How Gaming Culture Maintains Male Dominance

[Juan29.Zapata]

Disclaimer: There might be some people who don't know about GamerGate, and rather than make this thread solely about what GG is and their history, I'm posting these videos that Malmrose Projects cited as reference material, and I would like to post them so that we can all begin on the same page:

Why Are You So Angry? Part 4: An Autopsy on GamerGate

Folding Ideas - #GamerGate

Depression Quest and the Rhetoric of Gamer Identity

If you really don't know what GG is, then educate yourself with these videos (at least one!). Don't ask us to do your homework, please! Also, I kindly ask you to please not shut down this discussion down simply saying that you only play videogames for fun or with other similar posts.

Anyway, this YouTube user I follow called Malmrose Projects, who does video analysis about movies from directors like David Lynch and Stanley Kubrick, and even music artists like Queens of the Stone Age released a series of videos on Male Dominance in Gaming, which I've found very interesting. She's studying sociology, so I thought that her videos can nurture a better discussion in gaming academia.

It is a very long series, being a 9-parter, but I think it is one of the most complete series of videos on the topic. Since I have seen people say "videogames don't affect how people think" and other arguments that could be dispelled by the videos, I think it's good that we educate ourselves in the topic and become more inclusive.

Introduction & Thesis (Part 1):

But it needs to be addressed because the results of the [Feminist Frequency] Kickstarter were sort of a canary in a coalmine for the overarching topic of this video, which is how gaming culture maintain male dominance.

The Kickstarter that Anita launched brought a very strong wave of harassment towards Anita, which died down for a couple of years until a new wave of harassment began with the GamerGate controversy.

Click to shrink...

A lot of people of people would prefer to just sweep it under the rug altogether, for better or for worse. But for sociological analysis we don't have an option, because what GamerGate can about the sociological insight into not only gaming culture but culture as a whole it's too valuable to dismiss.

Click to shrink...

So why do I want to begin with discussing Anita Sarkeesian's Kickstarter campaign in particular? Because that was an instance where a woman was dragged through the mud, harassed, threatened and bullied in an attempt to prevent her from little more than basic feminist analysis of common videogame tropes.

Click to shrink...

The maintenance of the male-dominated status quo of gaming doesn't just present itself through things like harassment. It also presents itseft through the way in which conversations about games are framed because our perception of games and the culture is skewed by the perspectives of those with privilege in such a way that we inadvertently, as individuals, lend some credence the privileged perspective even as it's used to justify harassment, bullying and disenfranchisement. […] The world of gaming favors men. It favors white people, it favors straight people, it favors cis people, and it favors middle-class and upper class people.

Click to shrink...

What Causes Male Dominance? (Part 2):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Mq1bBAr0-I

[…]Organizations supposedly use logical principles to develop job descriptions and determine pay rates. But Acker argues that managers often draw on gender stereotypes when undertaking these tasks, privileging qualities associated with men and masculinity that then become reified in organizational hierarchies. Through organizational logic, therefore, gender discourses are embedded in organizations, and gender inequality at work results.

Click to shrink...

[…]Men maintain their privilege and quicker advancement into positions of power even within industries that are not male-dominated, so despite the claims that "women are better at some things" and "men are better at others", the trends do not reflect this in such a way that we should ideally see such a thing as "female-dominated industries". That simply doesn't exist.

Click to shrink...

Gender inequality is prominent in many fields, including in gaming, but this isn't the result of some sort of natural order, rather it's the result of a constructed order that maintains the illusion that men are simply more tuned or more valuable to the industry. What this means is that stereotypes about men and women like the kind we see in gaming culture leads to more barriers of entry for women to become part of the industry, which leads to more men helming the industry, which leads the further reproduction of gender inequality within the industry.

Click to shrink...

Once "subordinate" groups such as women become dissatisfied with their position within the status quo, people with more systemic power will be likely to do anything they can in order to prevent the status quo from changing and risk losing their position.

Click to shrink...

Simply put, the gaming industry is a male-dominated space because men feel threatened by the presence of women, so they use systemic privilege to weed women out of the field or keep them in low-level positions. This is my hypothesis and I accept that it's conjecture, but because I don't have first-hand knowledge of the gaming industry or its history, but I'd love to hear first-hand accounts on the matter. So for the sake of a future video if you're part of the gaming industry, specially working for AAA developers, and especially if you're a woman, and you have insight, feel free to contact me, and I can ask questions to help better understand the actual experiences of those in the gaming industry.

Click to shrink...

What do Gamers Say? (Part 3):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Mq1bBAr0-I

(One comment he got when he did the survey was so bad he had to note it in the video)

Those who answered that they do identify as gamers typically had very mundane answers, such as "I play games, therefore I am a gamer". Meanwhile, the answers for why people don't identify as a gamer are very relevant. Repeatedly, people brought up not wanting to be defined by a hobby, negative connotations, disassociating with gamer culture, and specifically people mentioned harassment a number of times. Even people who answered yes, tried to clarify a disassociation with negative aspects of gaming culture.


[…]But the very open reference to stigma on the part of both men and women, both gamers and people who reject the label, shows that to adopt the label there is some level of a cultural issue to that, that has to be reconciled in order to be comfortable with said label.

Click to shrink...

One particular person mentioned that games with female protagonists are so uncommon that Steam had to add a tag explicitly specifying that a game had a female protagonist.

Click to shrink...

When it comes the question about harassment, the responses were mostly that they don't experience harassment. But I noticed a lot of the time when people said they haven't experienced harassment for their gender or race or sexuality, they specifically made it clear that it was a conditional statement. People mentioned that they were in the closet about their gender or their sexuality, others mentioned they simply don't play games online, others mentioned avoiding playing online games with strangers, refusing to use voice chat, or mentioning that they had heard others being harassed for their gender, sexuality or race.


Among those who were harassed, it was often on the basis of gender, with particularly women, both cis and trans, talking about facing harassment. Though there were also some instances talking about being harassed for being Asian or black.

Click to shrink...

Most players would prefer not to be called a "gamer" because of negative connotations and gender-based, sexuality-based, and race-based harassment is a one-way street with regards to who is being affected. What this means is that, simultaneously, the industry, the audience and thus the culture as a whole is a male-dominated space, but also that just because it is a male-dominated space, doesn't mean that people by and large prefer it that way. Certainly some do. I don't think it would be possible to be a male-dominated space if everyone in the gaming culture wants it not to be.

Click to shrink...

Gaming culture is not isolated. It's a subculture. Meaning it is a product of the mainstream cultural values that we have as a society. Gaming culture does not actually need to have a majority of participants preferring male dominance for male dominance to take effect. The mainstream culture we live in is one that privileges men and subordinates everyone else.

Click to shrink...

Privilege, Discourse, and Framing (Part 4):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RtrD0codDxs

Language and culture are not separate concepts. Language is a part of culture, and culture is how language is created and sustained. So if we view language as being able to limit our perception, we should also be willing to examine how culture can do the same thing.

Click to shrink...

[…]What it means to be a part of gaming culture for the people who played games with me will be shaped by those interactions. This is how, in some small way, I am part of the bigger picture. Similarly I know people who have never played videogames and who do not participate in the culture, and as outsiders my perspective on the culture frames for them, in some way, what the culture is. This is how we, as individuals, can shape the culture, but in turn, the culture also shapes us.

Click to shrink...

Similarly, just like the mixed-up meanings of the word "theory" can create faulty perception, so can the culture and language of gaming. The antidote to this, I believe, is proper assessment and analysis, recognizing where, when and how these things operate, and more specifically how these things can create problems and what to do to resolve them.

A lot of the time, people tend to distance themselves from thinking about wider social trends and their implications, and try to act as though any individual circumstance or behavior is a product of individual choice and responsibility. While we should be willing to hold individuals accountable, we have to recognize that cultural forces have relevance.

Click to shrink...

Our results depend on the programme we begin with; as we pattern, select and interpret on the premise that males are superior – and of course, concomitantly, that females are inferior – we construct a view of the world in which males continue to be seen as superior, and females continue to be seen as inferior, thereby perpetuating the myth and reinforcing the justification for male power.

Click to shrink...

Going back to that statistic, 78% of people in the gaming industry are men, which means that statistically men are favored in the industry, and similarly women form around 41% of the audience for games, so men are favored in the demographics of gaming consumers. This is constructed as being inevitable, or natural, or acceptable, as some of the responses my survey pointed out. But it's really not. Because men dominate both game development and game consumption, what this means is that men play the biggest role in constructing the social language of gaming. […] What this means is that men control things like, for example, how women are portrayed in games, which in turn affects how people who play these games will perceive some aspect of women or womanhood.

Click to shrink...

The fourth, is that men control the social space of gaming at large, meaning that men at large will be able to affect to some degree who does and does not play games, and who is and is not welcome in gaming spaces, which usually means people of color, LGBTQ people and women.

Click to shrink...

The Gaming "Debate" (Part 5):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kaDm9lbH22w

To regulate discourse is to impose a set of formal or informal rules about what can be said, how it can be said, and who can say what to whom. When a form of discourse has established a standard practice, it becomes a powerful tool for reproducing inequality, because it can serve not only to regulate thought and emotion, but also to identify others and thus to maintain boundaries as well. Those who wish to belong to the dominant group or who simply want to be heard, may feel compelled to use the Master's linguistic tools.

Click to shrink...

The games that Chris [from Errant Signal] keeps pointing to as games that aren't "real games" are games that women like. […]It becomes very clear that the collective definition of what constitutes a "game" within gaming culture has a prerequisite of needing to be appealing to men.

Click to shrink...

It becomes evident to me, at least that the framing for how to qualify as someone who plays games is one that alienates women from the conversation. If you play Candy Crush on your phone all day, every day, for years; you're not a gamer because you don't play real games. As Chris points out, this limits the scope of what games can be, but I think that's kind of the point. Because recognizing and validating more feminized genres as legitimate games would pose as a risk to the male-dominated culture of games.


And this is where we get to an interesting usage of language. The difference between "hardcore gamer" and "casual gamer" is not always explicitly, but is often implicitly gendered. […] To be "hardcore" is to be obsessed with winning, with domination, with superiority. It is quite literally a construct of hegemonic masculinity, an ideal, whether they intend it or not, that is masculinized.

Click to shrink...

The Troubling Implications of "Objectivity" (Part 6):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eIN7WJ1q5o

Most gamers are still men and most developers are still men. We still belong to a culture largely by men and for men. So when we try to measure the value of the work involved in the reception that results, we're measuring the worth of games on the values of men.

Click to shrink...

Divorcing the games themselves from the culture that shapes both our intention and the reception, we ignore the gendered issues on how games are evaluated.

Click to shrink...

The problem is when we try to come up with objective measurements of value. To do so, requires ignoring the culture surrounding how we frame these measurements, and helps to influence perception within gaming towards favoring standards that stem from a masculinized gaming and social environment.

Click to shrink...

How Games Change Perception (Part 7):

(Also talks about the male gaze through videogames)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6Wkm2I0bzY

[…]Games also don't make you a misogynist, or make you a racist, or anything of the sort. But games still do have an effect on people, it's just that the effect is being poorly understood, I feel.

[…]By making things mostly about men, and things that men like and things that men relate to, it makes it harder for anyone who plays games to grow, or learn, or develop. The lack of development is not solely the fault of games, or gaming culture. It's pervasive in general.

Click to shrink...

Videogames do not create gender norms, and they do not convince people to believe in gender norms full-stop, instead they reflect those gender norm and that's an issue because gaming culture is particularly toxic when it comes to its presentation of gender.

Click to shrink...

We must pay close attention to what men do to preserve their power and privilege. One process involved is when superordinate groups effectively "other" those who they want to define as subordinate, creating devalued statuses and expectations for them. This manifested itself through the discourse of gaming, where women were effectively portrayed as external to the culture by referring to them as "casuals". But this also manifests in the games themselves. Consistently, male protagonists are prevalent among games across multiple genres.

Click to shrink...

By making a situation in which most player characters are men, and many games don't even have the option of playing as women, the games help construct women as "other", as fundamentally different, external, and less important as a result. This has consequences for men, in that men, over the course of years participating in gaming, grow ever so slowly more distant from the experiences and perspectives of women, because the media they consume always prioritizes men's perspectives and treats women as supplementary, if available at all. It also, of course, has effects on women.

Click to shrink...

[…]Whereas will get to be Gordon Freeman at expense of themselves, and the portrayal of women in the game will be external to the self, such that even when the portrayal is positive, it will often create a degree of separation from women's worth in the narrative.

Click to shrink...

Harassment (Part 8):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLCG82oKl4U

Violence is used to maintain who is and is not allowed to have power within a particular society and culture. This is reflected in the extreme lengths that GamerGate went in order to prevent feminist influences from affecting gaming culture.

Click to shrink...

Shaun [who did the video "The Fate of the Frog Men"] covered the ties between the alt-right and GamerGate, so it's not a coincidence that GamerGate rhetoric mirrors white supremacists. Simply put, a lot of gamers are white supremacists. What I'm saying, is that a vocal minority of privileged white men harassing women, queer people, trans people and people of color, in a way that mirrors act of terrorism, mirrors terrorism precisely because this vocal minority seems to believe the same thing as white supremacist terrorists.

Click to shrink...

GG was not just the hate mob, they were more of a hate team, portraying feminists and marginalized people as a literal us-versus-them game, in which the objective was to win back gaming culture for cis white men. This portrayal of an objective of a collective strategy of planning and adapting to plans to changing the name of the game serves as, I think, a damning reflection of why a lot of men play games. To dominate. Not all men do this of course, but those who harass do. Those who harass also don't take it as very serious that they wish to dominate, to them it's all part of the game. Even though when they regularly dropped slurs and dehumanized women and people of color, and LGBTQ people, it becomes very fucking real for most of us.

Click to shrink...

The goal for them is to win. The goal for the rest of us is to just survive and not in a videogame sense, in a real sense. The real world consequences of the harassment aren't seen 's that important to them, because they've already experienced such a state of "otherness" towards marginalized people, that we might as well be NPC's to them.

Click to shrink...

Where Do We Go From Here? (Part 9):



This thread took days (!) to make, so I hope you enjoy (and hope that this thread doesn't die quickly like my previous threads in the previous forum)!

 

[Windrunner]

I would have missed this thread had someone not posted it in the REgal discord (posted in the middle of the night for Europe) but I am glad I was able to catch it. I don't have time to watch all the videos just yet but your summaries have piqued my interest, thank you for posting!

 

[Deleted member 5086]

Watched the thread so I can check out the videos later. Thank you for posting~

 

[Sachiel]

Lots of stuff to go through. Watching as well, thank you for your efforts from me, too.

 

[Deleted member 8861]

Thank you for putting in the effort.

 

[The ๖ۜBronx]

As above, lots to work though before being able to participate properly in the discussion but thank you for posting the links. Definitely will be watching these over the coming week.

 

[Lime]

Imagine how old much of the first research, the first personal testimonies, the first public stories are. This paper came out 10 years ago and it is still relevant! This article came out in 2012 and things still haven't changed. Dickwolves happened in 2010! #1REasonwhy was in 2012, five years ago! Feminist Frequency's Kickstarter was also five years ago, yet you still have the gamer nazis operating and people terrorizing Sarkeesian. This is a topic that has been covered for a long, long time and I am frankly not seeing a lot of change in the industry in terms of taking a stand against the festering bigotry in games culture. We are in 2017 by now and people still cling to violence and harassment against anyone who's outspoken and now they're basically nazis. There are hardly any gaming communities left where people feel safe from this- can anyone seriously mention a community that does not have the same level of violence and domination as what is mentioned in the OP?

Frankly, something major needs to take place to curb these radicalized (usually white) men and their terror, because there are too many victims and too much pain and suffering being caused by this hegemony.

 

[Stuart]

I feel the author has taken a few negative incidents (hundreds of people within a gaming audience of millions is not indicative of a large trend), and used conjecture or assumptions to negatively generalise a wide segment of the male gaming public. I don't believe most men in the gaming industry are "weeding out" women due to some feeling of insecurity as stated.

 

[Ikaruga]

My two cents about the topic from a games perspective: If you want to play any multi player game with voice chat or just chat competively with strangers then you need to have very thick skin. Especially with mainstream FPS and Mobas. Many (young)males are venting their anger (about themselves, about the world) in these kind of games on others, without thinking about what they might feel like. I'm not taking part in that kind of spectacle for some time now as I can do well without it.

The only MP I attend to regularly atm is 6 hours of mythic raiding in world of warcraft a week. Our raid actually consists of 6-7 girls and 13-14 boys so the ratio isn't that bad. Needless to say we get along quite well, as a guild, we're something like a small family even. I also wouldn't say one gender is better than the other, or that there are strict roles to play: We had a female tank for a while which worked out perfectly fine(she's now playing melee dd), also some of our main healers are male.

What I am trying to say is, that this whole gamer gate mess didn't happen because of a majority of males but because of a minority of a-holes that not only harass women but also their fellow men in online games and also go as far as stalk them on social media, look for weaknesses and exploit them.

It's a despicable behavior but sadly one that seems to be allowed more or less or one that isn't met with adequate punishment. I can only recommend to stay away from those type of games I've mentioned earlier or if you want to play them then do so with people you know, it's a better experience that way for certain.

 

[Lime]

I feel the author has taken a few negative incidents (hundreds of people within a gaming audience of millions is not indicative of a large trend), and used conjecture or assumptions to negatively generalise a wide segment of the male gaming public. I don't believe most men in the gaming industry are "weeding out" women due to some feeling of insecurity as stated.

Click to shrink...

People are not doing this intentionally, but structures are in place that ensure male dominance.

• Conferences that represent and cater to straight men where you are met with hostility and casual sexism if you're a woman.
  
• Conventions which create spaces that invite harassment and groping.
  
• Industry wage gap between men and women
  
• Hiring practices at studios. Work environments that denigrate femininity.
  
• Assumptions about gaming audiences where they think women don't exist or don't play games (or that men are only interested in playing men).
  
• Accepted and dominant forms of conversations where women and female characters exist to provide pleasure for male gamers (waifu discussions, "censorship" of anime titties, harassment of outspoken women, etc.).
  
• Organized harassment campaigns for almost a decade by now
  
• Game studios and gaming news media are afraid to say anything because they fear that the male gaming audience will lash out
  
• Prominent women on Youtube and Twitch and other 'influencer' media are harassed and silenced by the toxic elements of male gaming audiences
  
• Marketing presentations usually always involve some white dudes (often wearing t-shirts and a blazer and blue jeans) standing on a podium presenting their AAA game
• Look up #1reasonwhy
• The concept of the "fake gamer girl"

You can read this research article if you want to get an idea of what is meant by a structural white male dominance: http://ict.usc.edu/pubs/The Hegemony of Play.pdf

Then you can google the cases of:
Jade Raymond
Jennifer Hepler
Anita Sarkeesian
Brianna Wu
Zoe Quinn
Mattie Brice
Samantha Allen
Jenn Frank
Alison Rapp
Tons of other names that have been silenced and harassed
Dickwolves
Gamergate (obviously)
Industry stripper parties (Microsoft for two years for example)
Youtube Gamers enabling harassment and spouting racist and sexist garbage (Totalbiscuit, Pewdiepie, a bunch of other people)
Xbox Live and PSN where it's difficult to exist if you're not a white dude


Then you have the statistics of course:

So yeah, gaming culture and the industry have a problem and it's high time something is done

 

[mclem]

I'll need to spend more time on this when I have the opportunity, but I note that the quoted points about the idea of some people "playing real life to 'win' at the expense of others" really struck me as ringing true.

 

[spineduke]

Thank you OP - I've added the videos to my playlist, will contribute my thoughts on it later.

 

[Fafalada]

Simply put, the gaming industry is a male-dominated space because men feel threatened by the presence of women, so they use systemic privilege to weed women out of the field or keep them in low-level positions. This is my hypothesis and I accept that it's conjecture

Click to shrink...

The problem with this (and other similar conjectures) is that they ignore the problem goes well outside the scope of any single industry.
In my experience (which is a sample more than large enough to be statistically relevant - ie. this is not anecdotal), in terms of numbers of available candidates for tech roles in games, women represent around 2-3% (1 in 50 basically). Note that this is purely the number of available candidates only - not actual hires or their success rates at work afterwards.

So with numbers skewed that badly before starting a job, it's really hard to construct an argument that work-environments(and all their associated issues) are maintaining the male-dominance in particular field above.

 

[Grailly]

I feel the author has taken a few negative incidents (hundreds of people within a gaming audience of millions is not indicative of a large trend), and used conjecture or assumptions to negatively generalise a wide segment of the male gaming public. I don't believe most men in the gaming industry are "weeding out" women due to some feeling of insecurity as stated.

Click to shrink...

I'm only saying this off of the quotes I read in OP. It does seem like he is making up a lot of what he is saying. He addresses some of it, though.

He does say here that it's just hypothesis:

Malmrose Projects said:
Simply put, the gaming industry is a male-dominated space because men feel threatened by the presence of women, so they use systemic privilege to weed women out of the field or keep them in low-level positions. This is my hypothesis and I accept that it's conjecture, but because I don't have first-hand knowledge of the gaming industry or its history, but I'd love to hear first-hand accounts on the matter. So for the sake of a future video if you're part of the gaming industry, specially working for AAA developers, and especially if you're a woman, and you have insight, feel free to contact me, and I can ask questions to help better understand the actual experiences of those in the gaming industry.

Click to shrink...

I feel like it's strongly worded and generalizing a lot, but as in any other industry, some of this is going on. The stronger argument to make would be that gaming started out male-centric with men making games for men, and that naturally attracted more men to be interested in being part of gaming. Things are getting better, but its a slow process.

Malmrose Projects said:
The games that Chris [from Errant Signal] keeps pointing to as games that aren't "real games" are games that women like. […]It becomes very clear that the collective definition of what constitutes a "game" within gaming culture has a prerequisite of needing to be appealing to men.

Click to shrink...

I didn't seek out the full quote, but I think it's a bad conclusion to get to based on the facts.

 

[Allseeingeye]

Great job OP, detailed. Will watch later.

 

[Lime]

I know that Malmrose Projects means well, but the claim that it's a "hypothesis and conjecture" by them makes me stop up because we have tons of personal testimonies, a large body of academic research since the 90's, and quantitative statistics that all prove without a doubt how male-dominated and oppressive the games industry and the culture are. It would do well for them to do some more research and listen to people about these issues, but I really appreciate the work and knowledge put into these videos.

 

[Gabbo]

I feel the author has taken a few negative incidents (hundreds of people within a gaming audience of millions is not indicative of a large trend), and used conjecture or assumptions to negatively generalise a wide segment of the male gaming public. I don't believe most men in the gaming industry are "weeding out" women due to some feeling of insecurity as stated.

Click to shrink...

I don't believe the author is sayings it's an active engagement by the men in the industry so much as the structure of the industry itself being perpetuated and perpetuating larger societal bias that leads to the marginalization of women in the industry and culture. You can be a male feminist game developer and still inadvertantly do this through no direct action of your own.

 

[Deleted member 1287]

Thank you for this, definitely gonna put some time into watching these

 

[Juan29.Zapata]

Thank you so much for the warm reception, guys! I know it's hard to begin discussion before watching such long videos, but I appreciate your posts.

I feel the author has taken a few negative incidents (hundreds of people within a gaming audience of millions is not indicative of a large trend), and used conjecture or assumptions to negatively generalise a wide segment of the male gaming public. I don't believe most men in the gaming industry are "weeding out" women due to some feeling of insecurity as stated.

Click to shrink...

He does mention that it is a minority of people who actively want to keep gaming as a male-dominated industry. However it becomes clear that indifference from the majority of gaming population also contributes to keeping gaming that way.

The problem with this (and other similar conjectures) is that they ignore the problem goes well outside the scope of any single industry.
In my experience (which is a sample more than large enough to be statistically relevant - ie. this is not anecdotal), in terms of numbers of available candidates for tech roles in games, women represent around 2-3% (1 in 50 basically). Note that this is purely the number of available candidates only - not actual hires or their success rates at work afterwards.

So with numbers skewed that badly before starting a job, it's really hard to construct an argument that work-environments(and all their associated issues) are maintaining the male-dominance in particular field above.

Click to shrink...

One must ask oneself in the case of your statistic: Why is that? Why is it that only 2-3% women present themselves as candidates in tech roles? Is it because there's an image of women being worse at that job that even women interested are dissuaded from applying? Is this a consequence from a vicious cycle (that is explained in the video) that also contributes to making tech a male-dominated space?

I didn't seek out the full quote, but I think it's a bad conclusion to get to based on the facts.

Click to shrink...

This is probably my fault, he explains it better and I had to get the best quote. Essentially you can see people from GG criticizing certain games (like walking simulators) calling them non-games. What's interesting is (and the video explains it) that games that are usually called non-games are actually genres that, statistically, are more liked by women than men. So calling them non-games is actually a way to prevent women to enter the culture. He even cites his mother as an example, who has been playing videogames since the 80's and plays everyday Candy Crush "more than any of us play games", and she still won't consider herself part of the culture.

 

[Grailly]

This is probably my fault, he explains it better and I had to get the best quote. Essentially you can see people from GG criticizing certain games (like walking simulators) calling them non-games. What's interesting is (and the video explains it) that games that are usually called non-games are actually genres that, statistically, are more liked by women than men. So calling them non-games is actually a way to prevent women to enter the culture. He even cites his mother as an example, who has been playing videogames since the 80's and plays everyday Candy Crush "more than any of us play games", and she still won't consider herself part of the culture.

Click to shrink...

Maybe it's the choice of wording I don't like. I absolutely agree with the example of his mother not considering herself a gamer while she games everyday being part of the issue. It's the part that makes it sound intentional of men to push women out of the culture that I don't like. I'm not saying it's not true, but that's not what the "stats" or examples are telling us, unless there's a piece of evidence I'm missing.

 

[Fafalada]

One must ask oneself in the case of your statistic: Why is that? Why is it that only 2-3% women present themselves as candidates in tech roles? Is it because there's an image of women being worse at that job that even women interested are dissuaded from applying? Is this a consequence from a vicious cycle (that is explained in the video) that also contributes to making tech a male-dominated space?

Click to shrink...

Looking further back(mid 90s) - the % of women in my Comp.Sci freshman class was even lower (1.3% - or to put it more succinctly, 4 out of a class of 300). So if you ask me - lack of woman participation in engineering fields was a deeply socially entrenched thing long before game-development became an industry, ie. the tech-industries being male dominated is a direct consequence of presumably, centuries, of prior social education as to what constitutes male/female work. But for what's worth - my personal experience has been that Western centric studios are generally worse both in terms of gender % distribution, and general likelihood of encountering the toxic aspects. Though I have to say I don't have a statistically relevant basis for this, it's very much anecdotal to places I worked in over the years.

 

[GallianGeneral]

I've watched almost every video in the series (just a few more left!) and it has been very informative. They back up their positions with well defined academia and it helps that they are an actual sociology student as well.

Remember that they are talking about social structures. Not generalizations about individuals but how culture exists and is maintained on a systemic level. Not saying that all men are toxic but that culture and social structures reinforce gendered ideals that are limiting to both men and women. Having that reconciled and trickled down into gaming culture is something they handle quite well.

 

[Llyrwenne]

Watching this thread for future reading / watching.
Thanks for taking the effort to put all this together!

 

[Juan29.Zapata]

Looking further back(mid 90s) - the % of women in my Comp.Sci freshman class was even lower (1.3% - or to put it more succinctly, 4 out of a class of 300). So if you ask me - lack of woman participation in engineering fields was a deeply socially entrenched thing long before game-development became an industry, ie. the tech-industries being male dominated is a direct consequence of presumably, centuries, of prior social education as to what constitutes male/female work. But for what's worth - my personal experience has been that Western centric studios are generally worse both in terms of gender % distribution, and general likelihood of encountering the toxic aspects. Though I have to say I don't have a statistically relevant basis for this, it's very much anecdotal to places I worked in over the years.

Click to shrink...

Oh yeah, and as it has been said here, what happens in gaming (a subculture), is reflected by human culture as a whole. But it is interesting nonetheless that we have people discussing it within the industry. And thanks for sharing!

 

[Crayon]

Thanks for posting! Will watch tonite.

 

[Khanimus]

Will be watching these later. Thanks OP

 

[CannonFodder52]

High effort thread, I'll check out these videos after work tomorrow.

 

[-PXG-]

This might be a little general or off topic but I think it's worth saying.

The thing with bullies, jerks, racists, sexists and generally unpleasant people is that they're inherently irrational. Most of them can't be dealt with through reason or sensible engagement. They simply lack the most basic levels of empathy to understand why they're wrong and why their actions are harmful. That's why it's important not wasting your time trying to understand them or rationalize them. The more you do, the more you'll inevitably torment yourself and ask why things are happening to you.

I'm a firm believer in preventative action. Instead of helping victims cope with abuse and harassment after the fact, I think a more effective approach is empowering people to defend themselves. Help people develope the confidence and mental fortitude to stop and deescalate bad situations. As much as we'd like our peers to step in and help, we all know how stifling the idle bystander effect is. As unfortunate and myopic as it may be, you have to rely on yourself and not expect someone else to fight your battles.

Of course, it's easier said than done, but with online engagements, it's easy for me foresee success against bullies and harassment compared to real life altercations. Online, you don't have to worry about physical or bodily harm. Unless the person who is attacking you knows where you live, they literally cannot harm you.

Basically, what I'm trying to say is that folks in general should use anonymity to their advantage. Fight fire with fire. You'll never stop every person with malice or bad intentions. Shitty people will always exist. That's why it's imperative to stand up for yourself. I've learned that most bullies are cowards. They're insecure and take out their doubt, fear and self loathing on others. Don't be their punching bag. As much as I hate to say it, to an extent you're on your own. Only you can control yourself. You are all you have. You must stand up and oppose those who seek to put you down. Put them in their place. Leave them behind and don't give them the pleasure of renting space in your mind.

Again, I know it's hard. It's really hard. But once you realize that you're better than them, it becomes much easier. I rambled a bit there. Hopefully it makes sense.

Spoiler: Rum and cokes. Whoa boy

I guess what I said is pertinent, right? Sorry if it isn't.

 

[Juan29.Zapata]

This might be a little general or off topic but I think it's worth saying.

The thing with bullies, jerks, racists, sexists and generally unpleasant people is that they're inherently irrational. Most of them can't be dealt with through reason or sensible engagement. They simply lack the most basic levels of empathy to understand why they're wrong and why their actions are harmful. That's why it's important not wasting your time trying to understand them or rationalize them. The more you do, the more you'll inevitably torment yourself and ask why things are happening to you.

I'm a firm believer in preventative action. Instead of helping victims cope with abuse and harassment after the fact, I think a more effective approach is empowering people to defend themselves. Help people develope the confidence and mental fortitude to stop and deescalate bad situations. As much as we'd like our peers to step in and help, we all know how stifling the idle bystander effect is. As unfortunate and myopic as it may be, you have to rely on yourself and not expect someone else to fight your battles.

Of course, it's easier said than done, but with online engagements, it's easy for me foresee success against bullies and harassment compared to real life altercations. Online, you don't have to worry about physical or bodily harm. Unless the person who is attacking you knows where you live, they literally cannot harm you.

Basically, what I'm trying to say is that folks in general should use anonymity to their advantage. Fight fire with fire. You'll never stop every person with malice or bad intentions. Shitty people will always exist. That's why it's imperative to stand up for yourself. I've learned that most bullies are cowards. They're insecure and take out their doubt, fear and self loathing on others. Don't be their punching bag. As much as I hate to say it, to an extent you're on your own. Only you can control yourself. You are all you have. You must stand up and oppose those who seek to put you down. Put them in their place. Leave them behind and don't give them the pleasure of renting space in your mind.

Again, I know it's hard. It's really hard. But once you realize that you're better than them, it becomes much easier. I rambled a bit there. Hopefully it makes sense.

Spoiler: Rum and cokes. Whoa boy

I guess what I said is pertinent, right? Sorry if it isn't.

Click to shrink...

I think it's pertinent, and I think some of what you said is true and it all comes from a good place, but I think it's quite idealistic and not always attainable.

I think it's important to understand the harassers, not from a "let's talk to him and meet in the middle" kind of point, but rather from a sociological view as Malmrose Project did. That way we can understand how deeply ingrained systems of exclusion are in our human culture. Knowing the problem allows for solutions to be made. And many solutions were proposed because of Malmrose's academic research.

Empowering is fantastic, however it has its limits. It's impossible to defend oneself from a coordinated harassment attack where 50 people are bombarding you, plus people trying to hack into your account, plus other ways of doxxing. You might say that anonymity is the solution, but that's impossible for some people. Many women and minorities want change and thus have become leaders in their fields, for them a target will always be painted on their backs. And these people do fear for their lives. One can say that "it's just online BS", but these harassers post their addresses, know who they are, what they do, where they work, their families. Even if you somehow are able to keep thinking "they'll never touch me", the constant harassment will get you eventually. It slowly erodes your mental health and sanity. And that's their objective, to erode your will to the point you give up and they win.

 

[Weltall Zero]

Great post by Juan29.Zapata and great followups by Lime as usual. Hopefully having all this information in one place makes it easier to direct "I don't know what GG is, but..." concern trolls here when they start derailing other threads.

People are not doing this intentionally, but structures are in place that ensure male dominance.

Click to shrink...

Unfortunately, a whole lot of them are actually doing it very much intentionally, which makes it all the more depressing.

 

[Hat22]

Dunno if I agree entirely with the views expressed here on "male spaces". Men and women seem to interact each other in fundamentally different ways, to the point where they'd naturally segregate themselves. Men insult each other more and are fine with being extremely offensive to make jokes and most women just don't seem to enjoy that to the same extreme.

This might be a little general or off topic but I think it's worth saying.

The thing with bullies, jerks, racists, sexists and generally unpleasant people is that they're inherently irrational. Most of them can't be dealt with through reason or sensible engagement. They simply lack the most basic levels of empathy to understand why they're wrong and why their actions are harmful. That's why it's important not wasting your time trying to understand them or rationalize them. The more you do, the more you'll inevitably torment yourself and ask why things are happening to you.

Click to shrink...

I think this is an extremely pessimistic position. Plenty of extremist racists and sexists have changed their mind when forced to confront them.

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/...cidental-courtesy_us_585c250de4b0de3a08f495fc

The problem is that they can't relate. If force them to through friendship and appearing to them as a good person they can't stop themselves from relating. Instead of immediately defriending them upon problematic views, query them on those views.

I think you're also wrong in assuming the views are irrational. In some sick and twisted way, even Hitler had a rationale that justified his views in his mind.
Although with Hitler, what I previously proposed didn't exactly work. He had plenty of Jewish people throughout his life that did him good and he still held crazy views. However, the previous example shows that you can break through that rationale.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eduard_Bloch

 

[-PXG-]

After years of dealing with varying levels of racism, I've just come to conclusion that willful ignorance and hatred, for the most part, can't be cured. The solution, if any, is to quarantine it. Leave it behind and let it destroy itself. It's better to allocate positive energy and positive intentions on yourself and those who support you than using it on those who resist.

Progress can only happen if all parties involved are willing to work together. That willingness requires a level of selflessness, empathy and intellectual modesty that, quite frankly, bigots and people who hold prejudice, don't have. It's just a waste of time trying to convert these people. Going down that rabbit hole to find the source of their malice is tiresome. I understand that people aren't inherently evil, and that they're products of their environment. But in this day in age, there are an abundant amount of resources and avenues that can educate and encourage people to act better towards others.

Sure, there may be be few exceptions and anecdotes of individuals changing their views, yet, it's still highly unlikely. Again, in order for such a change to happen, the individual must possess some level of humility, in the form of reasonable doubt. If not, you're merely talking to a wall. Engagement is seen as an attack on their beliefs, thus, making them a victim and you, the antagonist.

If there's any way to educate people like that, it's through example. As individuals and as a collective, if we set the standards we aspire to live by, we're sending a message saying, "Either join us, or be left behind". The responsibility is then forced upon them to either get with the program or forever be a petulant, dreg of society.

If it seems pessimistic, oh well. I've spent years trying to engage with racists, sexists and homophobes. Most don't change. It's an exhausting exercise. At my age, I can't stress myself out trying to fix people who should otherwise know better in the first place. Instead, I'll empower others and inspire them to happy about who they are.

 

[Juan29.Zapata]

Dunno if I agree entirely with the views expressed here on "male spaces". Men and women seem to interact each other in fundamentally different ways, to the point where they'd naturally segregate themselves. Men insult each other more and are fine with being extremely offensive to make jokes and most women just don't seem to enjoy that to the same extreme.

Click to shrink...

I think this is kind of wrong. I say "kind of" because men and women do behave differently, but there are some differences in that behavior that are explained in the videos (and some quotes) that end up alienating women from spaces from which they could perfectly be part of. The differences in behavior are fine, like the example you said (although I've seen women behave just like that), but some actions are clearly "othering" women.

I do want to be clear that I'm just basing my answer on what was said on the videos.

 

[Messofanego]

Excellent OP, haven't finished watching all the videos so watching this thread.

 

[VallenValiant]

I just want to say, as a male, that I personally avoid any kind of online multiplayer game because I don't want to deal with horrible people on the internet. The fact that most of these horrible people would be men does not mean women are nicer in those same games. It just mean there are less women playing.

It is absolute fact that multiplayer game chats are cesspools. I just don't think adding more women would magically fix it.

 

[Powerofthecloud]

I just want to say, as a male, that I personally avoid any kind of online multiplayer game because I don't want to deal with horrible people on the internet. The fact that most of these horrible people would be men does not mean women are nicer in those same games. It just mean there are less women playing.

It is absolute fact that multiplayer game chats are cesspools. I just don't think adding more women would magically fix it.

Click to shrink...

It depends on the game. Some communities are much better than others.

 

[VallenValiant]

It depends on the game. Some communities are much better than others.

Click to shrink...

And yet, does those nicer communities have more women?
Is there ANY corrilation between nice communities, and higher female participation?

One sexist myth still popular today, is the idea that women are nicer than men. I am pretty sure most women would agree that it is downright false. Men and women are equally horrible. I am not sure making the community nicer would mean more female gamers. Wouldn't a nicer community also attract more men as well? The ratio would remain unchanged.

 

[Redcrayon]

Thanks for this OP, I appreciate the work that went into the summary. I'll watch the videos, bookmark the thread and come back to the discussion later when I've had a chance to take it in

 

[Cid]

What is the percentage of male developers in the industry?

Probably more than 90%

So of course gaming is dominated by men, it makes sense

 

[ilium]

Updated my journal.

 

[Powerofthecloud]

And yet, does those nicer communities have more women?
Is there ANY corrilation between nice communities, and higher female participation?

One sexist myth still popular today, is the idea that women are nicer than men. I am pretty sure most women would agree that it is downright false. Men and women are equally horrible. I am not sure making the community nicer would mean more female gamers. Wouldn't a nicer community also attract more men as well? The ratio would remain unchanged.

Click to shrink...

I was talking about all online communities not being cesspools. Lighten up it's just a chat =p

 

[Juan29.Zapata]

Thanks for the replies guys.

What is the percentage of male developers in the industry?

Probably more than 90%

So of course gaming is dominated by men, it makes sense

Click to shrink...

It's a vicious cycle where there's a predominance of men in the development, which hurts representation in games, alienating women and perpetuating the idea that gaming is for "boys", causing that it is mostly men who want to enter the industry as devs. Granted, I'm not saying that there being more men in the industry is the cause, but just trying to show that a cycle is very much clear.

There are many parts of this series where I just though "holy shit, of course".

 

[Cid]

About how women are portrayed in games:

Most games I have played have strong women in them with important roles. This is the case in almost all rpgs.


"And this is where we get to an interesting usage of language. The difference between "hardcore gamer" and "casual gamer" is not always explicitly, but is often implicitly gendered. […] To be "hardcore" is to be obsessed with winning, with domination, with superiority. It is quite literally a construct of hegemonic masculinity, an ideal, whether they intend it or not, that is masculinized."


I don't think this is true.
That text puts the term "hardcore" in a bad light. It gives the word hardcore meanings that are not objectively in the word.


Hardcore is a term used in regard to many aspects of life.
Being hardcore in something means that that something is a significant part of your life. Obsession, winning and dominance and superiorty are not by definition part of it.
I know hardcore gamers that don't play online. And I know hardcore gamers that do play online and are really sweet people.

 

[Juan29.Zapata]

About how women are portrayed in games:

Most games I have played have strong women in them with important roles. This is the case in almost all rpgs.


"And this is where we get to an interesting usage of language. The difference between "hardcore gamer" and "casual gamer" is not always explicitly, but is often implicitly gendered. […] To be "hardcore" is to be obsessed with winning, with domination, with superiority. It is quite literally a construct of hegemonic masculinity, an ideal, whether they intend it or not, that is masculinized."


I don't think this is true.
That text puts the term "hardcore" in a bad light. It gives the word hardcore meanings that are not objectively in the word.


Hardcore is a term used in regard to many aspects of life.
Being hardcore in something means that that something is a significant part of your life. Obsession, winning and dominance and superiorty are not by definition part of it.
I know hardcore gamers that don't play online. And I know hardcore gamers that do play online and are really sweet people.

Click to shrink...

I believe she isn't attempting to generalize, but rather show how some people use the terms "hardcore" and "casual" gamer. As she mentioned in another video, it's clear that many people don't want gaming to be male-dominated, however it is because a small group wants to keep it that way and are very active about it (i.e. GG).

I have seen others, like you, give definitions and explain the term hardcore and I completely agree. However I can't also disagree with Malmrose's way of talking about the terms, because I have seen these be used to alienate minorities. Perhaps she didn't use the best words or explained it in the best way, but some people (said small group of people) do use the terms as she describes it.

 

[PhantomMartyr]

Zoe Quinn
Alison Rapp

Click to shrink...

Zoe Quinn had sex with five dudes to give positive reviews to her game, which is highly unethical.

Alison Rapp was prostituting herself and forced her boyfriend into prostitution, a heinous action if you ask me. Of course a family friendly company like Nintendo isn't going to keep someone who tarnishes their image like that.

Now, neither one deserves constant harassment, death threats, or rape threats, but they deserved to be fired, called out on, and punished for their actions.

 

[CannonFodder52]

Zoe Quinn had sex with five dudes to give positive reviews to her game, which is highly unethical.

Alison Rapp was prostituting herself and forced her boyfriend into prostitution, a heinous action if you ask me. Of course a family friendly company like Nintendo isn't going to keep someone who tarnishes their image like that.

Now, neither one deserves constant harassment, death threats, or rape threats, but they deserved to be fired, called out on, and punished for their actions.

Click to shrink...

I didn't follow the Alison Rapp events, but I'm pretty positive that Zoe Quinn story you're citing does not have sufficient evidence.

Edit: Nevermind, they're gone. Wonder if that was a genuine poster, or someone just trying to get a reaction.

 

[Juan29.Zapata]

Edit: Nevermind, they're gone. Wonder if that was a genuine poster, or someone just trying to get a reaction.

Click to shrink...

Trying to get a reaction. I'm actually surprised the thread lasted that long without that kind of post.

 

[T.I (uh oh)]

Looking further back(mid 90s) - the % of women in my Comp.Sci freshman class was even lower (1.3% - or to put it more succinctly, 4 out of a class of 300). So if you ask me - lack of woman participation in engineering fields was a deeply socially entrenched thing long before game-development became an industry, ie. the tech-industries being male dominated is a direct consequence of presumably, centuries, of prior social education as to what constitutes male/female work. But for what's worth - my personal experience has been that Western centric studios are generally worse both in terms of gender % distribution, and general likelihood of encountering the toxic aspects. Though I have to say I don't have a statistically relevant basis for this, it's very much anecdotal to places I worked in over the years.

Click to shrink...

There are also significant cognitive differences between male/female brains when it comes to maths - and given that computer science/game development is very maths/logic heavy, it makes sense that males are more heavily represented in that area, as we are drawn to work in areas that we excel at or find enjoyable.

Of course, games development these days has just as many artists, designers, sound engineers etc, as it does programmers (in which I doubt there are significant advantages between males/females), but historically it was all programming. You can't erase that kind of experience/skills/contacts etc overnight searching for equal gender distribution. The important thing is that discussions are being had by all stakeholders, including media and consumers - as that is what will kickstart the change.

 

[Don Fluffles]

There are also significant cognitive differences between male/female brains when it comes to maths - and given that computer science/game development is very maths/logic heavy, it makes sense that males are more heavily represented in that area, as we are drawn to work in areas that we excel at or find enjoyable.

Click to shrink...

Yeah. That's completely true. There's no way that people like Ada Lovelace or Gracie Hopper who helped blaze trails for programming and technology,could ever exist.
Oh wait...

 

[808s & Villainy]

People are not doing this intentionally, but structures are in place that ensure male dominance.

• Marketing presentations usually always involve some white dudes (often wearing t-shirts and a blazer and blue jeans) standing on a podium presenting their AAA game

Click to shrink...

Am I missing something in this detail being pointed out? How does this contribute to male dominance? I get white dudes nearly always being the presenters is a negative, but what does their outfit have to do with anything?