http://segmentnext.com/2015/11/04/r...&utm_campaign=Feed:+Segmentnext+(SegmentNext)
From a topic that exploded on Gaf with attempts to dismiss the source's findings that showed more women owned consoles than men. Women constantly have to play a "prove it" game in this culture and it's really dumb that that's the case. Some don't even bother trying to make it visible at all that they do precisely because of the toxic backlash that happens when this "male-dominated market" learns that their market isn't as male dominated as they'd like to believe. Why a fun hobby needs to be made into a boy's club in the first place is beyond me but the hoops some people make us women go through is ridiculous. Almost half is frankly accurate as any study will show you. Some even show a reverse on the "male-dominated" assumption.
I didn't follow that thread, but I don't see the issue with people questioning the findings of that survey. If it doesn't gel with people's general observations and perceptions why wouldn't we discuss and debate it? We discuss research claims all the time on this forum. Every time a paper claiming that 'consoles are dead' is released there's a 50 page thread where we analyse the claims made and compare them with our own experiences and observations. Ideally the console market will one day reach a point where 50% of players are women, it's not a development that i'm afraid of, quite the contrary. I simply don't believe we're there yet. Having read the article you provided a link to, the questions that sprang to my mind are which consoles were included, and what was the framing of the question (do you own a console, do you play a console, does your household have a console etc). If a survey asked my Mum and my Sister 'do you own a console' both would answer yes, but only one is a gamer. These questions aren't formed out of a desperate defensive need to disprove the findings and 'maintain dominance', it's just curiosity. I'm truly sorry if you feel drained by the need to defend female gaming; i'm not going to pretend like there aren't a LOT of male gamers that do attack any mention of the subject. But I don't think that should prevent people on this forum from discussing and debating the merits of that paper.
Back on topic, having looked at the last few pages, an argument I've seen is that the most qualified person for the job should be nominated regardless of gender. I don't agree that it should be the most 'qualified' (are there video game journalist qualifications?), but elements such as experience, judgement and knowledge should all be the basis of the nominations. The discussion has been on the overall number ratios of gender, but something that's been lost in the discussion is looking at the
actual people each outlet has nominated.
http://thegameawards.com/jury-and-advisors/
I can only comment on the outlets that i'm familiar with, but each of them has nominated (in my opinion) the best judge from their site/magazine.
Aus Gamers - Stephen Farrelly
Giantbomb - Jeff Gerstman
Edge UK - Tony Mott
IGN - Tal Blevins
US Gamer - Jeremy Parish
These are all very experienced, senior people who have been in and around the industry for a very long time, and I can't think of anyone else at each of their outlets (male or female) that I would nominate ahead of them. As a whole when looking over the website's list of judges there is a distinct lack of women and younger people, and while having greater diversity amongst the judging panel to offer a broader range of perspectives and better represent the gaming community would be ideal, when I look at the actual individual people nominated there isn't anyone that I would sub-out in favour of another specific person.
Finally, I think the outlets that are withdrawing from the Awards are taking the easy way out. If they feel so strongly about the imbalance they should do their part to help redress it by nominating an experienced female representative from their organisation as a judge. It wouldn't immediately make the balance 50/50, but every journey starts with a single step. If the outlets professing the most concern and outrage about this issue do nothing (and boycotting is very, very close to doing nothing), then nothing will change.
The cynic in me wonders if the people withdrawing are more concerned with
appearing progressive than they are with actually
being progressive by helping to instigate change.