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.

 Ashiraya wrote:
But... That is just a 'not a cause for a cause' fallacy.

You have nothing but speculation to back up your statements.

You assume that the biological differences are the sole reasons for this controversy but you have no proof whatsoever of this being the case, while it is obvious that the social hindrances are rather significant. Just look earlier in this thread for plenty of examples.

On the contrary, I simply don't dismiss biological differences outright or attribute them solely to societal pressure, the way Peregrine did in our earlier discussion.

Incidentally, there's plenty of anecdotal evidence for both sides. There are not, to the best of my knowledge, any extant studies on this topic. The only thing that comes close is studies video game developers have done, and they simply show that women tend to like more cooperative and story-driven games than otherwise, and delves not at all into the reasons why.

Of course it's possible the numbers won't reach 50% due to uneven genuine interest. Nobody has said anything else. But the current numbers are definitely skewed by far more than mere nature.

They are? By far more?

How do you know?

Plus what Startrotter says.

If you want to see the entire argument, it's still very much in the thread. You asked for a specific quotation, I provided it.

 Seaward wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:
But... That is just a 'not a cause for a cause' fallacy.

You have nothing but speculation to back up your statements.

You assume that the biological differences are the sole reasons for this controversy but you have no proof whatsoever of this being the case, while it is obvious that the social hindrances are rather significant. Just look earlier in this thread for plenty of examples.

On the contrary, I simply don't dismiss biological differences outright or attribute them solely to societal pressure, the way Peregrine did in our earlier discussion.

Incidentally, there's plenty of anecdotal evidence for both sides. There are not, to the best of my knowledge, any extant studies on this topic. The only thing that comes close is studies video game developers have done, and they simply show that women tend to like more cooperative and story-driven games than otherwise, and delves not at all into the reasons why.

Of course it's possible the numbers won't reach 50% due to uneven genuine interest. Nobody has said anything else. But the current numbers are definitely skewed by far more than mere nature.

They are? By far more?

How do you know?

Plus what Startrotter says.

If you want to see the entire argument, it's still very much in the thread. You asked for a specific quotation, I provided it.

I don't think Peregrine phrased it correctly at the start though as he mentions a 60:40 split later on.

Not even then with the games. The problem is, the only two possibilities to discover how much sexual dimorphism (nature) influences an individual is if we were to either observe a society where being male or female means absolutely 0 or we would need to isolate an individual from the entirity of society and then hand them both and see what they prefer. Then we'd have to multiply the number by a hundred or even a thousand to ensure that our findings are correct.

As per how it is influenced, considering it's currently more like 999:1 I'd say the proportions are very off

 StarTrotter wrote:
To be fair, the only thing he did was badly word it. You didn't link the rest of what he said: "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."

Badly worded yes but even he admitted a possible 60/40 which would also represent sexual dimorphism.

Trouble is, a few posts up, he states:

 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?

So, no, that's not an acknowledgement of physiological differences between men and women (sexual dimorphism). It's attributing any gender differential (if it exists) to social pressure, rather than biology-fueled divergence. Combined with his statement that sexual dimorphism is pseudoscience, I don't know what to conclude about his beliefs about such differences.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 StarTrotter wrote:
As per how it is influenced, considering it's currently more like 999:1 I'd say the proportions are very off

I'd say the same is true of the model ship building community.

Must we conclude that it, too, is inherently misogynistic?

You're absolutely right, though, that we can't solve the nature vs. nurture debate. My personal feeling is that it's undoubtedly a combination of both. The fiercely negative reaction many people have to the very notion that biology could play a role in the low relative interest of females in 40K makes me think there's an agenda at work here, though.

The hobby's not going to hit parity. It's not even going to come close. Should women be welcomed to it? Sure, same as anyone else. If these apparently rampant hygiene problems and rape jokes vanished overnight, would we see a surge in female players? I very much doubt it.

 Seaward wrote:

 StarTrotter wrote:
To be fair, the only thing he did was badly word it. You didn't link the rest of what he said: "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."

Badly worded yes but even he admitted a possible 60/40 which would also represent sexual dimorphism.

Trouble is, a few posts up, he states:

 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?

So, no, that's not an acknowledgement of physiological differences between men and women (sexual dimorphism). It's attributing any gender differential (if it exists) to social pressure, rather than biology-fueled divergence. Combined with his statement that sexual dimorphism is pseudoscience, I don't know what to conclude about his beliefs about such differences.

Peregrine has an odd way of wording things and can sometimes state things a bit too over the top. Heck, I thought, for the longest time, he hated chaos daemons in their entirety. Turns out he is fine with them just not as their own codex. I'll agree with you that Sexual Dimorphism does exist in humans. Most certainly considering how we differ physically! The question becomes more complicated though when it comes to human beings in their preferences. To argue for a certainty that it's this big thing or this non-existent entity is ludicrous. That said, the answer is somewhere in the middle yet we cannot discover this thanks to how society muddies this question.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Seaward wrote:

 StarTrotter wrote:
To be fair, the only thing he did was badly word it. You didn't link the rest of what he said: "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."

Badly worded yes but even he admitted a possible 60/40 which would also represent sexual dimorphism.

Trouble is, a few posts up, he states:

 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?

So, no, that's not an acknowledgement of physiological differences between men and women (sexual dimorphism). It's attributing any gender differential (if it exists) to social pressure, rather than biology-fueled divergence. Combined with his statement that sexual dimorphism is pseudoscience, I don't know what to conclude about his beliefs about such differences.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 StarTrotter wrote:
As per how it is influenced, considering it's currently more like 999:1 I'd say the proportions are very off

I'd say the same is true of the model ship building community.

Must we conclude that it, too, is inherently misogynistic?

You're absolutely right, though, that we can't solve the nature vs. nurture debate. My personal feeling is that it's undoubtedly a combination of both. The fiercely negative reaction many people have to the very notion that biology could play a role in the low relative interest of females in 40K makes me think there's an agenda at work here, though.

The hobby's not going to hit parity. It's not even going to come close. Should women be welcomed to it? Sure, same as anyone else. If these apparently rampant hygiene problems and rape jokes vanished overnight, would we see a surge in female players? I very much doubt it.

And I do not say this either. I agree that it's some combination. How much or how little? I can't say. Maybe.... if you ask me... I just feel it's more nurture oriented. Then again, I like the concept of as little as possible being influenced by your genetics. And removing sexism from one hobby won't make that big of a difference. Will it make it a bit more likely to see a female? Yeah but it's not solving the root cause. It's not just genetics or the models or even the group around the game. It's also what your society at large sees that being, it's what your clique of friends sees that as being, it's what the show says is good, it's what your parents encourage and disapprove of. If you were a kid and playing with a Barbie, how many male parents would try to deny you playing with it and give you something else. That influences people in some way or some form. The only question is, how much. I personally think the split if we threw away social influences would probably be more aroudn 60:40 or maybe even 75:25. But right now it is more like 99:1 or even 99.99:00.01

On a side note, I love co-operative games way too much. I dunno, working with a friend to win/crush my foes is always more satisfying.

 Seaward wrote:
Peregrine was arguing that women and men have exactly the same interests, it's just the patriarchy that forces some to go by the wayside.

Please don't straw man my arguments. I said very clearly that not everyone has the same interests, and that the issue is that some people are excluded by social pressure. Interest in wargaming may inherently be a 90/10 bias in favor of men, but what we actually have is a situation where it's 99/1 in favor of men because women who might be interested are driven away. The fact that it might never be a 50/50 thing doesn't make that problem go away.

Peregrine then said that sexual dimorphism doesn't exist, and it's all the patriarchy.

Sigh. No, I didn't. As quoted previously I said that differences exist, they just aren't the dominant factor that you seem to think they are.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Seaward wrote:
So, no, that's not an acknowledgement of physiological differences between men and women (sexual dimorphism). It's attributing any gender differential (if it exists) to social pressure, rather than biology-fueled divergence. Combined with his statement that sexual dimorphism is pseudoscience, I don't know what to conclude about his beliefs about such differences.

Please don't claim that I'm saying something that I'm not. The quoted statement is pointing out that you can't just automatically attribute the difference in preferences to inherent gender differences, especially when there are obvious social factors that would explain some or all of the difference. Nor can you automatically assume that if inherent differences exist they must be the dominant factor in the different preferences. Nowhere in that statement did I say that no inherent difference could possibly exist.

I'd say the same is true of the model ship building community.

Must we conclude that it, too, is inherently misogynistic?

No. The 40k community doesn't have problems simply because the gender ratio is uneven, the 40k community has problems because there is pretty clear evidence of women being driven away from the hobby rather than just not being all that interested.

The hobby's not going to hit parity. It's not even going to come close. Should women be welcomed to it? Sure, same as anyone else. If these apparently rampant hygiene problems and rape jokes vanished overnight, would we see a surge in female players? I very much doubt it.

But nobody is expecting parity. What I (and other people) want is a hobby in which women who are potentially interested are able to join the hobby instead of being pushed away. If that doesn't end up producing a significant change in the gender ratio then that's fine.

 Peregrine wrote:
Please don't straw man my arguments. I said very clearly that not everyone has the same interests, and that the issue is that some people are excluded by social pressure. Interest in wargaming may inherently be a 90/10 bias in favor of men, but what we actually have is a situation where it's 99/1 in favor of men because women who might be interested are driven away. The fact that it might never be a 50/50 thing doesn't make that problem go away.

Except you didn't, no. Your posts have been quoted in their entirety above, if you'd like to go back and look at them again.

Sigh. No, I didn't. As quoted previously I said that differences exist, they just aren't the dominant factor that you seem to think they are.

I pointed to sexual dimorphism as playing a role, and you dismissed sexual dimorphism as pseudoscience. I'm sure you wish you hadn't, and if you misspoke, fair enough, but I can only go on what you type, dude. I can't divine what you actually intended to say.

Please don't claim that I'm saying something that I'm not. The quoted statement is pointing out that you can't just automatically attribute the difference in preferences to inherent gender differences, especially when there are obvious social factors that would explain some or all of the difference. Nor can you automatically assume that if inherent differences exist they must be the dominant factor in the different preferences. Nowhere in that statement did I say that no inherent difference could possibly exist.

You're continuing to treat the notion that gender plays a role in behavior and preference divergence as if it's an "if" proposition, rather than scientific fact. I can't for the life of me figure out why.

No. The 40k community doesn't have problems simply because the gender ratio is uneven, the 40k community has problems because there is pretty clear evidence of women being driven away from the hobby rather than just not being all that interested.

Clear (anecdotal) evidence for some but hardly all of the myriad factors that have been claimed in this thread, yes. The counterpoint, though, as I was trying to illustrate with the shipbuilding, is that for similar traditionally male-dominated nerd hobbies that have exactly none of these issues, the ratio of men to women is even less. Dismissing a widespread general lack of interest out of hand in favor of grinding an axe over models with breasts seems specious, at best.

He misspoke. I mentioned it earlier actually, if you reread the place you got the quote from he even acknowledges a 60:40 split as a very real possibility.

As per prefrences, it yet again isn't that clear cut. Do women like competitive games because of a combo of expectations and genetics or is it entirely a construct of society? Both are very possible.

And thing is, even if the internal community doesn't have the problem, it's not just that. It's how you are raised, what is expected, what your friends think of what you like, what the shows say you should like, etc.

 StarTrotter wrote:
He misspoke. I mentioned it earlier actually, if you reread the place you got the quote from he even acknowledges a 60:40 split as a very real possibility.

Then I'd again question why we don't see something that close to parity in other niche nerd hobbies without 40K's apparent issues. At a certain point, you have to admit that most women simply do not appear to be into building model ships.

As per prefrences, it yet again isn't that clear cut. Do women like competitive games because of a combo of expectations and genetics or is it entirely a construct of society? Both are very possible.

It was cooperative games, but no. I'd say the former is possible. The latter is extraordinarily unlikely, given what we know of human evolution.

There's a lot of emphasis on how we as war gamers need to shape up (hygiene, cut the fascist/sexist/etc jokes and be more welcoming), and arguments on genetics, but little, comparatively, has been said on the impact of wider society.

Yes, there are elements of the wargaming culture that could (and should) be cut back and eliminated, but the fact remains that we are a niche in a society frowns upon what we do. Pen and paper games are much more accepted then miniatures games.

We should, by all means, do our best to make the atmosphere more welcoming, but the fact remains that it will not result in a surge of female players. 'We' are not the only factor pushing people away, wider society does just as much harm as we do.

There is also the fact that personal preference and gender do have a lot of contribution towards this. A 60:40 split may never exist. The potential for it to exist should be there, but I would personally believe it will never happen, and most definitely not in our lifetimes. There are simply too many factors to change for it to happen quickly.

On a less serious not, if there are players who want a 60:40 split, maybe the rest of us should stop playing, or retreat to dank caves and cut ourselves off from the rest of the world. The gender equality would be much greater (probably easier to achieve as well).

 Seaward wrote:

 StarTrotter wrote:
He misspoke. I mentioned it earlier actually, if you reread the place you got the quote from he even acknowledges a 60:40 split as a very real possibility.

Then I'd again question why we don't see something that close to parity in other niche nerd hobbies without 40K's apparent issues. At a certain point, you have to admit that most women simply do not appear to be into building model ships.

As per prefrences, it yet again isn't that clear cut. Do women like competitive games because of a combo of expectations and genetics or is it entirely a construct of society? Both are very possible.

It was cooperative games, but no. I'd say the former is possible. The latter is extraordinarily unlikely, given what we know of human evolution.

We also know that at certain points we've considered many odd things to be "natural" and "unnatural" yet we look at them entirely opposite. Especially monogamy. Look at that to poke a hole in all of our culture. We were certainly not meant to be monogamous, we just choose to be.

As I have mentioned several times, because it is not just the community around the game. As a kid, did you ever ant to get a Barbie or play with a Barbie? Did your dad ever take it from you (or your mom) and say it was for girls and shove a "boy toy" into your hands? Did you ever like the color pink but that was the "girly color" (despite being the masculine color whilst blue was feminine just a few decades before that)? It's never so simple. It's what your parents taught you, how your friends reacted to what you like, what tv said, what books said. In short, what everybody else said and instructed you to do influences us. If your friends are a bunch of girls that say eeew why would you want to play that? Well that kinda kills the mojo to play a game especially if your group dissaproves of it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Farseer Anath'lan wrote:
There's a lot of emphasis on how we as war gamers need to shape up (hygiene, cut the fascist/sexist/etc jokes and be more welcoming), and arguments on genetics, but little, comparatively, has been said on the impact of wider society.

Yes, there are elements of the wargaming culture that could (and should) be cut back and eliminated, but the fact remains that we are a niche in a society frowns upon what we do. Pen and paper games are much more accepted then miniatures games.

We should, by all means, do our best to make the atmosphere more welcoming, but the fact remains that it will not result in a surge of female players. 'We' are not the only factor pushing people away, wider society does just as much harm as we do.

There is also the fact that personal preference and gender do have a lot of contribution towards this. A 60:40 split may never exist. The potential for it to exist should be there, but I would personally believe it will never happen, and most definitely not in our lifetimes. There are simply too many factors to change for it to happen quickly.

On a less serious not, if there are players who want a 60:40 split, maybe the rest of us should stop playing, or retreat to dank caves and cut ourselves off from the rest of the world. The gender equality would be much greater (probably easier to achieve as well).

Actually society's observation is my biggest point of my argument personally.

 StarTrotter wrote:


Actually society's observation is my biggest point of my argument personally.

You have made significant contributions, apologies if it didn't read that way.

 Peregrine wrote:


But nobody is expecting parity. What I (and other people) want is a hobby in which women who are potentially interested are able to join the hobby instead of being pushed away. If that doesn't end up producing a significant change in the gender ratio then that's fine.

A serious question, is this not rather moot?
If the gender disparity is not resolved, how do we measure the effectiveness of our actions?
We would have a problem we would be working to resolve ad infinitum, with out ever knowing if our actions were doing anything.
As I've said, we do need to shape up, this just seemed rather pointless.
Making the hobby more inviting to women would result in a net gain of female players.

Farseer Anath'lan wrote:

 StarTrotter wrote:


Actually society's observation is my biggest point of my argument personally.

You have made significant contributions, apologies if it didn't read that way.

 Peregrine wrote:


But nobody is expecting parity. What I (and other people) want is a hobby in which women who are potentially interested are able to join the hobby instead of being pushed away. If that doesn't end up producing a significant change in the gender ratio then that's fine.

A serious question, is this not rather moot?
If the gender disparity is not resolved, how do we measure the effectiveness of our actions?
We would have a problem we would be working to resolve ad infinitum, with out ever knowing if our actions were doing anything.
As I've said, we do need to shape up, this just seemed rather pointless.

Eh it's a long thread and for a while I was more poking holes in the Girls not Allowed because of the mating game with a slightly... different argument but I hop back onto the one statement of it being a complex mess of societal expectations, genetics, and the hobby community itself. All have something to do with it, my hunch goes on the first of the three making the most significant difference.

 Janthkin wrote:
Who's asking for special treatment, now? If those socially awkward guys you just mentioned are feeling excluded by the inclusion of a female into the gaming group, aren't they suppose to just get over it?

Long story short - no. Very much no. Huge no. I know you do not mean what you wrote, nor do you think that way and you're just trying to provide an extreme opposite to what I wrote to pry on my argument, but I still want you to think about what you wrote right there. Is it really okay in your eyes for people from established group to have to get over the change for worse(in terms of comfort) in their small community because of a newcomer? Think how stupid that sounds.

 Janthkin wrote:
Yes, people tend to behave differently, depending on the setting and/or people they are interacting with.

And then:

 Janthkin wrote:
But if it takes the inclusion of a female into the gaming circle to cut down on the random (male) strangers farting & telling "humorous" sex jokes, then we really NEED more females gaming, because it is clear that some people don't otherwise realize that some behavior just isn't acceptable amongst strangers or casual acquaintances otherwise.

You're just proving my point. People act different among different other people. My point was that the actual status quo is comfortable for those people as they can do stuff they normally couldn't because of a broomstick up their.. spine. And now you're saying that it's perfectly okay to ruin their comfortable zone because someone wants in and they all have to get over it? I don't know, but that sounds ridiculous. Some groups, given the fact that vast, vast majority of players are men tend to use 40k gaming days their "guys nights out", especially if they're insecure nerds with social issues that they can bypass by interacting with other people with same issues. I don't want to sound like I'm making excluding women from the community because people want it to be guys night out, mind you. It's just that people who advocate for stuff like everyone just changing their behaviour because a girl wanted to hang out are really inconsiderate and ridiculous. It's like trying to wrap a group around the new person rather than having THAT PERSON blend in.. or just realize that this group/community is clearly not a place for her(the person) and get over it. No matter the gender.

 Janthkin wrote:
People are responsible for their own behavior. If (generic) you behave in a manner that is exclusionary of half the population, the problem isn't the females.

Not sure what you meant by the exclusionary part - was it about the nerds that feel uncomfortable around women or about acting carelessly in a group that likes some indiscriminate humour?

Lastly - I just want to state that while I try to defend some people's right to feel comfortable in their established groups which inclusion of a female would most likely change drastically unless she proves to be of similar mindset, I in no way think that women should not be included in the community. Not at all, believe me! In my first post here I explained that a girl would have to be very careful with her actions when trying to get into a group that for years upon years was made up of men in their carefree, a bit more primal and ultimately comfortable as I dare to say that most people would use their opportunities to ditch -some- of the social limitations in a friendly group if they could. Like women not wearing bras and not caring about their look when they're at home when they feel comfortable away from the society's standards and expectations, this situation is kind of similar - maybe we don't walk around wearing only undergarments and most people actually take a shower before going, that's the same level of standard-free comfort we want to achieve and that 'standard-free comfort' might be treatened by a girl if she doesn't put on a particular mindset that allows her to accept it, rather than just run away in disgust and whine how unwelcoming the community is. Of course any kind of a sexist joke is inappropriate if she feels bothered by it and those joking like that should be told not to do that, but she deliberately came there, to their group and wanted to be a part of it, so she still has to have a hide thick enough to not let those few odd jokes ruin it for her. If she expects everyone to outright change their behaviour just because she's there, she's wrong. It takes both sides' effort to make it work.

Edit: made a frickin' mistake, had to include "not"

Quite honestly, as long as everybody who is interested in playing tabletop games gets to play and enjoy playing tabletop games, I really don't care what the gender ratio ends up being at the end. To me it just seems like the focus should be more on improving acceptance of any newcomers to the hobby as opposed to "need more females".

 dementedwombat wrote:
Quite honestly, as long as everybody who is interested in playing tabletop games gets to play and enjoy playing tabletop games, I really don't care what the gender ratio ends up being at the end. To me it just seems like the focus should be more on improving acceptance of any newcomers to the hobby as opposed to "need more females".

I do not think anyone is arguing for actively recruiting females in particular rather than reducing the resistance to join.

friendlycommissar wrote:
This is exactly why I hate it when you people try to conflate sexism and racism

What “you people”?

friendlycommissar wrote:
when we talk about racism in the context of slavery and the ongoing conflicts between whites and people of color, we're talking about the consequences of the promotion of scientific racism

You know, racism combined with slavery by white people toward black people goes way back before scientific racism. See for instance this. Starting in 650, it kind of predates the Atlantic slave trade that you are likely thinking about. And yes, Arabs are white.

friendlycommissar wrote:
You want to change that even though it wouldn't really accomplish anything meaningful and would probably ruin the game for a lot of people, and would definitely drive a lot of people out of the community.

As I mentioned earlier, he just like more the people that would come in than those that would come out.

friendlycommissar wrote:
There's nothing sexist about being aware that many women silently reject and ostracize men who aren't attractive by society's standards. That's just understanding how people actually act. You just have to open your eyes and observe the world around you and you see it happening everywhere, all the time.

Okay, I do not judge if I am attractive or not, but I have neither been in a romantic relationship with a girl ever for the 27 years of my life, nor felt ostracized by women.

friendlycommissar wrote:
There are no meaingful physical differences between blacks and whites.

But sex is real. Hormones are real. Phremones are real.

Well, you think the color of the skin and the shape of the skull are not meaningful differences, but hormones are. Not everyone is going to agree.

friendlycommissar wrote:
We have different races because powerful elites constructed a concept of race to suite their needs in the Age of Imperialism.

And by some incredible coincidence, it also appeared in about every other place in the whole damn world. What were the chances?

friendlycommissar wrote:
For some people it can be really, intensely painful to be confronted with the absolute disinterest of the opposite sex.

Then, they need help to get better, rather than a place to be left alone. At least that is what I think. Even then, having “boys only” club, why not? But having “boys only” hobby is sad. There is a huge difference between those two notions.

bodazoka wrote:
Those guys would reeeaallllyyyyy benefit from having a little female interaction in there lives.

Yeah, I think so too.

 TheCustomLime wrote:
I think the best explanation for the gender disparity came from the guy who made the case about knitting clubs. Sewing is simply a female dominated hobby because men do not like the idea behind it. I, and I am pretty sure other men, can appreciate the end results of knitting but have no interest in the hobby itself. Same is true for women when it comes to 40k it would seem.

There is a big difference between knitting and 40k though. My brother started knitting. He did not join any club, he does that in the train. You cannot play 40k alone in the train. Clubs do not matter much to knitting, they are an integral part of 40k.

Why is there few female players?

1: People kill everyone for no reason other then to get further ahead" women only do this to peoples back over years of hate"
2: There is not to many....cute things which "most" women like.
3: They usually like to spend money on different things
4: Men like to kill things since the dawn of time examples of this are A: caveman and his poking stick and rocks B: bows and swords C: gun. Now that we aren't allowed to hunt all the time and we are discouraged from outside"real life" violence we find a way to vent our need to kill and hit things. AKA video games/pretend "table top games" but men need to kill lol.

I have my wife my 2 friends and their girls who all play. The armys are pretty..... expected

Tim "The smallest man I ever seen built like a lady "theme song may be dude looks like a lady" Plays chaos khorne and grey knights and ogres "maybe to make up for real life lol"
Reg A bit of a over thinking and a little weird. "Plays imperal guard trys to bunker in to mass seige wars and sets up huge 99 turn plans lol. Also empire
Me who thinks perversion of any kind is gross: Drawn to slaanesh, ogres and skaven.

My wife who says "women are weaker so we use our head and our bodies to get what we want" So she plays vampires and uses vlad and isabella and says she as in any relation ship is in the leadby letting vlad think he gets to do what he wants. Also dark eldar
Simone: biggest....I ever met plays space marines and complains .......alot..... like alot there is no female space marines
Tasha: Plays orks in both worlds and thinks cute things are awesom and paints them all with big eyes and over sized guns. She built a army with goblins are orks and snotlings and goblins. And likes when they blow up.

On a side note my wife collects tomagotchi's......... you want to see a place where women are in charge and everywhere with few men and none seem to be straight I got a collection for you lol. The quote "OMG HE IS SO CUTE AND FAT AND ROUND" then you look at the screen and see 3 pixles wiggling never gets old lol.

 Klerych wrote:

 Janthkin wrote:
Who's asking for special treatment, now? If those socially awkward guys you just mentioned are feeling excluded by the inclusion of a female into the gaming group, aren't they suppose to just get over it?

Long story short - no. Very much no. Huge no. I know you do not mean what you wrote, nor do you think that way and you're just trying to provide an extreme opposite to what I wrote to pry on my argument, but I still want you to think about what you wrote right there. Is it really okay in your eyes for people from established group to have to get over the change for worse(in terms of comfort) in their small community because of a newcomer? Think how stupid that sounds.

 Janthkin wrote:
Yes, people tend to behave differently, depending on the setting and/or people they are interacting with.

And then:

 Janthkin wrote:
But if it takes the inclusion of a female into the gaming circle to cut down on the random (male) strangers farting & telling "humorous" sex jokes, then we really NEED more females gaming, because it is clear that some people don't otherwise realize that some behavior just isn't acceptable amongst strangers or casual acquaintances otherwise.

You're just proving my point. People act different among different other people. My point was that the actual status quo is comfortable for those people as they can do stuff they normally couldn't because of a broomstick up their.. spine. And now you're saying that it's perfectly okay to ruin their comfortable zone because someone wants in and they all have to get over it? I don't know, but that sounds ridiculous. Some groups, given the fact that vast, vast majority of players are men tend to use 40k gaming days their "guys nights out", especially if they're insecure nerds with social issues that they can bypass by interacting with other people with same issues. I don't want to sound like I'm making excluding women from the community because people want it to be guys night out, mind you. It's just that people who advocate for stuff like everyone just changing their behaviour because a girl wanted to hang out are really inconsiderate and ridiculous. It's like trying to wrap a group around the new person rather than having THAT PERSON blend in.. or just realize that this group/community is clearly not a place for her(the person) and get over it. No matter the gender.

 Janthkin wrote:
People are responsible for their own behavior. If (generic) you behave in a manner that is exclusionary of half the population, the problem isn't the females.

Not sure what you meant by the exclusionary part - was it about the nerds that feel uncomfortable around women or about acting carelessly in a group that likes some indiscriminate humour?

Lastly - I just want to state that while I try to defend some people's right to feel comfortable in their established groups which inclusion of a female would most likely change drastically unless she proves to be of similar mindset, I in no way think that women should not be included in the community. Not at all, believe me! In my first post here I explained that a girl would have to be very careful with her actions when trying to get into a group that for years upon years was made up of men in their carefree, a bit more primal and ultimately comfortable as I dare to say that most people would use their opportunities to ditch -some- of the social limitations in a friendly group if they could. Like women not wearing bras and not caring about their look when they're at home when they feel comfortable away from the society's standards and expectations, this situation is kind of similar - maybe we don't walk around wearing only undergarments and most people actually take a shower before going, that's the same level of standard-free comfort we want to achieve and that 'standard-free comfort' might be treatened by a girl if she doesn't put on a particular mindset that allows her to accept it, rather than just run away in disgust and whine how unwelcoming the community is. Of course any kind of a sexist joke is inappropriate if she feels bothered by it and those joking like that should be told not to do that, but she deliberately came there, to their group and wanted to be a part of it, so she still has to have a hide thick enough to not let those few odd jokes ruin it for her. If she expects everyone to outright change their behaviour just because she's there, she's wrong. It takes both sides' effort to make it work.

Edit: made a frickin' mistake, had to include "not"

mmmm I think those people you are talking about should find a nice basement get a internet job and ...ya that's about that. You do not like to deal with new people tuff thats life, if you want to keep your weird....boy date night. The hobby will die because no new players means no growth and game dies.

OgreChubbs wrote:

mmmm I think those people you are talking about should find a nice basement get a internet job and ...ya that's about that. You do not like to deal with new people tuff thats life, if you want to keep your weird....boy date night. The hobby will die because no new players means no growth and game dies.

Yeeees.. you're right, they should be stripped of their only comfortable social interaction and kept in the basement! Brilliant, man, BRILLIANT! Fantastic idea, I tell ye!

OgreChubbs wrote:
The hobby will die because no new players means no growth and game dies.

Tell me, who is more likely to play tabletop games in the future? Girls or just more basement nerds that you're so eager to kick out of the community they belonged to for years? There is no way 40k would ever have equal amounts of both gender players, anyone can tell that. And if the universe is changed to be more girl-friendly, it'll most likely be utter garbage and it'll lose the 40k's feel - the fluff in that game is all about extremes.

What the heck do you think making the world work with girls will do to the bloody fluff O.o

Also the fluff is already a garbage dump. It just lets you pick what you like and pretend like the rest doesn't exist

Here's a theory backed by personal experience:

The vast majority or men and women show an intrinsic difference in outlook, bare in mind that male tabletop gamers often start out pretty early and open minded, as most gamers tend to hit 40k or fantasy first in the wargamming, once you have either of those systems down, you've essentially mastered the "Quantum Physics" of wargamming makes it easier to move to other less complicated, theres also the fact the 40k background "Used to" be cool what with space marines in drop pods blasting into ork ships for a good man to beast chainsword duelling.

Women by contrast start the gaming thing a lot later, usually at the behest of their other halves, they are then thrust into 40k as it was "Our" first game and well the rules system is off putting the background is massively exaggerated and there's not much their for a girl or woman to like.

For example my fiance learned 40k relatively early from her dad BUT has little interest in the story and the rules still confuse the hell out of her, she doesn't really enjoy it. However the first time she laid eyes on malifaux she dropped 50 quid on a crew, the rulebook and a card deck, much easier mechanics smaller number of models to paint and an aesthetic that REALLY appealed to her.

To summarise, the problem isn't sexism in tabletop gaming or even tabletop gaming itself, the problem is starting a 20 something young woman on a game whose backstory they probably won;t enjoy, art style is GRIMDARK and rules system is as stable as Charlie Sheen in a meth lab.

 Klerych wrote:

OgreChubbs wrote:

mmmm I think those people you are talking about should find a nice basement get a internet job and ...ya that's about that. You do not like to deal with new people tuff thats life, if you want to keep your weird....boy date night. The hobby will die because no new players means no growth and game dies.

Yeeees.. you're right, they should be stripped of their only comfortable social interaction and kept in the basement! Brilliant, man, BRILLIANT! Fantastic idea, I tell ye!

OgreChubbs wrote:
The hobby will die because no new players means no growth and game dies.

Tell me, who is more likely to play tabletop games in the future? Girls or just more basement nerds that you're so eager to kick out of the community they belonged to for years? There is no way 40k would ever have equal amounts of both gender players, anyone can tell that. And if the universe is changed to be more girl-friendly, it'll most likely be utter garbage and it'll lose the 40k's feel - the fluff in that game is all about extremes.

We are not coming into the hobby to exclude anyone, but you seem to be happy to exclude us to keep up the boys club status.
When it comes to it men like that are self excluding. They are rather than learning or anyone teaching them how to deal with women and girls equally and with respect, making the hobby less appealing and in some cases less safe for us.

I do not exclude anyone if I possibly cannot, I play games I would not play otherwise to help new players every week. And I try to talk with everyone.

All we want is a respectfull and inclusive HOBBY, groups can play on there own with just men just fine. But in the end being mature in the interactions with anyone should be encouraged.

I have no idea what is currently discussed in here...like...really.

First of all - yes, it's awkward for women to go into a GW store. They get stared at and maybe are made fun of. Reason: most people in there are boys. During puberty. Do they reflect the actual hobby? Certainly not. In all of the years, I have seen one occasion where a woman at a tournament was made fun of / mocked by her opponent stating that she's a woman and thus cannot play 40k "properly". Turns out, he was friends with a guy from Team Italy. Anyway. If you go to a proper tournament or a gaming club, you won't have any problems. In the contrary, we highly welcome new female members. Noone likes sausagefests. And as someone with mostly female friends (which my wife doesn't always approve of ), I'm much more comfortable playing with women as you can actually talk about stuff with them. Besides the usual men thingy. As a male who is bored by football and cars, it's awesome. Most fellow female refs I met (and granted, there aren't many) tend to do a better job when handling players.

Anyway. Warhammer being much more populated by men isn't a "problem" and everyone who thinks so should really consider putting more thought into his posts. The "problem" is any behavior that tends to actively alienate female players. And that is, mostly, teenage boys. Again: don't go to a GW store. As in: never.

The entire discussion on this matter is completely useless. Yes. ZERO use. You cannot change someone's behavior by discussing it on the internet. Do you really think a teenager will read such a thread and go: "Hey, these people on the internet are correct! I'm off to be a better man from now on!"? If yes, take my pity.

And really, those talks about "boohoo, society makes us be evil!" fall in the exact same category. Anyone's credibility who uses "society" in a discussion on said matter should be highly questioned right from the start. The entire "blame the society!" trope is just terrible and poor debating.

Men and women are different. From a lot of points of view. Socialisation and biology make the two genders behave differently. They mostly develop special interests and that's totally fine. Excluding someone because of those differences definitely isn't. Since you can only intervene on a very small scale, however, the only constructive thing you can do is to intervene when you see discrimination happening. Step in, man up and back the discriminated one up.

...and tell the boys to take a shower sometimes.

Wait hold on so saying society has things to do with it and then going on to say that socialisation and biology makes the two genders behave differently..... bwah?

Also never said society makes us evil by any means. Then again I don't think evil even exists. As per teenagers, oddly enough, maybe I'm just in odd places, but it's been, besides 3 players, a majority at least college students if not adults here. Dunno why honestly but it's very rare where Ilive. Heck, I saw more youthful people at the hobby shop that doesn't let you play wargames

I have run into this scenerio multiple times, where women are treated as less skilled artist and stratigists in the hobby than men.

I've personally over heard people talk about them as more sex objects (depending on thier looks) rather than potential friends in the game.


I think thats the 2 biggest reasons that more woman don't join up. The story below is another.

My wife used to play Fantasy and I taught her the basics and she learned to play against my army at the time. Her first pick-up game came along and she played this guy who pretty much took complete advantage of her niave nature. let me set this story up for you. I was already in a game and thought I could trust everyone in my local group to play a fair game, boy was I wrong. My wife was playing wood-elves and he was playing Skaven I think...during set-up he removed all wodland scenery and said let's just play with what's on here now? You need to remember the old wood-elves required woodlands for 4 out of 6 spells to work. So before turn one she would only be premitted one woodland 6" diameter for 4 of 6 spells to be effective!!! she was new and didn't argue. During the game he pretty much changed magic rules told her I and others were wrong with rules interprtation etc.

Too make a long story short she almost quit on the spot. The story does have a good ending the D-bag was banished by everyone except a few close friends. Nobody other than them would play him again. At the next tournnament I gave him a spanking from Vampire Counts he would not soon forget.

That scene has been played out time and time again even with younger newbies and is one of the worst scenerios hurting the hobby today. Our oldest player in our group has put a stop to that by intercepting newbie and teaming them up with good players that will teach rather than crush at all cost.

 Seaward wrote:

Sigh. No, I didn't. As quoted previously I said that differences exist, they just aren't the dominant factor that you seem to think they are.

I pointed to sexual dimorphism as playing a role, and you dismissed sexual dimorphism as pseudoscience. I'm sure you wish you hadn't, and if you misspoke, fair enough, but I can only go on what you type, dude. I can't divine what you actually intended to say.

That is not what he said and you know it, stop being disingenuous, you were the one talking about sexual dimorphism being the cause of psychological differences in men and women, that is evolutionary psychology and it is that which is pseudoscience at worst and pure conjecture at best.

 Krellnus wrote:
That is not what he said and you know it, stop being disingenuous, you were the one talking about sexual dimorphism being the cause of psychological differences in men and women, that is evolutionary psychology and it is that which is pseudoscience at worst and pure conjecture at best.

Do men produce more testosterone than women? Considerably more?

Does testosterone affect aggression? Would a castrated male of a given mammalian species, for example, exhibit less aggression than before castration?

Do gonadal hormones influence development of some human behaviors that show sex differences, including childhood play patterns and preferences?

The answer to all of those is yes. Not once did we brush even close to "evolutionary psychology" while identifying sexually dimorphic characteristics that could very well influence behavior and preference.

I get that it's popular, in certain circles, to blame society or that no-good confounded patriarchy or the Illuminati or whatever for the fact that men and women do indeed exhibit behavioral, emotional, and yes, psychological differences. The truth is that said differences do exist, in the aggregate, and they exist naturally.

Oh, and that is indeed what he said.

Apple fox wrote:

We are not coming into the hobby to exclude anyone

Never said that you are - I only refered to his post where he was eager to exclude those socially awkward for the sake of girls.

Apple fox wrote:
but you seem to be happy to exclude us to keep up the boys club status.

Never said that either. In my previous posts I kept saying that a girl entering such community just has to be careful with her behaviour as there is a chance that the current social status quo and atmosphere were established without girls and inter-gender social interactions, so caution regarding own behaviour is advised unless a girl wants to scare off the socially awkward nerds or threaten others' comfort. I have nothing against girls joining the community. All I'm saying is that it's them, as newcomers, that should adjust to the group they're trying to join rather than expect everyone to suddenly change their behaviour. If a group used to tell crude jokes and they don't mind them, a girl should not expect them to just stop joking like that after all - if she finds it rude or unacceptable, she's free to leave, just like with any other social group - there's no reason why THEY would have to change their ways just so she feels more comfortable there.

Apple fox wrote:
When it comes to it men like that are self excluding. They are rather than learning or anyone teaching them how to deal with women and girls equally and with respect, making the hobby less appealing and in some cases less safe for us.

I don't think it's about lack of respect for women personally.. if someone does that, he's one of those trillby-wearing neckbeard trolls that should be reminded not to be a male reproductive organ by those more responsible friends.. or the store owner as he kicks him out for bad behaviour.

Apple fox wrote:
I do not exclude anyone if I possibly cannot, I play games I would not play otherwise to help new players every week. And I try to talk with everyone.

All we want is a respectfull and inclusive HOBBY,

That's admirable and I support that with all my heart.

Apple fox wrote:
groups can play on there own with just men just fine.

What if local community is comprised of a single group like that?

Apple fox wrote:
But in the end being mature in the interactions with anyone should be encouraged.

Sure, but if everyone is okay acting a bit more relaxed over 'everyday' mature peoples' standards, who are we to deny them their fun? It's their hobby time, if it doesn't hurt anyone, we shouldn't deny them that or force them to censor themselves. Again, though, I'm talking about honest awkward nerds and random 'wargaming bros'. Despicable butthats with no manners and attitude of a 4chan troll should be taught to change their behaviour.

Long story short - if you don't like a group, you don't hang out with those guys. That works universally in every community and every hobby. Anyone is free to join but noone has the right to expect change just for himself to fit in the group. And as with every group - it's you who have to make a good impression, not the other way.

(Q)Klerych
What if local community is comprised of a single group like that?(Q)

I thaght I would respond to this specifcly as long posts like that are very hard to quote.

But I don't think we are talking about a little group at someone's house, I am talking about places that welcome all but put up a invisible sign that says this isn't realy for you go away.
Many places do this, just as a form off culture

And it's chargeing, it realy is as more geeky culture goes more mainstream.
But when the last strip club I went to has a more welcomeing attute than some stores I have been in, I think it's more than just guys place issues.

As for excluding I realy do think you are, you are saying that we are not welcome becouse some men can't handle it. That we should just accept the the issues since some people can't not say something they shouldent and would feal bad if they get called out for it.
Sexism is still sexism when girls can't here it.

danp164 wrote:
However the first time she laid eyes on malifaux she dropped 50 quid on a crew, the rulebook and a card deck, much easier mechanics smaller number of models to paint and an aesthetic that REALLY appealed to her.

Easier mechanics? I played a demo game, I found it pretty complex.

 Klerych wrote:
Yeeees.. you're right, they should be stripped of their only comfortable social interaction and kept in the basement! Brilliant, man, BRILLIANT! Fantastic idea, I tell ye!

If we keep them on the basement for too long, we may end up with a case of mole people. Oh, wait, we keep them down here with no girls? We should be okay then.

 Klerych wrote:
I don't think it's about lack of respect for women personally..

Then out of what?