Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Vulcan wrote:

Ah... you weren't a geek in middle or high school, were you. Never one of the social outcasts the girls would rather die than be seen with, yes?

Actually, I was. My family moved a lot when I was young, and after about the third or fourth school change in as many years, I just stopped trying to make friends. Then along came a physically abusive step father who spent 6 years trying to convince me that I was a total failure of a human being. By high school, I was a skinny, nerdy teen in a school full of kids who idolized sporting ability over anything else.

I think I was in about my mid twenties when I realized that high school was a long time ago, and I didn't have to let the rest of my life be dominated by the opinions of insecure teenagers who I would never actually see again.

So the answer is to kick out all the socially awkward people in the hobby? I mean, yeah, the ideal would be to magically make all the socially awkward people suave and sophisticated... but it's hardly realistic...

There's a fair amount of space in between 'socially awkward' and 'actively blaming women for making me socially awkward' for people to exist in.

My early life was fairly similar only other crap happened as well. Ofc I'm getting over my victim complex and that's something I've seen a lot in the woke crowd but admittedly in my own as well.

I started to get rid of my victim complex for different reasons though. I started to see how badly it effected those that cared about me and how hard they worked only for my selfish victim complex to kick in. This is something both sides need to work on but I see more work need to be done on the woke side but maybe that's because I'm not woke so I see the failings of the woke side more.

You end up fighting to see who's the biggest victim or use it as an excuse not to improve in anything. It's more about instead of taking something as a challenge to improve to rather take it as an excuse to fail or to be lazy or scared and to make no decisions in your own life and then feeling like a victim when someone else chooses things for you.

Anyway both sides do it but you gotta learn to fix yourself.

In my case I'm not saying I can't be less socially awkward. It just might take more effort on my part not to be. Ofc I've never heard people tell Harry potter nerds, yaoi girls or others to be less awkward or rap songs to not seem so abusive to certain groups but that's just how people choose to change. It feels unfair that's for sure.

 flamingkillamajig wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
No one is asking geeks to become suave. Simply that if the socially awkward want to be accommodated by others they need to make an effort to accommodate.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
I was an outcast in middle and high school. I was laughed at by women. I still think you come across really badly in this thread.

I agree with Ninthmuskateer about this thread being a great illustration of the toxicity in the hobby.

Yeah. I have spent an untold amount of effort in learning how to behave in a fashion to not make others uncomfortable, it boils my blood when people act as if it is everyone else's job to adapt to their individual needs.

Well that's weird because I'm supposed to understand what every single person's personal preferences are on your side and not to make anybody uncomfortable as an autistic man no less. I would expect a more give and take attitude but I guess not. You totally expect people to understand a person's situation but if it was a socially awkward autistic person not knowing how to socially act towards others it's somehow the autistic persons fault. May as well tell a man in a wheelchair to go up the steps because everybody else is expected to.

Well it is more reasonable than expecting every other member of the game group to go out and get a degree in psychology and specialize in the study of autism so that they can accommodate the one autistic kid without that kid making even the slightest effort to accommodate them.

Since we are making up bs and all.

I'm not making this up. I said the wrong thing before and about 7 to 8 people from a local game group crapped on me for it and a bunch of them wanted me to leave (out of over a hundred people). I never once insulted any of them in that facebook group. I'm also the autistic man in this situation. I could even post the conversation I had with 2-3 people from that group post thread topic through dm's.

Your line of thinking also goes if we have maybe 1% or so of trans people or asexual people then they're the odd one out and need to accommodate others but we know already that your stance would automatically switch with that.

Also I said a give and take attitude so yes I would change myself somewhat to accommodate them but they'd have to be more lenient with me as well

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

 flamingkillamajig wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
No one is asking geeks to become suave. Simply that if the socially awkward want to be accommodated by others they need to make an effort to accommodate.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
I was an outcast in middle and high school. I was laughed at by women. I still think you come across really badly in this thread.

I agree with Ninthmuskateer about this thread being a great illustration of the toxicity in the hobby.

Yeah. I have spent an untold amount of effort in learning how to behave in a fashion to not make others uncomfortable, it boils my blood when people act as if it is everyone else's job to adapt to their individual needs.

Well that's weird because I'm supposed to understand what every single person's personal preferences are on your side and not to make anybody uncomfortable as an autistic man no less. I would expect a more give and take attitude but I guess not. You totally expect people to understand a person's situation but if it was a socially awkward autistic person not knowing how to socially act towards others it's somehow the autistic persons fault. May as well tell a man in a wheelchair to go up the steps because everybody else is expected to.

Well it is more reasonable than expecting every other member of the game group to go out and get a degree in psychology and specialize in the study of autism so that they can accommodate the one autistic kid without that kid making even the slightest effort to accommodate them.

Since we are making up bs and all.

I think some context is necessary.
According to the latest statistic around 1 in a 100 kids has been diagnosed with autism in the UK.

https://www.bma.org.uk/what-we-do/population-health/child-health/autism-spectrum-disorder#:~:text=It%20is%20estimated%20that%20around,diagnosis%20of%20autism%20spectrum%20disorder.

If of those 1 in 100 half are drawn to geeky game stuff like wargaming that would be a huge chunk of the budding yearly crop of wargaming populations.

This number only seems to be rising as far as I understand. I don't know why it is, it could be due to diagnosing getting better (most likely) ?
But that's a whole other topic/
I don't think people are making up BS neceessarly.

The point is a lot of people even if not autistic will likely not realise they have done something wrong in the first place unless somebody trained or experienced will be able to explain to them I guess?
I'm not sure how you tackle this to be honest. I think all we can really do is build good communities where we help people be better, rather than attack and ostracise people who make mistakes.

I'm blessed with a very good community and we don't have any issues whatsoever. We were actually discussing this same article I think(or one like it). Our leadership reached out to women who are members to get their honest feedback. All of the response have been positive for our club...
But, there were complaints in regards to big events where they were met with uncouth behaviour such as being talked down, or "stared at" and one case of outright groped (this got me really really reaaaaaly angry). However, this was stated to be occurring very very sporadically in a very large concentration of people at huge events. Which kind of makes sense. If you have a 1000 people at a convention, you will 100% get one or two utter pond life dikheads.


Its anecdotal of course, but I take this as an indication that we don't have any sort of endemic problem more or less to other spheres of society. BUT there are certainly bad actors. Just like anywhere else. So as a community we need to protect and look after our own, and resolve issues amicably but also if someone cant be taught or bring to understand certain aspects of their behaviour than perhaps a sanction should be enforced. I think though this should always be the very last resort.

I really detest not giving people a chance to improve themselves just because they haven't developed the social skills through bad parenting or a condition.
Spaces like this seem to attract these people in disproportionate numbers so we have our work cut out.

isn't it just possible that a far smaller percentage of women find wargaming interesting? Is it just possible that this isn't a problem that needs solving? Is it just possible that it's not the fault of 'the patriarchy", "Misogyny", "toxic masculinity", "incels", etc?

 Matt Swain wrote:
isn't it just possible that a far smaller percentage of women find wargaming interesting? Is it just possible that this isn't a problem that needs solving? Is it just possible that it's not the fault of 'the patriarchy", "Misogyny", "toxic masculinity", "incels", etc?

Yes but when people obsess over one thing or another too much they see it everywhere. This works with anything. At this point people could hold an inkblot in front of someone and they would assume some political extreme.

Honestly I think the issue is everything got political and I enjoyed gaming of all kinds more when we all just got along overall despite differing opinions.

Usually the truth is more complex than just throwing out a blanket bigotry complaint and reasons vary from person to person. Sure some things may make it worse but there might be a variety of other reasons.

 Vulcan wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Voss wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

 Vulcan wrote:

And let's face it. Of that 25%, a good chunk never learned because the women around them refuse to spend enough time with them to teach them how.

You've italicized that like it's somehow something that should be expected, which is odd. It's not up to women who just happen to be in your proximity to go out of their way to teach you to be less anti-social, and if you're not giving them a reason to want to spend time with you, that's on you, not them.

I agree it's not up to women, but then on the flip side I don't think it's up to socially awkward gamers to change themselves to make wargaming more accommodating to women.

Absolutely it is.
Learning how to deal with other human beings in a socially acceptable fashion is the baseline required for anyone to participate in society.

And that's why some of them get really hostile to strangers. They HAVE their own little society where they all get along just fine and who are you to intrude in and tell them they have to be accepting of others who have constantly and cruelly rejected THEM?

Nope. If you really want to hold onto a personal grudge for the individual that was your specific personal high school nemesis, feel free. Maybe even their friends as well.

But as soon as you start applying that grudge to every single person of <type> that comes through the door of a gaming shop? You're the hostile jackass. Hostility to _strangers_ isn't warranted by your high school drama with someone unrelated.

Its not a big ask to treat strangers with polite neutrality. That's literally a defining trait of society.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 flamingkillamajig wrote:

In my case I'm not saying I can't be less socially awkward. It just might take more effort on my part not to be. Ofc I've never heard people tell Harry potter nerds, yaoi girls or others to be less awkward or rap songs to not seem so abusive to certain groups but that's just how people choose to change. It feels unfair that's for sure.

I mean... I think you're just not looking. People spent a lot of time freaking out at Harry Potter nerds, yaoi fangirls and rap in general gets hit with organized protests groups and even legislation.

A quick google search would find a lot of rants on those subjects, including live recordings of people browbeating those groups in public.
Examples:
https://www.google.com/search?q=yelling+at+yaoi+fangirls&rlz=1C1CHBF_enUS839US839&oq=yelling+at+yaoi+fangirls&aqs=chrome..69i57.5592j1j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

@voss: yes and while I used to sort of think my dad was bad for hating or disliking people on the political left I've seen plenty that hated people for being conservative or republican automatically just for that reason in their own words. Keep in mind this goes for both big political sides. The one that confuses me is big city people or big states completely dismissing swing states or fly over states. That's like hating the neutral group you should try your best to win over every election year.

 Argive wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

 flamingkillamajig wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
No one is asking geeks to become suave. Simply that if the socially awkward want to be accommodated by others they need to make an effort to accommodate.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
I was an outcast in middle and high school. I was laughed at by women. I still think you come across really badly in this thread.

I agree with Ninthmuskateer about this thread being a great illustration of the toxicity in the hobby.

Yeah. I have spent an untold amount of effort in learning how to behave in a fashion to not make others uncomfortable, it boils my blood when people act as if it is everyone else's job to adapt to their individual needs.

Well that's weird because I'm supposed to understand what every single person's personal preferences are on your side and not to make anybody uncomfortable as an autistic man no less. I would expect a more give and take attitude but I guess not. You totally expect people to understand a person's situation but if it was a socially awkward autistic person not knowing how to socially act towards others it's somehow the autistic persons fault. May as well tell a man in a wheelchair to go up the steps because everybody else is expected to.

Well it is more reasonable than expecting every other member of the game group to go out and get a degree in psychology and specialize in the study of autism so that they can accommodate the one autistic kid without that kid making even the slightest effort to accommodate them.

Since we are making up bs and all.

I think some context is necessary.
According to the latest statistic around 1 in a 100 kids has been diagnosed with autism in the UK.

https://www.bma.org.uk/what-we-do/population-health/child-health/autism-spectrum-disorder#:~:text=It%20is%20estimated%20that%20around,diagnosis%20of%20autism%20spectrum%20disorder.

If of those 1 in 100 half are drawn to geeky game stuff like wargaming that would be a huge chunk of the budding yearly crop of wargaming populations.

This number only seems to be rising as far as I understand. I don't know why it is, it could be due to diagnosing getting better (most likely) ?
But that's a whole other topic/
I don't think people are making up BS neceessarly.

The point is a lot of people even if not autistic will likely not realise they have done something wrong in the first place unless somebody trained or experienced will be able to explain to them I guess?
I'm not sure how you tackle this to be honest. I think all we can really do is build good communities where we help people be better, rather than attack and ostracise people who make mistakes.

I'm blessed with a very good community and we don't have any issues whatsoever. We were actually discussing this same article I think(or one like it). Our leadership reached out to women who are members to get their honest feedback. All of the response have been positive for our club...
But, there were complaints in regards to big events where they were met with uncouth behaviour such as being talked down, or "stared at" and one case of outright groped (this got me really really reaaaaaly angry). However, this was stated to be occurring very very sporadically in a very large concentration of people at huge events. Which kind of makes sense. If you have a 1000 people at a convention, you will 100% get one or two utter pond life dikheads.


Its anecdotal of course, but I take this as an indication that we don't have any sort of endemic problem more or less to other spheres of society. BUT there are certainly bad actors. Just like anywhere else. So as a community we need to protect and look after our own, and resolve issues amicably but also if someone cant be taught or bring to understand certain aspects of their behaviour than perhaps a sanction should be enforced. I think though this should always be the very last resort.

I really detest not giving people a chance to improve themselves just because they haven't developed the social skills through bad parenting or a condition.
Spaces like this seem to attract these people in disproportionate numbers so we have our work cut out.

Oh I am 100% on the same page as you. He just made a completely fictional straw man to use as my opinion, while explicitly quoting a statement that is VERY different, no less. I figured it must be how he wished to be treated considering that was how he treated others, and responded in kind.

All I have ever expressed seriously is that both sides of the equation should work to understand one another and it is unfair to put the responsibility entirely on one of them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 flamingkillamajig wrote:

 Matt Swain wrote:
isn't it just possible that a far smaller percentage of women find wargaming interesting? Is it just possible that this isn't a problem that needs solving? Is it just possible that it's not the fault of 'the patriarchy", "Misogyny", "toxic masculinity", "incels", etc?

Yes but when people obsess over one thing or another too much they see it everywhere. This works with anything. At this point people could hold an inkblot in front of someone and they would assume some political extreme.

Honestly I think the issue is everything got political and I enjoyed gaming of all kinds more when we all just got along overall despite differing opinions.

Usually the truth is more complex than just throwing out a blanket bigotry complaint and reasons vary from person to person. Sure some things may make it worse but there might be a variety of other reasons.

You are definitely spot on with that. Since the start this thread has been littered with posts that have little to do with the article and are just political rhetoric with some words changed around.

What is it I'm making up? Perhaps I'm being uncharitable here somehow or misread what you meant or you misread my statement?

It's not really that hard to read autism as you think. Granted its a broad spectrum and I'm lucky enough to be higher functioning but even so it tends to make social connections more difficult as well as doing some more adult functions in some cases (drive cars, live alone, work a job and get married). I have done some of these and not others. Sadly even higher functioning autism has these issues.

I'd say the thing I hate most is the infantilization of people with disorders. Plenty of people act nice to somebody but treat them mentally like children. If you don't understand look at someone that has down syndrome. I've gotten similar treatment as that from people which said they wanted to help me. I have wants and needs too and my opinions should be worth considering without dismissing them as child-like or less worthy of attention or consideration.

I want to try harder with self improvement and being more independent and social interaction but it's not the first time I've said something that's gotten me into trouble (up to the point of insults or physical threats) and I was almost never having negative intent more than teasing to which I just expect others to tease me back. Maybe in some cases I'm thicker skinned if I know someone's just joking.

Holy crap did we just manage to keep the thread fairly reasonable for an off topic thread normally likely to get locked?

 AustonT wrote:
Those hobbies it seems acceptable to just shrug and say “it’s not for everyone.”

Unlike this extremely niche hobby that requires a pretty focused interest in a number of things women don’t especially care for.
Then it’s unacceptable to point about that this already fringe hobby may not be very attractive to women (and most men); and that’s fine.

So for me its because with another hat on I am playing professional wargames. There we are desperate for women, in design and in the teams. An awful lot of the men involved came to it through wargames. I would love to co-opt the hobby to feed the professional world more fully. And that is a require for the security of the nation.

Otherwise I prefer to be around people who can handle the presence of women. I have found the mixed boardgame clubs as much fun as the all male wargame clubs. I would love to bring my daughter along and not get the creepy comments. Those guys don't have to go away, but I would like women to be a routine feature of the environment so they at least hide any unsavoury comments or stares as they would in other walks of life.

I believe a hobby that can and does include anyone has a stronger and more sustainable base, and I want to be playing with my (no doubt 3d printed, machine painted) toys 20 years from now.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 flamingkillamajig wrote:

All this said I have trouble wanting to get people into warhammer with my own hang-ups with the current game. Im just not really having fun anymore in the game.

If you like wargames, perhaps it time to try a different non warhammer one. There are some surprisingly good ones out there!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

A.T. wrote:
You can already get resin pillar men custodes. They are fabulous.

They are indeed awesome


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Matt Swain wrote:
isn't it just possible that a far smaller percentage of women find wargaming interesting? Is it just possible that this isn't a problem that needs solving? Is it just possible that it's not the fault of 'the patriarchy", "Misogyny", "toxic masculinity", "incels", etc?

The point is a) women's participation in wargames is lower than in previous centuries, b) women's participation is lower than in what are considered comparable hobbies.

No one has said things should be 50/50, or there may be a smaller market amongst women. Question is of those women that could be expected to play these games, why aren't they? Historically they did (19th century) and today they do all the other niche comparable games that were considered for boys 40 years ago.

As for it being a problem, that is a matter of personal perspective. You get a lot of railway enthusiasts who are happy with a dying hobby as it means you don't get the wrong sort joining it. Conversely you get those that think commercial support will be better with a growing market segment. For wargames you are see a variety of perspectives over the previous pages.

I imagine tabletop gaming is more just a dying breed. If video games might have helped put it one foot in the grave then id say 3d printing is gonna eventually put them 6 feet under. Until then they seem to be doing well somehow.

Honestly I think it's a mix of how awkward it is and just so many other things people could do or want to do. Video games and computers have come a long way since the 80s.

I remember i once suggested they should've scrapped dark tide and instead had a balls to the walls 4 player co op assassin game (eversor, callidus, vindicare and culexus) where you go on a rampage that'd make vermintide look civil and toned down in comparison. Basically vindicare snipers far away enemies on some hive spire addressing rogue troops or take out greater daemons or powerful weapons at a distance, callidus is the sneak mode followed by some nasty melee when things go wrong, culexus is great for psychics esp. Chaos and eversor is just absolute no one is left alive to tell the tail because things have gotten that bad.

NOW THAT is how you'd market a 40k game Fat Shark.

 flamingkillamajig wrote:
I imagine tabletop gaming is more just a dying breed. If video games might have helped put it one foot in the grave then id say 3d printing is gonna eventually put them 6 feet under. Until then they seem to be doing well somehow.

How is 3D printing going to put them 6feet under?
Thus far barring a few odds and ends for the house from what I see most 3D printers are either being used to machine masters or test designs for companies going into production; or they are being used by hobbyists to produce models. For painting and/or gaming.

The 3D printer is also a long way from being a common household item and the nature of resins makes it not very safe nor practical for younger customers who are unsupervised. So for a long time yet the injection mould or spin cast metal are still going to be able to compete. 3D print stores might be able to lower the market value of models and compete there on the highstreet/shelf but the GW injection moulded sprue would take a lot to beat.



However to say that 3D printing will kill tabletop gaming just seems strange. IT might change the nature of smaller companies as they shift from physical to digital sculpting and distribution methods; it might change the nature of getting into the market ; it might change the nature of 3rd party alternatives and how companies learn to deal with them (esp medium sized companies where its easier to lose a larger percentage of their customers to 3D printing). However if anything it will add to the tabletop market. Heck it will likely encourage model use in things like RPG games to be far more common and at a higher level of quality than a lot of your standard pre-painted DnD models.

The_Real_Chris wrote:
b) women's participation is lower than in what are considered comparable hobbies.

You keep saying this, I don't think it's true.
RPGs are not comparable to wargames, at all.
Nor are boardgames or video games.

When it comes to investing in RPGs, whether that be time or money, there is none. You can literally turn up to an RPG session (as a player), with no preparation and start playing using a pre-gen character. Or you can make own character takes about half an hour tops and a sheet of paper.
Same with board games, I can turn up to a boardgames night and join in. No investiture at all, explaining the rules for most games takes no more than 15 minutes.
Video games as well, turn on computer, boot up game, away you go.

Wargames are totally different.
Learning the rules is a project, they'll never explain all the rules to you quickly. And unlike RPGs you can't just rely on the DM to interpret your requests for you.
Buying an army is a significant monetary investment. Assembling the army is a significant time investment, painting it even more-so.

I think this is a big part of why wargaming attracts so many people on the spectrum, they have a tendency to get really invested in certain things.
Men in general are more likely to show this sort of dedication than women.

About the only similarity between RPGs and wargames is the fact that both involve combat, but they even focus on that combat completely differently.

Which also feeds into the other point you make about different centuries. War was seen completely differently in previous centuries, especially amongst the colonial aristocracy.

I mean computer games have no investment provided you actually own a gaming capable pc at home.

I know a good many people now don't own a pc, they use their tablet or phone and might use a PC at work.

Meanwhile owning a PC and owning a gaming PC are two totally different things. One might be £500 the other might be easily £1K for the tower alone, that excludes a good screen, mouse, speakers, keyboard etc...




Also RPG games are more and more using models these days. Sure the DM might provide all; but having models is becoming part of the hobby in a growing way. You might not have dozens but you might have one for your character and such.

1 model for your character (optional) vs dozens or even hundreds of models for your army (non-optional).
My DM uses dice for figures.

The same is true of boardgames, you *can* go all out and buy the fancy metal crafted meeples and whatever other extras, but you don't need to.

That huge dichotomy of investment is still there.

*I know there's wargames that can be played with fewer or even no models at all. But once you're past GW you're entering a niche within a niche.

I think all of the reasons brought up in this thread certainly contribute to the discrepancy. I do also think that the comparisons to other tabletop games (RPGs, boardgames) are not as applicable as many people think.

The elephant in the room when it comes to wargames is in the tile. War. Women, on average, are less interested in war as a concept (I have no data on this, it's just my first-hand experience). Obviously, there are many who are (about 1/4 of my professors on the subject back in university were women). I would also note that the subject matter of violence (say, in a dungeon crawl RPG or board-game) is not the same as war.

However, once you begin applying the other filters to the population of people interested or at least non turned off by playing war, it paints a different picture.

I think to get into wargames for a significant amount of time, you have to be interested in war. But you also have to be interested in long term modelling and painting projects, and miniatures, and so much that you're willing to spend thousands of dollars on those projects over time. And you have to be willing to learn and play dense rule sets.

I don't think any of those things appeal wildly more to men, but it's possible that on the margins, men are more interested in them. When you apply those filters to the original variable (interest in war and conflict), I'm not surprised that the end skew is so significant.

RPGs and boardgames are much, much, much broader genres of tactile gaming than wargames. Wargaming is actually a very narrow category. There are RPGs and boardgames for every conceivable milieu and genre. By definition, they will appeal to a larger pool of potential players. It's just not the case to wargaming. To those pointing out the larger player pool of women in these genres, do you think the proportional difference persists in the subcategories that are more analogous to wargaming, like avalon hill games, or GURPs WW2?

That said, I would love to see more women play and get involved in wargaming. I think there are clear things people can do to facilitate that like eliminating gatekeeping, stamping out casual or outright misogyny if and where it exists, etc.

I'm just skeptical that the wargaming population would ever, or necessarily should strive to be, reflective of the population gender-wise.

I agree, it's not one single net that excludes all women.

There's dozens of factors surrounding wargaming. If every factor is just a little skewed towards men, they will still quickly stack up to a heavily skewed system.

That said, I would love to see more women play and get involved in wargaming.

We do see larger percentage of women in stuff like Malifaux, which to me suggests that the idea of using toy soldiers to fight isn't entirely anathema to women. Though I guess it, like necromunda, isn't actually a WARgame, nor is Frostgrave or Mordheim.

Cronch wrote:

That said, I would love to see more women play and get involved in wargaming.

We do see larger percentage of women in stuff like Malifaux, which to me suggests that the idea of using toy soldiers to fight isn't entirely anathema to women. Though I guess it, like necromunda, isn't actually a WARgame, nor is Frostgrave or Mordheim.

Definitely take your point. I think it makes sense that if you scrutinize the margins of wargaming, the proportion differs. I don't think its necessarily relevant to get into the semantics of what is or isnt a wargame. Mostly because there ARE women who are interested in wargaming, so as you adjust the sliders of theme, modelling, mechanics, that a larger population of women players would appear makes total sense to me.

But yeah, I think when you get into the territory of 'munda, mordheim, frostgrave, and malifaux, you're closer to RPGs/boardgames than you are to traditional wargaming. Or at least far closer than you would be with 40k, and certainly than with DBM, Lasalle, or Art de la Guerre.

 AustonT wrote:
The difference is no one is writing articles about why fishing is so problematic; or salon/spas. Those hobbies it seems acceptable to just shrug and say “it’s not for everyone.”

Are you sure no one is writing articles about it? I am pretty sure they are.....

https://gearjunkie.com/outdoor/hunt-fish/women-fishing-advocacy-access
https://d2ouvy59p0dg6k.cloudfront.net/downloads/women_conservation_fisheries_2012.pdf
https://www.sportfishingmag.com/women-who-love-fishing-and-have-beaten-its-barriers/

I think most hobbies are trying to get their heads and hands around this issue. Why should Wargaming be different?

At the end of the day we keep asking women why and they keep giving the same answers, it isn't complicated.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
At the end of the day we keep asking women why and they keep giving the same answers, it isn't complicated.

I think so far the thread has done more guessing than actual asking and answering.

 Overread wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
At the end of the day we keep asking women why and they keep giving the same answers, it isn't complicated.

I think so far the thread has done more guessing than actual asking and answering.

I'll admit I haven't read the entirety of this 11 page thread, and the article focuses exclusively on removing social barriers. Could you indulge me a bit and surface what these answers might be? No sarcasm here on my part, I'm generally interested in this discussion.

Incidentally, I'm a little interested about this from another angle. ie; the conversation so far seems to me (from skimming, to be fair) to have circled around the barriers encountered by women who were interested in wargaming but found themselves bounced from it by social culture. While obviously important, it doesn't quite examine the question of why it appears that women seem to be less interested in wargaming in the first place.

I have a lot of female friends who I play RPGs and boardgames with, but not one of them is even slightly interested in wargaming, despite having been exposed to it. I know this is completely anecdotal, but I don't think its especially unusual. By contrast, while the vast majority of men I know are likewise completely uninterested in wargaming even if they enjoy RPGs and board games, I have had infinitely more luck introducing some here or there into the hobby.

This, by the way, is within a closed gaming culture: as in we are not interacting with strangers who may present as a passive or active social barrier, but with people who are already trusted and known to one another.

Getting women interested in wargaming isn't much helpful if the barriers pushing them away are still in place, so it logically follows that those barriers should be dealt with first.

There is also a certain morality to it; if someone is interested in the hobby but pushed away by abhorrent behavior that is a bad thing which should be minimized regardless of who that someone is.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Getting women interested in wargaming isn't much helpful if the barriers pushing them away are still in place, so it logically follows that those barriers should be dealt with first.

There is also a certain morality to it; if someone is interested in the hobby but pushed away by abhorrent behavior that is a bad thing which should be minimized regardless of who that someone is.

I mean, I definitely agree that people have a moral duty to not be misogynists. For the record, I also recognize that those barriers absolutely exist.

I do think that it doesn't quite answer the breadth of the question posed by the article's title. In order to encounter those barriers at all, you'd need to be interested in wargames to begin with.

 Las wrote:

 Overread wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
At the end of the day we keep asking women why and they keep giving the same answers, it isn't complicated.

I think so far the thread has done more guessing than actual asking and answering.

The potential reasons have been many including and not limited too:

Social ones - smelly rooms; bad hygine; bad behaviour; leering looks and social inexperience on the part of existing members

The marketing of "WAR"

The fact that it requires attention to detail for a prolonged duration (both in terms of building models and playing the game)

The lack of diplomacy/social interactions present within the game structure

Psychological make up - girls/women just do not like "war games"

The lack of sufficient public role models

The lack of historical marketing resulting in a gap

The existence of boob plate

The lack of female models present within every army




Those at least are the ones I recall appearing most often in the discussion. Personally there's some that I think are overblown and some that I think are more influential. My personal view is that its more a case of a lack of role models, marketing and general attempts to draw women in as one barrier; with the other being issues within the social group. I note that its not just the ones I outline above but also the fact that many wargame groups are often a bit informal in how they run and often as not so long as people "pair up" for games they are happy. So sometimes newbies (male and female) don't get the clear welcome, introduction and general orientating that they might otherwise need. Which, of course, affects both groups, just that when you couple it to a reduced influx of women walking in the door in the first place, it then compounds the issue.
I think this is the same with social aspects in general - guys also don't like rooms that stink and can also feel uncomfortable with people who have social interaction issues at times. However more guys tend to get marketed too (now and historically) so there's more volume of them walking through the door to off-set those that walk away.

 Las wrote:
I have a lot of female friends who I play RPGs and boardgames with, but not one of them is even slightly interested in wargaming, despite having been exposed to it. I know this is completely anecdotal, but I don't think its especially unusual. By contrast, while the vast majority of men I know are likewise completely uninterested in wargaming even if they enjoy RPGs and board games, I have had infinitely more luck introducing some here or there into the hobby.

This, by the way, is within a closed gaming culture: as in we are not interacting with strangers who may present as a passive or active social barrier, but with people who are already trusted and known to one another.

This has also been my experience.

 Las wrote:
[
Incidentally, I'm a little interested about this from another angle. ie; the conversation so far seems to me (from skimming, to be fair) to have circled around the barriers encountered by women who were interested in wargaming but found themselves bounced from it by social culture. While obviously important, it doesn't quite examine the question of why it appears that women seem to be less interested in wargaming in the first place.

I mean, the overwhelming majority of humanity, male or female, is not interested in wargaming, miniaturegaming or any variation of it. Wargamers are, i imagine, less than a statistical error in the sea of humanity on this planet.