Switch Theme:

Representation of women in miniature games (go-to thread to prevent off-topic on other threads)  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in gb
The Daemon Possessing Fulgrim's Body





Devon, UK

Apple fox wrote:
Spoiler:
 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.

-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.


No, we understand, we just don't agree.

Neither was I attempting to "belittle" anyone, unless I've touched a nerve here for some reason? I think looking for the reasons behind two clearly very different camps holding quite different opinions is both relevant and pertinent to the discussion.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2013/11/15 00:00:47


We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't. - Frank Howard Clark

The wise man doubts often, and changes his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubts not; he knows all things but his own ignorance.

The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!” Professor Brian Cox

Ask me about
Barnstaple Slayers Club 
   
Made in au
Longtime Dakkanaut





 azreal13 wrote:
Apple fox wrote:
Spoiler:
 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.

-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.


No, we understand, we just don't agree.

Neither was I attempting to "belittle" anyone, unless I've touched a nerve here for some reason? I think looking for the reasons behind two clearly very different camps holding quite different opinions is both relevant and pertinent to the discussion.
Quote broke here :(

I actuly don't think you do understand, and it's a bit odd to think that that speculation wouldn't.

Also I am female I am a custermer looking for alternatives, and I understand just how difficult this hobby is to get into when men assume disinterest.
Girls are getting into the gaming space, and at a younger age now. We may enjoy Hobbys in a difernt way sometimes, but we do and will get pushed out constantly.
These threads keep coming up since people now are starting to look at alternatives,
I within my gaming club is the only one playing warhammer/40k. But 1 of 9 playing warmachine now, it's just far More inviting, it isn't perfect for me but its getting there far faster than other company's.
and I will actively avoid places with to much of this, simply to avoid the issues that come up. Better to be in a enviroment that wants me there other than as something to look at.
Weather you want those models or not, I just want alternatives.
But when these threads come up its fairly obvious that this hobby has issues.

Weird quoting :0

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2013/11/15 00:26:24


 
   
Made in us
Ancient Ultramarine Venerable Dreadnought





UK

I dont see whats belittling about it at all, indeed, most men would like it if their partners played 40k with them, it certainly seems to be a reoccuring fantasy and I dare say most of us (me included!) have at some point, attempted to get our partners to play a game with us if only because nobody else was around!

Apple, you like wargaming, so do plenty of other women, its a good thing, not a bad thing, nobody is unhappy about it, and nobody thinks that you shouldn't be playing, the simple thing we are arguing about is that for some reason, some people seem to think that obscene models are the only reason that warhmmer isnt played by 50% men and 50%women, and as I have said heaps of times, its a proven fact that men like this gak more than women do. It doesn't matter why, I dont want to get into Freudian amateur psychology, so forget the whole "society pressure" or "gender roles" or anything else, all I am saying is that for whatever reason, men are more interested in this topic (war) than women are.

My point is very simple, and very correct. Regardless of any psychology, women are not as interested in things to do with violence as men are.

The same could be said of numerous other hobbies.

Men - Boxing, Rugby, Drinking Beer, Weightlifting.

Women - Netball, Hockey, Drinking cocktails, Aerobics.

What I want to know is,

Do you actually believe that if we somehow eradicated stereotypes and societal pressure, that men and women would be evenly split on absolutely everything? That men and women would make up even numbers in aerobics class? In the audience of the latest Sex in the City movie? At rugby matches? Sure men and women cross over, but there is an obvious difference in what people like thanks to their sex, its completely irrefutable.

Here is a good one, ask ten of your male friends and ten of your female friends to rate how much they liked Predator out of ten, and then do the same with Love Actually, and add all the numbers together.

I guarantee the ladies will score the latter higher and the men will score the former higher. Sure one or two ladies might like to watch Arnie headbutt an alien, and one or two guys might like watching effete British men ponce about in front of women, but there will be an obvious correlation between sex and choice.

And voila, there you have your answer, nudity be damned! (There are no boobs in Predator!)

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/11/15 00:25:41


We are arming Syrian rebels who support ISIS, who is fighting Iran, who is fighting Iraq who we also support against ISIS, while fighting Kurds who we support while they are fighting Syrian rebels.  
   
Made in gb
The Daemon Possessing Fulgrim's Body





Devon, UK

@Apple

You're a minority.

Both as a female in this hobby and evidently what people want to purchase given what has already been put forward in this thread with regard to the commercial viability of the minis you want to purchase.

You are not persecuted, but neither are you important enough for those whose livelihoods depend on making product that sells to cater to you, at least unless those interests align with other, more viable, ideas.

I do sympathise with you for some of the barriers you encounter while trying to pursue your hobby, but I'm afraid the onus on any minority in any walk of life is to conform to the status quo, because, by definition, you are less of a consideration than the majority.

Is this right? Well, no, not if prejudice or some other artificial method of suppression is at work, but to join a group of any sort, then rail against the nature of the group, when it is unchanged from the time you first became involved, is just futile, and a recipe for a stressful and unhappy life.

As I and others have said, if there really was an untapped market of female wargamers just waiting for the right product, then someone would have developed it by now.

As I and others have said, if you genuinely believe you have spotted this niche before anyone else, then the barriers to bringing either a game or range of miniatures to market are lower than ever before, so go for it!

I for one will be amongst the first lining up to congratulate you on your success if it works out, and will be pleased to see a step towards a greater blend of genders in the hobby, as I'm for variety in wargaming, in all ways, all of the time.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/11/15 00:38:16


We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't. - Frank Howard Clark

The wise man doubts often, and changes his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubts not; he knows all things but his own ignorance.

The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!” Professor Brian Cox

Ask me about
Barnstaple Slayers Club 
   
Made in au
Longtime Dakkanaut





I don't think it will ever truly be even, but what I want is a better and more varied representation within the hobby.
But I would say that the sexism within the hobby is far more a issue.
10 years ago it was constant no girls are on the Internet, and then no girls play these games.
And now it's the same, people talk in such absolute when girls within the hobby are saying that no the violence or competitiveness isn't the only issue and possibly not the bigist.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
@azreal I actuly don't think there is some niche female market waiting to be tapped, but I also don't think any company's have tried to realy find the market I am part of outside of a few.
GW when it wants to puts out some good female models, PP does also. And I think they doing ok. Weather there female models sell as well is hard to tell. But certenly I see a high female ratio in the army's that get played.
And I had a guy amazed at how awsome infinity was since he could get a kick ass female unit.

And then the spaceships and other games like it are exempt. I didn't even know reaper exist until I was well into the hobby.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2013/11/15 00:52:51


 
   
Made in fr
Hallowed Canoness





 mattyrm wrote:
I never met a single girl who likes video games as much as men either, and there are hundreds with no overt cleavage.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQnIJ-ljctk
 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?

Let's ask Apple fox.
Oh, wait, you won't like the result that much .
 azreal13 wrote:
I speculate because this is a thread in Dakka Discussions where we, you know, discuss things.

Oh, you do, really ?
 mattyrm wrote:
for some reason, some people seem to think that obscene models are the only reason that warhmmer isnt played by 50% men and 50%women

Who ? Please supply us with some pseudonyms. It shouldn't be hard. I guess you are speaking about people that actually wrote in this very thread, right ?
 mattyrm wrote:
Do you actually believe that if we somehow eradicated stereotypes and societal pressure, that men and women would be evenly split on absolutely everything?

How can we know without actually eradicating stereotypes and societal pressure ?
You might be surprised by the results. For instance, computer science is seen as mainly a male interest in European countries, it's very different in Malaysia.
I don't think it comes from physiological difference between Malaysian women and European women.
 mattyrm wrote:
Sure men and women cross over, but there is an obvious difference in what people like thanks to their sex, its completely irrefutable.

Why would it be irrefutable ? Because you have proofs, or because you have rock-hard prejudice ?

"Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be. [...] We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray [...] so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to. [...] If [you don't feel the same way], you will not be missed"
https://twitter.com/WarComTeam/status/1268665798467432449/photo/1 
   
Made in gb
The Daemon Possessing Fulgrim's Body





Devon, UK

You know, I'm half tempted to report you for that, I'm mean, seriously, your entire post is composed of snarky comments and patronising tone.

For a start, in one of the comments you quote, I distinctly referred to male posters, as I was aware of Apple Fox's involvement and knew her take would be different.

Secondly what exactly does "oh you do really?" Add to the discussion?

I repeat what I said a few pages back, your participation in this thread has devolved more or less to the point of mocking other people, while contributing little yourself. Please stop.

We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't. - Frank Howard Clark

The wise man doubts often, and changes his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubts not; he knows all things but his own ignorance.

The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!” Professor Brian Cox

Ask me about
Barnstaple Slayers Club 
   
Made in us
Ancient Ultramarine Venerable Dreadnought





UK

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Why would it be irrefutable ? Because you have proofs, or because you have rock-hard prejudice ?


Its entirely obvious, you would have to be insane to deny it.

And what prejudice do I have exactly?

And why would I have it? Women should have entirely equal rights in my book, I'm not a theist after all.

Im pro choice, pro womens rights, pro LGBT, pro gay marriage, Im as socially liberal as you can possibly be, I'm simply arguing the point because like Spock, entirely illogical arguments offend my brain, its got nothing to do with prejudice and inequality.

Lets review..

I don't buy cheesecake models, and I prefer women to look like actual soldiers and not battlefield slappers because I am into the fluff.
I wish my missus would play with me, but she isn't into it.
I think that women should play, and I encourage them to.
I am pretty old (in my thirties) happily attached and have been for 7 years, and obviously have no concerns about interacting with, playing with, and competing against, women.

I am merely saying, what is painfully obvious to pretty much everyone, that men are generally more into war films and war games and things associated with war, than women. It really does take fingers in the ears stubborness of the likes of the flat earth society to have your position, its nothing to do with prejudice, Im simply saying its obvious. Why on earth would a grown man with a normal relationship have a prejudice against women playing a hobby?

I know heaps of women, I know heaps of men, the men are more likely to like war movies and the women are more likely to like romantic comedies, surely you understand that these things are not hard and fast rules, and obviously men and women of all stripes can like both, but my view of the world, is the one shared by the vast majority of humanity. If you stopped 100 women of the street and asked them why they arent as interested in war movies and war games as men, 90 would say the same thing, its simply not a topic they are as thrilled about. Its not because of fear of revulsion, its not because they fear hate crimes from men, its not because of misogyny, its not because of semi naked models, its because, they prefer to go hang out with the girls and do other things, like drink some wine and chat, or go to a class, or go shopping, or exercise, or do all of the common sports that women enjoy. How many women like to go to the gym and box their friends, or go to rugby practice? Or when they all get together, instead of watching a DVD with some wine and a plot they like, go and buy a keg of ale and watch Arnold Schwarzenegger movies?

Most men and women, like different things, such is life. No need to worry about it, you are free to do whatever you like without judgement, but why do these differences bother you so much?

On that note, Ive explained why I am bothering to argue the point, I want to know why are you are so offended?

There must be a reason, what is it exactly about common human behavioural tropes that bothers you so much? Does the fact that my missus likes dresses and romantic comedies offend you for some reason?

If you play 40K and you are female, do you really care what the sex of your opponents is?

Cos I dont. It sounds like one of us might be prejudiced, but I dont think its me.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2013/11/15 04:01:57


We are arming Syrian rebels who support ISIS, who is fighting Iran, who is fighting Iraq who we also support against ISIS, while fighting Kurds who we support while they are fighting Syrian rebels.  
   
Made in gb
Worthiest of Warlock Engineers






preston

Okay, ive sought of lost track as to what we are discussing/arguing over.
It seems that this thread has become one long slugging match with different people trying to justify their views.
Can we just accept that we differ in them, and leave it at that?

As it is though, i am with mattyrm. So far all ive read of his posts has been entirely logical and made sense.

Free from GW's tyranny and the hobby is looking better for it
DR:90-S++G+++M++B++I+Pww205++D++A+++/sWD146R++T(T)D+
 
   
Made in fi
Calculating Commissar







 DarkTraveler777 wrote:
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.

Historical gamers as a group have a very poor reputation, alas. The stereotype is of basement-dwelling anoraks with replicas of Austerlitz and Waterloo populated with hundreds of tin soldiers, arguing about button color and flag dimensions.

The supply does not get to make the demands. 
   
Made in gb
Morphing Obliterator






 Agamemnon2 wrote:
 DarkTraveler777 wrote:
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.

Historical gamers as a group have a very poor reputation, alas. The stereotype is of basement-dwelling anoraks with replicas of Austerlitz and Waterloo populated with hundreds of tin soldiers, arguing about button color and flag dimensions.

"The 3rd button on the shirt of that soldier is blue, damit!"

See, you're trying to use people logic. DM uses Mandelogic, which we've established has 2+2=quack. - Aerethan
Putin.....would make a Vulcan Intelligence officer cry. - Jihadin
AFAIK, there is only one world, and it is the real world. - Iron_Captain
DakkaRank Comment: I sound like a Power Ranger.
TFOL and proud. Also a Forge World Fan.
I should really paint some of my models instead of browsing forums. 
   
Made in fr
Hallowed Canoness





 azreal13 wrote:
Secondly what exactly does "oh you do really?" Add to the discussion?

I'm not trying to have a discussion with you. Not anymore. I used to. When I had the epiphany that it was useless because you were just ignoring all the long posts I spent plenty of time thinking out and writing, your comment was
 azreal13 wrote:
Took you 14 pages to figure that one out huh?

Why would I want to have a discussion with you then ? You said it yourself, it would be wasting my time.
“Oh, you do, really” was a sarcastic comment at the obvious difference between what you pretend to do, and what you actually do. Sarcastic comments are all you will get from me, because those are the only one that are enjoyable by themselves, even if you do ignore them, and therefore I won't be wasting my time writing them. I don't care that they add nothing to “the” discussion since there is no discussion.

Now I'd be perfectly okay discussing with you again. All you have to do is answer, or, you know, acknowledge in any way those lengthy arguments I developed in multiple previous messages. If that's too much to ask of you, don't blame it on me !

 mattyrm wrote:
Its entirely obvious, you would have to be insane to deny it.

Sounds like someone justifying some religious stuff, there is no need for proofs !
I'm teasing you. Given the rest of your message, it's just a misunderstanding about what I'm denying.
Let's elaborate.
 mattyrm wrote:
I am merely saying, what is painfully obvious to pretty much everyone, that men are generally more into war films and war games and things associated with war, than women.

I agree with that. What I disagree with, very specifically, is :
“Do you actually believe that if we somehow eradicated stereotypes and societal pressure, that men and women would be evenly split on absolutely everything?”
Societal pressure, or societal influence for a less connoted word, is something extremely pervasive and extremely insidious. I really doesn't work on obvious way. And we are all shaped, a lot, by the culture we were brought in. And I don't mean we are shaped into what the culture expects from us, I mean we would likely be very different if brought in a different culture.
It's directly related to the age-old “nature vs nurture” issue.

I did illustrate with computer science, since that's what I'm doing. I can witness first-hand how both among my colleague and among my students, there are so much more men than women. Even though there is literally nothing preventing women from doing computer science. And I never heard any of my female colleague complaining about any kind of discrimination, or anything else, being done, intentionally or not, to make them feel unwelcome. I read some stuff like that from the industry or the “hobbyist” part of computer science, but I'm into the academic side of it, and I think it's a pretty different mindset.
Still, there are very few women. In Malaysia, there are plenty.
I'm pretty sure here prejudice (from the female students part first and foremost) and cultural influence play a huge part in that. I don't see no other reasons that convince me nearly as much. I totally don't buy into any kind of physiological explanation about the brain of females working differently and somehow making computer science less attractive to them.
Anyhow, without evidence, there is nothing irrefutable about the “It's nature, not nurture” answer, is there ?

 mattyrm wrote:
On that note, Ive explained why I am bothering to argue the point, I want to know why are you are so offended?

Offended by what ?
If I'm to recapitulate the main points spoke of about it this thread :
- I'm not offended by the Boob-windowsitor, I find it stupid and lame. The same way I would find the Gangstasitor (see the illustration I posted some message ago) lame and stupid without being offended by it. I wanted to explain why I find the boob-windowsitor stupid and lame, but I got misunderstood and then ignored.
- I'm offended by discrimination, and it doesn't matter whether it's supposed to be “affirmative action” (still discrimination !) or not. So I'm opposed to women being prevented to serve in the army, and I'm offended too by allowing a woman to enter the firefighter department even when she fails the test.
- I'm convinced there are cultural reasons for women not being more involved into wargaming, and I think that prevalence of cheesy models combined with lack of more neutral representations are both somehow consequences of this and a tiny part of the causes. Both at the same time because things don't just follow a very simplistic pattern when it comes to cultural issues. While I'm totally not offended by the fact men and women have different interests in general, I have to admit I'm a bit offended by the idea that those differences would come entirely from nature rather than culture.
I hope I answered your question and made my opinions clearer.

Also, you didn't supplied the pseudonyms I was asking for. I meant the question seriously, because I think there is a misunderstanding here. Some people, including me, are saying it's a tiny but still existent reason, among many others, for the gender gap. I've not noticed anyone pretending it's the main cause, or even close from it. Actually, I think everyone on the thread agrees that some wargamer's behavior was a way bigger issue than the models.

"Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be. [...] We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray [...] so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to. [...] If [you don't feel the same way], you will not be missed"
https://twitter.com/WarComTeam/status/1268665798467432449/photo/1 
   
Made in gb
The Daemon Possessing Fulgrim's Body





Devon, UK

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
 azreal13 wrote:
Secondly what exactly does "oh you do really?" Add to the discussion?

I'm not trying to have a discussion with you. Not anymore. I used to. When I had the epiphany that it was useless because you were just ignoring all the long posts I spent plenty of time thinking out and writing, your comment was
 azreal13 wrote:
Took you 14 pages to figure that one out huh?

Why would I want to have a discussion with you then ? You said it yourself, it would be wasting my time.
“Oh, you do, really” was a sarcastic comment at the obvious difference between what you pretend to do, and what you actually do. Sarcastic comments are all you will get from me, because those are the only one that are enjoyable by themselves, even if you do ignore them, and therefore I won't be wasting my time writing them. I don't care that they add nothing to “the” discussion since there is no discussion.

Now I'd be perfectly okay discussing with you again. All you have to do is answer, or, you know, acknowledge in any way those lengthy arguments I developed in multiple previous messages. If that's too much to ask of you, don't blame it on me !



We have discussed your arguments. I understand them, I disagree with them, that isn't going to change. Accept it and move on. Please just stop the snarky sniping at mine or other posters' comments, it just makes you sound butthurt and undermines any serious contribution you may make to the conversation at a later date.

EDIT
To address the somewhat wider argument you put forward in your replies to mattyrm, I still think you're partly wrong. We have somewhat of a chicken and egg scenario, does society produce the gender stereotype, or does the predisposition of the genders shape the society? While societal influence is undoubtedly a factor, hence the global variations in gender in educational subjects etc, but the fact remains that men and women are different, both literally and figuratively, to their very bones. Women have organs and chemistry that just aren't found in men. Studies constantly pop up in the news confirming how women interpret data and process environmental information differently to men. So, no, even if all societal influence was magically removed tomorrow, you still wouldn't have a lot more women wargamers.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/11/16 01:41:19


We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't. - Frank Howard Clark

The wise man doubts often, and changes his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubts not; he knows all things but his own ignorance.

The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!” Professor Brian Cox

Ask me about
Barnstaple Slayers Club 
   
Made in us
Ancient Ultramarine Venerable Dreadnought





UK

Oh ok then, so we don't disagree on that much then, simply the bit about nature vs nurture, and that I think its a little bit of an overreaction to the inquisitor picture, I mean, if it could be conceivably seen at any normal social function (that tiny bit of cleavage is obviously fine) then it isnt that big a deal in my book, maybe she just left a dinner party.

I think that obviously there is a large amount of societal pressure, and that young girls would be more likely to play with toy guns if they didn't have dolls thrust upon them, obviously, I just disagree with the severity. I think it clearly is a factor, just less than you seem to think, because I think as a result of our long evolution, men are more aggressive, and women are more nurturing.

Its pretty OT now though, I think we can best some up what we have learned about the representation of women in the industry as follows and see if you agree with me there.

1. Yes, the majority of the models are obviously aimed at men and we could do with more female models which are not hyper sexualized, certainly I and many others of both sexes would be interested in such models.

2. It occurs because the manufactures have said that they sell much better, and men DO make up the majority of the target market.

3. Simply changing the models would not suddenly cause a noticeable influx of female interest in wargaming.


Would you agree with those points?


We are arming Syrian rebels who support ISIS, who is fighting Iran, who is fighting Iraq who we also support against ISIS, while fighting Kurds who we support while they are fighting Syrian rebels.  
   
Made in au
Longtime Dakkanaut




Squatting with the squigs

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Why would it be irrefutable ? Because you have proofs, or because you have rock-hard prejudice ?


That's not the only thing about mattrym that is rock hard..Badooom- TISH!

I like female models , of both cheesecake and more realistic varieties , but lets face it even the more realistic ones are stylised , pictures of female modern soldiers i have seen they look very similar to men with all the webbing and in the army uniform.

So what people seem to be asking for is stylised models of women that fit in with their particular favourite style , meh ,whatever , I'll use both my khadic winterguard sergeant and my cheescakey pieces as I see fit.

There are many, many models that are female, you just won't find them much with the larger producers of miniatures and that is completely understandable however, hasslefree and reaper both have huge ranges of female miniatures (i'll also spruke darksword - I like em , very 1980s art style which brings back memories of first and second edition D&D ) If you cannot find female figures in them I think you may as well give up.

I think mattrym brings up an important point, the stylisation in wargaming of women exists due to it being a large proportion of men in wargaming, if the gender imbalance does change then the stylisation of women will change. Why is it now that most activities have to be seen to cater to women even if there aren't many women doing it? <--- old dinosaur moment

My new blog: http://kardoorkapers.blogspot.com.au/

Manchu - "But so what? The Bible also says the flood destroyed the world. You only need an allegorical boat to tackle an allegorical flood."

Shespits "Anything i see with YOLO has half naked eleventeen year olds Girls. And of course booze and drugs and more half naked elventeen yearolds Girls. O how i wish to YOLO again!"

Rubiksnoob "Next you'll say driving a stick with a Scandinavian supermodel on your lap while ripping a bong impairs your driving. And you know what, I'M NOT GOING TO STOP, YOU FILTHY COMMUNIST" 
   
Made in fr
Hallowed Canoness





 azreal13 wrote:
We have discussed your arguments.

You have ? I must have missed that. I saw many comments about burqas and women's rights and prudishness, but none about whether boob window actually evokes important parts of being an Inquisitor (in the same way that being nude evokes important part of what it is being Dr Manhattan/a repentia, or how having a funny western hat evoke stuff about Inquisitors are).
If there is any comment defending the narrative relevance of boob window on an Inquisitor, please show it to me.
And please, I don't mean “Could an Inquisitor realistically (whatever the bloody damn hell that might mean) wear that”. Inquisitors could realistically wear a bunch of very stupid clothes that nobody wants them to wear because we want them to wear clothes that evoke to us the awesome part of being an Inquisitor, not realistic ones. For instance, funny western hats that we associate both with badass, taciturn loners and with classic witchhunters (Yeah, the nice hat is explicitly mentioned).
Really, point me to any message in which you address what we naturally associate with boob windows and how that fits an Inquisitor, and I'll retract everything I said.

 azreal13 wrote:
To address the somewhat wider argument you put forward in your replies to mattyrm, I still think you're partly wrong. We have somewhat of a chicken and egg scenario, does society produce the gender stereotype, or does the predisposition of the genders shape the society?

Yeah, that's a big question. On the same basis, are there less black people with a Nobel prize because they used to be slaves and treated as inferiors, or were they slaves and treated as inferiors because they were less intelligent ?

 azreal13 wrote:
but the fact remains that men and women are different, both literally and figuratively, to their very bones.

It's a nice coincidence : black people and white people are also literally different to their very bones, as I guess any good forensic could tell !

 azreal13 wrote:
Studies constantly pop up in the news confirming how women interpret data and process environmental information differently to men.

Just like we have all those old studies about racial differences, which are not really trusted anymore for some reason .

I'm definitely not sold on this being intrinsic differences. So, I'm going to keep by my position that we should get rid of this societal pressure, and if things don't change, you'll be proven right. Too bad we will likely both be dead for a long long time then, since those things don't actually change fast. Biology have already been abused to fit prejudice in the past.
 mattyrm wrote:
and that I think its a little bit of an overreaction to the inquisitor picture, I mean, if it could be conceivably seen at any normal social function (that tiny bit of cleavage is obviously fine) then it isnt that big a deal in my book, maybe she just left a dinner party.

So, I still didn't made myself clear on that, I see.
I find it lame-looking. I don't argue against it on any kind of political or social basis, I argue against it on an aesthetic and narrative basis. I think it doesn't work to convey what an Inquisitor is supposed to embody. Have you seen my gangstasitor image, and the message surrounding it ? I don't care about the many, perfectly fine reasons why the gangstasitor or the boobwindowsitor could be dressed that way, I know they exists but those Inquisitor still look awful, and that's just not what I want to see !
Except maybe as comic relief, as an illustration in a book that actually describe a funny situation where they are forced into stupid clothing, like this classic and very good episode of Not So Dark Heresy.

 mattyrm wrote:
Its pretty OT now though, I think we can best some up what we have learned about the representation of women in the industry as follows and see if you agree with me there.

1. Yes, the majority of the models are obviously aimed at men and we could do with more female models which are not hyper sexualized, certainly I and many others of both sexes would be interested in such models.

I agree.
 mattyrm wrote:
2. It occurs because the manufactures have said that they sell much better, and men DO make up the majority of the target market.

Here, I only partly agree. I think this is much more true for Reaper, that is going to sell a few, extra-special models that have a need to stand out rather than a big streamlined units, rather than for companies like GW or PP that release big armies for whole factions that needs to have some mass effect, and that comes with a specific ruleset for each model. I'm going to illustrate my point with two units from Privateer Press and Games Workshop :
The first unit is Eldar Guardians.

I'm really convinced the fact that there is some female guardian among them ever had any influence on how good the guardian box ever sold. Rules, fluff and the aesthetic of the whole unit (as opposed to how the female version of the armor was made) were the big sell factors !
The second one is trollkin sluggers.

It's basically the same thing. Trollkin sluggers' main argument is that they are bad-ass trollkin though guys with huge bullet-spewing machineguns. People buy them because they look like that description, and because of the rules. Actually, in both case, I think most people never even notice that there are females among the models. I know I didn't notice anything before buying my sluggers.
So, the difference between sexy female miniatures and normal female miniatures is that the selling point of sexy female miniatures is directly in their sexiness, hence in them being female (because of the market's sexual preference ), while the selling point of normal female miniatures is definitely not related to them being female. It makes any sale comparison hardly fair.

We had the comparison between sexy and normal female models sales on Reaper. I don't have any figures, but I'm pretty sure GW has sold way more female Eldar guardian than it has sold those Dark Eldar sexy “slaves”. Because many people wants one or two sexy miniatures, but nearly nobody wants an army of them. Many people wants an army of model though, and won't have any problem with it if even half of the army is female.
 mattyrm wrote:
3. Simply changing the models would not suddenly cause a noticeable influx of female interest in wargaming.

I agree.
Bullockist wrote:
however, hasslefree and reaper both have huge ranges of female miniatures (i'll also spruke darksword - I like em , very 1980s art style which brings back memories of first and second edition D&D ) If you cannot find female figures in them I think you may as well give up.

Yeah, I got my conclave from PP and Reaper.
Pics :

Bullockist wrote:
Why is it now that most activities have to be seen to cater to women even if there aren't many women doing it?

I'm not a woman. I want more realistic female models. For instance, why is there not a single female troll pygmy ? Are those asexual ? And, same question for pureblood trolls and dire trolls ? I'ld like my blitzer or one of my bombers to be female. It would bring more variety. Maybe I'll need to convert one. She'll likely end up barechest and still totally not sexy .
(It's okay, both my warlocks and one of my heavy warbeast are already showing their middle finger to the enemy, so my army is already PG-13 anyway )

"Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be. [...] We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray [...] so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to. [...] If [you don't feel the same way], you will not be missed"
https://twitter.com/WarComTeam/status/1268665798467432449/photo/1 
   
Made in nz
Boom! Leman Russ Commander




New Zealand

Anecdotal but whatever.

More than a decade into online gaming competitively and in that time the two games in which I've interacted with more female competitors than the others also happened to be the most violent and sexually suggestive games. APB:R and TERA.

The more I think about my own experience, and the type of women I've met through these types of hobbies, the more I think the notion that a 'clevage window' being the reason women don't do TTWG is totally ridiculous.

5000
 
   
Made in gb
The Daemon Possessing Fulgrim's Body





Devon, UK

Oh look, it must be that time again, another lengthy post from HSoO. Is this going to go on forever, or are we going to reach a point where you finally concede our viewpoints have a fairly diametrically opposed basis and stop trying to win the discussion?

I suppose once you've actually spent some time in a full blown relationship you'll realise that women do generally view the world around them in a different way, so much so that you will sometimes wonder how they even qualify as the same species as men (as much as I loathe all the namby pamby, self help, liberal nonsense, "Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus" is so much more than a book title!)

On to your post.

Firstly, you're citing arguments (about Burqas etc) I didn't make, so how on earth can you know if we have discussed your points of you've lost track of who said what?

Secondly, a cowboy hat and a Puritan hat are not the same.

I cannot justify the presence of the "boob window" (which I remain unconvinced of, I think you've misinterpreted the way the clothes are arranged, but for the sake of argument we'll assume you're right) just as you cannot dismiss it's relevance, because we have no bastard context for the image. As has been mentioned. You're assuming its in the middle of battle, but there's really no solid basis for that, any more than there's basis to say she isn't in battle and has just been called out of a dinner party because of a local uprising or was discovered trying to go undercover in a brothel.

This will be the last time I respond to this line of discussion from you in this thread, I really don't see how we can go forward at this point, so feel free to respond, but I won't be.



This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2013/11/17 00:18:35


We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't. - Frank Howard Clark

The wise man doubts often, and changes his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubts not; he knows all things but his own ignorance.

The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!” Professor Brian Cox

Ask me about
Barnstaple Slayers Club 
   
Made in fr
Hallowed Canoness





 azreal13 wrote:
I cannot justify the presence of the "boob window" (which I remain unconvinced of, I think you've misinterpreted the way the clothes are arranged, but for the sake of argument we'll assume you're right) just as you cannot dismiss it's relevance, because we have no bastard context for the image.

Irrelevant. We do have a context : this picture is alone in the codex with no details about it. It's all the context we need for my criticism.
You would have noticed if you had understood it. You did not, and you did not even try, I guess. I'm pretty sure if I were to ask you what is my problem with this illustration, you'll either be completely unable to answer, or say something totally wrong.

You are still using the same old defense all over again, so I'm going to repeat something I just said, but in bold, and with a huge font, hoping it will finally allow you to understand :
Inquisitors could realistically wear a bunch of very stupid clothes that nobody wants them to wear because we want them to wear clothes that evoke to us the awesome part of being an Inquisitor, not realistic ones.
You are still arguing about how it's realistic for this Inquisitor to be wearing some boob window because of whatever context you may imagine…

 azreal13 wrote:
This will be the last time I respond to this line of discussion from you in this thread, I really don't see how we can go forward at this point, so feel free to respond, but I won't be.

And then you'll reproach me not to add anything to the discussion .

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/11/17 01:08:33


"Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be. [...] We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray [...] so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to. [...] If [you don't feel the same way], you will not be missed"
https://twitter.com/WarComTeam/status/1268665798467432449/photo/1 
   
Made in gb
The Daemon Possessing Fulgrim's Body





Devon, UK

I have an IQ of around 130. English is my first language. If I'm not understanding your argument, statistically, the fault probably isn't with me.

You post criticising arguments I haven't made, clearly attributing other people's comments to me, yet seem to assume I'm intimately familiar with every word you say? That is somewhat arrogant.

I have made an effort to ignore the tone of your post and consider the content, but I'm afraid the patronising air and aspersions on my intellect are irritating me too much to do so. Superficially, it doesn't appear to make sense.

Fair warning, reply to me in that tone again and I will report you, rule 1 isn't hard to follow, I do my best to stick to it and I expect others to do the same.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2013/11/17 01:22:32


We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't. - Frank Howard Clark

The wise man doubts often, and changes his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubts not; he knows all things but his own ignorance.

The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!” Professor Brian Cox

Ask me about
Barnstaple Slayers Club 
   
Made in fr
Hallowed Canoness





 azreal13 wrote:
I have an IQ of around 130.

That changes everything ! I'm sure you are right and I'm wrong now !
 azreal13 wrote:
yet seem to assume I'm intimately familiar with every word you say?

I didn't exactly quote something from some message far away in the depth of this thread. I quoted something from my previous message, the one you were answering to.
Even though I did say similar things starting as early as page 3.
 azreal13 wrote:
Fair warning, reply to me in that tone again and I will report you, rule 1 isn't hard to follow, I do my best to stick to it and I expect others to do the same.

What with that “Took you 14 pages to figure that one out huh?” comment you made ? Is that the example of non-patronizing comments I should made ?
I could also mention “ 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? ”

Yeah, I said I felt like you didn't try at all to understand what my arguments are. It's because I've been regularly writing long messages explaining them, to no avail, and I don't think it's because you are not intelligent enough to understand them. So, no “aspersions to your intellect”, but clearly some doubts on your goodwill. If the problem comes from my English, I guess you could tell me which part of my messages are wrong or incomprehensible, but so far, I don't think anyone else has complained about my written English.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/11/17 02:35:21


"Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be. [...] We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray [...] so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to. [...] If [you don't feel the same way], you will not be missed"
https://twitter.com/WarComTeam/status/1268665798467432449/photo/1 
   
Made in gb
The Daemon Possessing Fulgrim's Body





Devon, UK

You're quoting me out of context, then getting upset about it. Are you sure you're NOT a woman?!

The IQ remark, in conjunction with speaking English, was me trying to explain that it was unlikely to be me failing to understand your point, that it was more likely you weren't expressing it as you intended. It was also because you were throwing around words like "idiotic" in your previous post, so I felt the need to clarify I am far from an idiot.

You have repeatedly, not just recently, posted as if you expect me, or other posters, to be well acquainted with all your arguments when replying, you're just one voice amongst several, over many pages, if you feel that your argument is getting lost amongst others, in those circumstances it would probably benefit everyone if you quickly restated your key points and how they differ from the broader points under discussion.

I don't quite see how my two comments you quote are rude? Except, again, if taken out of context. The "took you 14 pages" comment was qualified by how this was a pointless discussion because neither side was ever going to come around to the other's way of thinking, hence that the whole discussion was a waste of everyone's time, but you appear to have missed that, both in your quote and your comprehension.

As for the other comment, if you've taken that personally then that's all on you, as I wasn't quoting or responding directly to you, and my curiosity remains, I do wonder whether those posters who are married or have had long term, or a number of, relationships vs those posters who have less romantic relationship experience correspond with those saying "women are just different" and those saying "women would be more the same if we evened out all the societal stuff"

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2013/11/17 02:53:46


We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't. - Frank Howard Clark

The wise man doubts often, and changes his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubts not; he knows all things but his own ignorance.

The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!” Professor Brian Cox

Ask me about
Barnstaple Slayers Club 
   
Made in fr
Hallowed Canoness





 azreal13 wrote:
You're quoting me out of context, then getting upset about it. Are you sure you're NOT a woman?!

Uh, yeah. Do you need pics to check ?
 azreal13 wrote:
It was also because you were throwing around words like "idiotic" in your previous post

Which I quickly edited out, before you could answer, and I (apparently wrongfully) thought before you could read it.
 azreal13 wrote:
I don't quite see how my two comments you quote are rude? Except, again, if taken out of context. The "took you 14 pages" comment was qualified by how this was a pointless discussion because neither side was ever going to come around to the other's way of thinking, hence that the whole discussion was a waste of everyone's time, but you appear to have missed that, both in your quote and your comprehension.

The “took you 14 pages” comment was after I stated nobody seemed to read my messages. And you quoted me saying so. In other word, you were practically saying “Yes, I never read your message, you should have noticed earlier”.
Also, I'm convinced you didn't read that message I was referring too, because else you would doubtlessly have noticed my big brain malfunction, and called me on it .
 azreal13 wrote:
if you feel that your argument is getting lost amongst others, in those circumstances it would probably benefit everyone if you quickly restated your key points and how they differ from the broader points under discussion.

I doubt it would benefit anyone. I would get frustrated about wasted efforts (and I dare mention how you specifically not only agreed it would be wasted time but also insisted that this should have been obvious to me), and nobody would notice or react. Well, that's what happened every time I tried. And frustration build up until I had to edit my messages afterward to remove expressions like “idiotic”.
But anyway, I just did. I even singled out one sentence, put it in bold with a huge font size. It's here. I'll even rephrase it because it's not well written.
Inquisitors could realistically wear a bunch of very stupid clothes. Even clothes that are so stupid that nobody wants to see an Inquisitor wearing them, like the bandannaquisitor I posted here. What we want Inquisitor to wear clothes that evoke to us the awesome part of being an Inquisitor, not clothes that they could realistically be wearing.
Let's see if it benefits anyone, or if it's just going to get me an extra frustration.

"Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be. [...] We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray [...] so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to. [...] If [you don't feel the same way], you will not be missed"
https://twitter.com/WarComTeam/status/1268665798467432449/photo/1 
   
Made in au
Unstoppable Bloodthirster of Khorne





Melbourne .au

Wow. I'm glad I left this particular thread about 17 pages ago. You guys seem to be mostly arguing in circles at this point. Might be time to agree to disagree and call it quits?

   
Made in gb
The Daemon Possessing Fulgrim's Body





Devon, UK

 Azazelx wrote:
Wow. I'm glad I left this particular thread about 17 pages ago. You guys seem to be mostly arguing in circles at this point. Might be time to agree to disagree and call it quits?


I'm trying honest! But HSoO keeps trying to win a discussion, and for whatever reason I'm not in the mood to walk away. Can you see the point he is trying to make about the picture? Cause I think if I understood what he was trying to say i might be able to leave it, but I just don't get what he is arguing (about the pic) and maybe if I crack that I will be able to turn lead into gold or something.

We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't. - Frank Howard Clark

The wise man doubts often, and changes his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubts not; he knows all things but his own ignorance.

The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!” Professor Brian Cox

Ask me about
Barnstaple Slayers Club 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





IL




After 20 pages it's still pretty much this.

Paulson Games parts are now at:
www.RedDogMinis.com 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka






Are we still talking about that blurb picture from the Inquisiton codex?


No one ever expected.

I still need those female catachans.



At Games Workshop, we believe that how you behave does matter. We believe this so strongly that we have written it down in the Games Workshop Book. There is a section in the book where we talk about the values we expect all staff to demonstrate in their working lives. These values are Lawyers, Guns and Money. 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:
but the fact remains that men and women are different, both literally and figuratively, to their very bones.

It's a nice coincidence : black people and white people are also literally different to their very bones, as I guess any good forensic could tell !

 azreal13 wrote:
Studies constantly pop up in the news confirming how women interpret data and process environmental information differently to men.

Just like we have all those old studies about racial differences, which are not really trusted anymore for some reason .

I'm definitely not sold on this being intrinsic differences. So, I'm going to keep by my position that we should get rid of this societal pressure, and if things don't change, you'll be proven right. Too bad we will likely both be dead for a long long time then, since those things don't actually change fast. Biology have already been abused to fit prejudice in the past.


1. Straw man. Melanin. That's the only difference. Black skin has a higher concentration of the pigment melanin than white skin.

2. You'd be surprised. That intrinsic difference does exist. Read it up. Men and women are different and process data differently. genetically, chemically and physically, we are extremely different from each other. Even to the extent that the brains of men and women form differently in the womb. It all has an effect. There are as many differences, genetically speaking, between men and both chimpanzees and women. Men are from mars, and women are from Venus. Old nazi pseudo science, and ideas from way back when, (when frankly they knew very little, scientifically speaking) don't really hold water as comparisons.

As to the boobqisitor, meh. You want her to evoke awesome. I think she does that. Yup, I'm immersed. I don't see the issue in what she is depicted as wearing. Wow, she's got cleavage. Get over youself folks, and stop thinking like brain addled teenagers. She can wear what she likes, and no one wants to mess with her. Is boobs the problem, or the perception of boobs? Part of me thinks everyone should go naked, and we'd all lose this silly prudish view of the human body.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/11/17 09:36:00


 
   
Made in fi
Calculating Commissar







 Grot 6 wrote:
Are we still talking about that blurb picture from the Inquisiton codex?


I don't understand why, either, there's so much more fertile ground for dispute in the miniatures hobby.

The supply does not get to make the demands. 
   
Made in fi
Courageous Space Marine Captain






 azreal13 wrote:

I suppose once you've actually spent some time in a full blown relationship you'll realise that women do generally view the world around them in a different way, so much so that you will sometimes wonder how they even qualify as the same species as men (as much as I loathe all the namby pamby, self help, liberal nonsense, "Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus" is so much more than a book title!)

Oh wow! And this is the man who accuses others of not understanding women! I feel that I'm much more part of the same species with an average woman than I'm with you.

I've been in a relationship (with a woman) for a long time. I work as a teacher and most of my co-workers are women. I see how children of both genders behave. You know what? We are all people. There are some attitudes and behavioural modes that are on average slightly more common in women than in men and vice versa, and that's it. On individual level we are all different in certain ways and similar in others, and gender is pretty bad determiner of those similarities and differences.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 azreal13 wrote:
You're quoting me out of context, then getting upset about it. Are you sure you're NOT a woman?!

Well, you are certainly working hard to prove that the people in the hobby are the problem instead of sexualised art/miniatures! BTW, if you find women being upset at you often, you might want to try not being so blatantly sexist. It might help!

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2013/11/17 13:34:43


   
 
Forum Index » Dakka Discussions
Go to: