I claimed and showed it. Just because you disagree, it doesn't mean evidence is not evidence.
Claims are not evidence.
Evidence in support of the claim that women suffer significant backlash for picking up a controller or getting into e-sports would be a study showing statistically significant causation of the former by the latter.
I don't know how to split quotes up like you did, so sorry if it's hard to follow. I addressed everything paragraph by paragraph.
Reply to a post. Break down what you're replying to into sections. Select each section. Go to the ellipsis menu and choose " Quote. Alternatively, you can manually type [quo te] at the start and [/quo te] and the end of each paragraph or section. it'll do the trick.
I'm not a member of that school of thought and I'm confused as to what that entails. Define to me the stance you apparently think I have.
In open free societies, opinions don't qualify as barriers, for reasons already explained.
When did I say that barriers are a systemic obstacle that are all put in place deliberately?
You didn't. Neither did I claim you did.
I offered what I consider to be a clear objective definition.
They can be a product of interactions and expectations, which are in every society. Do you not interact with the people around you? Do you not form expectations regarding their behaviours? Norms exist everywhere.
Tell me, in your mind, what sort of tangible penalties do women face for picking up a controller in this day and age?
I never claimed to be entitled to any of those things. I agree with this entire paragraph. It would be best if you didn't assume my stance on subjects since that's counterproductive in an argument.
When you claim peer pressure - the opinions others have and express - amounts to a barrier you seem to be suggesting that, as a barrier, peer pressure must be removed so the noble goal of having more female gamers is achieved.
No.
Let the peers hold and express the opinions they want to hold and express. Let the future female gamer learn not to award that much importance to them or just cave in, if gaming is less important to her than the opinion of her peers.
When you say "Barriers? In Western societies? Sure." It can be easily interpreted that you're being sarcastic and implying that barriers do not exist in western society. My mistake if that wasn't your intent.
That's why I provided a precise definition of the term. Unless otherwise stated, whenever I use the term I am referring back to this definition.
Third-party opinions - peer pressure - do not qualify as a barrier.
I gave you examples in my previous statement of what's deterring them. I say deter and not stop because, as I stated before, this isn't something they absolutely cannot do. It just isn't encouraged and, in some ways, discouraged.
Let's say I agree with this depiction, for the sake of argument. You're still burdened with the need to present evidence that's the case, but let's set that aside.
That's a free open society operating healthily.
I think you should act in this or that manner and I am letting you know. You then freely decide how to proceed. I then freely react to your decision. And so on.
There's nothing to rectify here. That's a free open society doing its thing.
I agree that peer pressure is not a barrier.
Didn't you cite it as an example of a barrier in western societies?
However, peer pressure leads to barriers.
Such as?
Be specific.
I never advocated for silencing anyone. If you were raised in a family and environment that heavily discourages something, that would be a barrier.
You're contradicting yourself.
Family pressure is a form of peer pressure.
You said peer pressure is not a barrier. Now family pressure is?
You may break the barrier and do it anyways, but that doesn't mean it's easy and you won't face heavy criticism. I don't see why barriers must be absolute, as you seem to be claiming.
I never used the word absolute. The concept is likewise nowhere to be found in the definition I provided.
Majority opinions that influence one's actions can be seen as barriers
You're contradicting yourself.
Majority opinions are peer pressure.
because they have a directive influence.
It's up to the invidiual to decide, ultimately.
If you build a wall around a river, it's a barrier. That's because it directs the river in a certain direction. Is it impossible for the river to break the barrier? No. With enough pressure, the barrier will break. It doesn't stop the barrier from being a barrier, maybe just not a very strong one.
See, that's the problem with imprecise language. When you see the opinons of others as barriers you end up with twisted conclusions. It seems you are likely to put the blame on them, instead of owning up your decisions.
Is me not liking strawberry juice a barrier to you drinking it?
Is me telling you shouldn't dress uplike a drag queen a barrier to you dressing up however you feel like dressing up?
And I'm still waiting for evidence that shows women face reproach in impactful and statistically relevant ways in today's western societies. Do you have evidence for your claims?
Sexualizing is making comments regarding their body in a sexual way.
You could say it's rude, in certain situations.
Effectively objectifying her.
This is a popular but ridiculous claim.
Praising or criticizing someone for their looks is no more objectifying than praising or criticizing someone for their IQ.
It's not.
Commenting on this or that personal charactertic does not necessarily entail the belief such person is reduceable to this or that characteristic. If I say your watch looks cheap, that doesn't mean I am objectifying you as a cheap-watch wearer.
I completely reject your assertion.
I'm not arguing regarding the morality of it. I'm saying that it happens. Many women do not like that and it might deter them from leading down that route.
I suppose they can block those individuals, no?
Again, this is the big picture: so far you have yet to present a case under which systemic barriers exist against women picking up a controller or getting into e-sports seriously.
The same goes for discrimination.
First define the term.
Saying that a woman is shit at playing a game because she is a woman is discrimination.
No, it isn't.
You're terribly imprecise with words.
In this context, discrimination is behaviour, typically treating someone unfairly, behaviour sourced in the belief that a certain group is inferior to another. Therefore, opinions, even outlandish absurd opinions, are not discrimination.
Saying that a woman should spend their time in the kitchen is discrimination.
Opinions, even absurd opinions, do not amount to discrimination.
It happens, it influences people. Am I saying we should start a revolution and turn over society? Nope. I'm saying it happens and I would consider that a barrier.
Opinions are not barriers.
Barriers are everywhere, sometimes justly so, and I think it's a product of our interactions. You can't have a completely free society, that would be an absolute disaster. We have laws and limits to our "free speech" for a reason.
Yes and the limits to free speech have historically been very precise:
1. Incitement to violence.
2. Child pornography.
None of that is at stake here.
Please.
Heterosexual men do regard women differently. Women regard women differently.
Obviously, "regard differently" as in "from other heterosexual men".
I regard people differently than you do, we are our own people. Not sure what the significance of your question is.
See above.
