-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
EA Exec: Sexism isn't keeping women out of the industry
- Thread starter shinobi602
- Start date
Wolves Evolve
Member
You know zero about my political persuasion, except that I say homosexuality is natural. Which, unless you're an episcopalian, a baptist, or a transcendentally fuckwitted lunatic who deserves the limitless, unyielding scorn of the very stars, is not that controversial. I'm remarkably conservative across most issues, but I suppose in ways which the above three categories would find incomprehensible.
I block intellectually incapable people, not people I disagree with.
cicero
Member
ah! Because there is no vast overriding biological urge to bear children? Because all of that is nurture based and not nature? What this really comes down to is what toys children play with? I would love to see the overwhelming scientific evidence supporting this apparent position of yours. Because if this is indeed a nature vs nurture debate, and is ongoing within society at large, and not already assumed to be concluded in your favor, then I just might not be a complete rock smashing grunting troglodyte for voicing the obvious opposing viewpoint to yours.
I live in the bubble of reality, not some utopianesque world where playing or not playing with specific toys hardwires human brains into specific lifelong activities and behaviors. I have the audacity to suggest that you "suck it up" like men are forced to "suck it up" when it comes to adversity. If a man goes into a field unprepared, what other option is given to them? What other solution is there? But assuming that all biological and psychological differences between the genders are entirely, or largely, due to nurture, means that all differences in basic makeup, career choice, personal preferences and motivations, etc etc are "solvable" because any non-representative differences are and should be viewed as a "problem" to be solved. Of course these perceived "problems" never seem to carry over to human sexual behavior, or we might be trying to "fix" those too, eh?
So yes, when it comes to equality of OUTCOME, I say "suck it up". Because this is what IMO the institutionalized male bias argument boils down to. Equality of OPPORTUNITY vs equality of OUTCOMES. No one is actually debating the merits of women being in STEM fields or in the video game industry, they are debating the position that the absence of women in these industries is inherently indicative of institutionalized male bias.
CHEEZMO
Obsidian fan
HolyBaikal
Banned
On the other hand, I seem have found a gaming discussion forum where at least this many people aren't on the side of extreme misogyny, and even a few feminists!
Some of the places I've been to it's been around %99.9 woman hating trolls who need to save precious gaming from those evil feminazis. My faith in humanity has raised a notch and my 6 month or so long wait to be accepted as a member here seems all too worth it.
I'd rather be in a gaming community with over a dozen people who aren't over the top misogynists than... maybe two.
I am pretty liberal-minded and I think it's stupid to block people just because you don't like what they say.
I also wanted to comment on something that came up earlier in the thread about gender roles in regards to careers. I am a male elementary school teacher and never have I ever felt like "less of a man" for it. I had a prof ask me when I was in teachers college if I was ever concerned about the image I was sending out by becoming a male primary teacher and to be honest, I had never thought about it before that. I haven't really thought of it since. What do I care if someone looks at me differently or "less than" what is traditionally societally expected of me?
While I do think there is some bias from early early for women and more technical interests, I also think that if you are good with yourself, you won't give a shit and do what you'd like. If we want to see more women in these fields, we need to stop dressing them in pink and giving them princess dolls to play with.
My wife and I had a daughter a year and a half ago, and the shit she's given as gifts floors me at times. She was given a Disney Princess book, and I shit you not, every story in there is about how the female lead is just waiting for a man to save her. Guess what book got dumped off at goodwill ASAP? I think that's where it starts, and where everyone collectively needs to work towards changing. A UNISEX, ANDROGYNOUS FUTURE.
I also wanted to comment on something that came up earlier in the thread about gender roles in regards to careers. I am a male elementary school teacher and never have I ever felt like "less of a man" for it. I had a prof ask me when I was in teachers college if I was ever concerned about the image I was sending out by becoming a male primary teacher and to be honest, I had never thought about it before that. I haven't really thought of it since. What do I care if someone looks at me differently or "less than" what is traditionally societally expected of me?
While I do think there is some bias from early early for women and more technical interests, I also think that if you are good with yourself, you won't give a shit and do what you'd like. If we want to see more women in these fields, we need to stop dressing them in pink and giving them princess dolls to play with.
My wife and I had a daughter a year and a half ago, and the shit she's given as gifts floors me at times. She was given a Disney Princess book, and I shit you not, every story in there is about how the female lead is just waiting for a man to save her. Guess what book got dumped off at goodwill ASAP? I think that's where it starts, and where everyone collectively needs to work towards changing. A UNISEX, ANDROGYNOUS FUTURE.
ColonelColon
Member
Whoops, I should have been clearer. I meant that I was surprised someone would compare the benefits enjoyed by people born into affluent families to the "benefits" of being born male rather than female. Being wealthy is advantageous in almost any situation. In western society, being male might give you a slight advantage in some situations, but statistically, it could be to your detriment in many others.
jim-jam bongs
Member
To be uncharacteristically democratic he was actually attempting to use the question to identify a flaw in my argument, I don't think he genuinely thinks there's a question there to be answered.
Why does it need "fixing"? Why is it so bad that there will just be some fields dominated by men and some by women?
Well, you're a woman, what do you think?
Granted when it comes to things such as game development I think it's largely because women are considerably more social than men and thus getting into such a field is really not something women will do.
When it comes to things such as mining, oil rig worker etc. (not that we're talking about them, just bringing them up) that's very obvious. Most women just can't physically do them and simply don't like how rough and dirty/muddy/gross they can be.
CHEEZMO
Obsidian fan
Screencaps pls.
HolyBaikal
Banned
In the case of video games, it is much like Hollywood, movies in general, and even things like literature(though arguably literature is doing fairly well at bridging the gender gap). These media are all a part of culture and have a huge influence on society, whether we like to admit it or not.
Not having many women making movies or video games severely hinders the self expression and representation of women in society. A limited amount of women in the arts and media gives women a limited perspective shown in public culture.
Also, having certain things male or female dominated generally shows a lack of equality in something and a tendency towards uncomfortable roles and stereotypes for people, both men and women. As if a field is largely dominated by one gender, there is pretty much undoubtedly some cultural reason for it. And those cultural reasons are undoubtedly also going to be less than optimal.
The best situation is where men and women feel comfortable in any field.
jim-jam bongs
Member
CHEEZMO;46643540 said:
Seconded.
This thread is exactly what this video is about.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4rOS1z3bHZU
Really. IT CANT BE DONE.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4rOS1z3bHZU
Really. IT CANT BE DONE.
Charoncaori
Member
That's great that it doesn't bother you as much here. =D I felt the same way the first time I went to PAX, the vast majority of people were mature and welcoming.
do we really have to justify thing as natural or innatural? i don't think so, we should just let them be.
because, you know, killing is also natural. infanticide too. male harem is natural, sometimes even necrophilia
It makes it harder to join a group if other people feel you don't belong there.
If you were a woman who was trying to get into a STEM field and people held the belief that women were weaker in those areas, they would be inclined to see you as less capable than you were.
They might try to discourage you from going into that field on account of your gender rather than your talents. They may see your setbacks as evidence that you belong. They may not be interested in helping you because they don't think that you have as much potential.
If we conclude that men are generally better than women at STEM, then it will be harder for women who are qualified to overcome that stigma.
When you factor in that we can't actually prove definitively that men are better than women at STEM, it's destructive to promote it as an opinion.
Although, maybe you can see from my reasoning that the problem isn't that there are fewer women in STEM but rather that it's harder for women to get into STEM.
Oh, that's a shame for those groups. Time to disqualify the disenfranchisement of women as a talking point.
Are you serious? Why are you bringing up completely unrelated arguments?
Steve Youngblood
Member
CHEEZMO;46643540 said:
Why? It's a valid argument. If democracy existed on this forum, I'm confident that we'd accept that I'm the smartest, most handsome, and most deserving of being promoted to moderator on the whole forum. I have many PMs to that effect, after all.
I see what you're saying. I agree it's not a good comparison, I just wanted to add another example of advantages a person can be born with. My bad :S
If nuture (ie: social expectations and cultural attitudes) is part of the reason why a field is dominated by one group, yeah, I think that should be changed. It seems unfair that there could be two people, both naturally interested in a field and equal in all other ways, but one is less likely to pursue that field simply because of their gender or race or whatnot.
cicero
Member
You are not the thread designator of truths though, and you are certainly not the designator of what is actually reasonable for me to discuss in a discussion where fairness is literally being brought up as the/a major goal of societies. We are specifically arguing about what is "fair" or not and how that relates to percentages of men vs women within fields, innate differences between genders, how that relates to percentages of men vs women within fields, and whether that is "fair" or not. We ARE indentifying potential problems, and more to the point, potential problems with what you consider problems and the varied vague "solutions" being alluded to. Again, you are setting yourself up as some lofty arbiter of objectivity, when you are so decidedly unobjective.
I do feel like it makes for honest dialogue, because IMO that is the original basis for the perceived problem of institutionalized male bias and the legitimacy of proposed "solutions" for it. That undermines nothing. In all of your supposed high minded even-handed objective appraisals of the viewpoints and worldviews of others, you might try accepting that other people might find that a legitimate position to have, and also accept that they might find it to be at the core of this "dialogue". Whether you agree with it or not...
Killing is highly natural and is a normal behavior.
Infanticide is "recommended" for many species who cant afford to have a weakling in the troup. If you have a baby born without 4 legs in a world where anything can kill you, you should just kill the kid so that he do not waste your food. For humans, we do have infanticide in many cases where the baby is just so malformed that its more compassionate to kill the baby that to let it suffer that badly. Like that case where the baby do not have a working brain, or that type of thing.
I dont see anything wrong with Male harems too.
Necrophilia is kind of a effy subject. Its not really natural, as you wont really see any animal try to sleep with a dead person. We do eat dead animals, and egypt recently tried to pass a law that made it possible to sleep with your wife (or husband) up to 2 hours after her death. Didnt went so well.
Steve Youngblood
Member
Throughout all of this, you still haven't established how I'm being hypocritical as suggested by your "Pot. Meet Kettle. Black." post. I called out what I thought was bad faith posting. You don't like my contributions. So be it. I don't understand the hypocrisy at play. Would you like my apologies in regards to my own bad posting? We clearly would be better off accepting your reasonable position. There are no problems in regards to lack of equality. Anyone who suspects otherwise must realize that the possibility of bootstrapping oneself to "equality" exists.
cicero
Member
Thank you. I had forgotten about that Pan Am case.
As for private organizations and initiatives, they aren't legally binding and wouldn't involve the dumbing down of educational standards or removal of merit to absolutely necessary and important STEM fields. By all means, form and join organizations and initiatives to improve the education and involvement of ANYONE into STEM fields, we absolutely need it. Not at the expense of legitimately deserving, and actually interested, people in those fields though.
There is no comparable attention given by those pushing for "equality", it is almost entirely one-sided in favor of anti-male bias.
I give it as the logical end to any genuine efforts to solve that supposed "problem". If it is nurture based, then requiring specific percentages within fields would force society to change its rules and negate the supposed institutionalized male bias that is supposedly the root cause of this "problem". That IS the basis for the ongoing efforts to expand Title IX to STEM fields. They are already pushing for this.
I don't see the need for large scale attempts at fixing this supposed problem. I don't even see it as a problem per se, just as the end effect of certain choices individuals make based on person preferences stemming in part from natural differences between the genders. If there was a "solution", I would ignore pushing differences in outcomes as the problem to begin with, and push for private initiatives to further self-education or online solutions that encourage and allow for individual students to get interested in and further their educations in varied fields. That and informing students of the real requirements and standards they will face after HS. And of course completely reforming our pathetic bloated K-12 education system...
I don't think this is the solution, but it does seem like a very easy one to argue against.
cicero
Member
I honestly felt that you were being hypocritical because IMO you were doing the exact same thing that you condemned him for.
IMO you did this to him, and most certainly you did it to me.
Unfortunately he is now banned for voicing what I told him via private message would likely happen. That people here are so amusingly and smugly incredulous to find that people might voice views contrary to their own, or might have to do so in private because of the standard response and end conclusion given to those who voice them here, well, it really is just tiredly expected. I was one of a number of people who private messaged him with a warning, or support for his comments. I have remained in my hole for years, never venturing out into OT, or even into off gaming topics on the gaming side, because you just don't voice certain viewpoints and not expect to be given a little slack before having your noose jerked taut. I wouldn't even say that much because I try to respect even the most tedious of grating anti-social behavior when it comes to people desiring to run their own forums/sites based on their own likes/dislikes and standards. But I actually private messaged him and gave him private support due to aforementioned perceived standards around here, and figured he deserved a heads up, but now even his claims of support are met with derision and claims of illegitimacy.
But now of course I have mentioned a ban and the general reasons for someone privately messaging someone else here to give them support or warn them about it. I figure I could do no less, unless I was a coward of some kind and could ignore my own responsibility and by my silence implicitly accede to the premise that he wasn't being truthful. Anyone now has the necessary TOS pretext to jerk my noose and rectify me as a readily apparent error of a user here though. If not, well then, back to the "well-deserved" hole for me.
Steve Youngblood
Member
The thing is, I'm not steadfast in my view. If you haven't noticed, I've never suggested that we must accept institutional bias as a legitimate problem in dire need of being addressed. Honestly, my position is that given the low participation rate and stories of people who have tried to enter the field/disciplines, the possibility of gender discrimination seems highly plausible, and at the very least it's worth exploring why women en masse choose (or "choose") not to enter into them.
I don't rule out that the problems are over reported, or that innate gender differences can't explain some of these statistics. Perhaps even most of the statistics -- though I'm highly skeptical of that suggestion. What I then proceeded to call out as bad faith posting was the style and tone of posting basically suggesting that there is no problem, it's all nature, and people who suggest otherwise are guilty of either misguided liberalism or naive entitlement (i.e. "it's not just women/minorities that face challenges, you know" arguments).
Given this, I think you misunderstand the level of nuance I maintain on this. And that's all I was encouraging. Open-minded dialogue. Even if I'm not completely on board with the nature argument, I don't seek to dismiss it as nonsense. I've merely argued that focusing on that aspect works to the detriment of exploring other options if we can agree that nature does not account for all, or even most of the discrepancy.
Grand Funk Carwash
Banned
What are the metrics for determining if there is no longer sexism in an industry? Participation? Attrition? Actually what is the attrition rate for women in the video games industry? Once they're in, how often do they leave?
cicero
Member
But is it inherently bad faith to have a style and tone which may basically suggest that position to begin with? Assuming that was his only position, which I don't think sums it up properly. Assuming it was though, how is that inherently disingenuous or an argument made in bad faith? Is misguided liberalism or naive entitlement even remotely any kind of probable cause that someone might conclude is the basis for some of the pro-institutionalized male bias positions taken here? Or is it just that you feel he was unfairly lumping you in with a one size fits all argument?
I have to say though, some of your comments seem open-minded and then you describe someone's opposing arguments, which I personally didn't find as described, as being "disingenuous" "lazy" or made in "bad faith", which suddenly seems so very hard and strident. That is why your comments seemed off putting and, well, hypocritical. If encouraging open-minded dialogue is your intended goal, putting someone on the defensive with attacks against the basic honesty of his arguments or intent is a pretty unfruitful way of achieving this, isn't it?
AlimNassor
Banned
I hate it when the first thing someone does is label the entire gaming community as misogynistic. Heres the thing, most gamers are not even kind to each other and spew racial slurs and death threats to each other, is it any shock they're misogynistic? They really aren't though, they're just stupid and immature and use the internet to say whatever they want.
You got banned for using "liberals pls" and "mixed race is communism", I think.
How is that men's fault? If women want into engineering they're more then welcome. If women see more of them in engineering they'll feel more welcome. But, many women don't want too, they want to conform. Then that problems lays with you not men. Do you not think men also have a need to conform? the pressure for a man to be a "manly man" is always present. A man who cries, who does "unmanly" things is shunned by society, women aren't going to be attracted to them, other men won't be friendly with them, they'll get no respect in life and end up bitter and defeated.
That's the problem, people seem to think being a man is easy street. it really isn't and the pressure to live up to your fellow men is ever present. Specially when your bombarded daily by the media telling you what a man should be and every man telling you how you should be.
A woman who goes outside her gender role, into manly things can still at least be loved by men. I, and many men love it when women like the same things we do. But a girly man, or a man without confidence or looks? "eww god get away from me you loser!"
zombiecyborg
Neo Member
I think you should seriously look up the definition of feminism, because while the media likes to drum up feminists as man-hating anger riddled women with a desire to make men doormats, the actual definition of feminism is about gender equality - not feminine superiority.
Charoncaori
Member
These were all very interesting, thank you. If I ever have kids, I'm going to become the best damn tip calculator ever.
I think its just circumstance more than anything. I work as a RN and I am a male. Needless to say, there is not a whole lot of male nurses. I became interested in it after shadowing several healthcare professionals and found out that nursing fit me far more so than being a doctor/PT/RT or any other number of disciplines. It's a very different kind of work and it does require being very comfortable with yourself, but it works for me.
I have got plenty of friends who would want nothing to do it whatsoever, male and female alike. I really think any industry is going to have some bias, sure, and I think its very proactive to get different types of backgrounds in it, sure, but it is what it is at the end of the day. I don't think getting so hung up on it is necessary.
I have got plenty of friends who would want nothing to do it whatsoever, male and female alike. I really think any industry is going to have some bias, sure, and I think its very proactive to get different types of backgrounds in it, sure, but it is what it is at the end of the day. I don't think getting so hung up on it is necessary.
It's a shame that Rieko Kodama isn't more well-known by videogame fans. She was the force behind some of my absolute favorite games of all time.