had those issues isn't likely to speak up. And, as other posters mentioned, it might instead be a trend of women interpreting hostility that happens to all gamers as specifically sexism.
macluvin wrote: c) this thread has had some content that was hostile towards women, and content that belongs in an incel forum has been deleted by mods in a recent female space marine thread. The mods do an excellent job curbing the most egregious of offenses but due to the nature of discrimination against certain groups, unless you are the discriminated against party, you are unlikely to be aware of a lot of it because it has to happen around you, you have to be receptive to how it can effect the discriminated against party, and most of it is not going to happen around you anyways so you won’t be aware of the extent in which it occurs anyways. Also also we tend to only consider text book “(insert group here) is inferior” or statements of violence or stereotypical insults directed at said groups as discriminatory behavior. We don’t consider how we may have been raised to treat different groups differently or how we may have been consciously or subconsciously taught to associate different people with different traits; for example, I have an Asian friend. Asians being good at math and schoolwork is a good stereotype right? Except she is terrible at book stuff and it has absolutely wreaked havoc on her mental wellbeing because she basically lived her whole life not living up to society’s expectations of her as an Asian. We don’t consider these things though because we are not often the focal point of these discriminations and biases.
Ok cool. All this is red herring.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
macluvin wrote: Because being known for appealing to Nazis is damaging to the profit motive?
Well very specifically they're doing the awkward dance of portraying genocidal fascist-like monsters as unironic heroes in their setting and condemning similar ideologies in the real world.
Hecaton wrote: Isn't that confirmation bias? A woman who hasn't had those issues isn't likely to speak up. And, as other posters mentioned, it might instead be a trend of women interpreting hostility that happens to all gamers as specifically sexism.
Erm, no. Just no. If anything, minorities (in this context, women, but it really applies to all of them) are so desensitivized to constant abuse and harassment, be it active or passive, that when they DO speak up, the issues had been vastly bigger than these experienced by men. If a woman doesn't speak up, she most likely is already way past the level at which a man would speak up (again, desensitization). If she didn't have these issues, she would be offering gloving praises, not 'not speaking up'
And really? Hostility to 'all gamers'? Have you hid in a hole for past ten years? What is 'gamer gate'? Current reports (and huge lawsuits) about insanely toxic, misogynistic anti-women atmosphere in pretty much all big gaming companies (and this is even worse, because these relationships are supposed to be professional)? Mad Max (the game, and this is just one example out of dozens) being review bombed on review platforms by screeching incels because Mad Max (the movie) dared to have strong woman as a lead (despite game being very good)? It's not 2010 anymore, sexism in various gaming circles had been exposed and shown so many times that hemming and hawing it away is so out of date it's just sad. It's a real issue, no matter how many times it's whitewashed away.
Ok cool. All this is red herring.
Translation: I failed to either understand or empathize with point being made.
Well very specifically they're doing the awkward dance of portraying genocidal fascist-like monsters as unironic heroes in their setting
Mind naming 5 examples?
I disagree with the rest of the stuff Hecaton was saying, but...
The Emperor of Mankind (destroyed multiple alien civilizations, treated as divine figure and indisputable protagonist of Horus Heresy series)
Robute Gulliman (destroyed multiple alien civilizations, treated as Jesus figure and indisputable protagonist of Horus Heresy series)
Ferrus Magnus (destroyed multiple alien AND HUMAN civilizations, indisputable deuteragonist of Horus Heresy series)
Rogal Dorn (destroyed multiple alien civilizations, indisputable deuteragonist of Horus Heresy series)
and basically any commissar protagonist in a piece of Warhammer fiction. Do I get a reward?
Irbis wrote: Erm, no. Just no. If anything, minorities (in this context, women, but it really applies to all of them) are so desensitivized to constant abuse and harassment, be it active or passive, that when they DO speak up, the issues had been vastly bigger than these experienced by men. If a woman doesn't speak up, she most likely is already way past the level at which a man would speak up (again, desensitization). If she didn't have these issues, she would be offering gloving praises, not 'not speaking up'
Nah, you're failing to understand what confirmation bias is. Not every woman who has a positive experience in their gaming groups is vocal about it. People are more likely to be vocal about negative experiences than positive ones.
Irbis wrote: And really? Hostility to 'all gamers'? Have you hid in a hole for past ten years? What is 'gamer gate'? Current reports (and huge lawsuits) about insanely toxic, misogynistic anti-women atmosphere in pretty much all big gaming companies (and this is even worse, because these relationships are supposed to be professional)? Mad Max (the game, and this is just one example out of dozens) being review bombed on review platforms by screeching incels because Mad Max (the movie) dared to have strong woman as a lead (despite game being very good)? It's not 2010 anymore, sexism in various gaming circles had been exposed and shown so many times that hemming and hawing it away is so out of date it's just sad. It's a real issue, no matter how many times it's whitewashed away.
The tabletop gamer communities and the video game development communities are fairly discrete. There's crossover, but one does not define the other - and it's particularly noteworthy considering that in the case of Blizzard, it comes top-down from Bobby Kotick, who's not a gamer (and seems to generally despise his consumer base). Holding the tabletop gaming community responsible for the actions of some jerks in LA is incredibly disingenuous and doesn't amount to meaningful evidence of any sort.
I'll just name one, THE IMPERIUM. It's a genocidal and oppressive regime that's portrayed as unironically heroic from an out-of-universe perspective. They kill babies that are born with cleft palettes or sixth fingers or whatever. They commit genocide against other races. And they've got the "heroic" Ultramarines in their advertising material, going out and defending this regime. If you're going to portray fascism, or at least fascism-like, ideas as heroic in your setting, it's a cowardly move to claim that you don't endorse them in the real world. GW wants the money but none of the smoke.
The confirmation bias argument would hold more weight if the sample size of women in 40k was bigger. There are very few women in the hobby and the few that are seem to trend to express feelings of discomfort as women in the hobby, which, considering how people often feel discouraged from speaking about how they feel uncomfortable (especially, as evident here, the community is quick to generally hand wave their complaints with little serious consideration of the complainants) should be surprising that we hear from them at all. They are a minority and they are not likely to be speak up. Case in point: rape tends to be a seriously underreported crime and for the same reasons and from the same social pressures and often from the same sort of logic. Not to infer or equate these things to rape, I am not making or touching that argument. The point being that my explanation that women face discrimination in the 40k community and possibly other tabletop wargaming communities builds on already understood and very well supported phenomena. Already the confirmation bias argument falls apart once you start assuming that the only voices we hear are just the vocal minority when we are considering a small minority as is. This also falls in line with behavior in video gaming communities and role playing communities, as there is still a fair bit of toxicity towards women in them despite the fact that they have wedged themselves into those communities, and they have become more appealing to women because women are starting to become normalized in them and that toxicity as a result is weaning. We are seeing steps towards that in 40k as well, as they do have female representation in their videos (sometimes).
Confirmation bias is something we are all guilty of, but you’ve got the bias wrong. Confirmation bias is our tendency to seek information and data and other resources that support our point of view over others; we are terrible at researching opposing points of view as human beings. The bias you are thinking about occurs with people that are empowered to complain, or those who hold power and are used to things going their way. Women in this hobby simply have not been and the evidence of that is the lack of women in the hobby and even right now, making decisions about what women’s opinions and behaviors are while disregarding their input.
If women were common in the hobby enough to get their perspective more often, I would entertain your argument a bit more.
macluvin wrote: The confirmation bias argument would hold more weight if the sample size of women in 40k was bigger. There are very few women in the hobby and the few that are seem to trend to express feelings of discomfort as women in the hobby, which, considering how people often feel discouraged from speaking about how they feel uncomfortable (especially, as evident here, the community is quick to generally hand wave their complaints with little serious consideration of the complainants) should be surprising that we hear from them at all.
Small sample size doesn't have anything to do with ameliorating confirmation bias. How do you know how many women aren't being vocal and don't have major problems with the community?
macluvin wrote: They are a minority and they are not likely to be speak up. Case in point: rape tends to be a seriously underreported crime and for the same reasons and from the same social pressures and often from the same sort of logic. Not to infer or equate these things to rape, I am not making or touching that argument. The point being that my explanation that women face discrimination in the 40k community and possibly other tabletop wargaming communities builds on already understood and very well supported phenomena. Already the confirmation bias argument falls apart once you start assuming that the only voices we hear are just the vocal minority when we are considering a small minority as is. This also falls in line with behavior in video gaming communities and role playing communities, as there is still a fair bit of toxicity towards women in them despite the fact that they have wedged themselves into those communities, and they have become more appealing to women because women are starting to become normalized in them and that toxicity as a result is weaning. We are seeing steps towards that in 40k as well, as they do have female representation in their videos (sometimes).
Your analogy fails there when comparing sex crimes to possible community hostility. The right analogy would be comparing people who are victims of rape who are properly served by the justice system versus those who aren't - if justice is swiftly done there won't be complaints with the justice system. But justice isn't always swiftly done, or at all. And there are people who study this, who look at statistics and are able to show how and why this lack of justice occurs. We don't have any of that here with this situation with a wargaming community, there aren't numbers. People have opinions, certainly, but without data to back them up opinions are just opinions.
macluvin wrote: Confirmation bias is something we are all guilty of, but you’ve got the bias wrong. Confirmation bias is our tendency to seek information and data and other resources that support our point of view over others; we are terrible at researching opposing points of view as human beings. The bias you are thinking about occurs with people that are empowered to complain, or those who hold power and are used to things going their way. Women in this hobby simply have not been and the evidence of that is the lack of women in the hobby and even right now, making decisions about what women’s opinions and behaviors are while disregarding their input.
Oh, so you magically are immune to confirmation bias but not me? Forgive me if I'm skeptical, lol. You certainly seem set in your beliefs; how would you react if there was data that showed that, despite your opinion and the complaints of some female members of the community, women in the community were actual treated fairly compared to men? Would that be easy for you to accept? I think not.
Just because a group is a minority within a larger group does not mean they are discriminated against. That argument is a failure of logic and if I were you I'd sit down and think hard about why you're saying that.
macluvin wrote: If women were common in the hobby enough to get their perspective more often, I would entertain your argument a bit more.
Very specifically how common would women have to be for that to be true? I'd imagine that goalpost would move right out of the stadium if that were the case. Regardless, just because women are a minority in the wargaming hobby, it's not evidence that there is discrimination. Just because a bunch of nerdy guys are off doing something without women, doesn't mean misogyny is taking place, though there are some people who experience visceral disgust at that behavior (Sally Gearhart etc).
Irbis wrote: Erm, no. Just no. If anything, minorities (in this context, women, but it really applies to all of them) are so desensitivized to constant abuse and harassment, be it active or passive, that when they DO speak up, the issues had been vastly bigger than these experienced by men. If a woman doesn't speak up, she most likely is already way past the level at which a man would speak up (again, desensitization). If she didn't have these issues, she would be offering gloving praises, not 'not speaking up'
Nah, you're failing to understand what confirmation bias is. Not every woman who has a positive experience in their gaming groups is vocal about it. People are more likely to be vocal about negative experiences than positive ones.
Um no, Irbis is exactly correct there. People do get desensitized to this sort of stuff and don't speak up. Look what someone speaking up did here in this thread, a bunch of people attacked her and someone claimed she was a sockpuppet account, and there were claims that girls are genetically predisposed to dislike games and therefore their opinions on games don't matter. Lots of people, when faced with the choice of putting up with a bad time, or speaking up and ending up with an even worse time, will opt for the first one. And if they can, will just up and leave the community.
Hecaton wrote:
macluvin wrote: The confirmation bias argument would hold more weight if the sample size of women in 40k was bigger. There are very few women in the hobby and the few that are seem to trend to express feelings of discomfort as women in the hobby, which, considering how people often feel discouraged from speaking about how they feel uncomfortable (especially, as evident here, the community is quick to generally hand wave their complaints with little serious consideration of the complainants) should be surprising that we hear from them at all.
Small sample size doesn't have anything to do with ameliorating confirmation bias. How do you know how many women aren't being vocal and don't have major problems with the community?
And how do you know how many women aren't being vocal but do have major problems with the community. I'm not saying we need to go and poll every women tabletop player in the world here, but when people think that nothing will change and if anything things will get worse for them, they might just be less likely to speak up. For example, at this point, do you really think the OP will return? I know I can't blame her with the mess this thread has become. She asked for some simple advice and this thread has then spiraled in all sorts of...not great...directions.
The problem is you are throwing out demands that are literally unprovable short of taking polls on each and every women who plays the game or interacts with the community (which do note, also claiming that a majority of people are perfectly fine and dandy with how things are but just aren't screaming to the skies about how great it is is equally unprovable). In this very thread there have been people giving examples of women being treated differently (and some posters insisting that women must be treated differently). Hemming and hawing about how there are plenty of women who are perfectly fine with their groups (which is likely true, not all game groups are terrible) doesn't change the fact that the entire point of this thread was to help someone with a new group she had joined.
How about, instead of going on, we turn this thread around, and instead focus on how we can include more people in the hobby of various backgrounds? I know I have inbuilt biases - I've challenged many but I still have room to grow as a person, and don't have an answer for everything. Instead of divisiveness and arguing, how about stop and think "how can we make women, lgbtq, minority groups, etc more welcome in the community."
kurhanik wrote: Um no, Irbis is exactly correct there. People do get desensitized to this sort of stuff and don't speak up. Look what someone speaking up did here in this thread, a bunch of people attacked her and someone claimed she was a sockpuppet account, and there were claims that girls are genetically predisposed to dislike games and therefore their opinions on games don't matter. Lots of people, when faced with the choice of putting up with a bad time, or speaking up and ending up with an even worse time, will opt for the first one. And if they can, will just up and leave the community.
People can, it can also be a matter of a squeaky wheel getting the grease. Without data there's no way to tell. There's multiple kinds of bias that can be in play here. So Ibris isn't really correct, he's just saying what he *wishes* was true.
kurhanik wrote: And how do you know how many women aren't being vocal but do have major problems with the community.
I don't. The point is that you can't make generalized statements about the community on biased hunches.
kurhanik wrote: I'm not saying we need to go and poll every women tabletop player in the world here, but when people think that nothing will change and if anything things will get worse for them, they might just be less likely to speak up. For example, at this point, do you really think the OP will return? I know I can't blame her with the mess this thread has become. She asked for some simple advice and this thread has then spiraled in all sorts of...not great...directions.
I'm not going to respond to the specific case presented in the OP for reasons I've stated.
kurhanik wrote: The problem is you are throwing out demands that are literally unprovable short of taking polls on each and every women who plays the game or interacts with the community (which do note, also claiming that a majority of people are perfectly fine and dandy with how things are but just aren't screaming to the skies about how great it is is equally unprovable). In this very thread there have been people giving examples of women being treated differently (and some posters insisting that women must be treated differently). Hemming and hawing about how there are plenty of women who are perfectly fine with their groups (which is likely true, not all game groups are terrible) doesn't change the fact that the entire point of this thread was to help someone with a new group she had joined.
You wouldn't need to take a poll of every woman who plays the game. Do you know what a representative sample is? Or anything about statistical sampling? It's not unprovable at all.
kurhanik wrote: How about, instead of going on, we turn this thread around, and instead focus on how we can include more people in the hobby of various backgrounds? I know I have inbuilt biases - I've challenged many but I still have room to grow as a person, and don't have an answer for everything. Instead of divisiveness and arguing, how about stop and think "how can we make women, lgbtq, minority groups, etc more welcome in the community."
From my perspective, minority groups are very welcome in minis wargaming in California in 2021, which is where I live. This is overall a good thing. In my experience not too many women are interested in wargaming; in fact, cis women are outnumbered by trans women from what I understand, which to me suggests it's not a matter of prejudice, since trans women are going to get a lot more hostility from almost any community than cis women.
Never thought about it before I read Hecatons post above but I think I actually know about equal amounts of trans and queer people as straight women in 40k.
We even had a local paper make an article about our club recently and they "translated" what one of our members said to "extremely LBTQ friendly" instead of the longer version that was more like "we don't care about background as long as you are up to a game and thus the hobby is more accepting than the rest of society to marginalized groups" and had some backlash for risk of being too inclusive to the point it could be seen as a political statement. (The club is quite left leaning on average, even for Sweden, if looking at the members but we don't want to come off that way since politics should be left at the door anyway)
Most men prioritize the "thing". I don't mean literally the rules of the game and a bunch of waac players. Women are more concerned with the social interaction while the men are going to care less and be more forgiving of the awkward.
What's the "thing"? For many, including me, the "thing" is mostly assembling, painting and collecting. Gaming is fun but it's definitely the worst part of the hobby.
And where's that "most" men come from? I've always perceived 40k as friendly minded for the majority with just a tiny fraction of the player base that actually plays cut-throat competitive. Look at all the youtube channels that do battle reports, even most of the more "competitive oriented" ones are actually very friendly minded and not that competitive after all. How many of those channels are overly serious and deal only with the actual gaming, with no chat, jokes, etc..?
Hecaton wrote:Not every woman who has a positive experience in their gaming groups is vocal about it. People are more likely to be vocal about negative experiences than positive ones.
So where's the flood of men complaining about their hobby experiences feeling excluded? In terms of complaints about feeling excluded, those comments disproportionately come from women. If, as you say, people would be more vocal about negative experiences, where are those same complaints from everyone else?
Hecaton wrote:How do you know how many women aren't being vocal and don't have major problems with the community?
We don't - but we could assume anything is fine with that kind of logic. "We don't see it all, so maybe the silent majority are fine" is a pretty awful talking point, especially when it's used to shut down criticism from minority groups.
Just because a group is a minority within a larger group does not mean they are discriminated against.
No-one's saying that. However, when the minority group themselves are saying that they feel discriminated against, I suggest you listen very closely, and think hard about why you're so afraid to hear that out.
Regardless, just because women are a minority in the wargaming hobby, it's not evidence that there is discrimination.
And what about the testimony and feelings of those women? Is that not evidence for you? Do their voices not concern you?
Hecaton wrote:Without data there's no way to tell.
So maybe, instead of shutting down what little data we have (OP's testimony), we should hear it out and consider it, instead of screaming "there's no data, we can't possibly judge this" - you're right, there's no data because people keep handwaving it away.
The point is that you can't make generalized statements about the community on biased hunches.
And you're not also doing that?
kurhanik wrote: How about, instead of going on, we turn this thread around, and instead focus on how we can include more people in the hobby of various backgrounds? I know I have inbuilt biases - I've challenged many but I still have room to grow as a person, and don't have an answer for everything. Instead of divisiveness and arguing, how about stop and think "how can we make women, lgbtq, minority groups, etc more welcome in the community."
A good place to start is to listen to the comments made by minority groups, without stifling them with "BUT IN MY EXPERIENCE" or "YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO LIKE THIS" or "YOU'RE NOT ACTUALLY VICTIMISED, GET OVER IT" or "THERE ISN'T A PROBLEM, BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE ANY DATA".
Listen to people, and *respect their input*.
I should mention that's not aimed at you, kurhanik.
Look, all I'm saying is I don't like the precedent of "well, can *really* trust what that woman said, after all - 'women aren't known to be infallible'". At that point, why should we ever listen to any comment anyone makes - all groups of people are capable of lying or misrepresenting.
You're so close to getting my point here but you chose to focus on the "woman" part of it like I'm being sexist instead of just human. Like I said, go watch Rashomon then see how the story of that film can be applied here. If you don't want to watch a classic Kurosawa film (in which case, what's wrong with you?) the film is about 4 people relating their versions of a crime. Each witness tells a different story and each version casts the person telling it in the best possible light. Its about how our perceptions alter our experiences and recollections because they're filtered through our own subjectivness and ego. Women aren't exempt from this and to think they are is just as sexist as you're accusing others of being.
There's actually a lot of condescension from people in this thread towards women from people purporting to be allies. Its kind of funny. I'm reading a lot of these out to my ex rad-fem wife and he reactions are priceless.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
kurhanik wrote: Look what someone speaking up did here in this thread, a bunch of people attacked her and someone claimed she was a sockpuppet account, and there were claims that girls are genetically predisposed to dislike games and therefore their opinions on games don't matter. Lots of people, when faced with the choice of putting up with a bad time, or speaking up and ending up with an even worse time, will opt for the first one. And if they can, will just up and leave the community.
No one attacked her.
One person claimed it was a sock puppet.
Claims of women being predisposed wasn't talking about OP specifically and you're taking it out of context.
Having to put up with people who annoy you is part of being a community. You cannot agree with people 100% of the time and sometime people will do stuff that annoy you. Doesn't matter what gender you are, this will always be the case. This is true with family, work, hobbies and anything else that involves directly interacting with people. My wife doesn't get along with one of the guys in my board game group but shes never assumed that his issues with her are due to sexism. They just don't get along because sometimes humans just don't mesh well with other humans. I get along with him fine for the most part because I can overlook his more irritating behaviours as personality flaws so that i actually have a board game group. Some people in this thread are talking about the OP as if she was walked into an FLGS and was met with a MGTOW rally. Others are talking about what probably happened, where she entered a room full of socially awkward nerds.
Sim-Life wrote:Weren't you just saying that people can be discriminatory without knowing it? How do you know your social awkwardness isn't a result of sexism you don't know you have?
Sure - but I'm waiting for someone to correct me on if I do behave in a sexist way.
Well alright...
Compare this post:
Sgt_Smudge wrote: So where's the flood of men complaining about their hobby experiences feeling excluded? In terms of complaints about feeling excluded, those comments disproportionately come from women. If, as you say, people would be more vocal about negative experiences, where are those same complaints from everyone else?
To this a few posts earlier, blowing a guy off for talking about their autism and depression:
Sgt_Smudge wrote: I'm talking about the very real genuine sexism and ideas that "this is not a space for women" - some of which have been espoused in this thread. If we can keep our eyes on that, instead of trying to conflate non-issues with that and thereby drown out those concerns, that would be good.
Ask yourself if your replies here would have been different if it was a guy posting that people in their new group have been treating them as if they don't know the rules, accusing them of luck when winning,sometimes ignoring them in conversations, and asking if there was anything they can do to make the community more welcoming. That is ultimately the long and short of the OPs actual post content after all.
Hecaton, no surprise that you disagree with me. You miss the point entirely. Regardless of the intent of the people in the OPs experience they made her feel excluded, that was her experience and nothing you can say can change that.
Now if you are happy with people feeling excluded that’s fine, and on you. Also not a surprise.
If you want to ignore the problems in the community, also on you. But the more you rant and gripe about the people complaining and trying to fix it and the more you shout about how there isn’t a problem at all, the more you are part of the problem.
Look, all I'm saying is I don't like the precedent of "well, can *really* trust what that woman said, after all - 'women aren't known to be infallible'". At that point, why should we ever listen to any comment anyone makes - all groups of people are capable of lying or misrepresenting.
You're so close to getting my point here but you chose to focus on the "woman" part of it like I'm being sexist instead of just human.
I literally quoted what was said. It wasn't "focusing" on the woman part, it was literally quoting the comment back.
Like I said, go watch Rashomon then see how the story of that film can be applied here. If you don't want to watch a classic Kurosawa film (in which case, what's wrong with you?) the film is about 4 people relating their versions of a crime. Each witness tells a different story and each version casts the person telling it in the best possible light. Its about how our perceptions alter our experiences and recollections because they're filtered through our own subjectivness and ego. Women aren't exempt from this and to think they are is just as sexist as you're accusing others of being.
I'm well aware that perceptions of reality are different, thank you. However, there's a time and a place for it, and right now, unlike Rashomon, we don't have 4 conflicting perspectives: we have one perspective, which people are choosing to inject their own opinions and views on, thereby implicitly devaluing and distrusting the opinion and perspective of the ONLY person who was actually there.
This may be my experience (bringing that back around), but I don't see this happen to men nearly as much as it happens to women and non-men. In my experience, when a non-man presents their experience and feelings, it is nearly always shut down by men who question it - and yet I hardly see men treat other male experiences the same.
I'm not saying women are exempt, but I am saying that it's pretty poor behaviour that so many people are more willing to distrust OP than to trust her.
There's actually a lot of condescension from people in this thread towards women from people purporting to be allies. Its kind of funny. I'm reading a lot of these out to my ex rad-fem wife and he reactions are priceless.
There's a lot of people in this thread claiming to be harmless and innocent in their comments, and remain blissfully unaware of the systems they are perpetuating as well.
YMMV.
No one attacked her.
One person claimed it was a sock puppet.
And that's not an attack? I think we have different standards of what constitutes an offence/attack. Claiming that someone is a sockpuppet is an attack on the entire identity and legitimacy of OP's experiences. How do you not recognise that?
Claims of women being predisposed wasn't talking about OP specifically and you're taking it out of context.
Aw, at least they didn't associate the OP with their troglodytic views!! /s
I frankly don't care if it was addressed to the OP or not, they still claimed that the demographic the OP is in *should not be interested*, and therefore isn't worth catering to. It wasn't a direct attack, but it was an attack regardless.
Having to put up with people who annoy you is part of being a community.
Disagree.
Annoyed by the way people might prefer one faction to another? Sure.
Annoyed by colour schemes which I might not personally have used myself? Sure.
Annoyed by feeling excluded and victimised because of a severe lack of respect and trust over my gender? That's not something anyone in any community should have to stand for. Sorry, but you need better community standards there.
I get along with him fine for the most part because I can overlook his more irritating behaviours as personality flaws so that i actually have a board game group.
As above - your standards indicate that you'd rather have a gaming group than deal with problematic behaviours in it.
I have different standards, and I stick by them. I'd rather have the smallest group of people who love and respect eachother, despite their small quirks, than a large group who can't even agree on if some people deserve the same amount of respect.
Some people in this thread are talking about the OP as if she was walked into an FLGS and was met with a MGTOW rally. Others are talking about what probably happened, where she entered a room full of socially awkward nerds.
Were you there? No? So how can you, in any authority, claim what "probably" happened?
You only have one person's actual evidence to go off of. Why are you so eager to dismiss it?
A.T. wrote:Compare this post:
Sgt_Smudge wrote: So where's the flood of men complaining about their hobby experiences feeling excluded? In terms of complaints about feeling excluded, those comments disproportionately come from women. If, as you say, people would be more vocal about negative experiences, where are those same complaints from everyone else?
To this a few posts earlier, blowing a guy off for talking about their autism and depression:
Sgt_Smudge wrote: I'm talking about the very real genuine sexism and ideas that "this is not a space for women" - some of which have been espoused in this thread. If we can keep our eyes on that, instead of trying to conflate non-issues with that and thereby drown out those concerns, that would be good.
Ask yourself if your replies here would have been different if it was a guy posting that people in their new group have been treating them as if they don't know the rules, accusing them of luck when winning,sometimes ignoring them in conversations, and asking if there was anything they can do to make the community more welcoming. That is ultimately the long and short of the OPs actual post content after all.
I'm sorry, but I'm not aware of any systemic indication that men are shunned from groups because of their gender - could you show me some indications of that?
By ignoring the gender aspect (which was quite evident in OP's post), you are missing vital context which frames the discussion, and actually contributes to wider issues of systemic marginalisation.
It's not sexist to point out trends of sexist behaviour.
Look, all I'm saying is I don't like the precedent of "well, can *really* trust what that woman said, after all - 'women aren't known to be infallible'". At that point, why should we ever listen to any comment anyone makes - all groups of people are capable of lying or misrepresenting.
You're so close to getting my point here but you chose to focus on the "woman" part of it like I'm being sexist instead of just human.
I literally quoted what was said. It wasn't "focusing" on the woman part, it was literally quoting the comment back.
Like I said, go watch Rashomon then see how the story of that film can be applied here. If you don't want to watch a classic Kurosawa film (in which case, what's wrong with you?) the film is about 4 people relating their versions of a crime. Each witness tells a different story and each version casts the person telling it in the best possible light. Its about how our perceptions alter our experiences and recollections because they're filtered through our own subjectivness and ego. Women aren't exempt from this and to think they are is just as sexist as you're accusing others of being.
I'm well aware that perceptions of reality are different, thank you. However, there's a time and a place for it, and right now, unlike Rashomon, we don't have 4 conflicting perspectives: we have one perspective, which people are choosing to inject their own opinions and views on, thereby implicitly devaluing and distrusting the opinion and perspective of the ONLY person who was actually there.
This may be my experience (bringing that back around), but I don't see this happen to men nearly as much as it happens to women and non-men. In my experience, when a non-man presents their experience and feelings, it is nearly always shut down by men who question it - and yet I hardly see men treat other male experiences the same.
I'm not saying women are exempt, but I am saying that it's pretty poor behaviour that so many people are more willing to distrust OP than to trust her.
There's actually a lot of condescension from people in this thread towards women from people purporting to be allies. Its kind of funny. I'm reading a lot of these out to my ex rad-fem wife and he reactions are priceless.
There's a lot of people in this thread claiming to be harmless and innocent in their comments, and remain blissfully unaware of the systems they are perpetuating as well.
YMMV.
No one attacked her.
One person claimed it was a sock puppet.
And that's not an attack? I think we have different standards of what constitutes an offence/attack. Claiming that someone is a sockpuppet is an attack on the entire identity and legitimacy of OP's experiences. How do you not recognise that?
Claims of women being predisposed wasn't talking about OP specifically and you're taking it out of context.
Aw, at least they didn't associate the OP with their troglodytic views!! /s
I frankly don't care if it was addressed to the OP or not, they still claimed that the demographic the OP is in *should not be interested*, and therefore isn't worth catering to. It wasn't a direct attack, but it was an attack regardless.
Having to put up with people who annoy you is part of being a community.
Disagree.
Annoyed by the way people might prefer one faction to another? Sure.
Annoyed by colour schemes which I might not personally have used myself? Sure.
Annoyed by feeling excluded and victimised because of a severe lack of respect and trust over my gender? That's not something anyone in any community should have to stand for. Sorry, but you need better community standards there.
I get along with him fine for the most part because I can overlook his more irritating behaviours as personality flaws so that i actually have a board game group.
As above - your standards indicate that you'd rather have a gaming group than deal with problematic behaviours in it.
I have different standards, and I stick by them. I'd rather have the smallest group of people who love and respect eachother, despite their small quirks, than a large group who can't even agree on if some people deserve the same amount of respect.
Some people in this thread are talking about the OP as if she was walked into an FLGS and was met with a MGTOW rally. Others are talking about what probably happened, where she entered a room full of socially awkward nerds.
Were you there? No? So how can you, in any authority, claim what "probably" happened?
You only have one person's actual evidence to go off of. Why are you so eager to dismiss it?
A.T. wrote:Compare this post:
Sgt_Smudge wrote: So where's the flood of men complaining about their hobby experiences feeling excluded? In terms of complaints about feeling excluded, those comments disproportionately come from women. If, as you say, people would be more vocal about negative experiences, where are those same complaints from everyone else?
To this a few posts earlier, blowing a guy off for talking about their autism and depression:
Sgt_Smudge wrote: I'm talking about the very real genuine sexism and ideas that "this is not a space for women" - some of which have been espoused in this thread. If we can keep our eyes on that, instead of trying to conflate non-issues with that and thereby drown out those concerns, that would be good.
Ask yourself if your replies here would have been different if it was a guy posting that people in their new group have been treating them as if they don't know the rules, accusing them of luck when winning,sometimes ignoring them in conversations, and asking if there was anything they can do to make the community more welcoming. That is ultimately the long and short of the OPs actual post content after all.
I'm sorry, but I'm not aware of any systemic indication that men are shunned from groups because of their gender - could you show me some indications of that?
By ignoring the gender aspect (which was quite evident in OP's post), you are missing vital context which frames the discussion, and actually contributes to wider issues of systemic marginalisation.
It's not sexist to point out trends of sexist behaviour.
Okay I think I'm done here. Its pretty clear that you seem to think OPs experience was with some kind of formless misoginistic blob rather than actual humans with thoughts and perspectives of their own and that the OP is a perfect creature, incapable of misunderstandings but fully capable of discerning peoples motives and opinions instantly from a few hours of interactions (presumably because she's a woman and therefore correct in all things). It's also clear that you play in some kind of echo chamber where everyone must conform to the agreed upon standards lest they be exiled. If you kick everyone that disagrees with you out of your group you're going to eventually find yourself alone.
Also I never said she can't be trusted because shes a woman. I said women aren't infallible. Don't put words in my mouth to portray me as sexist in order to strengthen your argument.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: I'm sorry, but I'm not aware of any systemic indication that men are shunned from groups because of their gender - could you show me some indications of that?
No. You said that you were waiting for someone to point out if you were acting in a perhaps unkowningly discriminatory way and that was my intent, nothing more.
Andykp wrote: Hecaton, no surprise that you disagree with me. You miss the point entirely. Regardless of the intent of the people in the OPs experience they made her feel excluded, that was her experience and nothing you can say can change that.
For the specific case mentioned in the OP, I'm not commenting for reasons I stated above.
In general, though, people's feelings aren't always valid or in tune with reality.
Andykp wrote: Hecaton, no surprise that you disagree with me. You miss the point entirely. Regardless of the intent of the people in the OPs experience they made her feel excluded, that was her experience and nothing you can say can change that.
For the specific case mentioned in the OP, I'm not commenting for reasons I stated above.
In general, though, people's feelings aren't always valid or in tune with reality.
Feelings not being in tune with reality, sure. I'll grant you that.
If I greet my friend with a text that's seemingly insulting, like a "What up, *****?" and they get their feelings hurt, then that's not in tune with the reality of what I meant to say.
That doesn't make their feelings invalid-I should still apologize if they let me know that that hurt them, and strive to do better in the future.
The OP chose the title because as a woman she felt uncomfortable in the company of her local hobby community. You can believe whatever you want is not sexist but the truth is, sexism has been a core part of our culture up until very recently. Even then, it is important to realize that the sexism (and racism and any other -ism you’d like to pursue) was not due to people being inherently evil, but because people believed that
a) the discrimination inherent in their society had some basis in biology
b) that their beliefs of women belonging in submissive roles was right, and by the cultural values of the time they were.
c) refuted and marginalized the women’s input with inputs from people like Sigmeund Froyd, the father of modern psychology but whose earlier research was heavily influenced by the cultural values that included things like beating your wife being normal.
d) dismissed women’s claims of being uncomfortable; it was normal for sexual assault allegations to be determined culturally and in court rooms as “she was asking for it” and “look at what she was wearing,” etc. it all was designed to take their voice away and it discouraged any sort of self advocacy. Sexual assault, rape and harassment were culturally enabled because of these issues.
I’m not saying you are a sexist. I’m saying that you should try to remove sex based biases from your decision making processes. Think carefully about the words you want to say next and the potential consequences. Hell, try to think of it from the perspective of a woman. Do your words and ideas sound like they may disempower women, by trying to negate or reframe the OP’s perspective to fit your masculine perspective? People don’t want guilt they want change. They don’t want others to feel attacked, they want to stop others from being so. Feeling defensive or feeling attacked
Is normal, but change is not a comfortable process. Maybe try an implicit bias screening to see how much you may be implicily biased against women or possibly any other minority group if you feel really brave. Maybe take a minute to seriously consider what you have to lose by even acting like this woman knows what she is talking about and experiencing, and why she chose the title for this thread. What do you have to lose from listening to other women? Is there some sort of ulterior motive to steal the hobby from men? What would anyone gain from that when there are plenty of other hobbies women feel comfortable in, especially if they are supposed to be biologically predisposed to not integrating into this hobby for whatever reason?
Sorry if I'm just adding gas to the fire but I find a lot of humor in this thread. Every once in a while when I go to the game store with my wife, this exact thread happens in real life. 2-4 people start arguing about why/how women experience the gaming culture and continue the conversation long after we walk away. Not that walking away mattered, no one bothered to hear anything my wife said after the initial spark that stated to convo.
Your enjoyment of 40k will be hugely dependent on the gaming group you are part of.
There are a lot of... we'll say people that do not provide for a positive experience that you will want to avoid.
But that is true of a lot of hobbies.
So when it comes to gate keeping, if you find people trying to gatekeep you out because you are a woman - do not be a part of that group or avoid those particular people.
If I was privy to this misogyny and outright jerkness at our FLGS I would confront the detestable behaviour. I wish more people would stand up to the bully/ass-hat crowd.
Very much this. The only way anything changes is if we take a stand when we see it. ( And raise our kids to be better )
Keramory wrote: Sorry if I'm just adding gas to the fire but I find a lot of humor in this thread. Every once in a while when I go to the game store with my wife, this exact thread happens in real life. 2-4 people start arguing about why/how women experience the gaming culture and continue the conversation long after we walk away. Not that walking away mattered, no one bothered to hear anything my wife said after the initial spark that stated to convo.
That was exactly what one of the women on this forum I was friendly with said her experience consistently was here, and why she stopped posting here. That was about 5 years ago but nothing has really changed.
The issue is that we usually won’t see it because it mostly happens to women who are rare in the hobby, so the odds of you being around a woman in the hobby are low enough as it is, then you have to actually be there when it happens, and most of it is small things with innocent intentions that can be difficult to even notice.
JNAProductions wrote: Feelings not being in tune with reality, sure. I'll grant you that.
If I greet my friend with a text that's seemingly insulting, like a "What up, *****?" and they get their feelings hurt, then that's not in tune with the reality of what I meant to say.
That doesn't make their feelings invalid-I should still apologize if they let me know that that hurt them, and strive to do better in the future.
Ok, but that's not really relevant to the discussion at hand. Some people can have their feelings hurt by unreasonable things - like this last weekend, I was at a tournament, and one of the players was unsportsmanlike, insisting that everyone else give them the ability to take things back and they took an insane amount of time for deployment, but refused to take the time to explain his own models' special rules to his opponents, who were relatively new. The TO ejected him after he got heated with the TO, and everyone there understands that the dude was way out of line, but to hear him tell it on social media he's a victim and the TO conspired to stop him from winning a small tournament. His feelings are hurt. His feelings aren't valid.
macluvin wrote: I’m saying that you should try to remove sex based biases from your decision making processes.
In general I see this on the supposedly pro-woman side quite often; in the talks about female space marines, there seems to be a lot of people who think that the Imperium automatically becomes more moral if it's woman doing the baby-killing, genocide, and brutal oppression, since women have some sort of special moral license that men do not. And in the real world, oftentimes there's an idea that women need special accommodations in the hobby as opposed to being treated like equal members of it.
macluvin wrote: I’m saying that you should try to remove sex based biases from your decision making processes.
In general I see this on the supposedly pro-woman side quite often; in the talks about female space marines, there seems to be a lot of people who think that the Imperium automatically becomes more moral if it's woman doing the baby-killing, genocide, and brutal oppression, since women have some sort of special moral license that men do not. And in the real world, oftentimes there's an idea that women need special accommodations in the hobby as opposed to being treated like equal members of it.
I have literally never seen this take in my life and I have seen a huge number of female space marine debates.
Keramory wrote: Sorry if I'm just adding gas to the fire but I find a lot of humor in this thread. Every once in a while when I go to the game store with my wife, this exact thread happens in real life. 2-4 people start arguing about why/how women experience the gaming culture and continue the conversation long after we walk away. Not that walking away mattered, no one bothered to hear anything my wife said after the initial spark that stated to convo.
How often was that discussion started by a woman? I should like to see their input more often otherwise it’s just a bunch of men arguing about it to the best of our abilities.
Rihgu wrote: I have literally never seen this take in my life and I have seen a huge number of female space marine debates.
It was all over a thread here about female space marines. Generally the people who wanted to see female space marines saw the Imperium as unironically heroic, and thought that it was a flaw in the Imperium that it wasn't gender-equal among Astartes. I perceive this as a result of GW's modern "the space marines are heroic and laudable" advertising push.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Catulle wrote: It's entirely possible that Hecaton's lying here to prolong some kind of drama. After all, people aren't truthful the whole time. :rolleyes:
I mean there's a chance, but given that the situation I described is *possible*, you'd have to agree with my point that people's feelings aren't always valid.
macluvin wrote: I’m saying that you should try to remove sex based biases from your decision making processes.
In general I see this on the supposedly pro-woman side quite often; in the talks about female space marines, there seems to be a lot of people who think that the Imperium automatically becomes more moral if it's woman doing the baby-killing, genocide, and brutal oppression, since women have some sort of special moral license that men do not. And in the real world, oftentimes there's an idea that women need special accommodations in the hobby as opposed to being treated like equal members of it.
I have literally never seen this take in my life and I have seen a huge number of female space marine debates.
Yeah... in my experience (which included being the creator of the last female space marine thread and having followed it intimately to the end) the female space marine argument from the pro-female space marine side was focused on giving women representation in the most iconic warhammer 40k faction there is to make the hobby more inclusive. I’ve never seen the argument that atrocities are more justified if they are committed by women... or any sort of implication of such.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Edit: on this forum. I don’t follow other forums.
Rihgu wrote: I have literally never seen this take in my life and I have seen a huge number of female space marine debates.
It was all over a thread here about female space marines. Generally the people who wanted to see female space marines saw the Imperium as unironically heroic, and thought that it was a flaw in the Imperium that it wasn't gender-equal among Astartes. I perceive this as a result of GW's modern "the space marines are heroic and laudable" advertising push.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Catulle wrote: It's entirely possible that Hecaton's lying here to prolong some kind of drama. After all, people aren't truthful the whole time. :rolleyes:
I mean there's a chance, but given that the situation I described is *possible*, you'd have to agree with my point that people's feelings aren't always valid.
I was in that same thread, and by my memory you're fabricating that particular stance. I do recall people thinking it strange that among all the spiraling branches of the Imperial beauracracy that it would be odd for them to say "no, we don't want to use 50% of our potential recruiting pool for space marine bodies - women are icky" when they don't show any preference for sex in any other department (except Custodes, Sisters of Silence, and Sisters of Battle). There are women Imperial Guard, after all. If the Imperium saw them as inferior stock for battle that wouldn't be true.
And it doesn't mean the Imperium is "woke" or "heroic" or "laudable". It means that human life is worthless to them, and women are as equally worthless as men.
How often was that discussion started by a woman? I should like to see their input more often otherwise it’s just a bunch of men arguing about it to the best of our abilities.
Started by her? Never that I've seen. No girl i know walks into a room and goes, "yo so let me tell you why this hobby sucks for me".
Usually it starts by someone commenting they never played with or seen a chick play 40k before and then it goes into some scientific debate with some other dudes. I've been guilty of chiming into it like I'm doing now.
How often was that discussion started by a woman? I should like to see their input more often otherwise it’s just a bunch of men arguing about it to the best of our abilities.
Started by her? Never that I've seen. No girl i know walks into a room and goes, "yo so let me tell you why this hobby sucks for me".
Usually it starts by someone commenting they never played with or seen a chick play 40k before and then it goes into some scientific debate with some other dudes. I've been guilty of chiming into it like I'm doing now.
You’re literally in a thread that started like that.
Hecaton wrote: Some people can have their feelings hurt by unreasonable things - like this last weekend, I was at a tournament, and one of the players was unsportsmanlike, insisting that everyone else give them the ability to take things back and they took an insane amount of time for deployment, but refused to take the time to explain his own models' special rules to his opponents, who were relatively new. The TO ejected him after he got heated with the TO, and everyone there understands that the dude was way out of line, but to hear him tell it on social media he's a victim and the TO conspired to stop him from winning a small tournament. His feelings are hurt. His feelings aren't valid.
This happens a lot, to everyone, we all have our own biases and perceptions based on our interpretations of events. (One of my favorite quotes is "There are three sides to every story, your side, their side, and the truth.") However, by the logic your using, what's the point in trusting anyone's personal account of any given situation, they are all effected by personal bias.
She came to us in good faith asking for some advise on inclusion, why is the default response to doubt instead of to trust?
Should people have jumped on those suggesting that it was POSSIBLE it could be a misunderstanding, no, because it is possible, and that I could be misinterpreting an event or action is something that I personally need to be reminded of from time to time as well in my own personal life. That is a useful perspective to have. HOWEVER, there are plenty who just dismissed things outright because they are either (willfully or not) ignorant of the issues women do face when trying to take part in a traditionally male dominated activity. Many of these true claims do get dismissed out of hand incorrectly as a biased perception of events or a variety of other excuses when they were real issues; so it's a really touchy subject for a lot of people.
At the end of the day, no one here can know exactly what happened and why it happened. All we have is a newer member of the community who was looking for advise, and boy did we gak the bed in trying to be the welcoming and inclusive community that almost everyone seems to claim to either be or at least want to be.
Rihgu wrote: I was in that same thread, and by my memory you're fabricating that particular stance. I do recall people thinking it strange that among all the spiraling branches of the Imperial beauracracy that it would be odd for them to say "no, we don't want to use 50% of our potential recruiting pool for space marine bodies - women are icky" when they don't show any preference for sex in any other department (except Custodes, Sisters of Silence, and Sisters of Battle). There are women Imperial Guard, after all. If the Imperium saw them as inferior stock for battle that wouldn't be true.
And it doesn't mean the Imperium is "woke" or "heroic" or "laudable". It means that human life is worthless to them, and women are as equally worthless as men.
Except everyone in that thread was talking about how empowering it would be for there to be female Astartes. This goes against your "equally worthless" idea pretty strongly.
Sure, there's been some cringe in this thread; there have also been some really positive and articulate posts. I've been reading a lot, but trying to wade in rarely, and for the most part, people are replying when I otherwise would and often in a more articulate way. I did just want to address a few posts, hopefully in a non-confrontational way, and hopefully, no one feels attacked by what I have to say.
Before I get going, I'd also like to acknowledge the Mods and they work they do- thanks for keeping it open, because I do feel there is value in these discussions, but thanks also for keeping your eyes open and letting us know you're there.
Okay- so earlier, A. T. pointed out a couple of Smudge's posts as "possibly" containing "unconscious" sexism. Kudos to A.T. for being clear on that, and for reclarifying afterwards- I didn't perceive those quotes as an attack, and I don't think Smudge did either. They responded, and I don't think their response indicated feeling of an attack. For my part, I agree that Smudge's posts that were quoted weren't expressions of unconscious sexism, and just wanted to offer a detached observers perspective on why. For reference, here are the quotes:
Sgt_Smudge wrote: So where's the flood of men complaining about their hobby experiences feeling excluded? In terms of complaints about feeling excluded, those comments disproportionately come from women. If, as you say, people would be more vocal about negative experiences, where are those same complaints from everyone else?
To this a few posts earlier, blowing a guy off for talking about their autism and depression:
Sgt_Smudge wrote: I'm talking about the very real genuine sexism and ideas that "this is not a space for women" - some of which have been espoused in this thread. If we can keep our eyes on that, instead of trying to conflate non-issues with that and thereby drown out those concerns, that would be good.
In the first quote, I think that the points being made, though related to gender, are observable:
1) I don't think there are a lot of posts by men who say they feel excluded from the hobby.
2) This is not the first time I've seen a woman post about feeling excluded, and I also believe it's not the only woman IN THIS THREAD who has reported feeling that way. (Pretty sure there was another, but didn't have the time to go back through nine pages to confirm- sorry if I'm incorrect).
3) Given the meaning of the term "disproportionately" I do think Smudge's conclusion is also reasonable: given that a) I see few (if any) posts from men who say they feel excluded and b) the sample size of men on Dakka is large vs. c) I do see posts from women who feel this way and d) the sample size of women on Dakka is smaller, it is a reasonable hypothesis that a disproportionate number of women feel excluded.
I concede it can't be absolutely proven- I just agree with Smudge that it's a reasonable hypothesis.
I further will say that it's possible to debate issues around "feeling excluded" and what exactly that means, but I don't think that's relevant in the context of what Smudge was saying; I also think it's the hardest part of this thread to talk about and leads to greater instances of cringe than any other element of the discussion.
As for the second quote, I don't think Smudge was dismissing the post of a person living with autism and depression; on the contrary, I think Smudge was clarifying the difference between socially awkward and sexist behaviours- there is certainly a difference, and it is one that some people on the spectrum might need a bit of help to see. The piece of conversation between Smudge and this person that you quoted doesn't convey this as well as the whole conversation, but I believe the kernel is there. Smudge does certainly present as someone with an awareness if issues surrounding ASD. The conversation between the two posters, if I recall correctly, actually ends with Smudge clarifying this, and then doing the thing another poster suggested- apologizing anyway, to indicate that one does care about the feelings of the other, and is aware of the possible impact of one's words.
Having said all that A.T. , I again want to reiterate that I'm not "calling you out" because I don't think your post was a malicious attack, but merely an intellectual response to a request that Smudge made. I just want you to know that I personally don't see evidence of "unconscious sexism" in the quotes you selected.
Before I respond to the second post, I should preface a bit: I fully acknowledge that I have a history of disagreeing with the person I'm about to quote- usually about rules and game related stuff, and not this type of thing. I don't think I've every attacked or insulted this person before, though I concede I may have crossed a line once or twice, and perhaps I just don't remember. I do remember multiple occasions when I felt this person was attacking me, though I try hard to avoid responding in kind when offended.
I will also point out that this person has already said they are about to walk away from the conversation, and would probably be better to just let them do that. Maybe I'm a bad person for not letting it go, but I have to point this out.
In an earlier post, Sim made this request of Smudge:
Its pretty clear that you seem to think OPs experience was with some kind of formless misoginistic blob rather than actual humans with thoughts and perspectives of their own and that the OP is a perfect creature, incapable of misunderstandings but fully capable of discerning peoples motives and opinions instantly from a few hours of interactions (presumably because she's a woman and therefore correct in all things). It's also clear that you play in some kind of echo chamber where everyone must conform to the agreed upon standards lest they be exiled. If you kick everyone that disagrees with you out of your group you're going to eventually find yourself alone.
If Smudge put words in your mouth at all Sim- and I'm not even 100% sure they did- it certainly isn't as many as you're putting in theirs.
I'm not sure you were even aware of it, which is the reason I post this. I mean, it's possible you'll come back with:
"Yeah, I was aware I was doing the exact same thing I asked someone not to do to me: I did it to illustrate the point."
I might even be talked into believing it.
Please notice that I'm not even engaging you on your take in the debate about sexism and feelings- I don't want to go down that rabbit hole with you- I've seen how tense conversations between us get when we debate rules in a game. Like I said, I'm just not even sure you're aware of it.
Rihgu wrote: I was in that same thread, and by my memory you're fabricating that particular stance. I do recall people thinking it strange that among all the spiraling branches of the Imperial beauracracy that it would be odd for them to say "no, we don't want to use 50% of our potential recruiting pool for space marine bodies - women are icky" when they don't show any preference for sex in any other department (except Custodes, Sisters of Silence, and Sisters of Battle). There are women Imperial Guard, after all. If the Imperium saw them as inferior stock for battle that wouldn't be true.
And it doesn't mean the Imperium is "woke" or "heroic" or "laudable". It means that human life is worthless to them, and women are as equally worthless as men.
Except everyone in that thread was talking about how empowering it would be for there to be female Astartes. This goes against your "equally worthless" idea pretty strongly.
How often was that discussion started by a woman? I should like to see their input more often otherwise it’s just a bunch of men arguing about it to the best of our abilities.
Started by her? Never that I've seen. No girl i know walks into a room and goes, "yo so let me tell you why this hobby sucks for me".
Usually it starts by someone commenting they never played with or seen a chick play 40k before and then it goes into some scientific debate with some other dudes. I've been guilty of chiming into it like I'm doing now.
You’re literally in a thread that started like that.
Maybe I misunderstood the question. I was referring to real life. I've never seen my wife or any girl approach someone in real life and start a debate on why chicks don't approach the hobby. And in case I'm misunderstood I'm not saying the Op is fake or anything. She's asking an online form about how to make friends in a store. I'm sure chicks do that. I was just answering what I thought was your question.
How often was that discussion started by a woman? I should like to see their input more often otherwise it’s just a bunch of men arguing about it to the best of our abilities.
Started by her? Never that I've seen. No girl i know walks into a room and goes, "yo so let me tell you why this hobby sucks for me".
Usually it starts by someone commenting they never played with or seen a chick play 40k before and then it goes into some scientific debate with some other dudes. I've been guilty of chiming into it like I'm doing now.
You’re literally in a thread that started like that.
Maybe I misunderstood the question. I was referring to real life. I've never seen my wife or any girl approach someone in real life and start a debate on why chicks don't approach the hobby. And in case I'm misunderstood I'm not saying the Op is fake or anything. She's asking an online form about how to make friends in a store. I'm sure chicks do that. I was just answering what I thought was your question.
Maybe not referring to women as "chicks" is a good starting place, hm?
macluvin wrote: I’m saying that you should try to remove sex based biases from your decision making processes.
In general I see this on the supposedly pro-woman side quite often; in the talks about female space marines, there seems to be a lot of people who think that the Imperium automatically becomes more moral if it's woman doing the baby-killing, genocide, and brutal oppression, since women have some sort of special moral license that men do not. And in the real world, oftentimes there's an idea that women need special accommodations in the hobby as opposed to being treated like equal members of it.
I have literally never seen this take in my life and I have seen a huge number of female space marine debates.
Same. The pro-female space marine arguments are always more about representation than adjusting the factions morality. I'd love to see even a single link to an argument on Dakka were someone made the argument you are saying crops up "quite often".
It wouldn't be empowering to the player, either, unless it was divorced of the context of the setting. Saying that women are now shown to be as expendable as men in a given media/setting would be *disempowering* to women, not *empowering*.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
PenitentJake wrote: 1) I don't think there are a lot of posts by men who say they feel excluded from the hobby.
That's because they know that nobody will care if they say so lol.
Maybe not referring to women as "chicks" is a good starting place, hm?
I feel like you tried to zing me there but that has nothing to do with anything I was talking about with anyone. Starting place for what exactly? That thing i mentioned that doesn't happen? Does my wife not love me for saying chicks? I'm confused here.
Octopoid wrote: Maybe not referring to women as "chicks" is a good starting place, hm?
It's not. Culturally, in many areas it's considered normal and acceptable to refer to women as "chicks." Depends on where you live and your specific (sub)culture.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ouze wrote: Same. The pro-female space marine arguments are always more about representation than adjusting the factions morality.
Nah, that's pretty much it. It's a bunch of guys self-conscious that their hobby is male-dominated and their minis are mostly male, who think they need to signal otherwise for some reason. They just think that groups of men on their own are inherently immoral, whether in real life (a hobby group) or in fiction (Astartes).
Ouze wrote: I'd love to see even a single link to an argument on Dakka were someone made the argument you are saying crops up "quite often".
I'm not going to go back through those threads. If you've read them, you've seen what I'm talking about.
It's not. Culturally, in many areas it's considered normal and acceptable to refer to women as "chicks." Depends on where you live and your specific (sub)culture.
Yeah... Just a reminder though that this isn't where you live, nor is it your (sub)culture: it's an international internet forum.
As for female representation in the game:
I think GW is doing better at this. I personally don't feel like we NEED female space marines, but I wouldn't care if they made them... and if I did, my only complaint would be that there are already enough models in the Space Marine range.
But I like having female models in DE units; I think that giving SoB and SoS real attention is good; female Inquisitors and Rogue Traders are great. I think they can and will go further at gender mixing CWE and Guard, and they've certainly laid the groundwork. I'd like to see more women at White Dwarf, though there are some. And I do think these things will help women feel more included in the hobby, and in the end I think that's a good thing for everyone.
Hate is ok, but only fictionally.
door and maybe things will change. I am not optimistic though I encourage it.
