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:
Times are changing. Take a game like WoW - one of the most infamously neckbeardy video games around. Its gender ratio is surprisingly even. Not completely even, but it's much closer to being even than people think it is.

I suspect this will spread to wargaming as cultural norms evolve and people consider what they would not previously.

Do you have any indication of the number of women in WoW? I googled and found one source that said 35%, without quoting a source. The server stats say currently 38% female, but I'm pretty sure that's 38% female CHARACTERS not PLAYERS. Plenty of dudes play female characters in games, when it comes to MMORPGs (of which I haven't played many and I've never played WoW) I often alternate my characters, male - female - male.

Also, it wouldn't surprise me if women penetrate the MMORPG and even physical RPG markets far more easily than they do the wargaming market. MMORPGs and RPGs are still a much more inherently social activity than wargaming.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

3. It not being seen as a productive way to waste time by much of society. Maybe it's just me, but I think this is more off-putting to women than it is to men.

Three words: Facebook and Instagram.

True that FB and IG might not be viewed as productive, but they are definitely more socially acceptable ways of wasting time. I've personally never been a FB fan, I only made an account because the groups I was hanging around in University would use FB to organise events... so basically I joined FB to avoid being a social outcast rather than the other way around


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ashiraya wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
Somewhere very far down the list you might find "lack of modestly proportioned female models", "male dominated scifi and fantasy factions" and "cheesecake models". I'm not even sure cheesecake models would even register as I'd think most people would have made up their mind before they even hit their first cheesecake model, and I think it's as likely to attract some females as it is to scare off others.

I suspect it would really help. Men have everything from slim and agile Eldar to average (outside the absurd Cadian models, anyway, though models like FW DKoK are very realistically proportioned) IG, heroically strong Space Marines and even brutish Ogryns depending on preference. This is a variety that, for female models, pretty much does not exist. Female models without gratitous boobplate, such as some Victoria Miniatures, is so rare as to become famous for that alone, and if you want someone like Zarya or Mei from Overwatch you are SOL.

I'd still hazard a guess that it's further down the list, I think most women (like most men) would have made up their mind on wargaming before they even reach the point of knowing the lack of big beefy female warriors or non-boob-plate female warriors.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
Do you have any indication of the number of women in WoW? I googled and found one source that said 35%, without quoting a source. The server stats say currently 38% female, but I'm pretty sure that's 38% female CHARACTERS not PLAYERS. Plenty of dudes play female characters in games, when it comes to MMORPGs (of which I haven't played many and I've never played WoW) I often alternate my characters, male - female - male.

I am on my phone and can't easily do thorough digging (Praise Dakka for eating surprisingly little bandwidth!) but I found this statistic at a glance.

http://www.statista.com/statistics/240998/gender-split-of-mmo-gamers-in-the-us/

Even the infamous Call of Duty, which used to be all but exclusively a boys' club, has about 20% female players and the percentage is rising.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/call-of-duty-ghosts-shakes-up-venerable-video-game-1.2355531

 Kojiro wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
There are facets of nerdom where highly sexualised imagery IS in the spotlight, it tends not to be wargaming.

I'm curious if the same people who object to sexy miniatures object to sexy cosplayers? I mean, if it's harmful to women for miniatures to depict women then surely its at least as harmful to have real women turn themselves into these depictions?

In the case of cosplayers the women have agency, in other words, it is their choice not mens'.

It's the same reason as when black people use the term "ni**er" compared to when white people use it.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Why, then, do most women not feel like being a part of a war gaming community?

That is a wide blanket statement that serves no purpose and has no actual data.

its like me asking "why men not feel like been part of the quilting community?"

Does it serve a purpose? no.

There has been a big discussion over Extra Credits mainly about FPS but still the question is the same, do female players really want to play this type of game? I stand with James that gender does not preclude someone from enjoying a gender, it has more to do with social pressure and wargames already have a social pressure stigma on them regardless of gender.

So what are the barriers to enter the wargaming hobby regardless of gender really? social pressure, the hobby itself (it requires you to assemble and possibly paint the models and then display them to others), the theme, time invested, cost, aesthetics, maybe something more I forget.

I think the female player who passes all those barriers would not then look at the really few examples of cheesecake miniatures (if they even exist in the genre she chooses) and say "that's it I am out" I firmly believe the social pressure is the one most critical aspect of joining the wargaming hobby for both genders, males been slightly easier because it is more socially accepted for them (as accepted can be the opinion that they are men who have not grown enouph and stil play with toy soldiers), most outside observers will never see KDM, prodos space crusade, Hasslefree or whatever other cheesecake miniature you can think of, they will see grown human playing with toy soldiers and move on (unfortunate they miss a great hobby but hey) those that will be interested in my opinion will not stop because of the naked models somewhere.

As it has already been said above humans are varied and have different tastes and opinions about EVERYTHING, clumping all females in a stereotypical, puritanical, mindset, that are offended of everything female depicted that has even the slightest hint of sexuality (or worse) is as bad as assuming the exact opposite and not accepting there will be uncountable shades of grey between the two extremes and most will be in the middle of the "don't care" camp.

Anecdotal I know, but I ran a booth last year in the first big "geek con" in my country promoting wargaming and Infinity in general, didn't get any bad comments from female attendants for the models, I even got a few positive comments from them for some of the female models (some were happily surprised to see female models).

There are quite a few good reasons why wargame models are designed as they are and a sexualised pose and gender specific attributes help define the aesthetic of a small figure that is intended to be seen from quite some distance and be recognizable and this goes for both genders (the excuse for male models that it is a power fantasy is weak in my opinion), of course sex does sell and it is attested by many of the big manufacturers willing to discuss it but I do not think it is out of line in this industry.

There will be a part of the industry that will test the waters of a more mature and niche theme like KDM and prodos Space Crusade and I think that this is great in a healthy industry, stagnation leads to ruins.

If somebody wants to try the exact opposite niche they can try and see the results, that would be great too.

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
(the excuse for male models that it is a power fantasy is weak in my opinion)

That's funny, male models seem to be able to wear armour that does not exaggerate their sexual characteristics just fine.

Consider yourself in the same situation. You are going to start wargaming, and you want to play a male army. People tell you 'the models must have gratuitous pecs or shoulders the width of a tank, often both, because if it isn't obviously male at a glance why not just make it a female'.

If you kept hearing this over and over, wouldn't it feel pretty dumb?

So what does that mean? If a woman wants to sculpt or play with sexy models its ok because its a womans choice?

 Ashiraya wrote:

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
(the excuse for male models that it is a power fantasy is weak in my opinion)

That's funny, male models seem to be able to wear armour that does not exaggerate their sexual characteristics just fine.

Or not wear armour in the parts were body building muscles have to be shown, were armour even plain clothing would be quite practical, overall body mass is skewed towards at least "too athletic" and usually way too pumped and many usual body types are not present at all if you can except caricatures.

I am not going to quote you but victoria models, Zaria and Mai have the "boobplate" phenomenon in one form or the other, they just look better/ more reasonable?

 Ashiraya wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
Do you have any indication of the number of women in WoW? I googled and found one source that said 35%, without quoting a source. The server stats say currently 38% female, but I'm pretty sure that's 38% female CHARACTERS not PLAYERS. Plenty of dudes play female characters in games, when it comes to MMORPGs (of which I haven't played many and I've never played WoW) I often alternate my characters, male - female - male.

I am on my phone and can't easily do thorough digging (Praise Dakka for eating surprisingly little bandwidth!) but I found this statistic at a glance.

http://www.statista.com/statistics/240998/gender-split-of-mmo-gamers-in-the-us/

Even the infamous Call of Duty, which used to be all but exclusively a boys' club, has about 20% female players and the percentage is rising.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/call-of-duty-ghosts-shakes-up-venerable-video-game-1.2355531

Your first link wants me to pay $50 a year to see the sources. I tend to not believe stats without the sources to put them in context.

Your second link says the numbers come from Activision, again I'd like to see how they got those stats. I don't recall ever having to put down my sex when signing up for a CoD game though I haven't played the recent ones, but even if I did, how many people are going to lie? Rarely do I give correct personal information over the internet unless I have to. Maybe it's from credit card info, in which case how many kids are using Mommy's CC instead of Daddy's?

The anonymity of online gaming makes it exceedingly difficult to determine realistic stats about the basement dwellers playing. The best you could probably do is look at events and hope that a similar balance of males/females exists in homes as it does at events.

Zarya and Mei not only have relatively toned-down boobplate, especially Mei, but they also have body shapes (weightlifter and stocky, respectively) that are a bit exaggerated like all of the game's art style but still quite believable, which are all but non-existent among our models.

I would not put them in the non-sexist category, at all, there are people who like those body types a lot.

Now in the Extra Credits they made a few discussions that theme and not the nature of the game could be more important to be appealing for a female player, I know they talk about CG but still, making an argument for example about an FPS were a mother guides her children through a warzone.

I am not sure if that really has ground but I would like to hear opinions about it.

Allow me to propose a (for the sake of argument), a biological basis. That is, tabletop wargaming appeals to characteristics that are most commonly distributed among males.



As I alluded to before, when people with options exhibit differences along sex lines, it doesn't hurt to ask "are these differences due to the fact that men and women really are profoundly different?"

It's also worth pointing out, as was alluded to above, war gaming is not a popular hobby. When I did a post mortem on Maelstrom's Edge, Legoburner was kind enough to reply in detail; on of his points was this astonighing (to me) statistic;

 legoburner wrote:
...By our calculations, the market size for Maelstrom's Edge on kickstarter was/is dramatically less than the retail market, with a total upper limit of around 1300 people (compared to way over 5 figures at retail - 40k for reference is about 200K active players as of 2 years ago by our calculations). We managed to get 63% of that market which is not a bad result in our eyes, but perfect marketing (including much higher expense) would have let us get closer to 80% or so....

200,000 players, worldwide, for 40k. That's it. I think we can all agree that 40k was the most popular sci-fi tabletop game, but to put it in perspective, the football stadium at Texas A&M seats 100,000 people... for a college football team.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Kojiro wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
There are facets of nerdom where highly sexualised imagery IS in the spotlight, it tends not to be wargaming.

I'm curious if the same people who object to sexy miniatures object to sexy cosplayers? I mean, if it's harmful to women for miniatures to depict women then surely its at least as harmful to have real women turn themselves into these depictions?

In the case of cosplayers the women have agency, in other words, it is their choice not mens'.

It's the same reason as when black people use the term "ni**er" compared to when white people use it.

So wait what are saying? That the characters that women dress up as at conventions are the equivalent to people calling black people the n word? I have an odd feeling that there are many female cosplayers that would like have a word with you if that is the case.

Because I am pretty positive that female cosplayers dress up as those characters because they love them and think they are a positive thing, not because they are offensive. You know "Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery" and all that. And really don't thing black people use the n word because the love and think it is a positive thing.



Also a thing to keep in mind though is that men and women aren't attracted to the same things in the opposite sex as far as physical characteristics go. Men are attracted to women's breasts while vice verca isn't true.

Also I made another point earlier about male power fantasies and female sexual fantasies. That they can often be interchangeable. There are strong heroic men with big muscles saving women in many super hero stories, which are popular with men and boys. However similar things pop up in Romance novels, which cater more to women.

Also many of the characters or figs that you might point to as being male sexual fantasies are often popular with many women. Hence female cosplayers.

 Buzzsaw wrote:
Allow me to propose a (for the sake of argument), a biological basis. That is, tabletop wargaming appeals to characteristics that are most commonly distributed among males.

Is that anything like the arguments which state that aptitude towards science and math are more commonly distributed among males? Just asking because it's not clear how rhetorical your devil's advocacy is.

 Blood Hawk wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Kojiro wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
There are facets of nerdom where highly sexualised imagery IS in the spotlight, it tends not to be wargaming.

I'm curious if the same people who object to sexy miniatures object to sexy cosplayers? I mean, if it's harmful to women for miniatures to depict women then surely its at least as harmful to have real women turn themselves into these depictions?

In the case of cosplayers the women have agency, in other words, it is their choice not mens'.

It's the same reason as when black people use the term "ni**er" compared to when white people use it.

So wait what are saying? That the characters that women dress up at conventions are the equalivent to people calling black people the n word? I have an odd feeling that there are many female cosplayers that would like have a word with you if that is the case.

What I am saying is that you deciding to do something for yourself is different to someone else deciding that you will do something for them.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Blood Hawk wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Kojiro wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
There are facets of nerdom where highly sexualised imagery IS in the spotlight, it tends not to be wargaming.

I'm curious if the same people who object to sexy miniatures object to sexy cosplayers? I mean, if it's harmful to women for miniatures to depict women then surely its at least as harmful to have real women turn themselves into these depictions?

In the case of cosplayers the women have agency, in other words, it is their choice not mens'.

It's the same reason as when black people use the term "ni**er" compared to when white people use it.

So wait what are saying? That the characters that women dress up at conventions are the equalivent to people calling black people the n word? I have an odd feeling that there are many female cosplayers that would like have a word with you if that is the case.

What I am saying is that you deciding to do something for yourself is different to someone else deciding that you will do something for them.

Once again you are avoiding the question. Are female characters that women cosplay as negative or harmful?

 solkan wrote:

 Buzzsaw wrote:
Allow me to propose a (for the sake of argument), a biological basis. That is, tabletop wargaming appeals to characteristics that are most commonly distributed among males.

Is that anything like the arguments which state that aptitude towards science and math are more commonly distributed among males? Just asking because it's not clear how rhetorical your devil's advocacy is.

I'm not well researched in the area, but the references Buzzsaw provided were to toy preferences. That's something that can be analysed at a very early age, supposedly (I'm not entirely convinced) early enough to try and separate nature from nurture.

Aptitude for science and math is something that can't be analysed early enough to make a meaningful statement about nature vs nurture. Even in primary school it's hard because the methods of thinking required for primary school math and science is fundamentally different to that required for university level math and science (I know several people who struggled with basic math but excelled at abstract math). Personally it wouldn't surprise me at all if one sex statistically has a better chance of grasping certain concepts, though I wouldn't hazard a guess as to which way.

 Blood Hawk wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Blood Hawk wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Kojiro wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
There are facets of nerdom where highly sexualised imagery IS in the spotlight, it tends not to be wargaming.

I'm curious if the same people who object to sexy miniatures object to sexy cosplayers? I mean, if it's harmful to women for miniatures to depict women then surely its at least as harmful to have real women turn themselves into these depictions?

In the case of cosplayers the women have agency, in other words, it is their choice not mens'.

It's the same reason as when black people use the term "ni**er" compared to when white people use it.

So wait what are saying? That the characters that women dress up at conventions are the equalivent to people calling black people the n word? I have an odd feeling that there are many female cosplayers that would like have a word with you if that is the case.

What I am saying is that you deciding to do something for yourself is different to someone else deciding that you will do something for them.

Once again you are avoiding the question. Are female characters that women cosplay as negative or harmful?

I hadn't realised that was the question. i don't know what the answer is.

To expand on that, I don't personally object to sexy miniatures per se, but I do recognise that the fact that I don't, does not give me an automatic right to have them regardless of other people's opinions on the matter.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

I hadn't realised that was the question. i don't know what the answer is.

To expand on that, I don't personally object to sexy miniatures per se, but I do recognise that the fact that I don't, does not give me an automatic right to have them regardless of other people's opinions on the matter.

That fine. I was asking that question because by saying that women dressing up as characters is somehow equivalent to black people using the n word is therefore implying that these characters are equivalent to the n word. That is something that those female cosplayers would strongly disagree with.

What I meant was that if black people claim the N word for their own, that is their decision, and it is different to white people forcing it on them.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
What I meant was that if black people claim the N word for their own, that is their decision, and it is different to white people forcing it on them.

I understand what you are trying to say now but just understand that women embrace female characters for radically different reasons than black people do with the n word.

@Buzzsaw Men and Women aren't profoundly different, at least in my experience. Gender differences tend to be cultural differences. When my daughter wears a spider-man shirt to school it's note worthy for some of her peers but not others. She doesn't understand why they care as an example. There are differences between male and female but even those are blurry at best.

As far as gaming in general is concerned, I'm worried that teenage girls lets say 12-14,The demo I think TWG would appeal too most, might be put off by over sexualized minis. Boys just don't deal with the same level of shame/akwardbess that girls of that age do.

@Kilkrazy
I think I see the point your making but I think that equating N* too cosplay is a little too far.
The jist I think is that by taking back something used to harm people (N*/Sexuality) is empowering.

We could also talk about how culturally sexy= powerful for women. I assume that a bad *ss female character without the over-sexualized look would appeal just as much to the girls being raised in a more gender neutral world.

Mostly I concerned that the choice isn't really there at all. I can name three companies off the top my head making cool non-sexualized mini's.

I'm not saying women shouldn't be sexy or should be ashamed of wanting to be sexy. I care about the choice and it just isn't there.

I'm not equating the N word with cosplay. I am trying to point out what "agency" means by reference to things a lot of people understand. Once people understand the concept of agency, it can be applied to other situations.

@Kilkrazy I get that, freewill is only good if the culture around you is supportive. Despite people with freewill making a choice it's limited by a number of factors, at least when those people care about the social standards. I think that's why free spirits are portrayed using the stereotypical bohemian life style in western culture. It's hard to be truly free if your living up too your end of the social contract.

Equates was a poor choice of words, I should have said compare. Both can be used as a shield or as a weapon. Socially using N* in a positive way is still more acceptable in most social circles than women who express their sexuality in my opinion.

I can't speak for other women as likes and dislikes as to their reasons. Social issues with peer pressure and stigma's have been brought up, but these are also effected by environment locally and regionally. As conventions are starting to bridge gaps, gaming at anime conventions, cosplay at normal gaming conventions, etc these gaps start to shrink but there are many factors. It isn't an easy discussion to just say it is because of X or Y.

I can however speak for my wife and the women in my game group as this is a discussion that happens frequently. We have a game group of 20 people, 8 of the people are couples either dating and married. There are also another 3 women in our game group as well, so the breakdown is 13 males, 7 women. The majority of the game group is mostly board gamers and RPGers. When we discuss things on why they aren't interested in miniatures games there are a few factors that are common, none of it has ever been centered around female sexualized miniatures though.

Traditionally miniatures games have a fairly steep learning curve. There is a lot of information to keep in mind and process when trying to be competitive. Our group is casual and not competitive but it takes a certain environment to ease these two different styles of groups together. No one likes to lose games, especially when you invest a couple hours in a game. Board games tend to be 30-45 minutes on average so in the time of one miniatures game, we can get 4-5 board games in which they may win 30% but there are wins compared to one game with no wins. It is discouraging. That isn't all women though but I am generalizing it.

The other factor actually does come down to miniatures but not sexualized females. They actually don't care about that, they would prefer there were more miniatures targeted towards them. They have different views on opinions on what they find attractive (Chris Hemsworth vs Akashi Jin vs Brad Pitt) but none of these types tend to exist in miniatures gaming. They are bulky, grizzled veterans with beards smoking manly cigars for the most part. It isn't that there are sexualized females, there isn't a lot of sexualized males unless you are doing Conan (to be fair not a lot of women find Conan attractive). So there is nothing visually that draws them in. Now there are elves, there are some alien races that can attract them but for the masses of human models there isn't a lot of choices.

There is a shift to more objective type of game play for miniature vs elimination. That does help a bit. There is also the aspect they assimilate and learn things differently than most of us. Most of us trudged through the hobby, learned by smacking our heads against the wall. I mean in most environments you learned just by playing over and over and observing. There is a lot of "outside" time devoted to miniature gaming, not just painting and assembly but strategy around playing. Board games and RPG tend to be limited responses to plays and easier to pick up. Many people just aren't willing to devote that time to playing. They play games and when they are done they do other things, not spend time researching or learning.

The high learning curve and competitiveness also leads us to not being a welcome environment. Back when I was heavy into Magic and WoW TCG, that was one of the limiting factors. Although WoW tended to be more inviting environment to women but that was mostly due to WoW MMO, it still could easily become an unwelcoming environment and it usually isn't intentional.

Board games with miniatures and cooperative games help bridge this gap. Getting them to play Super Dungeon Explorer, Zombicide, etc is easier and they tend to have fun as it is a group effort with more people involved. They are easier to pick up and understand the mechanics vs miniatures with LoS, movement, psychic, magic, etc.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Blood Hawk wrote:
Once again you are avoiding the question. Are female characters that women cosplay as negative or harmful?

If they are harmful or negative is subjective. For a good portion of 'options' that women have as choices to cosplay as... Yes there is a fairly large group that views those types of characters as negative and harmful, although that tends to revolve around sexualization. There are also an almost equal number that view them as strong, powerful choices to cosplay as.

The question by itself doesn't mean anything without any real further background. Are they negative or harmful as in what way and to whom? The question you ask is way too general and can easily be answered yes and no.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 solkan wrote:

 Buzzsaw wrote:
Allow me to propose a (for the sake of argument), a biological basis. That is, tabletop wargaming appeals to characteristics that are most commonly distributed among males.

Is that anything like the arguments which state that aptitude towards science and math are more commonly distributed among males? Just asking because it's not clear how rhetorical your devil's advocacy is.

I'm not well researched in the area, but the references Buzzsaw provided were to toy preferences. That's something that can be analysed at a very early age, supposedly (I'm not entirely convinced) early enough to try and separate nature from nurture.

First, let me make something clear I should have in my earlier post: that video is not from some random guy on YouTube, but from Gaad Saad, Professor, "holder of the Concordia University Research Chair in Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences and Darwinian Consumption". It's basically a video presentation of his lay article on the evolutionary basis of toy selection (lots of links in that article).

So, forgive me when I'm a little unclear on what you (Solkan) mean by "devil's advocacy"; that toy preferences in children are subject to innate sex differences is, I would say, pretty standard for anyone interested in evolutionary biology or evolutionary phsychology. (Unless you were making a very obscure pun on evolution as the devil's work, in which case, bravo!)

Now, that is dealing with small children, and it is not the whole of my argument: that is the baseline assumption for my proposal. Which is, that differences in interest in table top wargames is largely a consequence of innate differences in interests.

This is one reason why I think it's important to point out how few TT wargamers there are: that an already rare trait (interest in TTGs) would skew along sex lines is completely unsurprising once one accepts the sexes as innately different.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
Aptitude for science and math is something that can't be analysed early enough to make a meaningful statement about nature vs nurture. Even in primary school it's hard because the methods of thinking required for primary school math and science is fundamentally different to that required for university level math and science (I know several people who struggled with basic math but excelled at abstract math). Personally it wouldn't surprise me at all if one sex statistically has a better chance of grasping certain concepts, though I wouldn't hazard a guess as to which way.

I don't want to delve too deeply into the nuances of sex differences, but I did want to point out that once one takes biological reality into account, a lot of questions get turned on their head. This is one: why, after all, would one expect a sexually dimorphic species like homo sapiens to exhibit no sex diversity with regards to traits like aptitudes?

Which goes back to my earlier point: what if there simply isn't a commercially significant number of women that are being 'kept out of the hobby'? I'm not saying there is no utility in increasing advertising to girls, for example (it's hard to gauge interest when so many people don't know about the product at all), but I think it's worth challenging this underlying assumption that 'but for X, more women would be playing.'

There is, after all, a certain amount of futility in directing a great deal of effort in attracting a group that may not exist (at least, not in any great numbers).

I will have to call BS on him despite his really impressive title, I was not aware that "scientists" ever tried to make a theory of tying social aspects on biology and calling them "evolutionary psychology" that was an interesting read.

So after science decried those who insisted the measurements of ones body dictates what they will become and do, they try again with more "elaborate" theories.

He even says colour choices are dictated by biology, no, just no.

I will agree that there are biological differences between male and female humans, we are sexually diverse species after all, but social behavior been dictated by biology? no.

Yes, I realize quite a few pages ago that I also said that the potential female player base may be small, but I believe its because of social pressure, preconceptions and gender roles society enforces on genders, not "biology".

as it relates to the topic:

Bad Suiddo just released a new range of 28mm Red Army female soldiers:

http://thedicebaglady.net/bad-squiddo-games-women-of-the-red-army/



I think they do look female (shape of the face) and tailoring of the uniform. Also nice that this historical topic gets some exposure.

 Dark Severance wrote:
The question by itself doesn't mean anything without any real further background. Are they negative or harmful as in what way and to whom? The question you ask is way too general and can easily be answered yes and no.

Let me see if I can restate my question to be more specific.

There is a claim that certain depictions of women that are in some fashion harmful or negatively impact real women. This can be through various vectors from teaching me to objectify women to body shaming with unattainable figures. The exact form of the harm doesn't actually matter so long as we can agree that it is in fact harmful.

The claim that there is harm is the essential core of the moral argument. Because if there is no harm, the complaints loose all moral authority. They become nothing more than subjective opinions. Nothing more than 'stop liking what I don't like!'

Now if seeing a tiny pewter statue of a woman is going to cause harm- if that example crosses the harm threshold- how could a fully grown woman copying it be anything less? For example, if a picture or miniature of Red Sonja in her chainmail bikini is distressing, how much worse to see it in real life?

I understand that the cosplayer has the agency and choice to dress like that- which I fully support- but it seems like an inconsistency to decry a model of Red Sonja while approving of an actual Red Sonja. If the depiction is harmful, I fail to see how the genitals of the person doing the depicting makes it acceptable in some fashion.

I feel like this thread can be sumerized as:

"The trend is usely male miniatures are the men the cis-male gamer wants to me, and the women are the women that the cis-male gamer wants to be with. This is because the Cis-Male is the main demographic for Wargameing."

People are taking notice now, because in other fantasy media their has been recognition of making a wider variety of representations because this means more people of different backgrounds will be able to find characters they can relate to. This generally also makes for better stories and deeper worlds, but most importantly to companies means wider appeal to more people you can sell to. But Wargameing for the most part has been lagging behind in regards to this trend, to the point that people are starting to take notice.


Disclaimer: I know I just made a bunch of huge generalizations, and that there are exceptions. What I'm trying to get at is that this is more the historic trends in the industry, and trends have have started appearing in other industries. Compare Modern Role playing games to classic ones to see this evolution. I think here on dakka many people lament the fact that Wargameing feels like it's lagging behind other more progressive IP's.

Mostly I wanted to try and speculate about how market forces could play a role in these changes.

It also needs to be said the elephant in the room in all of this is Games-Workshop's Warhammer games. Well industry leader RPG books like D&D and pathfinder have been moving towards more inclusive depictions of characters, We have not seen this in the warhammers. In fact, the reboot of fantesy with Age-of-Sigmar and introduction of the stormcasts would of been a perfect time to make add a more gender inclusive army. Instead we got the space mariens 2.0 "boys only" club with the storm cast eternals.

The main argument of agency is a real person chooses to do what they do, but a fictional character is "enslaved" to the will of its creator.

A logic I cannot really follow, it can be used against any and every fictional character for every aspect of their existence.