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.

 azreal13 wrote:

 rabidaskal wrote:
I wonder if there are 18 page threads in the knitting and crochet forums where women wonder why more men don't get into it.

Because it would go

"I wonder why more men aren't into knitting and crochet?"

"They're not that into it, they prefer paintball, wargames, videogames and things like that."

"Oh well, fair enough I suppose. Boys and their toys eh?"

"Exactly, but at least it gets him out from under my feet a few days a month."

"True dat."

And that would be an end to it.

I think the reason behind this is because, at the heart of it, this is a feminist rights issue. Feminist issues are very, very contentious since they challenge Western Culture's norms.

Of course, the crochet thing is a Masculinist (Hate that word) issue. And about those.. well.. check out the thread about the fish that mutilates male genitals. People openly admit that it's funny to them. If those same fish, say, started ripping apart a woman's private parts and killing a couple then it would be tragic.

I think you're looking a little too hard at the issue, i had begun to write something which I would have then had to spend another 18 pages justifying to some of those involved in this thread.

Let's just say I suspect some people want more women involved in the hobby so they can meet some women and leave it there.

 azreal13 wrote:
Just out of curiosity, I wonder if their is any correlation between the opinions expressed by male posters in this thread and their experience (or lack thereof) in dealing with actual, living, breathing members of the opposite sex?

I get it. Those of us who don't agree with the manly men must be Nice Guy virgins, amirite?

I happen to know a lot of women who are into board games and would make the jump to tabletop pretty quickly if it weren't for one or two things. My wife, for instance, loves playing Space Hulk and started to learn 40k during Battle for Macragge (she loved the Tyranids). She also plays/played MTG, various RPGs and lots and lots of board games. But the local GW and Brookhurst Hobbies both creep her the hell out. She says the gamers inside those places make her so uncomfortable she isn't willing to go back.

My friend plays Warmachine, but has a similar problem getting his wife interested. She is totes into killing stuff for fun and plays a lot of zombie games, as well as having her own cosplay sith costume and weapons. But somehow gaming night is still about the board games.

I also have a few (female) friends into WoW and other video games and MTG, and cosplay to a big degree, yet they aren't willing to take on TTWGs because they just don't feel as comfortable in that space.

So, yes, some of us know the touch of a woman and somehow still argue unnecessary cleavage is a problem getting our friends and lovers into the game. But these are all anecdotes and not evidence, so whatever.

So less cleavage on models would make your wife more comfortable with the creepy gamers?

Not following that leap, sorry.

azreal13 wrote: Let's just say I suspect some people want more women involved in the hobby so they can meet some women and leave it there.

I was thinking the exact same thing. 
Some folks see “being a gamer” as their identity, so in a way, it makes a certain kind of sense to want to meet a gamer girl as their significant other, and “live the fantasy”. I mean how can there be a better way to meet girls than if there were more girls involved in gaming?
In a way, it makes me glad that I didn’t meet my girlfriend through these geek circles –lets face it, it’s a really small, and at times extremely cliquey and incestuous little pool of people. Part of me wants to suggest getting out more.

BobtheInquisitor wrote:I get it. Those of us who don't agree with the manly men must be Nice Guy virgins, amirite?

A lot will be though, funnily enough. As a social group, I’d argue gamers have a larger degree of social disfunction, social uncomfortability, and a general lack of social skills and graces, and more of a lack of general life experience than other groups.
Doesn’t mean to say there aren’t plenty ordinary joes and janes with significant others involved with plenty of the above though.
But on the whole, I’m more than a little bit wary of taking a lot of the comments of this community on topics other than “in-game” at face value considering this.

BobtheInquisitor wrote:I happen to know a lot of women who are into board games and would make the jump to tabletop pretty quickly if it weren't for one or two things. My wife, for instance, loves playing Space Hulk and started to learn 40k during Battle for Macragge (she loved the Tyranids). She also plays/played MTG, various RPGs and lots and lots of board games. But the local GW and Brookhurst Hobbies both creep her the hell out. She says the gamers inside those places make her so uncomfortable she isn't willing to go back.
My friend plays Warmachine, but has a similar problem getting his wife interested. She is totes into killing stuff for fun and plays a lot of zombie games, as well as having her own cosplay sith costume and weapons. But somehow gaming night is still about the board games.
I also have a few (female) friends into WoW and other video games and MTG, and cosplay to a big degree, yet they aren't willing to take on TTWGs because they just don't feel as comfortable in that space.
So, yes, some of us know the touch of a woman and somehow still argue unnecessary cleavage is a problem getting our friends and lovers into the game. But these are all anecdotes and not evidence, so whatever.

Im not saying this as a criticism – but its coming across like you and your circle of friends are very entrenched in the gamer community. Would I be right in saying that? (And btw, im not criticising, or complaining, or anything like that). An entrenched community is going to have a very different perception of a subject that someone “looking in”. However, as valid as your point is, I just wouldn’t necessarily take that as an indicator of the population in general. Please see below.
For what its worth, on one hand, we’ve got a handful of girls that play warmachine – one is our pressganger even. A handful. In percentage terms, single digits. A few others might be seen to play boardgames, or rpg’s.
One the other hand, take my girlfriend. And her friends. Proper tomboys. The lot of them. (rugby players). She likes my painted dudes, but really has no interest in painting herself. And although she’ll always show interest, and ask how my game goes, she’s got no interest in playing herself. Video games? Same story. No interest. Board games? Doubt it. Same with my other female friends. (and I’ve got quite a few-certainly more non-gamer girl friends than gamer girl friends) They know I play/paint. They’ll show interest, and compliment me on my dudes if they see them. A few even painted stuff for their brothers back when they were kids. But as a general interest? Nope, sorry.
Funnily enough, she’ll have no issues heading into the FLGS or a GW if I need to pick up stuff, or look around, (gamers don’t scare her at all). But get involved in the hobby, whether its board games, rpgs, video games or TTGs? Nope, just no interest. Cleavage or no, it’s got nothing to do with the issue. Its simply not something a lot of folks are interested in, at all.

 mattyrm wrote:

The rest of what you wrote wasn't worth replying to, it was yet another post saying that gender roles are nonsense. The fact is, women don't want to wargame as much because they don't want to wargame as much. You can talk about gender roles all you like, that's a fact. My missus hasnt been conditioned to prefer reading over boxing, she just does, shes very much a tomboy and always has been, but she aint a man, and funny thing, men and women are a little bit different, gender roles be damned.

I have anecdotes too: my GF likes all sorts of violent video games and is really good at them, she was a melee lead of a top raiding guild of our server in WoW. I know a tons of girls who like violent video games and RPGs, and one who likes knitting (she still likes those games too, and is the only person I know who practices shooting with a handgun.)

Women don't like to wargame as much because women don't like to wargame as much. Its a fact. I guarantee that even if GW suddenly released a range of fully clothed, cammed up Cadian Womens Regiments, and banned anyone under the age of 21 from their stores for fear of childish leering, you STILL wouldn't see women make up more than the current smaller smattering of hobbyists, they just aren't as interested, and there is no way you can possibly argue that the sole reason for that is because society and men are dicks.

Culture doesn't change overnight, but is changing with video games and tabletop RPGs, so it can with wargames too. And yes, it is quite possible that in any situation more men than women will play wargames, but how large percentage of female players should there be until it is acceptable to stop pandering exclusively to the males?

The only possible way your argument would make sense, is if you are talking about indoctrination since birth, and that all women inevitably embrace feminine roles because of pressure since they were babies. If you are arguing that, you are taking this already dour conversation to a next level, and I still wouldn't agree with you anyway.

That indoctrination absolutely happens, but of course despite that not all women embrace traditional gender roles.

I don't believe for a second that If I was stranded and raised by wolves on a desert island when I was 4, I would prefer a doll to a bazooka, I think women have a more nurturing instinct because of 200,000 years of evolution, and men are more aggressive for the exact same reason.

If you think removing all cultural norms would suddenly make women want to go around beating people up, and men want to stay at home and stoke babies, you are ignoring the fact that we are evolved apes.

Culture affects things massively, but this doesn't mean it is the sole determiner of behaviour. More gender-neutral culture would lessen the different behaviour of genders, but not completely eliminate it. And, still, that is averages, in either case individuals differ and should not be restricted by what an average member of their gender is like. (Also, it is a pretty odd statement that men want to go around beating people up. Furthermore, I know several women that really don't like babies.)

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:
I'd imagine it has something to do with the perception of miniature war gaming that both men and women have. Miniature war gaming is generally considered an activity appropriate only for males. Coupled with the historic elements of warfare which, and I don't have any statistics to base this statement off of so grain of salt and all that, but I imagine is a field of study that most women choose not to undertake, and you will begin to approach an answer to your question.

Something else to consider is the severe lack of relatable protagonists in historic settings for women. Sci-Fi and Fantasy at least allow for women to be central to the story being told because real world cultural mores can be changed or ignored in those fantastical settings. Unless you focus on very rare outliers the same cannot be said for historic games where women's roles were limited and often took the form of supportive activities not devoted to direct combat. I doubt a rousing game of playing American Civil War Nurses would be as much fun as recreating the Battle of Antietam. Although, bonesaws are cool, so maybe I'd play an ACW Nurses game.

The low appeal of historical games (to both sexes) is also a matter of scale. There's no room for individual characters in most of them. Indeed, Flames of War differentiating between lone heroes is something of an outlier in that field already, the general trend tends to be for uniform hordes/platoons/squadrons of troops. Another thing that drives people of both sexes away is the perception, as you point out, a lot of people have of such games, they're seen as a pastime for reenactors and serious history buffs, not for someone with no more than a passing interest in medieval chivalry. Historical games come across as being about recreating and refighting history, whereas fantasy games come across as making up your own stories with your own characters. The two appeal to very different personalities and interest groups, and there is limited overlap there to begin with. People into napoleonics and ACW tend not to also have Necromunda gangs and a Blood Bowl team. Flames of War has tried to cross this divide by being easier to pick up and more aimed for the "beer and pretzels" crowd, of course.

But get involved in the hobby, whether its board games, rpgs, video games or TTGs? Nope, just no interest. Cleavage or no, it’s got nothing to do with the issue. Its simply not something a lot of folks are interested in, at all.

Very much the same impression here. Funnily enough, she help me from time to time on scenery, but other than that, she just have no interest in the hobby. Sexualisation of women have nothing to do with it, because she didn't go deep enough in the hobby to even realise it was there.

 azreal13 wrote:

 rabidaskal wrote:
I wonder if there are 18 page threads in the knitting and crochet forums where women wonder why more men don't get into it.

Because it would go

"I wonder why more men aren't into knitting and crochet?"

"They're not that into it, they prefer paintball, wargames, videogames and things like that."

"Oh well, fair enough I suppose. Boys and their toys eh?"

"Exactly, but at least it gets him out from under my feet a few days a month."

"True dat."

And that would be an end to it.

>_>

<_<

http://www.knittingparadise.com/t-150564-1.html

Bit of an interesting read, and far less vitriol. I'm thinking I'll start posting there

Also, they do have a 23 page thread about why their daughters can't/won't knight.
http://www.knittingparadise.com/t-126933-1.html

Edit: Also instead of FLGS, they have FLYS (yarn shop)

 Alfndrate wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:

 rabidaskal wrote:
I wonder if there are 18 page threads in the knitting and crochet forums where women wonder why more men don't get into it.

Because it would go

"I wonder why more men aren't into knitting and crochet?"

"They're not that into it, they prefer paintball, wargames, videogames and things like that."

"Oh well, fair enough I suppose. Boys and their toys eh?"

"Exactly, but at least it gets him out from under my feet a few days a month."

"True dat."

And that would be an end to it.

>_>

<_<

http://www.knittingparadise.com/t-150564-1.html

Bit of an interesting read, and far less vitriol. I'm thinking I'll start posting there

Also, they do have a 23 page thread about why their daughters can't/won't knight.
http://www.knittingparadise.com/t-126933-1.html

Edit: Also instead of FLGS, they have FLYS (yarn shop)

Maybe we should organize some sort of cross-hobby mixer. As one of the posters said over there: "The creating and crafting and the masterpiece is not restricted to any sex." From the hobby side, it's all art, just different mediums. The application is a bit off though. Once they are done with their project, they get a nice snuggly throw blanket to keep them warm. We get an army to crush the foes of the Imperium of Man.

The Wife does a quite of bit of craft projects, and has war-gamed in the past. But shows no interest in W40k. She does like the painting I do, and is supportive of me in the hobby.

 Seaward wrote:

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:
Is that what I said? Did I reference "the patriarchy" at all?

No, you said that the reason for the lack of women on historic battlefields was cultural rather than practical.

What I said was that, with some rare exceptions, there aren't historical examples of women engaging in combat. Now the reasons for that are definitely cultural and those cultural practices were most certainly grounded in practicality, but that doesn't make what I said any less true. Sci-Fi and Fantasy settings aren't tethered to the gender limitations of history. In D&D you can have a female Paladin leading an army of the righteous against a horde of skeletons. You cannot easily find a female figure to rally around in the Battle of Hastings, for example.


And the general sense that women are not interested in violent games (video or table top) is, as Ouze said, likely generational. Anecdote time!

My girlfriend loves violent FPS and RPGs. She also loves games that allow her to explore and build things, so the Borderlands and the Bioshock series really resonated with her. She also introduced video games early on to her niece who has taken a liking to games like Mario, Zelda and Metroid. The niece has also been exposed to movies like Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, and damn near every Marvel and DC movie that has come out in the last 15 year--and loves them. I don't think the niece has the same perception of games as girls who grew up in the 80's or 90's because she has never been told that certain games (or movies) are only for boys. I imagine a lot of little girls are benefiting from the wider acceptance of geek culture, as well as the relaxing of our cultural notions of what is and is not acceptable interests for boys and girls to have, and developing a taste for hobbies like gaming (video and table top).

The idea that guys want more women in the hobby so that they can chase tail is rather silly (and likely a none too subtle jab at some of the posters in this thread). I am sure there are some guys who have that goal, but I think the vast majority would prefer to have table top gaming be more widely accepted and inclusive, allowing them to have more opponents and less stigma attached to their interests.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Agamemnon2 wrote:

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:
I'd imagine it has something to do with the perception of miniature war gaming that both men and women have. Miniature war gaming is generally considered an activity appropriate only for males. Coupled with the historic elements of warfare which, and I don't have any statistics to base this statement off of so grain of salt and all that, but I imagine is a field of study that most women choose not to undertake, and you will begin to approach an answer to your question.

Something else to consider is the severe lack of relatable protagonists in historic settings for women. Sci-Fi and Fantasy at least allow for women to be central to the story being told because real world cultural mores can be changed or ignored in those fantastical settings. Unless you focus on very rare outliers the same cannot be said for historic games where women's roles were limited and often took the form of supportive activities not devoted to direct combat. I doubt a rousing game of playing American Civil War Nurses would be as much fun as recreating the Battle of Antietam. Although, bonesaws are cool, so maybe I'd play an ACW Nurses game.

The low appeal of historical games (to both sexes) is also a matter of scale. There's no room for individual characters in most of them. Indeed, Flames of War differentiating between lone heroes is something of an outlier in that field already, the general trend tends to be for uniform hordes/platoons/squadrons of troops. Another thing that drives people of both sexes away is the perception, as you point out, a lot of people have of such games, they're seen as a pastime for reenactors and serious history buffs, not for someone with no more than a passing interest in medieval chivalry. Historical games come across as being about recreating and refighting history, whereas fantasy games come across as making up your own stories with your own characters. The two appeal to very different personalities and interest groups, and there is limited overlap there to begin with. People into napoleonics and ACW tend not to also have Necromunda gangs and a Blood Bowl team. Flames of War has tried to cross this divide by being easier to pick up and more aimed for the "beer and pretzels" crowd, of course.

Great point! To be honest I have avoided games like Flames of War because I do not perceive myself as enough of a history buff to participate and I do not want to run afoul of players who nit pick every detail of a miniature army.

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:
Sci-Fi and Fantasy settings aren't tethered to the gender limitations of history.

Because they're not tethered to reality, where you frequently have to do things like carry wounded individuals back from the line, march under heavy load, engage in contests of strength with your enemy, and so on.


No one's disputing that plenty of women like videogames, violent or otherwise. No one's disputing that plenty of women like tabletop games. What's being disputed is the notion that there's this huge female audience out there that would absolutely love miniature tabletop wargaming if only it weren't for those darn sexist sculpts! That's patently ridiculous.

And, since we're doing anecdotes, my girlfriend's favorite sculpts to paint for me are the cheesecake ones.

 Seaward wrote:

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:
Sci-Fi and Fantasy settings aren't tethered to the gender limitations of history.

Because they're not tethered to reality, where you frequently have to do things like carry wounded individuals back from the line, march under heavy load, engage in contests of strength with your enemy, and so on.


No one's disputing that plenty of women like videogames, violent or otherwise. No one's disputing that plenty of women like tabletop games. What's being disputed is the notion that there's this huge female audience out there that would absolutely love miniature tabletop wargaming if only it weren't for those darn sexist sculpts! That's patently ridiculous.

And, since we're doing anecdotes, my girlfriend's favorite sculpts to paint for me are the cheesecake ones.

Yeah exactly, like birds would suddenly flock to play Wargames if it wasnt for the tits.

I know gak loads of women, none of them are interested in my war gaming, not because of tits, but because its war. Funny thing, they arent as into Arnie films and war movies either.

Like I said ten pages ago, its simply a topic they are less interested in, it doesn't matter what hobby you are talking about, yet just because a small percentage of women DO like war movies, war games, and war in general, it invalidates a point that nobody made anyway?

As you say, nobody is questioning that some girls like it, but most dont, and its got nothing to do with baps or wargames and everything to do with the subject.

 Seaward wrote:

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:
Sci-Fi and Fantasy settings aren't tethered to the gender limitations of history.

Because they're not tethered to reality, where you frequently have to do things like carry wounded individuals back from the line, march under heavy load, engage in contests of strength with your enemy, and so on.

What exactly are you trying to argue here? It appears to me that you are being intentionally obtuse in order to argue a point that is not related to my original statement. In that statement I said that women may not like historic games because there are few if any personalities for them to identify with for reasons that are historic fact, and Sci-fi and Fantasy settings are not constrained by those same historic facts. There are more opportunities in fantastical settings for women to have agency and drive a story forward. Simple as that.

The merits of women on the battlefield is for another discussion and not something I referenced when making my original statement.

And really, do we have those battlefield realities that you listed in our games? Mostly, no. I don't recall having to drag my dead Praetorians away from a failed assault in 40k, or any rules in Warmachine that require my army to spend hours loading coal into my Warjacks' furnaces. Hell, even in Battletech, which loves to make rules for every possible situation, doesn't require those aspects of warfare to be represented. Because we are playing games not recreating accurate-down-to-the-last-detail battlefields.

So, please let it go. We are talking about the representation of women in gaming, not women in war.

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:
What exactly are you trying to argue here? It appears to me that you are being intentionally obtuse in order to argue a point that is not related to my original statement. In that statement I said that women may not like historic games because there are few if any personalities for them to identify with for reasons that are historic fact, and Sci-fi and Fantasy settings are not constrained by those same historic facts.

If that'd been what you actually said, we'd be all good. Unfortunately, you decided to use the term "cultural mores," which propagates a lot of bs myths. If you're abandoning that position, then fair enough.

 mattyrm wrote:

As you say, nobody is questioning that some girls like it, but most dont, and its got nothing to do with baps or wargames and everything to do with the subject.

Which begs the question why don't women like the subject. The answer, in my opinion, is multi-faceted and includes a lot of the issues brought up in this discussion.

It isn't because women just don't like war. Absolute statements like that are silly.

Women are plenty capable of being nasty, violent beings, just like men. So something else has to be creating the disparity between the number of men who like table top war games and the much smaller number of women who also enjoy the hobby. It isn't just a natural division among the sexes.

 mattyrm wrote:
Yeah exactly, like birds would suddenly flock to play Wargames if it wasnt for the tits.

I know gak loads of women, none of them are interested in my war gaming, not because of tits, but because its war. Funny thing, they arent as into Arnie films and war movies either.

Like I said ten pages ago, its simply a topic they are less interested in, it doesn't matter what hobby you are talking about, yet just because a small percentage of women DO like war movies, war games, and war in general, it invalidates a point that nobody made anyway?

As you say, nobody is questioning that some girls like it, but most dont, and its got nothing to do with baps or wargames and everything to do with the subject.

I dunno why this is so hard to grasp.

 Seaward wrote:

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:
What exactly are you trying to argue here? It appears to me that you are being intentionally obtuse in order to argue a point that is not related to my original statement. In that statement I said that women may not like historic games because there are few if any personalities for them to identify with for reasons that are historic fact, and Sci-fi and Fantasy settings are not constrained by those same historic facts.

If that'd been what you actually said, we'd be all good. Unfortunately, you decided to use the term "cultural mores," which propagates a lot of bs myths. If you're abandoning that position, then fair enough.

Grind that axe, baby.

 Seaward wrote:

 mattyrm wrote:
Yeah exactly, like birds would suddenly flock to play Wargames if it wasnt for the tits.

I know gak loads of women, none of them are interested in my war gaming, not because of tits, but because its war. Funny thing, they arent as into Arnie films and war movies either.

Like I said ten pages ago, its simply a topic they are less interested in, it doesn't matter what hobby you are talking about, yet just because a small percentage of women DO like war movies, war games, and war in general, it invalidates a point that nobody made anyway?

As you say, nobody is questioning that some girls like it, but most dont, and its got nothing to do with baps or wargames and everything to do with the subject.

I dunno why this is so hard to grasp.

As I've posited, perhaps limited experience of the subject matter is a factor!

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:

 mattyrm wrote:

As you say, nobody is questioning that some girls like it, but most dont, and its got nothing to do with baps or wargames and everything to do with the subject.

Which begs the question why don't women like the subject. The answer, in my opinion, is multi-faceted and includes a lot of the issues brought up in this discussion.

It isn't because women just don't like war. Absolute statements like that are silly.

Women are plenty capable of being nasty, violent beings, just like men. So something else has to be creating the disparity between the number of men who like table top war games and the much smaller number of women who also enjoy the hobby. It isn't just a natural division among the sexes.

Oh yeah, I wasnt intending to make it an absolute, obviously plenty of women like war stuff, just not as many as men do. As I said, I just think the sexes are a bit different, I dont think that even without societal pressures women would like Arnie films quite as much as men for example.

Anyway, we can have this out in person Saturday.

 azreal13 wrote:

 Seaward wrote:

 mattyrm wrote:
Yeah exactly, like birds would suddenly flock to play Wargames if it wasnt for the tits.

I know gak loads of women, none of them are interested in my war gaming, not because of tits, but because its war. Funny thing, they arent as into Arnie films and war movies either.

Like I said ten pages ago, its simply a topic they are less interested in, it doesn't matter what hobby you are talking about, yet just because a small percentage of women DO like war movies, war games, and war in general, it invalidates a point that nobody made anyway?

As you say, nobody is questioning that some girls like it, but most dont, and its got nothing to do with baps or wargames and everything to do with the subject.

I dunno why this is so hard to grasp.

As I've posited, perhaps limited experience of the subject matter is a factor!

Maybe it's you with a lack of experience. Times are changing . Just like with gaming in other mediums

@Mattrym:

I've never understood why people have an issue with there being a difference between the genders. Difference doesn't equate to one or the other being superior. Difference is just that. Difference is a neutral issue by itself, not a positive or a negative.

It's perfectly ok for people to be different. It's perfectly ok for those differences to be a result of gender. Those differences in gender as represented in behavior are more than more issues of socialization. The brain chemistry and functionality of male and female brains (as examined by things like CAT scans and EEG readings) are different. Neither one is better or worse, just different. Those functional and chemical differences in the brain are, of course, going to cause differences in behavior.

And there's nothing wrong with that.

Apple fox wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:

 Seaward wrote:

 mattyrm wrote:
Yeah exactly, like birds would suddenly flock to play Wargames if it wasnt for the tits.

I know gak loads of women, none of them are interested in my war gaming, not because of tits, but because its war. Funny thing, they arent as into Arnie films and war movies either.

Like I said ten pages ago, its simply a topic they are less interested in, it doesn't matter what hobby you are talking about, yet just because a small percentage of women DO like war movies, war games, and war in general, it invalidates a point that nobody made anyway?

As you say, nobody is questioning that some girls like it, but most dont, and its got nothing to do with baps or wargames and everything to do with the subject.

I dunno why this is so hard to grasp.

As I've posited, perhaps limited experience of the subject matter is a factor!

Maybe it's you with a lack of experience. Times are changing . Just like with gaming in other mediums

Yeah...

No.

Saldiven wrote:
@Mattrym:

I've never understood why people have an issue with there being a difference between the genders. Difference doesn't equate to one or the other being superior. Difference is just that. Difference is a neutral issue by itself, not a positive or a negative.

It's perfectly ok for people to be different. It's perfectly ok for those differences to be a result of gender. Those differences in gender as represented in behavior are more than more issues of socialization. The brain chemistry and functionality of male and female brains (as examined by things like CAT scans and EEG readings) are different. Neither one is better or worse, just different. Those functional and chemical differences in the brain are, of course, going to cause differences in behavior.

And there's nothing wrong with that.

And no one realy disputes differences.

We like difernt things, and want difernt things from the hobby. Doesn't mean there isn't some of us who want to be able to get into it more.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 azreal13 wrote:

Apple fox wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:

 Seaward wrote:

 mattyrm wrote:
Yeah exactly, like birds would suddenly flock to play Wargames if it wasnt for the tits.

I know gak loads of women, none of them are interested in my war gaming, not because of tits, but because its war. Funny thing, they arent as into Arnie films and war movies either.

Like I said ten pages ago, its simply a topic they are less interested in, it doesn't matter what hobby you are talking about, yet just because a small percentage of women DO like war movies, war games, and war in general, it invalidates a point that nobody made anyway?

As you say, nobody is questioning that some girls like it, but most dont, and its got nothing to do with baps or wargames and everything to do with the subject.

I dunno why this is so hard to grasp.

As I've posited, perhaps limited experience of the subject matter is a factor!

Maybe it's you with a lack of experience. Times are changing . Just like with gaming in other mediums

Yeah...

No.

So how can you bring it up in this thread at all, if you can simply say such.

Do we know how woman are treated in this fictional world? Maybe the artwork is within the context of the universe?

I myself get annoyed by the way anime/video game girls are portrayed.. But in this instance maybe the artist was working with what was established as part of the 40k culture which would make fluff correct?

I agree with Mattyrm on basically all counts. Women, in general, just aren't as interested in war as men! FFS, why is this so difficult to grasp?

@Apple

I was referring to my "lack of experience," which I am uniquely qualified to assess, and doubt many would find it "lacking" under most criteria you could reasonably apply.

It was speculation on my part about others, I don't need to qualify speculation in any way, shape or form.

 azreal13 wrote:
@Apple

I was referring to my "lack of experience," which I am uniquely qualified to assess, and doubt many would find it "lacking" under most criteria you could reasonably apply.

It was speculation on my part about others, I don't need to qualify speculation in any way, shape or form.

Why speculate at all then, unless you are trying to legitimise your points via it. Which I see it as nothing but the same as, I know lots of women therefore I can speak for how they think.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

-Shrike- wrote:
I agree with Mattyrm on basically all counts. Women, in general, just aren't as interested in war as men! FFS, why is this so difficult to grasp?

Since no one has missed it.

Apple fox wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:
@Apple

I was referring to my "lack of experience," which I am uniquely qualified to assess, and doubt many would find it "lacking" under most criteria you could reasonably apply.

It was speculation on my part about others, I don't need to qualify speculation in any way, shape or form.

Why speculate at all then, unless you are trying to legitimise your points via it. Which I see it as nothing but the same as, I know lots of women therefore I can speak for how they think.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

-Shrike- wrote:
I agree with Mattyrm on basically all counts. Women, in general, just aren't as interested in war as men! FFS, why is this so difficult to grasp?

Since no one has missed it.

I speculate because this is a thread in Dakka Discussions where we, you know, discuss things.

If my tangent isn't to your liking, then I'm afraid the problem doesn't lie with me.

 azreal13 wrote:

Apple fox wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:
@Apple

I was referring to my "lack of experience," which I am uniquely qualified to assess, and doubt many would find it "lacking" under most criteria you could reasonably apply.

It was speculation on my part about others, I don't need to qualify speculation in any way, shape or form.

Why speculate at all then, unless you are trying to legitimise your points via it. Which I see it as nothing but the same as, I know lots of women therefore I can speak for how they think.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

-Shrike- wrote:
I agree with Mattyrm on basically all counts. Women, in general, just aren't as interested in war as men! FFS, why is this so difficult to grasp?

Since no one has missed it.

I speculate because this is a thread in Dakka Discussions where we, you know, discuss things.

If my tangent isn't to your liking, then I'm afraid the problem doesn't lie with me.

Then what does it achieve but try and belittle others that don't hold your views, it's a constant cercle of men saying what women dislike on here without understanding the issues it seems to me.