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.

 BlaxicanX wrote:
> Implying gender preferences for wargames is influenced by neurological differences between men and women.

Nah.

Yeah. Men and women would not have identical pastime preferences in this ideal world where "society" hadn't corrupted everybody. The idea that men and women are actually the same, it's just that we've imposed different ideals onto them? That's ludicrous.

I do believe there are differences between men and women just based on genetics. Back when humans were still evolving it was males role to protect the females, and by protect I mean get eaten by whatever nasty thing was hungry, while the females ran away. You can still see that in play now with men tending to be bulkier and easier to gain muscle, while women are smarter, more resistant to disease, and have better reactions. And personally I think the concept of everyone being equal is a fallacy, we are very different from one another. Now does that mean that one is better than the other? No, of course not (although if I had to pick one I would say females are better) just merely different. One thing that has been repeated through out this thread is that people need to treat female gamers as if they are just gamers, and I agree with that sentiment completely. I think one of the problems with not only our culture but every culture is that people are treated different based on their gender.

 Seaward wrote:

 BlaxicanX wrote:
> Implying gender preferences for wargames is influenced by neurological differences between men and women.

Nah.

Yeah. Men and women would not have identical pastime preferences in this ideal world where "society" hadn't corrupted everybody. The idea that men and women are actually the same, it's just that we've imposed different ideals onto them? That's ludicrous.

I don't think she quite means that. I myself think that, to a certain extent, being male or female does influences one's interests on a biological level in a general manner (exceptions always exist). That said, one could easily argue that the difference between men and women in terms of pastimes isn't quite what we think it is. Nothing is ever really that simple. Both nature and nurture, in my opinion, influence us to varying extents. For example, there is TVs, friends, and more that all reinforce our inclinations as well. Then there are the communities around games that, in general nerd fashion, are... intriguing and often volatile. From raging on the slightest retcon or inaccuracy to being smelly And, whilst I've never seen it around me, I've heard tales from friends of places they've been to where girls will be creeped on. Doesn't help many nerds aren't the best at being social Will genetics, including male and female, still influence things and provide general preferences on both sides of the demographic? Most certainly but if you changed these two factors, social influence and communities, I don't think the disparity would be quite so good.

Bear with me, this is going to be a LONG post. Female here, and I brought my fiance into the hobby. I mainly play 40k, and I'm on the verge of starting fantasy. Our local GW has 5-7 women (including myself) involved in the hobby on a regular basis. Only about four of us actually play the game. The others mainly paint and collect or use the minis for other games like D&D. We have a couple other stores in the area that also run wargaming along with other board games and CCG's, but I don't play there, so I don't know what the wargaming atmosphere's like. (I do not work for GW, nor does my fiance.)

I'm not going to quote everybody because there are a ton of posts and that would be an absolute mess.

Gender role issues:
It's been scientifically proven that male brains are better with math and spatial distances, while female brains are better with languages and fine motor skills at different ages and such. That does not mean one is smarter than the other, just processing differently.

You really can't run a bias free study on toys with kids for trucks and dolls. Kids are affected by parents, tv, other kids, advertising, everything around them. You can try and go as bias free as you can, but it does creep in.

General Gaming Atmosphere:
Our local store is actually free of the general "NO GURLS ALLOWED" attitude, and it would be quickly put to a stop if that sort of thing got started. Not everybody's going to get the same sort of experience. Occasionally you get people who aren't going to hit the hygiene mark. Such is geek culture, unfortunately.

I'm sure the rent is cheaper in the dying strip malls, and since GW is a one man store policy, I guess it's easier for them to find the right size store for one person to run it. It's also less foot traffic, and since a GW store manager can't advertise, it sucks for them.

As for getting women into the hobby, let's talk about the attitude:
For female geeks, with "The rape jokes"...etc...there's a point where it doesn't bother you, and there's a point where it gets out of hand. As a female geek (I have an engineering degree, so you get used to being 1 of like 3 females in a class of 30) you get used to that. You might have even grown up with a lot of that. I grew up with more male friends than female friends. I still have more male friends than female friends.

For other women, it's probably going to be a complete turn-off and they have no interest at all in dealing with it.

At least the local GW store has it a little easier when it comes to this because policy is "Family friendly store". That keeps a lot of talk out.

Models:
I don't care, although looking at some of the "man faces" it would be nice to see some newer better female models. It would be also nice to see some more female models. As far as toy companies go, selling to girls isn't always about making things girly...when I was a kid I watched and played with He-man more than She-ra because He-man had cooler stuff.

As for 40K not being appealing to women, why not push the fantasy line? In 40k the sisters or Eldar or (for whatever weird reason) 'nids don't have to be the "girl" armies. (I do not play 'nids becuase it's cute, or some other girly reason. I play 'nids because I wanted to play something really alien looking and I come from a starcraft background...

Just Build and Painting:
As for the women that just paint. One of them is the store manager's wife. She buys stuff she wants to paint, convert or build. She picks out and pays for her own stuff to build and paint, and he gets more armies to play. She's tried a couple of times to play the game, and doesn't really have the patience for it.

One of the other women is building and painting models for D&D.

We do have other people that just come into the store and just build, paint and collect models though. One of the guys in the store comes in every week, buys some LOTR stuff, and builds and paints it for a diorama. I'm sure it's going to look amazing when it's done. He has no desire to play the game.

It's still part of the hobby.

Couples:
All of the women in our store are part of a couple.

As I stated before, I play with my fiance. (My fiance proposed to me during the store's big apoc game, and surprised me, btw). I have my 'nids, he has his dark eldar. We often play against each other. I brought him into the hobby. I was actually looking for miniature storage for some board games I had when I walked into the GW store at the time.

One of the other women is also a 'nids player, but she's been playing since at least 3rd ed. She and her husband both play, and they have a battleforce table at home.

I haven't seen a woman come into the store and play or paint that wasn't in a relationship. I'm not saying that couldn't happen, just that it hasn't happened. I know I've gone a little bit out of my way, sometimes when my fiance has been in the store (and it's been around new players I didn't know) to make it obvious that I was taken, so I didn't get the whole "hey, you single?" thing.

 Seaward wrote:

 BlaxicanX wrote:
> Implying gender preferences for wargames is influenced by neurological differences between men and women.

Nah.

Yeah. Men and women would not have identical pastime preferences in this ideal world where "society" hadn't corrupted everybody. The idea that men and women are actually the same, it's just that we've imposed different ideals onto them? That's ludicrous.

The notion that 40K appeals to women less than it does to men because of biological wiring is silly.

I would just like to thank everyone that participated in this discussion not only for having it but doing it in a mature, well informed manner. These type of discussions can only be good for improving our hobby and our mindset.

Taking a large parse of people and making a sweeping generalization about a part of them is silly.

My girlfriend plays video games. Lots of them.

Says painting, math, and awkward social situations really aren't her thing. Though I got her to do some painting, and even a mini game of 40k were just put up some models and played strictly the shooting phase until there was one. She admitted it was fun.. But maintains that video games are better because there is no painting, counting, or strange boys.

Edit.. she also said the likelyhood she would ever stumble into a store pickup abox and go "I want to do this" are slim. That and she can't afford it.

I'm starting to feel very glad for my flgs. I've been a mother as long as I've been a gamer and whether I've had the girls with me or not I've not had any problem. Years ago in the late 90s absolutely, and that was what put me off the hobby then, but not now.

Anyway, to give my opinion on previous points:
"Women only like painting" - I'd like to pay these women to do it for me. I hate painting and would just dip the lot in the paint pot of my husband didn't sulk.

"Women lose all the time" - I've kept a log since November and won 73% of my games since then.

"Women will only play if there are female models" - well yes my IG does include female models. It also includes rogue trader models, steel legionnaires, last chancers, a tallarn and two mordians - I just like that guard has such a range, makes them more human. My necrons, unsurprisingly, have no female models.

There are barriers to get through as a female gamer - my mum strongly disapproves, for example - but it would probably help ifwe could all treat players like pplayers no matter what that look like.

 Psienesis wrote:
It's not a male/female thing with getting bored with how 40K plays. With some armies, a single turn can be forty-five minutes (or more) of moving, dice-rolling, and what-not. Shoot, I get bored if a single player's turn takes more than twenty minutes, that's why I prefer lower-points games, action happens faster and often more decisively.

This needs to be emphasized. 40k's IGOUGO system and ridiculous complexity are pretty much designed to drive away anyone who isn't absolutely dedicated to the game. If you're a woman who's already going against social pressure just by being interested in traditionally "male" hobbies are you really going to have enough motivation left to push through those obstacles and get to a point where you can enjoy the game? In the case of my GF that's exactly how it worked, she thinks my display shelf full of models is nice, but had no interest in trying a second game just because it's too much work to learn.

 BlaxicanX wrote:
The notion that 40K appeals to women less than it does to men because of biological wiring is silly.

We'll have to agree to disagree.

The people who subscribe to the, "Society imposes gender roles, that's why X and not Y happens," stuff like to point out that once the stigma with video gaming disappeared, women poured in in vast numbers. And it's true. They did. Depending on how you select your numbers, they make up over half the video game-playing populace today.

But there are very clear genre delineations in that. MMOs, RPGs, so-called 'casual' games? Women in spades. Simulators, sports games, (and, most germane to this discussion) war-oriented strategy games? Very few women. Gaming companies have done research on this, and it's not exactly a secret that different aspects of gaming appeal to the genders differently. There's not really any getting around that.

 Seaward wrote:
But there are very clear genre delineations in that. MMOs, RPGs, so-called 'casual' games? Women in spades. Simulators, sports games, (and, most germane to this discussion) war-oriented strategy games? Very few women. Gaming companies have done research on this, and it's not exactly a secret that different aspects of gaming appeal to the genders differently. There's not really any getting around that.

But how much of that is the game itself, compared to the community of those games? MMOs are an easily accessible genre (even for new players with little previous gaming experience) that generally has smaller guilds/etc that can cater to a particular interest and no real need to play with anyone outside of your group. So if a group gets a reputation for not being a hostile environment for women then it's easy for them to get into that game. Compare that to other genres: simulation games have tiny dedicated communities and difficult learning curves, FPS and RTS games tend to emphasize random matchmaking and have communities full of abusive s that you can't easily avoid, and sports games tend to be played offline in male-dominated groups as part of a "guy thing".

And note that this isn't an entirely gender-based thing: the simulation genre is a tiny niche market that most male gamers have no interest in, while the wargame genre (other than Starcraft, which is more of a clicks per second test) is hardly a thriving one.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Psienesis wrote:
It's not a male/female thing with getting bored with how 40K plays. With some armies, a single turn can be forty-five minutes (or more) of moving, dice-rolling, and what-not. Shoot, I get bored if a single player's turn takes more than twenty minutes, that's why I prefer lower-points games, action happens faster and often more decisively.

This needs to be emphasized. 40k's IGOUGO system and ridiculous complexity are pretty much designed to drive away anyone who isn't absolutely dedicated to the game. If you're a woman who's already going against social pressure just by being interested in traditionally "male" hobbies are you really going to have enough motivation left to push through those obstacles and get to a point where you can enjoy the game? In the case of my GF that's exactly how it worked, she thinks my display shelf full of models is nice, but had no interest in trying a second game just because it's too much work to learn.

I would also say that due to the game length 40k can be realy tireing simply due to how long it can take bent over the table on tables that can be built a little bit high than optimal for likly shorter avg of players.

I know every time I play my deamons I am much less comfortable and sore after games than I am with my eldar, leading to the game becoming far more grumpy inducing.

In response to gaming in the last few years there was the tekken X streatfighter tournament where a female player was harassed nearly consistantly until she quit by her team captan, at which point thousands of men come out of the internet in his defence, sexism and harrasment of female players is just part of the game to them. That's realy an enviroment you would consider inviting and easy for players to get into ?
Would men be happy with there wives, girlfriends or daughters going into that sort of enviroment.
The gaming industry still has a long way to go in some genres, fighting games like dead or alive advertise there breast physics and the sexuality of minors. Still a long way to go

Also, even if there is a gender difference in which aspects of gaming are appealing that does NOT mean that it's the result of inherent gender differences instead of social pressure. For example, the often-cited difference is competitive vs. cooperative play: women prefer cooperative games like RPGs, men prefer competitive games like FPSs. But there's a very obvious social factor here to consider. Women spend their whole lives being told that they favor cooperation over competition, and face criticism if they're "too aggressive". So is it really any surprise that it's hard to overcome that and embrace the hardcore competitive attitude required to be successful at certain games, and games that don't require such a dramatic change of attitude are more appealing?

 Peregrine wrote:
But how much of that is the game itself, compared to the community of those games?

Given the trends hold true in singleplayer games, I dunno if the community can be explained away as the answer.

And note that this isn't an entirely gender-based thing: the simulation genre is a tiny niche market that most male gamers have no interest in, while the wargame genre (other than Starcraft, which is more of a clicks per second test) is hardly a thriving one.

Really? Plenty of wargames get released. Everything from Civ to Total War. Many of them seem to do alright. They're not hitting COD sales (again, a male-dominated market), but not much is.

One thing I genuinely do not get in all of this is the seemingly urgent need by some guys to make excuses for why women aren't into the same things they're into. Everything from the, "Please, please get rid of sausagefest 40K," sentiment expressed earlier in the thread to the argument that women would absolutely be into World War II naval combat simulations if only it weren't for The Man keeping them down in traditional gender roles.

Why doesn't this happen in reverse? Why aren't men constantly being told they'd totally dig romance novels if only their parents had raised them right?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Peregrine wrote:
Also, even if there is a gender difference in which aspects of gaming are appealing that does NOT mean that it's the result of inherent gender differences instead of social pressure. For example, the often-cited difference is competitive vs. cooperative play: women prefer cooperative games like RPGs, men prefer competitive games like FPSs. But there's a very obvious social factor here to consider. Women spend their whole lives being told that they favor cooperation over competition, and face criticism if they're "too aggressive". So is it really any surprise that it's hard to overcome that and embrace the hardcore competitive attitude required to be successful at certain games, and games that don't require such a dramatic change of attitude are more appealing?

There's also an obvious evolutionary factor. Cooperation-oriented females and competition-oriented males aren't exactly unique to humanity.

Ultimately, it's something that's not going to get firmly resolved until we raise some test kids in absolute isolation from society. My bet? The gender with more testosterone will unsurprisingly prove to be the competitive one even without the patriarchy around to tell them to be.

Part of why I thought it was interesting that it was suggested more girls play chess at a young age and then stop is that could indicate it's not an innate difference but that it's caused by the immense pressure to conform as you age.

The biggest problem when you talk about "men are better at X, women are better at Y" is in basically 100% of those studies the difference between the genders is utterly dwarfed by the variance between individuals. We find that sometimes on the mean there is a difference, but that your gender matters a lot less than who you are. That's why the disparity is eyebrow-raising and suggests there's more to it. Maybe in an ideal world there would be more men wargaming than women, but there's nothing to suggest the disparity should be as large as it is today.

 Seaward wrote:
Given the trends hold true in singleplayer games, I dunno if the community can be explained away as the answer.

Is the single-player market really even around anymore? I mean, I know the latest Call of Battlefield games have a token hour or two of single player, but can you really call those single-player games when it's just an entertaining side bit to the multiplayer core? How many dedicated single-player games are there these days?

Really? Plenty of wargames get released. Everything from Civ to Total War. Many of them seem to do alright. They're not hitting COD sales (again, a male-dominated market), but not much is.

That's why I said "not thriving", not "dead". It's like with 40k, you can talk about reasons why women aren't interested, but the are also a lot of men who aren't interested either. It's not exactly surprising that the genres of games that are having the most success outside their "traditional" market are genres that are very successful overall.

One thing I genuinely do not get in all of this is the seemingly urgent need by some guys to make excuses for why women aren't into the same things they're into. Everything from the, "Please, please get rid of sausagefest 40K," sentiment expressed earlier in the thread to the argument that women would absolutely be into World War II naval combat simulations if only it weren't for The Man keeping them down in traditional gender roles.

That "need" exists for two reasons:

1) Many of the things being criticized are things where women are actively driven away, not just coincidentally not interested in something. It's entirely fair and appropriate to point out issues like the bad behavior of a lot of 40k players, or the near-complete (and inexcusable from a fluff perspective) absence of female characters. Even if the gender ratio in wargaming is never going to come anywhere near 50/50 it shouldn't be very controversial to suggest that it's a lot more uneven then it would be if everyone who was potentially interested in the game was actually able to play and enjoy it.

2) Bad arguments about inherent gender differences need to be disputed because they're simply wrong. It's like asking why people feel the need to complain when someone says 1+1=5. If you make claims about inherent differences and ignore obvious social effects then yes, you're going to get people objecting to that.

Why doesn't this happen in reverse? Why aren't men constantly being told they'd totally dig romance novels if only their parents had raised them right?

Actually I suspect a lot more men would be interested in romance novels if they weren't told how much they hate them as soon as they started reading, and likely to be mocked as "not a real man" if they dare to admit interest. The fact that most romance novels are written from a female point of view might make it harder to relate to them, but in this hypothetical world I would expect to see a genre of male-point-of-view novels aimed at men.

Now, if you want to know why this isn't a priority, it's simple: men have a lot more freedom to choose their hobbies right now, so there's not a whole lot of motivation to push for more options.

 Peregrine wrote:
Is the single-player market really even around anymore? I mean, I know the latest Call of Battlefield games have a token hour or two of single player, but can you really call those single-player games when it's just an entertaining side bit to the multiplayer core? How many dedicated single-player games are there these days?

If you look exclusively at shooters, not many.

If you broaden genres a bit, though? Quite a few.

That's why I said "not thriving", not "dead". It's like with 40k, you can talk about reasons why women aren't interested, but the are also a lot of men who aren't interested either.

But of the people who do play, it's predominantly men. I guess I don't really get what you're saying here.

It's not exactly surprising that the genres of games that are having the most success outside their "traditional" market are genres that are very successful overall.

Like CoD? I dunno. The vast majority of its market remains men.

That "need" exists for two reasons:

1) Many of the things being criticized are things where women are actively driven away, not just coincidentally not interested in something. It's entirely fair and appropriate to point out issues like the bad behavior of a lot of 40k players, or the near-complete (and inexcusable from a fluff perspective) absence of female characters. Even if the gender ratio in wargaming is never going to come anywhere near 50/50 it shouldn't be very controversial to suggest that it's a lot more uneven then it would be if everyone who was potentially interested in the game was actually able to play and enjoy it.

Controversial? No. Unsupportable? Certainly.

2) Bad arguments about inherent gender differences need to be disputed because they're simply wrong. It's like asking why people feel the need to complain when someone says 1+1=5. If you make claims about inherent differences and ignore obvious social effects then yes, you're going to get people objecting to that.

Oddly, I feel the same way about "social effects." I mean, sexual dimorphism isn't exactly a controversial concept. It very much exists. I suppose we can pretend like it doesn't influence anything, but I'm not sure I see the point in that.

Actually I suspect a lot more men would be interested in romance novels if they weren't told how much they hate them as soon as they started reading, and likely to be mocked as "not a real man" if they dare to admit interest.

I honestly cannot recall ever hearing that. I'm pretty sure I'm uninterested in the crap my fiancee reads because it's dreadfully uninteresting, not because society told me I didn't like it. Which is, incidentally, exactly how she feels about 40K. Given her other 'masculine' interests, including guns, hockey, and hot naked chicks, I somewhat doubt what society would think of her rolling wargaming dice would have had much influence there, either.

 Seaward wrote:
But of the people who do play, it's predominantly men. I guess I don't really get what you're saying here.

What I'm saying is that those genres of games, like 40k, have a lot of reasons that people in general aren't interested in them. Most men won't be interested because of those reasons, while women will share those same reasons and start from a position where even playing a game at all is already going against social conventions. When it takes some effort just to play any game which is a more appealing one: the MMO that is easy to get into and has lots of players, or the RTS/simulation/etc with a huge learning curve and a community consisting of a forum or two in some dusty old corner of the internet? Like in 40k what you get is a community where only the absolute most determined fanatics get through the obstacles and start playing, and that's almost inevitably going to be a male-dominated group since they have just a slightly smaller number of obstacles to deal with.

Like CoD? I dunno. The vast majority of its market remains men.

But again, consider why it remains male-dominated. It's an online game that emphasizes competitive games with random strangers and has a community with a truly awful reputation. Set aside gaming preferences and ask yourself this: if you were a woman and knew that playing CoD would mean spending hours listening to some 15 year old's obscene sexist rants would you be interested in playing? Probably not.

Oddly, I feel the same way about "social effects." I mean, sexual dimorphism isn't exactly a controversial concept. It very much exists. I suppose we can pretend like it doesn't influence anything, but I'm not sure I see the point in that.

Well, it exists as long as you love bad evolutionary psychology and other pseudoscience. The much more likely scenario is that any inherent gender differences are less significant than the variation between individuals, and most of the "inherent" differences are better explained by social factors. The fact that wargaming, in an ideal sexism-free world, might be 60/40 in favor of men doesn't mean that we should pretend that the current 99/1 ratio represents inherent attributes rather than problems in the community and society as a whole.

I honestly cannot recall ever hearing that.

Really? Because I thought that's a pretty obvious stereotype, even if nobody explicitly said "if you like romance novels I'm going to laugh at you".

I'm pretty sure I'm uninterested in the crap my fiancee reads because it's dreadfully uninteresting, not because society told me I didn't like it. Which is, incidentally, exactly how she feels about 40K. Given her other 'masculine' interests, including guns, hockey, and hot naked chicks, I somewhat doubt what society would think of her rolling wargaming dice would have had much influence there, either.

Yes, but that's not the point. Nobody is claiming that every individual woman would be interested in 40k if only the community was less offensive. Obviously that's not true, just like it's not true that every man would have even the slightest interest in the hobby. There are plenty of men who like guns, hockey, and hot naked chicks, but find the thought of playing 40k about as appealing as watching paint dry. And there's nothing wrong with that. Individuals are free to have any preferences they want. The problem is when you look at larger groups it's very difficult to imagine that the current gender ratio is entirely the result of legitimate preferences, especially when there are obvious things that would drive potential female players away from the game even if they would otherwise be interested.

 Peregrine wrote:
But again, consider why it remains male-dominated. It's an online game that emphasizes competitive games with random strangers and has a community with a truly awful reputation. Set aside gaming preferences and ask yourself this: if you were a woman and knew that playing CoD would mean spending hours listening to some 15 year old's obscene sexist rants would you be interested in playing? Probably not.

And why not, exactly? Is that somehow more annoying than hearing said 15 year-old scream about how he anally violated me and suggesting I involve myself in frequent sexual congress with other men?

Well, it exists as long as you love bad evolutionary psychology and other pseudoscience.

Okay, wow. Either you think we're talking about different things, or...I have no idea. Sexual dimorphism is not a controversial topic. I'd start here, but failing that, I'd ask one simple question: do you believe men produce and consume more testosterone than women? If the answer is "no," you're incorrect from every possible biological standpoint. If the answer is "yes," then we've just pointed out one of many examples of sexual dimorphism in humans.

I'd go on to ask if you're aware of what testosterone does in the body and if you believe higher or lower levels of it can cause different reactions to stimuli and go from there into a deeper discussion about whether or not different hormonal and chemical levels could possibly lead to different methods for processing information, reacting to threats, etc., and from there into...well, does it really matter? Let's be honest: it wouldn't matter, because it's not just about the facts, it's about the politics, and you hate my political stance and I hate yours, so we might as well just knock this off and keep the OT stuff down in OT.

 Peregrine wrote:
especially when there are obvious things that would drive potential female players away from the game even if they would otherwise be interested.

While absolutely true, we as a community do not hold all the cards to fixing the problem.
An even larger factor is the social construct among women. In many cliques, a young woman that tries her hand at plastic soldiers is going to get ridiculed by her peers, lose social standing and maybe even be ostracized.
But I mean sure, we can attempt to create an environment that doesn't so readily invite the ridicule. But no matter how awesome we become, it's still gonna be plastic men and dice.

 Goldphish wrote:
Too long didn't read so I'm going to assume no one mentioned the most obvious reason women do not play this hobby.

In my 15+ years of table top gaming I have noticed that the majority of players severely lack a sense of hygiene. The males tend to act rather foolishly talking in a manner which is not very inviting to the opposite sex. Honestly I have trouble half the time playing with some people because they are so disgusting. Then of course there is the fun fact that whenever a woman does enter the room half the guys act like they have never seen a woman before and the other half tries to act macho. Then the creepy staring...why would a woman want to endure that.

Exactly why my wife won't even go near the local store it stinks of unwashed bodies!! She told me she nearly threw up when she went in to get me a prezzie, and that was it for her... So thank you, you slovenly ba57ards for that! she couldn't even stay long enough to make a purchase.

However, a number of years ago after the GW shop closed for the night, we all headed to a local pub, the owner was hanging out with us and playing, he opened just for us an started pouring pints of beer, and we played 40K. A smallish crowd of beautiful ladies appeared outside the large glass windows, and wanted to come in to see what we were doing... the owner told them the pub was closed... grrrrr I missed out on my second wife that night... So they wanted to see what a bunch of dudes were doing around tables pushing toy soldiers around.

Then I observed a load of gals at a Games Day. I followed them a bit before I approached them and asked what they were doing there... Well, as a matter of fact they weren't local gals, they had travelled to check out men, and play GW games...

I know this isn’t just about ladies playing the game, but there is interest out there fellows, so make it interesting for them!! If you demo a game make it quick and simple and don’t win! Act all upset and surprised that she just kicked your buttocks at your favorite game. You never know, may just work and then she brings her girlfriends into it. Not to dumb it down but don't get complicated as with any new player is all I'm saying.

I've known about 5 females that play model wargames.

1 mainly plays malifaux and has a couple female led crews.
1 plays fantasy and has Dwarves.
1 plays Dark Eldar
1 paints stuff for her husbands 40k armies
1 plays orks in 40k and lizards in fantasy.

None of them get treated any differently than the males and the males don't usually act stupid around them.

But I would love some more females for the armies of 40k and fantasy. I would love to see some guardswomen and more female eldar.

 Seaward wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
But again, consider why it remains male-dominated. It's an online game that emphasizes competitive games with random strangers and has a community with a truly awful reputation. Set aside gaming preferences and ask yourself this: if you were a woman and knew that playing CoD would mean spending hours listening to some 15 year old's obscene sexist rants would you be interested in playing? Probably not.

And why not, exactly? Is that somehow more annoying than hearing said 15 year-old scream about how he anally violated me and suggesting I involve myself in frequent sexual congress with other men?

Well, it exists as long as you love bad evolutionary psychology and other pseudoscience.

Okay, wow. Either you think we're talking about different things, or...I have no idea. Sexual dimorphism is not a controversial topic. I'd start here, but failing that, I'd ask one simple question: do you believe men produce and consume more testosterone than women? If the answer is "no," you're incorrect from every possible biological standpoint. If the answer is "yes," then we've just pointed out one of many examples of sexual dimorphism in humans.

I'd go on to ask if you're aware of what testosterone does in the body and if you believe higher or lower levels of it can cause different reactions to stimuli and go from there into a deeper discussion about whether or not different hormonal and chemical levels could possibly lead to different methods for processing information, reacting to threats, etc., and from there into...well, does it really matter? Let's be honest: it wouldn't matter, because it's not just about the facts, it's about the politics, and you hate my political stance and I hate yours, so we might as well just knock this off and keep the OT stuff down in OT.

Does that mean I have less testosterone if I like quite a bit of "girly" things?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Purifier wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
especially when there are obvious things that would drive potential female players away from the game even if they would otherwise be interested.

While absolutely true, we as a community do not hold all the cards to fixing the problem.
An even larger factor is the social construct among women. In many cliques, a young woman that tries her hand at plastic soldiers is going to get ridiculed by her peers, lose social standing and maybe even be ostracized.
But I mean sure, we can attempt to create an environment that doesn't so readily invite the ridicule. But no matter how awesome we become, it's still gonna be plastic men and dice.

The problem is an utter mess really. That's ignoring all the factors that already make the game unappealing to guys! You have the community around the game which I've heard enough tales of the unwelcoming attitude or the... overwelcoming attitude some come up with when a female appears. Then there's more societal factors. Group mentality heavily influenced by friends, how society observes it such as shows, movies, toy advertisements, advertisements. Hell there's the whole entire BOYS ONLY and GIRLS ONLY nonsense that sometimes appears. And all of that before I even have to think of talking about how genetics might influence an individual which is a pain thanks to basically everything else that happens during your life. What is because of genetics? What is because of your life experiences? Really it's hard to say we can entirely know unless we tear it down entirely and compare the differences and similarities.

 StarTrotter wrote:
Does that mean I have less testosterone if I like quite a bit of "girly" things?

Nope.

[quote=Kelly502 594021 there is interest out there fellows, so make it interesting for them!! If you demo a game make it quick and simple and don’t win! Act all upset and surprised that she just kicked your buttocks at your favorite game. You never know, may just work and then she brings her girlfriends into it. Not to dumb it down but don't get complicated as with any new player is all I'm saying.

 Seaward wrote:

 StarTrotter wrote:
Does that mean I have less testosterone if I like quite a bit of "girly" things?

Nope.

Apologies I've been on a Dark Souls stunt and all this talk of testosterone and co-operation awakened my inner "Praise the Sun" Solaris. Jolly co-operation!

Anyways, I added something to my message. No matter what we argue we just don't really know enough and sadly we don't have enough evidence either. We'd have to have somebody born, give them entirely neutral entertainment with an equal proportion of everything, limit their friendship to only individuals that also experienced this as well and let them grow up in an artificial world before then tossing them all sorts of hobbies to observe everything with everything permitting you to be male or female if not something iconic like Mario or something. Which would be completely creepy and I would doubt it would get passed

The Russians have probably already done it.

But yeah, generally speaking in these nature vs. nurture debates, it often tends to be a little from nature and a little from nurture.

Which begs the question of whether or not the nature (our biological components) informs the nurture (the 'traditional gender roles' it's become popular to rail against) and if this stuff's all been intertwined from the start.

 Mahtamori wrote:
P.s. I don't think the sexualization of females (Wych cults) or males (Catachans) in itself is a problem

Catachan are not sexualized. The day the artworks for Catachan emphasize their asses or nipples, then I will agree that they are sexualized. Until then, only BA get to be arguably sexualized.

 MWHistorian wrote:
She really liked Minions, but no female character. She said she wa sticking to Vampire Counts.

There is one coming IIRC. A female Gatorwoman caster. And, thanks goodness, Privateer Press remembered that reptiles are not mammals and therefore have no boobs.



About the smell/hygiene problem, have you thought of actually telling the guys that they smell bad? I am serious. Do it tactfully and friendly, but do it. I used to take a bath about, I guess, once a week. After two or three people in a row told me how I smelled bad, I started taking a shower every morning, and I bought a deodorant. I have a bad sense of smell, and I really did not realized that I was annoying people around me. Really, I feel better now that I know I am not a nuisance to people just by being around them anymore. Do it, they will thank you later .

I tried getting Mrs monders to play Bloodbowl once.

"It's just rules for rules sake, and not much fun".

She didn't mind Dreadball as much though.

She likes the Dungeon! boardgame though. Nice and easy to pick up and she's proper jammy with rolls...

the sexist-stereotype that gaming is for men of any type is still fairly common these days. Its way LESS common now, as i come across girls in minecraft and various other games all the time whereas 10 years ago i was shocked to find a girl in any game. Even boardgames i had a hard time finding a girl that enjoyed any lol.

I have yet to meet a girl that plays warhammer though. I know they exist, theres a few on these forums that are usually posting often. But then again i dont live in a very 40k popular area, my FLGS is about 6 gamers lol.

I treat girl games the same as guy gamers when i do find them. I'll never be that guy that goes "Girls should never play games..." because hey i would fething love to find a girl thats into 40k lol then i dont have to explain why i have ~2500USD in toy soldiers rofl. Not to mention its a lot easier to hold a conversation when you have more than one thing in common

About the smell/hygiene problem, have you thought of actually telling the guys that they smell bad? I am serious. Do it tactfully and friendly, but do it. I used to take a bath about, I guess, once a week. After two or three people in a row told me how I smelled bad, I started taking a shower every morning, and I bought a deodorant. I have a bad sense of smell, and I really did not realized that I was annoying people around me. Really, I feel better now that I know I am not a nuisance to people just by being around them anymore. Do it, they will thank you later

I have the same issue. I wont notice body odor or any foul odor unless it is REALLY bad, so often my house or even myself will reek and i wont notice. I will FEEL dirty before i notice i stink. I used to shower "if i had the time" but i used that excuse loosely lol as it usually meant "if i was bored" lol. And i never used deodorant before. After about a year in the military that changed because people would constantly comment on my stench. Now i take showers just because i got a minute, even though im very skinny (so no rolls for sweat to hide in) and not that physically active so i dont sweat much. I feel cleaner, but i dont even smell the deodorant when i stick it under my nose let alone my armpit lol.
It kinda sucks because i honestly dont know what any type of flower smells like