BruceVC

There isn't a great deal here to appeal to a female gamer. The KotOR 2, Neverwinter Nights 2, and Fallout: New Vegas forums are all off-site. That leaves the Project Eternity, Alpha Protocol, Dungeon Siege III, and 'Obsidian was once Black Isle' crowd. In general, I don't see many women who are interested in old-school RPGs or hack and slash dungeon romps. If Alpha Protocol had been more successful, you probably would have gotten an infusion of female gamers. But it wasn't. Thanks, you have raised some relevant points around the question

I'd assume - perhaps wrongly - that would be up to the individual. Don't get me wrong I think your standpoint is understandable and your point well made; but I can also understand those who don't agree with you feeling this is important to bring up. Perhaps it is crusading for the sake of having a windmill to tilt at. I don't know the answer to that. But I don't think its wrong to ask the question, even if in answering it you find that the question didn't need asking. Mayhap there are invisible barriers being put into place by individuals who don't intend to do so that - if those barriers were removed more women would care? Without pondering the question, without examining the system, without thinking about ones actions these unintended consequences can't necessarily be measured. The one thing I don't get is this view by some, and its common, that sexism doesn't really exist or isn't relevant on the Internet and forums We have already had one female member clearly explain it is an issue and I guarantee you there thousands more who would agree with her. So why are we even asking the question "why raise the issue of sexism" when it is a problem? The question we need to ask is not "is it an issue" but rather "how do we address it". Its a no-brainer for me

I appreciate your enthusiasm for this project, its infectious and I know I can rely on you for updates I expect to wake up tomorrow and find this KS funded...yaaaaaaay

What I find interesting about this is this type of breakdown is not at all what I see on comments (and certainly not the case on this forum). On some level there's a level of this going viral, and it's easy to be an outside observer that has an email address or a twitter account and can take a few minutes to write something up. I'm also curious if "the stage" is what motivates the more adversarial people. And I mean adversarial as in the types that are itching for a good internet argument (i.e. people like me, although I don't think I'm as intense as I once was... clearly I still have it in me somewhat). Despite a moderator telling me to do so on numerous occasions (on numerous message boards), I have very limited recollection about ever taking a discussion from the public space to the private PM space. It just wasn't as much "fun" then. Sort of like that bit in Thank You For Smoking where Aaron Eckhart's character tells his son that he's not trying to convince his son with the argument, he's trying to convince the hypothetical observers. In this sense, many internet pissing matches end up becoming a competition to see who can win, as opposed to any sort of attempt to educate or promote genuine discussion. There are certain people who flock to being contrarian. And there are some people who feel being an ass is a valid debating topic. True story - back in my days on Usenet groups, there was a guy whose common debating tactic was to take anyone who disagreed with him repeatedly and create a thread accusing them of being a child molester as a way to try and cow people from disagreeing with him. Its not a valid question. Really? Which arbiter of validity said so? What people do is always interesting from a social standpoint. How they do it is important from a social standpoint. Once you've satisfied the basic needs of your society (food, water, shelter) then things are going to turn to the luxuries of life and how those are used (or how they're available). Neither is what's posted on message boards on the internet. So we're already pissing in the wind, contextually, as it were. But I'm not sure that just because this message board isn't the real world doesn't mean it isn't worth it to think about broader topics. "Someone will say: Yes, Socrates, but cannot you hold your tongue, and then you may go into a foreign city, and no one will interfere with you? Now I have great difficulty in making you understand my answer to this. For if I tell you that this would be a disobedience to a divine command, and therefore that I cannot hold my tongue, you will not believe that I am serious; and if I say that the greatest good of a man is daily to converse about virtue, and all that concerning which you hear me examining myself and others, and that the life which is unexamined is not worth living — that you are still less likely to believe." Another really interesting and insightful post on this topic, these forums never cease to amaze me when people apply themselves to these types of debates. Good points

What I find interesting about this is this type of breakdown is not at all what I see on comments (and certainly not the case on this forum). On some level there's a level of this going viral, and it's easy to be an outside observer that has an email address or a twitter account and can take a few minutes to write something up. I'm also curious if "the stage" is what motivates the more adversarial people. And I mean adversarial as in the types that are itching for a good internet argument (i.e. people like me, although I don't think I'm as intense as I once was... clearly I still have it in me somewhat). Despite a moderator telling me to do so on numerous occasions (on numerous message boards), I have very limited recollection about ever taking a discussion from the public space to the private PM space. It just wasn't as much "fun" then. Sort of like that bit in Thank You For Smoking where Aaron Eckhart's character tells his son that he's not trying to convince his son with the argument, he's trying to convince the hypothetical observers. In this sense, many internet pissing matches end up becoming a competition to see who can win, as opposed to any sort of attempt to educate or promote genuine discussion (I have been guilty of this on numerous times). Okay I hear you but you have to email John to comment about this topic and I think this would reduce the bravado and anonymity a little so people would be less vituperative? So I would expect more supportive views. I have to be honest I would be a little annoyed if people are just debating for the sake of argument I think this topic is very relevant and I assume people who agree or disagree actually are serious about it, but I may be naive.

Once again its not the article, its the principle that applies on forums and real life. And I don't believe people are getting riled up but expressing important opinions about a subject that does matter, equality and discrimination

So explicit admission that your response was actually irrelevant to what you quoted? You're right that you didn't talk about shame or instilling it, I did. I brought it up because you addressed a point about how he is not proud of the fact that most of his readers are male. Should he be? You did a poor job of addressing backbone, character, and integrity, given that with this post he displays that he is willing to stand up against those that try to intimidate and bully him into submission, feels it is important to him, and does it all while not hiding behind any sort of anonymity. Artistic integrity? Selling Out? Honestly, selling out would be him keeping silent and not speaking his mind because it gives him a paycheque (you can critique him about other aspects of this if you like. Ask Zoraptor for more information). This is Walker taking a stand, and whether you do or do not agree with it I fail to see how you can accuse him of not having a backbone nor character for doing so. I could reason some level of a lack of integrity, if RPS hadn't been taking steps towards something like this for some time. He closed the comments because because he doesn't want that particular article to be a stage used by those that wish to silent the debate with their irrelevant discourse. It's a lot like what you're doing, which is focusing on the comment issue rather than the article. Dwelling on him not allowing comments is a tactic in obfuscation and misdirection, by shifting the discussion away from the content itself to something else altogether. It's an attempt to discredit an author through the use of red herring fallacy. Furthermore, Walker also came straight up and said it and why he is doing it, all while dealing with mountains of responses (apparently both supportive and against his position) on places like Twitter, a very public forum. It was actually quite entertaining to see people accuse him of refusing to publicly address criticisms while using Twitter. Spineless cowards are the ones that go and spread their hate over comments and internet forums under the veil of anonymity because they know they won't be held accountable for their actions. It's easy for someone to **** all over something when he knows that the likelihood of ever being taken to task on the things he said is virtually nil. Wow, what can I say. Really relevant post, you have this ability to articulate points better than I ever can. I really admire that, nice one As I mentioned on another post I did email John in support of the article and he told me out of the 900 emails received so far only 30 were negative about the article. So many people like me support his unequivocal stance on this subject

This discussion is about several things for me, one of them being the prevalence of sexism and discrimination on the Internet and what people who say they are opposed to those things are prepared to do about it. In real life you wouldn't accept overt bigotry but it seems because its on the Internet many of us say things like " well its the Internet, what can I do" or "I can't tell someone else on forums they are saying something I find unacceptable". I reject this as I believe we can condemn discrimination on any level. But hey, thats just me It should be noted he does not say he's ashamed that most of his readers are men. If you look at it, the notion that "most of our readers are men" is not really something someone should be proud of. Ideally, it should be a non-issue. But in his opinion it's not. Also whats wrong with them acknowledging that they want more female members? I would also want a more balanced representation of gamers amongst my members

You have asked an honest and relevant question "what can we do about other peoples behavior" on the Internet There is something we can do, we can reject it and make a point of commenting on it when we see someone displaying bigotry. For many us it's easier to not say anything, I understand that. But the reality is sexism and other forms of bigotry are a real problem on the Internet in many cases and surly we can condemn it when we are exposed to it. I don't see this as enforcing your morality but rather doing the right thing?

Okay that was funny, but you know what I mean

No, you have to be a woman to be alienated by seeing women who are not like you or are doing something you wouldn't. I haven't seen the video in question, but from how it's described it isn't sexist. Having electrocution and spanking is common in BDSM, which can involve degrading, but BDSM can be consensual and an expression of someone's sexuality, it's not wrong. Degrading to women in general? No, that's generally more of a prudish reaction and projection, these people are individuals involved in role play, it's a fantasy. These people talk about systematic issues of society wrapped in the phrase "the patriarchy", but this reaction is also a symptom of similar issues. Yes context is important in life but in this case this video is not a video promoting BDSM but a video that is trying to appeal to gamers. Please explain to me what message you are sending to prospective gamers when women are being degraded in this way? Where is the positive to this type of marketing?

I'm fairly new here (joined a few months ago) and so far I've had I guess a neutral to good experience. I haven't seen or experienced any overt abuse--but again, I've noticed a lot of people assume I'm a guy (despite my profile noting otherwise). Sure I have a fairly gender-neutral username, but that shouldn't necessarily invite presumption (and given I've seen guys with "feminine" usernames, determining gender by username isn't reliable anyway). So am I treated well because I'm just one of the members here, or am I treated well because people think I am a guy? Honestly I assume the former rather than the latter, but it's still food for thought. I have seen some disturbing comments made in a Project Eternity thread regarding how female vs male PCs should be treated, and of course there was a thread discussing Anita Sarkeesian's "Feminist Frequency" series that had some disturbing comments, which was sadly unsurprising. (Now, I don't think everything Anita Sarkeesian has to say is gold or even good, but it is possible to disagree, agree, and discuss the points she brings up in her video series without either taking a mention of feminism as a personal attack--which many people do for some reason--or getting unpleasant, and unfortunately the mention of her name--which I realize I risk even doing so here--invites the wrath of those inexplicably frightened by her). But at the same time, the comments in those threads I've found disturbing were not outright abusive or hateful, and it was possible to carry on a fairly reasonable conversation. We can't and shouldn't necessarily censor or drive out opinions some find disturbing on that alone, especially if we can use it to build a more productive dialogue later. I've also seen similar subjects broached at other message boards and having gotten MUCH more messy and out of hand than they were here. So I'd say so far, for a gamer board, this is one of the more welcoming ones. And then of course there's Hiro Protagonist's post above, with the inevitable "female gamers must be playing browser games only" which, again, reflects an attitude I find extraordinarily irritating and non productive to encouraging women to both be gamers and publicly "come out" as gamers. And everytime I see female gamer demographics discussed, I see that alienating attitude flaunted by someone, and it just doesn't help at all. All that said, I think the community is more welcoming than others, and that it tends toward discussion and exploration rather than fighting and alienating, and that is a very good thing. You're not going to avoid discussing issues of gender and sexism and related issues, so the community having the potential of keeping it as a discussion and not turning into a flamewar is a good thing. I'm just one person though; others' experiences may vary. I would hope, however, the majority are good. Once again thanks for the detailed response on this topic Several people have mentioned that they think our female members hide the fact that they are female to avoid uncalled attention or comments. Just this thought concerns me even though I realize its a reality. To all male members on these forums imagine a world where you had to hide your sex to avoid people possibly being rude or dismissive. Seriously think about it for a while, you prefer to hide who you really are. That should never be the case in life, it should be something we all reject but I understand thats one of the realities of bigotry. I have always believed that most bigots are people who just don't understand whats its like to a victim of discrimination and until the tables are turned they never will

My point was, as I mentioned, is that he shouldn't be using lone videos as examples of a systematic issue suggesting it's ubiquitous, it's clearly an exaggeration. That's the thing about anecdotes, they're not representative, not in terms of content or in terms of prevalence, we don't know how many women see them or what effect it has on them, probably way more women saw that video when they seek out that content and post about it on blogs to complain about it. I question the motives of people who seek out content for other audiences to then highlight for people that it was never designed to appeal to, and then to complain it's alienating to those people because it's not designed for them. The argument seems to be "content I don't like or isn't designed for me shouldn't exist". Your point makes no sense, so I have to be a women to find a video sexist or degrading to women?

I fail to see the problem with this, without having seen the video because it has been taken down. Lecheroineineus isn't a word, maybe they meant lecherousness, and this kind of bent that's anti-sexuality and prudish has nothing to do with sexism, it's sexism itself, I think it comes from an anti-equality position and detracts from feminism, one of the many reasons why feminism as a brand is tarnished so badly. The argument is fallacious, seeing all the people that share some categories with you doing something you wouldn't enjoy can be alienating (of course no one complains when it's something they support), but there are two basic facts most women in game related media are not in their underwear, spanked, or electrocuted and no rational female would ever feel alienated by one video, it suggests that this is ubiquitous which is an extreme exaggeration, I've never seen a gaming related video where anyone person gets spanked and electrocuted, and if even I wanted to, now I can't. It's so illiberal, just because you don't like it doesn't mean you can lie about it and make up excuses to want to take it down. By all means, if people think their is an audience they can make content that they'd like, the push to censor and destroy content that's not meant for them, seems just malicious to me. I find your point difficult to understand and I'm sorry but if you haven't seen the video how can you comment? The crux of the point is the sexist nature of video. The video was and is degrading to women and it was stupid. I don't get how people can debate something that they haven't experienced. It just seems like a waste of discussion to me. Also feminism does not have a bad image in the circles I move in, I'm sorry thats how you feel.

Thats a really insightful post, thanks for commenting. This was the type of feedback I was looking for and you have confirmed some of the issues I was thinking about. Can I ask you a general question, how do you find these forums in regard to other forums where ladies are treated rudely or with irrelevance?

Was more of a joke at what I suspect you're getting at, especially with the RPS article. Not really seeing this as a question we must ask, but eh. Just looking at a simple answer to it rather than anything more grandiose. I guess you'd need to get some numbers on how many active posters we actually have out of the ~ 40,000 registered ones. I think you misunderstand me, I like the opinion of women and I enjoy interaction with them. Ladies tend to give a certain perspective to debates that men may miss. But I also enjoy these forums and the level of debate we have, yet we seem to have very few female members. So where do they post? I am not trying to imply anything but it does seem strange to me. I may be missing something

They probably don't post for a variety of reasons. The main one being they don't play Obsidian games. Also where does the article get the 50% of gamers are female? Are they talking games on FB? If that's the case, then they're probably spending time on FB. Interesting, I agree it may be that lady gamers just don't really play Obsidian games. That would make sense

" lot of Scandinavians, and that makes up for the lack of women" You funny

Odd why that is special - pretty much everything is unserious and unrealistic and immature in games. As for closing the comments who knows, Walker could just be a giant puff like Kuchera is. I guess trolling or disagreeing comments that can be painted as such constitute silencing or something. Meh, it's just the usual "justice!" jawing online, in any case. The reason they didn't put comments in is listed below. I emailed him in support of his article and he explained he has already received 900 emails and only 30 were negative, so 5% of total comments are opposed to his view. That makes me happy "The comments are off on this post. This is a reference post, a place we can point people toward to understand our position. I am not willing to let this post become yet another platform for the people who wish to silence this debate. On this occasion I have no desire to publicly put up with the invasive ignorant spite and fearful anger that will be littered amongst the usual excellent comments from our fantastic readers. This is not an attempt to stifle discussion – RPS provides ample opportunity for it, and will continue to do so. If you want to communicate your thoughtful disagreement or unpleasant bile, my email address is at the top of this page, where your remarks will receive an audience of one. So please do use it. I will read and consider everything."

Your comment isn't helpful, I know they don't post here and thats why I am asking the question. No need to be so defensive, I know these forums aren't sexist or misogynist but we should be asking "why we don't have many female members" Or does this not concern you at all?

Hi All I really enjoy these Obsidian forums, I find most people intelligent and they offer thoughtful and insightful comments on topics. I also believed that these forums were balanced in the way of male\female contributions. As I mentioned numerous times I am a liberal and I recently read the excellent article on RPS about sexism http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2013/04/06/misogyny-sexism-and-why-rps-isnt-shutting-up/ In that article they mention that 50 % of gamers are female, and that struck me. Where are all the female gamers on these forums? I know about LadyC but how come we don't see more ladies commenting. I assume they play RPG and its not like these forums are in any way immature or sexist so whats happening? Any insight to this would be appreciated.

I agree completely, I read the article on RPS and everything they say is reasonable and accurate. Also they are not saying that there is some conspiracy to shut down any comments from them about sexism they are just saying they want to highlight again the issue of sexism. Thats what they mean when they say " RPS isn't shutting up", at least thats my understanding of the headline

Yeah good idea .. I've started taking a lot of pictures recently too. I realized my dad almost took none from the same period of his life and I wanted to make sure that if eventual kids were ever interested some kind of documentation exsisted from mine. The only two recent pictures (2-3 years) of me are either from my thesis defence, where I'm wearing a "white tie" tailcoat or the party after, with the same attire, and one where I'm sitting on a park bench with two gorgeous russian models are kissing me. Way I figure, sometimes quality beats quantity. Hi Nep I vote for the 2 Russian model pictures

I believe in equal opportunities. Wow thats a trip down memory lane, I am not sure but do you think women could vote in those days ?

I am just glad that this sham of a KS hasn't raised more than $25k, it seems to be stuck on $23K for a while now Hopefully in the last 8 days they don't get much more. Also read the latest comments on the KS page to see some more legitimate issues with this KS