Support NeoGAF

[galvenize]

I think everyone is in support of the notion of more equitable representation. i consider myself a feminist and have written grad school essays on brilliant feminist writers that the world could learn a lot from, like Judith Butler, Gayatri Spivak, etc. I say that not to brag, but to attempt to establish feminist credentials before I'm shouted down like many people who don't toe a strict ideological line when it comes to feminism and issues like this.

What I don't see ITT are concrete examples of women who were passed over because they are women, or a list of clearly undeserving men and the women who should replace them. The unequal representation is certainly something to raise an eyebrow at, as is the relative lack of women who choose to write in and about the games industry, but moving from that fair, honest, unpleasant observation to a concrete, actionable plan requires delicacy and not simply ascribing negative motives to people involved in the selection or a sloppy attempt to immediately make things equal.

When someone says, "I'm not supporting these awards until they're 50/50 split between men and women," I view that person as fighting an admirable battle in the worst way possible. The goal, as it should be in every situation like this, whether it's about race, sexuality, etc, is to provide equal opportunity and to avoid discrimination on any basis. No proof has been provided to show this happened, particularly in an industry that skews heavily male in the first place and as a result leads to unequal representation in situations when people are selected from pools of preexisting applicants/candidates (which I do hope shifts over time).

Good post.

 

[Mobius and pet octopus]

Exactly. If the process was genuine then there is little reason to be upset. People seem to be upset at TGA's themselves and not at these publications that have either no women or People of color or very little of it.'

The publications needs to hold themselves accountable instead of "boycotting" and awards show that won't get to the root of the issue.

So the publications choose who represents them and then they got mad when they themselves chose wrong?

Someone mentioned they did not communicate with each other. So what? Wouldn't that be more liable for a tainted process than not. Lets say they had communicated with each other, people would just accuse them of creating a boys only club. By not communicating they at least do not influence each other's decision which ultimately influences the results.

 

[Rndm]

Shame on those men for being good at their jobs and being selected!! /s

I mean come on. If you don't know how each juror was selected you can't say it's sexist or racist. There are no facts to support this. All you have is a group of jurors that conists mainly of white males, but that doesn't mean that there is any sexism or racism going on. Dig deaper or be quiet please.

The actual shame is that people are looking at it this way instead of treatint the selected jurors as the best the outlets have to offer which is why they were choosen in the first place. I'm sorry, but I prefer having the best juror rather than one that fits certain criteria.

An example: Case one: The best juror is a women or black or whatever. Send her please and let the white dude that also works there not be the selected juror. Case two: I'ts the other way around. - That's not sexist or racist. The difference is that in case one people will support it, defend it, praise it and admire it. In case two something like this thread will happen and people will attack the decision for all the wrong reasons. If you really want to change something and are a women, or black or whatever. Work for an outlet and be the best.

All this sexism talk really is pitty sometimes. If there isn't a drama let's create one even though there are NO hard facts backing up the claims.

Now I understand why people want a bigger variety in jurors because it is true that women look at games differently than men. Black people do probably too, so do gay people, younger people, older people, and the list goes on. But The Game Awards apparently went for the "we want the best gaming journalists" approach. And they let the outlets pick their best to be a juror. there is nothing wrong with that and I think it is the best thing to do for an award show. Now if they ever want an awards show that represents all types of races, sexes, nationalities with the same power then that'd be a different show but that'd be ok too. But personally I prefer getting the best involved and if there ever was a rule put in place that would require a minimum of people that are like this or that then I would definitely question the qualification of the jury.

 

[Familienoberhauptvogel]

Yeah institutionalized discrimination doesn't exist at all...

 

[BlastProcessing]

Shame on those men for being good at their jobs and being selected!! /s

I mean come on. If you don't know how each juror was selected you can't say it's sexist or racist. There are no facts to support this. All you have is a group of jurors that conists mainly of white males, but that doesn't mean that there is any sexism or racism going on. Dig deaper or be quiet please.

The actual shame is that people are looking at it this way instead of treatint the selected jurors as the best the outlets have to offer which is why they were choosen in the first place. I'm sorry, but I prefer having the best juror rather than one that fits certain criteria.

An example: Case one: The best juror is a women or black or whatever. Send her please and let the white dude that also works there not go there. Case two: I'ts the other way around. - That's not sexist or racist. The difference is that in case one people will support it, defend it, praise it and admire it. In case two something like this thread will happen and people will attack the decision for all the wrong reasons. If you really want to change something and are a women, or black or whatever. Work for an outlet and be the best.

All this sexism talk really is pitty sometimes. If there isn't a drama let's create one even though there are NO hard facts backing up the claims.

If it was just about sending the most qualified person then it wouldn't be limited to one person per publication. Why should small sites get to send people over more qualified options from Gamespot or IGN?

 

[AniHawk]

But personally I prefer getting the best involved and if there ever was a rule put in place that would require a minimum of people that are like this or that then I would definitely question the qualification of the jury.

first you say that you don't know how people were selected. then you claim they selected the best of the best, all while insinuating it might mean having just straight white guys.

okay.

 

[Rndm]

If it was just about sending the most qualified person then it wouldn't be limited to one person per publication. Why should small sites get to send people over more qualified options from Gamespot or IGN?

That is just one of the criteria: One per publication. We don't see 2 IGN reviews for one game just because they have a bigger staff, do we? Also it's smart as Geoff also wants to include many different outlets from international gaming outlets to less hardcore outlets. Having multiple people from bigger outlets would not be a fair option for many reasons, but to make it as simple as possible. Each person from one outlet represents that outlet just like each outlet just has one review out there (even though there are/might be other qualified people and also different opinions at that same outlet respectively).

first you say that you don't know how people were selected. then you claim they selected the best of the best, all while insinuating it might mean having just straight white guys.

okay.

So the worst case for me is that I am as bad as all those who attack the decision that the jury is the way it is? Nice. I could live with that.

But on a more serious note. It's easy to tell that they sent the best they have. Just look at the names. Those are in pretty much every case the best representetive for each outlet.

A few random examples: Tony Mott for Edge. He's the editor. So sure. Katsuhiko Hayashi for Famitsu. He's the editor in chief. Good choice. Ben Howard for gamespot. He's the current vice president of content. Sure. Brandon Jones for GT. Editor in chief and co-founder. Sure. Joachim Hesse for spieletipps. Editor in chief. Once again the best choice.

And those are just a few. So did they really pick them randomly or did they pick the best they have to offer based on the examples I just brought up? See the difference is that I provided facts to you. Those who say it is sexist or racist can't do that for each case. It's hard to argue why the outlets picked these people instead of someone else. So where is the drama coming from? I don't know.

And about the contradiction you thought you spotted. I said people do not know how they were selected, they do not know if there was an outlet that sended a male instead of a female because they are sexist. They do not know the process. And sure I don't too, but based on who they selected it's clear that they went for the most qualified person at the outlet and the best person to represent that outlet. I never said they were all straight, but whatever. If it means that the most qualified and experienced are white males, so be it.

 

[BlastProcessing]

That is just one of the criteria: One per publication. We don't see 2 IGN reviews for one game just because they have a bigger staff, do we? Also it's smart as Geoff also wants to include many different outlets from international gaming outlets to less hardcore outlets. Having multiple people from bigger outlets would not be a fair option for many reasons, but to make it as simple as possible. Each person from one outlet represents that outlet just like each outlet just has one review out there (even though there are/might be other qualified people and also different opinions at that same outlet respectively).

Websites have totally had multiple people review the same games. It's not odd to see a review with multiple scores and/ second opinions. Also no one person reviews all the games for any publication.

Why is any of that more important than having the most qualified people possible? Why is having a more diverse award jury desirable? Why shouldn't we only listen to the hardcore outlets?

 

[Oersted]

Websites have totally had multiple people review the same games. It's not odd to see a review with multiple scores and/ second opinions. Also no one person reviews all the games for any publication.

Why is any of that more important than having the most qualified people possible? Why is having a more diverse award jury desirable? Why shouldn't we only listen to the hardcore outlets?

Thing is, men mostly consider men as most qualified and therefore it is very hard for women to enter.
Thats why we have quotas in more and more countries.

 

[GorillaJu]

I think everyone is in support of the notion of more equitable representation. i consider myself a feminist and have written grad school essays on brilliant feminist writers that the world could learn a lot from, like Judith Butler, Gayatri Spivak, etc. I say that not to brag, but to attempt to establish feminist credentials before I'm shouted down like many people who don't toe a strict ideological line when it comes to feminism and issues like this.

What I don't see ITT are concrete examples of women who were passed over because they are women, or a list of clearly undeserving men and the women who should replace them. The unequal representation is certainly something to raise an eyebrow at, as is the relative lack of women who choose to write in and about the games industry, but moving from that fair, honest, unpleasant observation to a concrete, actionable plan requires delicacy and not simply ascribing negative motives to people involved in the selection or a sloppy attempt to immediately make things equal.

When someone says, "I'm not supporting these awards until they're 50/50 split between men and women," I view that person as fighting an admirable battle in the worst way possible. The goal, as it should be in every situation like this, whether it's about race, sexuality, etc, is to provide equal opportunity and to avoid discrimination on any basis. No proof has been provided to show this happened, particularly in an industry that skews heavily male in the first place and as a result leads to unequal representation in situations when people are selected from pools of preexisting applicants/candidates (which I do hope shifts over time).

Very good post. This is an ocamm's razor situation. The publications chose who they send and since most people in this industry are white guys, most of the judges are white guys. If the award committee chose the judges, you'd expect more diversity.

 

[Joegrine_TT]

http://nintendoeverything.com/iwata...-nintendo-will-apparently-have-stuff-to-show/

Zelda or NX news anyone??

 

[Crono27]

http://nintendoeverything.com/iwata...-nintendo-will-apparently-have-stuff-to-show/

Zelda or NX news anyone??

highly doubt it will be nx. If it's nx might just be a teaser to like annoucement of when they will reveal more info about it. Probally a short zelda trailer.

 

[jschreier]

I'm hoping it changes over time as well. I'd love for Jason of Kotaku to possibly write an article on this. What the process is. The stats on women/people of color applying for these positions and maybe what they can do in the future to help facilitate a more open and diverse culture.

I will say that we just opened up a position for Managing Editor at Kotaku and, rather than just quietly ask around for references, Stephen's put up a public job listing and is working with our company recruiter to get it on message boards and websites that will reach as diverse a group of applicants as possible.

 

[Camjo-Z]

Totally in agreement with those seeking more female representation. I feel both men and women should be afforded the opportunity to make shitty award choices that I will complain about on NeoGAF immediately after the show.

 

[MasterHoodie]

I will say that we just opened up a position for Managing Editor at Kotaku and, rather than just quietly ask around for references, Stephen's put up a public job listing and is working with our company recruiter to get it on message boards and websites that will reach as diverse a group of applicants as possible.

This is a positive step all around imo. Bringing people into the industry, instead of cycling people already in the industry, should bring about some kind of positive change.

 

[Metfanant]

I think everyone is in support of the notion of more equitable representation. i consider myself a feminist and have written grad school essays on brilliant feminist writers that the world could learn a lot from, like Judith Butler, Gayatri Spivak, etc. I say that not to brag, but to attempt to establish feminist credentials before I'm shouted down like many people who don't toe a strict ideological line when it comes to feminism and issues like this.

What I don't see ITT are concrete examples of women who were passed over because they are women, or a list of clearly undeserving men and the women who should replace them. The unequal representation is certainly something to raise an eyebrow at, as is the relative lack of women who choose to write in and about the games industry, but moving from that fair, honest, unpleasant observation to a concrete, actionable plan requires delicacy and not simply ascribing negative motives to people involved in the selection or a sloppy attempt to immediately make things equal.

When someone says, "I'm not supporting these awards until they're 50/50 split between men and women," I view that person as fighting an admirable battle in the worst way possible. The goal, as it should be in every situation like this, whether it's about race, sexuality, etc, is to provide equal opportunity and to avoid discrimination on any basis. No proof has been provided to show this happened, particularly in an industry that skews heavily male in the first place and as a result leads to unequal representation in situations when people are selected from pools of preexisting applicants/candidates (which I do hope shifts over time).

great post.

I really don't see how this is the fault of Keighley or anyone involved really...if the publications were contacted to send one rep from their organization, they picked the person they felt was best qualified...this isn't an issue with the selection process, its an issue with the amount of females that work in the industry, or the views of the people at the individual publications making the choices...

there should be more diversity in the industry as a whole..

however, artificially creating a 50/50 split is not the answer to the problem

 

[Wuthering_Heights]

I agree with this wholeheartedly, The "diversity for the sake of diversity" business never sat well with me.

Yep, I don't have an issue with this at all. If they are qualified, I don't care what race or gender they are.

The game industry isn't perfectly diverse or gendered, so I don't expect this to be.

Looking forward to these awards.

 

[BlastProcessing]

Very good post. This is an ocamm's razor situation. The publications chose who they send and since most people in this industry are white guys, most of the judges are white guys. If the award committee chose the judges, you'd expect more diversity.

It's a real shame that international bylaws prevent that from happening.

 

[Rndm]

So just because I had some time to waste I created a list with all the names of the jurors and added their positions at the respective company. I hope this highlights the fact that the sites selected the most qualified and best representative for their site. In a few cases descriptions are a bit extended and sometimes I added the sex and skin color of co-workers in the same position (where needed and known) to show that there is no sexism or racism in place).

Imho the selection shows that all sites did make a fair choice sent the person who is the most qualified. The question if more women should be in the jury is a fair one, but keeping qualification in mind the choice for this year is totally fine. Maybe the discussion needs to go in a different direction than it went. The reality is that there are less women in gaming media and even though many more women are entering the field it is obvious that there are mostly males who have more experience and have worked in gaming media for much longer. I bet this will not be as drastic in a few years though. So that's good.

Anyway, here's the list:

1. Lou Kesten (not a gaming focused site and he's their main reviewer)
ASSOCIATED PRESS - USA

2. Stephen Farrelly (one of three (wite male) editors)
AUSGAMERS - AUSTRALIA

3. Federico Cella (not a gaming focused site and he's their main for gaming, runs the vita digitale (digital life) section)
CORRIERE DELLA SERA - ITALY

4. Tony Mott (editor, they only have one and he's been that a few times now)
EDGE - UK

5. Victor Lucas (creator, executive producer, co-host, co-writer, co-director (with Scott Jones) and president and founder of EP Media Ltd)
ELECTRIC PLAYGROUND - CANADA

6. Darren Franich (not a gaming focused site and he's their main for gaming)
ENTERTAINMENT WEEKLY - USA

7. Jean-Marc Wallimann (editor, one of four (white male) editors)
EXTRALIFE - FRANCE

8. Katsuhiko Hayashi (editor-in-chief)
FAMITSU - JAPAN

9. Andy McNamara (editor-in-chief)
GAME INFORMER - USA

10. Ben Howard (vice president of content for CBSi Games - GameSpot (btw who is their current editor-in-chief? do they have one?))
GAMESPOT - USA

11. Ludwig Kietzmann (editor-in-chief)
GAMESRADAR - USA

12. Brandon Jones (co-founder, editor-in-chief, voice)
GAMETRAILERS - USA

13. Jeff Gerstmann (co-founder, editor, former GameSpot editorial director (until he got screwed for fair low scores))
GIANT BOMB - USA

14. Tal Blevins (co-founder, publisher, VP of content (btw Steve Butts (white male) is their editor-in-chief)
IGN - USA

15. Frédéric Goyon (editor-in-chief)
JEUXVIDEO – FRANCE

16. Todd Martens (not a gaming focused site and he's their main for gaming/reviewer)
L.A. TIMES - USA

17. Jorge Arellano (editor-in-chief)
LEVELUP - Mexico

18. Chelsea Stark (not a gaming focused site and she's the games editor)
MASHABLE - USA

19. Nacho Ortiz (editor-in-chief)
MERISTATION - SPAIN

20. Malik Forté (not a gaming focused site and he describes himself as their "video game dude", gaming editor (according to LinkedIn))
NERDIST INDUSTRIES - USA

21. Tyler Wilde (executive editor. former features editor for GamesRadar)
PC GAMER - USA

22. Robert Khoo (president of operations and business development, business manager, also managing director for Child's Play (a gamer charity))
PENNY ARCADE - USA

23. Megan Farokhmanesh (deputy managing editor, former senior reporter)
POLYGON - USA

24. Joachim Hesse (editor-in-chief)
SPIELETIPPS - GERMANY

25. Theo Artioli Azevedo (editor-in-chief)
UOL JOGOS - BRAZIL

26. Jeremy Parish (editor-in-chief)
US GAMER - USA

27. Brett Molina (not a gaming focused site, online producer for USA TODAY Tech, co-host on The Mothership podcast)
USA TODAY - USA

28. Mike Diver (not a gaming focused site, editor for VICE gaming, works for various other outlests (Kotaku, Edge, The Guardian) as a freelancer)
VICE - UK

29. Chris Kohler (not a gaming focused site, founder of wired's Game|Life channel, contributing editor)
WIRED - USA

30. Ben Silverman (not a gaming focused site, senior editor for Yahoo Games, games editor for Yahoo Tech, correspondent/reviewer for Reviews on the Run (now again part of EP Daily))
YAHOO! - USA

 

[BlastProcessing]

So just because I had some time to waste I created a list with all the names of the jurors and added their positions at the respective company. I hope this highlights the fact that the sites selected the most qualified and best representative for their site. In a few cases descriptions are a bit extended and sometimes I added the sex and skin color of co-workers in the same position (where needed and known) to show that there is no sexism or racism in place).

Imho the selection shows that all sites did make a fair choice sent the person who is the most qualified. The question if more women should be in the jury is a fair one, but keeping qualification in mind the choice for this year is totally fine. Maybe the discussion needs to go in a different direction than it went. The reality is that there are less women in gaming media and even though many more women are entering the field it is obvious that there are mostly males who have more experience and have worked in gaming media for much longer. I bet this will not be as drastic in a few years though. So that's good.

Anyway, here's the list:

That is not a list of the 30 most qualified judges in gaming. The point is that The Game Awards set up their criteria with the idea that one type of diversity was important to them (Diverse publications), so it's not unreasonable to say that other types of diversity could also be valued.

It's cool that you would like to see things change. One of the ways to affect change is by pointing out the status quo in threads like these. So if you want the representation of women in games to improve, notice it, care about it, and talk about it.

 

[Metfanant]

That is not a list of the 30 most qualified judges in gaming. The point is that The Game Awards set up their criteria with the idea that one type of diversity was important to them (Diverse publications), so it's not unreasonable to say that other types of diversity could also be valued.

It's cool that you would like to see things change. One of the ways to affect change is by pointing out the status quo in threads like these. So if you want the representation of women in games to improve, notice it, care about it, and talk about it.

what makes someone "most qualified" to judge gaming exactly? and what makes you qualified to decide who is, and isnt qualified?

the word went out to publications to send a representative as a judge...I think, from the provided list that they obviously are sending the person in the most relevant position...

if youre arguing that there is a disproportionate representation of women, or minorities in positions of "power" at these publications, then yes, youve got something. But, when you look at who was sent, and the positions they hold at their respective companies, the right people are probably being sent.

 

[Rndm]

That is not a list of the 30 most qualified judges in gaming. The point is that The Game Awards set up their criteria with the idea that one type of diversity was important to them (Diverse publications), so it's not unreasonable to say that other types of diversity could also be valued.

It's cool that you would like to see things change. One of the ways to affect change is by pointing out the status quo in threads like these. So if you want the representation of women in games to improve, notice it, care about it, and talk about it.

I never said they were the best in all of gaming. Some of them are. However they are (among) the best picks for the respective sites though.

 

[BlastProcessing]

what makes someone "most qualified" to judge gaming exactly? and what makes you qualified to decide who is, and isnt qualified?

the word went out to publications to send a representative as a judge...I think, from the provided list that they obviously are sending the person in the most relevant position...

if youre arguing that there is a disproportionate representation of women, or minorities in positions of "power" at these publications, then yes, youve got something. But, when you look at who was sent, and the positions they hold at their respective companies, the right people are probably being sent.

Basically when ever anyone talks about women or minorities getting positions, people become super concerned with qualifications. Look at this thread for dozens of examples. Of course qualifications are nebulous, they always are, and it's pretty a convenient way to argue for the status quo.

Within the criteria that The Game Awards used, this is a pretty good list, other than the jerkwad from Breitbart whose recent actions are the reason for this bump. But we could make a lot of different "pretty good lists" and they could be more representative of the actual gaming audience.

The Game Awards felt that enforcing a diversity of publications was prudent, I am just suggesting that valuing other diversities could make a better group. Of course, the actual publications and companies involved could be doing more, way more, but this is about the choices The Game Awards made. There is less inertia behind an internet awards show than there is behind these multi-million (or billion in some cases) companies, so it's a pretty good place to ask for a little change.

 

[Carcetti]

When you draw on judges from the most established sites only you get this representation because most of these guys got into the business when it was 'men only'. That's why men are in the leading spots as well even though many no doubt have women contributors. It's not just a question of 'skill' whatever that is.

 

[Metfanant]

Basically when ever anyone talks about women or minorities getting positions, people become super concerned with qualifications. Look at this thread for dozens of examples. Of course qualifications are nebulous, they always are, and it's pretty a convenient way to argue for the status quo.

Within the criteria that The Game Awards used, this is a pretty good list, other than the jerkwad from Breitbart whose recent actions are the reason for this bump. But we could make a lot of different "pretty good lists" and they could be more representative of the actual gaming audience.

The Game Awards felt that enforcing a diversity of publications was prudent, I am just suggesting that valuing other diversities could make a better group. Of course, the actual publications and companies involved could be doing more, way more, but this is about the choices The Game Awards made. There is less inertia behind an internet awards show than there is behind these multi-million (or billion in some cases) companies, so it's a pretty good place to ask for a little change.

I agree with you wholeheartedly..but I don't think there is a real answer to this, without first tackling the real underlying issue, which is the fact that not enough women work in the industry as a whole...

In this particular case I think it's more important that as many sites/publications are represented as possible..some of the smaller publications may be completely male, but I don't think it would be right to give massive sites like IGN, or GameSpot 3,4, or 5 people on the panel simply because they can bring 2-3 women as part of their group...In that scenario, you equally risk compromising the quality of judging...

I truly, 100% believe that the make up of this panel is just an terrible coincidence, and a sad commentary on the diversity of the industry as a whole, rather than some conscious plan concocted to keep women or minorities off the judging panel

 

[cerulily]

I agree with you wholeheartedly..but I don't think there is a real answer to this, without first tackling the real underlying issue, which is the fact that not enough women work in the industry as a whole...

Let's not forget that plenty of women have just outright left the industry due to toxic environments who then get disregarded as being overly sensitive or a conducting conspiracy to feminize the industry or, perhaps worst of all, the work environment is just the way things are and always should be.

 

[Lime]

Let's not forget that plenty of women have just outright left the industry due to toxic environments who then get disregarded as being overly sensitive or a conducting conspiracy to feminize the industry or, perhaps worst of all, the work environment is just the way things are and always should be.

Plus you have toxic gamers on various social platforms who spout sexist bullshit about how these women don't exist or aren't qualified to be part of an awards jury or probably only play "mobile games".

 

[NinjaCoachZ]

Geoff Keighley has been answering questions about the Game Awards on Tumblr and this subject was brought up. Forgive me if this has been posted before; this is from today so I think it's new.

http://thegameawards.tumblr.com/post/134277703920/theres-a-wide-variety-of-games-among-this-years

Q: There's a wide variety of games among this year's nominees that reflect gaming's changing demographics, but the jury and advisory panels have received some well-deserved criticism for a serious lack of diversity. Is this an issue you've acknowledged and, if so, are there plans to improve the jury selection next year? Especially for the eSports advisory panel, which appears to have no female judges?

A: This is a great question and something I’ve been thinking about very deeply. I’ll be posting a more detailed response soon on this very topic, but in short, yes, it’s something we need to address. I’ve been working behind the scenes to do just that. I want the show on Thursday night to be diverse and inclusive and hopefully we will hit that mark. Appreciate the question.

Not huge but it looks like a step forward to me. The fact that he's pledged to a more detailed response is something I'm looking forward to and I'm glad he seems to genuinely be acknowledging and listening to the concerns.

 

[Metfanant]

Let's not forget that plenty of women have just outright left the industry due to toxic environments who then get disregarded as being overly sensitive or a conducting conspiracy to feminize the industry or, perhaps worst of all, the work environment is just the way things are and always should be.

and as with every situation, and stereotype there are multiple sides to everything, and the truth is often obscured because of it...there very well may be a few that actually are overly sensitive, or have some sort of agenda...

but you're absolutely right, the industry is probably a very toxic place to work in a lot of cases...but we walk a thin line in immediately screaming "SEXIST!" or "RACIST!" because we see a list of predominantly white males..jumping to the conclusion that there is some sort of conspiracy, is just as bad as those, as you pointed out, stereotype women are either too sensitive, or the like

Plus you have toxic gamers on various social platforms who spout sexist bullshit about how these women don't exist or aren't qualified to be part of an awards jury or probably only play "mobile games".

and that attitude is of course disgusting

 

[BlastProcessing]

Geoff Keighley has been answering questions about the Game Awards on Tumblr and this subject was brought up. Forgive me if this has been posted before; this is from today so I think it's new.

http://thegameawards.tumblr.com/post/134277703920/theres-a-wide-variety-of-games-among-this-years



Not huge but it looks like a step forward to me. The fact that he's pledged to a more detailed response is something I'm looking forward to and I'm glad he seems to genuinely be acknowledging and listening to the concerns.

That response from Geoff makes me hopeful. He recognizes the issue and didn't get defensive about it. That's an important step.

 

[Lime]

Geoff Keighley has been answering questions about the Game Awards on Tumblr and this subject was brought up. Forgive me if this has been posted before; this is from today so I think it's new.

http://thegameawards.tumblr.com/post/134277703920/theres-a-wide-variety-of-games-among-this-years



Not huge but it looks like a step forward to me. The fact that he's pledged to a more detailed response is something I'm looking forward to and I'm glad he seems to genuinely be acknowledging and listening to the concerns.

Good that he's acknowledging it and in a very constructive manner as well. Looking forward to the response and more importantly, future actions

 

[Loakum]

Can a mod DM me. I have an question to ask?

 

[entremet]

Can a mod DM me. I have an question to ask?

Weird bump.

Why don't you just message a mod?

You can do that.

List is here.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showgroups.php

 

[Diffense]

I think everyone is in support of the notion of more equitable representation. i consider myself a feminist and have written grad school essays on brilliant feminist writers that the world could learn a lot from, like Judith Butler, Gayatri Spivak, etc. I say that not to brag, but to attempt to establish feminist credentials before I'm shouted down like many people who don't toe a strict ideological line when it comes to feminism and issues like this.

What I don't see ITT are concrete examples of women who were passed over because they are women, or a list of clearly undeserving men and the women who should replace them. The unequal representation is certainly something to raise an eyebrow at, as is the relative lack of women who choose to write in and about the games industry, but moving from that fair, honest, unpleasant observation to a concrete, actionable plan requires delicacy and not simply ascribing negative motives to people involved in the selection or a sloppy attempt to immediately make things equal.

When someone says, "I'm not supporting these awards until they're 50/50 split between men and women," I view that person as fighting an admirable battle in the worst way possible. The goal, as it should be in every situation like this, whether it's about race, sexuality, etc, is to provide equal opportunity and to avoid discrimination on any basis. No proof has been provided to show this happened, particularly in an industry that skews heavily male in the first place and as a result leads to unequal representation in situations when people are selected from pools of preexisting applicants/candidates (which I do hope shifts over time).

That's similar to what I was thinking though you probably expressed it much more diplomatically than I would have. Good post.
EDIT: As an aside I would be interested to know neogaf's male/female ratio and whether they discriminate against the under-represented gender during registration.

Spoiler

YOU PIGS!

 

[Haunted]

No one person is to blame here, but everyone together can recognise that the resulting lineup of jurors has turned out to be a bit of a problem and could be much improved.

I hope at the very least that everyone involved will keep this in mind for the next go, or - even better - everyone comes together to publically brainstorm ideas how to prevent something like this from happening again an improving for next time and the future, without any one person in particular needing to take the blame.

 

[tcrunch]

lol at people who think having very few/no women or non-whites on your review board is fine.
The quality of your review board will always suffer when lacking complex perspectives, even if your reviewers are the greatest and "most qualified" in the world.
e: It's also a great way to indicate that those parties simply aren't included in your community.